|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What evidence absolutely rules out a Creator | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
According to several religions, there is such a thing as "sin," which cannot be committed unless we are aware of right and wrong. If we did not know in basic terms what is right and what is wrong, the concept of sin would be meaningless. We would have the moral status of animals. Animals cannot commit sin, just as they cannot commit a crime. According to this tradition, then, we know what's right and wrong, and we can examine events and make judgements. There may be complicated situations which are puzzling, but we know the basics.
Theologically speaking then, before the Fall, all creatures, including humans did not know the difference between right and wrong. Adam/Eve did not kill any other creatures - they were the first to have an awareness of what not to do (disobey God) yet they did it anyway. Evolution does not rule out a Fall at all. Everything up to the Fall could have evolved as we know it with no sin (you said it yourself, there is no sin without a concept of right/wrong). Humanity was given the concept of right/wrong (don't disobey God). They disobeyed God, and fell into sin. It's probably the clearest argument you've put forward, but it fails to formal logic because it excludes other possibilities.
God need not have chosen the set-up of life as it is under evolution. He might have made all animals herbivores; he might have tossed manna from heaven on a daily basis. He did not do this. Instead he chose a killing field. The nature of reality raises some questions theologically. Why was there a pre-fall killing field? Unfortunately, since we don't know the reasons why God decided to create the universe/life/humans in the way he did, we can't assess using our good/evil knowledge whether or not those reasons were good or evil.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
Only 13 posts left until End of Thread.
It is a good time to start winding down and presenting summaries or conclusions. Thanks for debating, carry on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
It would appear that I have already made my final statement on this thread. Even though robinrohan responded to it, I will let it stand as my last say.
"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The question of "What evidence absolutely rules out a Creator" or for that matter what evidence would rule in a creator is simply mental masturbation.
If GOD exists, She exists regardless of any evidence that shows She does not exist. If GOD does not exist, It does not exist regardless of any exidence that It does exist. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
The question of "What evidence absolutely rules out a Creator" or for that matter what evidence would rule in a creator is simply mental masturbation. Since I find masturbation, mental or otherwise, rather delightful, I will continue. My own view, which as Paulk says, is "close-minded," and about which,, as Jar says, "nobody cares," can be summed up as follows: There is a certain traditional morality that is, I think, widespread. According to this morality, we must not do harm to others unjustifiably. There are all sorts of disagreements about what is justifiable harm and what is not, but there is not much disagreement with the view that IF the harm we do to another is in fact unjustifiable, then it is evil. The question is whether the process of evolution can be justified morally. The God we are speaking of is supposed to be all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing. When we look at how life has evolved, we note that in order for some creatures to survive, they have to kill and eat other creatures. This does not seem very nice. One might say that what happens to animals doesn't matter, but pain is pain no matter what sort of creature feels it. On the assumption that some animals do feel physical pain just as we do, then harm has been done to such animals as have been killed by others. These animals have been tortured and murdered. But the animals who have performed these acts are not reponsible for their actions because they do not, we assume, understand our traditional morality. The responsibility for their actions rest not with the animals but with He who made them. Is such harm that animals have done to other animals justifiable? It could only be justified if evolution was the only possible way that life could have developed. If so, we could build the case that life is worth that pain. But the only action that this God of Western tradition cannot perform (excepting immoral actions)is an action that is self-contradictory. God cannot make a round square. Since this is the case, special creation would have to be a round square, something impossible for God to perform. But if this God can create the universe, it must be possible for Him to create things within this universe--things like lions and tigers and bears. So evolution is morally unjustifiable. But this God can do nothing which is morally unjustifiable, being all-good. So he doesn't exist. ed: typos.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 03-18-2006 12:40 PM This message has been edited by robinrohan, 03-18-2006 12:43 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
robinrohan writes:
That is your indictment of God. When we look at how life has evolved, we note that in order for some creatures to survive, they have to kill and eat other creatures. This does not seem very nice. One might say that what happens to animals doesn't matter, but pain is pain no matter what sort of creature feels it. On the assumption that some animals do feel physical pain just as we do, then harm has been done to such animals as have been killed by others. These animals have been tortured and murdered. But the animals who have performed these acts are not reponsible for their actions because they do not, we assume, understand our traditional morality. The responsibility for their actions rest not with the animals but with He who made them. Evolution does not appear to be involved in this indictment. It is not evolution that persuades you to rule out a creator. Rather, it is your observation as to the way the world is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Evolution does not appear to be involved in this indictment. It is not evolution that persuades you to rule out a creator. Rather, it is your observation as to the way the world is. Evolution rules out the Fall. It also rules out the necessity of special creation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2303 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
Besides, nwr, Robin hasn't ruled out a creator, he's just ruled out his particular version of one.
He anthropomorphizes nature and then whines that any all-good god wouldn't not have done things that way. If a true atheist were to do the same things that he is doing, his current fan base would lambast them non-stop.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Evolution rules out the Fall. It also rules out the necessity of special creation. Hell, reading the Bible rules them out too. LOL Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
well...if the Bible is ruled out, we can't prove that there IS a Creator...but I don't see the logic of anything that proves that there is NOT one, either. In my prayers, I am either talking to Him or talking to myself!
Note to self: Quit pretending to grovel and get busy living the life you feel you were meant to live!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: And in the end, what matters is whether it works for you. "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
What does that have to do with what I posted? I thought I was specifically ruling the Bible in in my reply?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
robinrohan writes:
There is no biblical basis for the Fall. In any case, the fall would only give God an excuse. Your indictment would still stand. Evolution rules out the Fall. It also rules out the necessity of special creation. Evolution does not rule out that God created everything, including evolution as a system to generate biological diversity. This message has been edited by nwr, 03-18-2006 01:37 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Well, what robinrohan's argument seems to rule out is God being good as judged by robinrohan.
"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
Time to put this puppy to bed.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024