Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Great Compromise
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 10 of 58 (420986)
09-10-2007 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
09-10-2007 10:30 AM


Re: Theistic Evolution
If humans were a goal of the god you describe, the god you describe appears terribly inefficient and inept.
And if this week was one of God's goals, then all the preceding weeks would be terribly inefficient and inept, proving that god created the Earth last Thursday.
I told you, but would you listen?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 09-10-2007 10:30 AM jar has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 11 of 58 (420997)
09-10-2007 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Utrimque
09-09-2007 2:33 PM


"I do not detract from God. Everything that is, is from him, and because of him. But [nature] is not confused and without system, and so far as human knowledge has progressed it should be given a hearing. Only when it fails utterly should there be recourse to God." - Adelard of Bath
"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances ... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn." - St. Augustine, On The Literal Interpretation of Genesis
This in mind: unless you believe that the earth jumped from the head of god fully formed, that the laws of the universe are subject to sudden change (i.e. 2+2=5 or fluctuating gravity), that the entire earth (including New Zealand) was covered by water, that a very small boat held every life form on earth for a month and a half with out losing any thing, that the entire human race was developed from several Jewish people on the so said boat (every one else died, didn't they?)
And there's your problem right there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Utrimque, posted 09-09-2007 2:33 PM Utrimque has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 17 of 58 (421239)
09-11-2007 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Taz
09-11-2007 12:59 AM


Allow me to introduce an analogy that actually works. There are people who believe the Earth is round, there are people who believe that the Earth is round and that God in his ineffable wisdom wanted it that way; and there are people who go around saying that they know the world is flat 'cos God says so and everyone who disagrees with them are atheists who will burn in the eternal firey pits of Hell.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Taz, posted 09-11-2007 12:59 AM Taz has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 18 of 58 (421240)
09-11-2007 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Ihategod
09-11-2007 12:35 AM


Re: SICKO
What kind of sick god would use evolution as a mechanism for developing spiritual creatures? Or for the less metaphysic, natural creatures?
I'll tell you: A sick perverted god who enjoys suffering and death and if it is true get ready for the fire cuz we're goin' ta burn!
Could you explain what you find "sick" and "perverted" about a God who permits evolution?
Do bear in mind that if there is a God, then that's the sort of God we've got.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Ihategod, posted 09-11-2007 12:35 AM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Ihategod, posted 09-12-2007 6:16 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 31 of 58 (421521)
09-13-2007 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Ihategod
09-12-2007 6:16 PM


Re: SICKO
If God made death and suffering as a mechanism to bring about life, he is reservered words far worse than sick and perverted.
Whereas if he made death and suffering and they have no such consequences ... is that OK?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Ihategod, posted 09-12-2007 6:16 PM Ihategod has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 43 of 58 (422429)
09-17-2007 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Ihategod
09-16-2007 2:02 AM


Re: SICKO - as you say
Death is a consequence of action not a mechanism to bring forth creatures as you would like to think.
So, let's see if I've got this straight --- it's not "sick and perverted" for God to permit death and suffering --- so long as nothing evolves as a result?
If I am mischaracterising your position, I would ask you to take another run at it yourself.
Which is a historically accurate work ...
... about talking animals and magic fruit!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Ihategod, posted 09-16-2007 2:02 AM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 8:01 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 47 of 58 (422605)
09-17-2007 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Ihategod
09-17-2007 8:01 PM


Re: SICKO - as you say
Very well. To summarise. You wrote:
If God made death and suffering as a mechanism to bring about life, he is reservered words far worse than sick and perverted.
However, you do seem to accept that God did make death and suffering.
It seems that, in your book, this is not "far worse than sick and perverted", but it would be "far worse than sick and perverted" if it was "a mechanism to bring about life".
I am not sure how you came to this conclusion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 8:01 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 8:29 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 51 of 58 (422667)
09-17-2007 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Ihategod
09-17-2007 8:29 PM


Re: SICKO - as you say
When did I accept that?
Well, don't you accept:
(a) God as Creator
(b) death and suffering as existing?
No God no where, unless sick and perverted(sinful) would use evolution as a mechanism to bring about life and higher taxa.
But you still haven't explained how you came to this conclusion. Why is it OK for God to permit suffering and death, as he evidently does; but wrong for him to permit it if this results in "higher taxa"?
It doesn't make more sense to me than saying: "It's OK to let your dog foul your neighbor's lawn --- unless this provides the fertiliser which causes a beautiful flower to grow, in which case it's sick and wrong."
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 8:29 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 11:54 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 55 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 11:55 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 56 of 58 (422732)
09-18-2007 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Ihategod
09-17-2007 11:55 PM


Re: SICKO - as you say
Why do you keep bringing up evolution? It doesn't matter that allele might have a mutation or two in a population. Death is only necessary for the ToE to work in a population so the mutated organisms can take over the population. Death doesn't result in higher taxa per-se, rather life results in higher taxa, if you want to believe that yarn. So your entire misunderstanding of my position is completely irrelevant and sustained only by your desire to argue with me.
Please do not lie to me about my motivations.
I asked you questions about evolution and higher taxa because you wrote:
No God no where, unless sick and perverted(sinful) would use evolution as a mechanism to bring about life and higher taxa.
I asked you to justify that statement, I'll ask you again, and when you cease to be suspended perhaps you will be good enough to favor me with a freakin' answer. Thanking you kindly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Ihategod, posted 09-17-2007 11:55 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Ihategod, posted 09-24-2007 10:01 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 58 of 58 (423780)
09-24-2007 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Ihategod
09-24-2007 10:01 AM


Re: SICKO - as you say
Did you know that I cannot substantiate this claim? Yes.
Well, I had a fair guess that you couldn't substantiate your claim --- you are, after all, a creationist --- but I wanted you to have an opportunity to try.
If you yourself don't believe that you can substatiate it, then I wonder why you introduced a claim that you cannot substantiate into the discussion in the first place. You sounded awfully definite about it at the time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Ihategod, posted 09-24-2007 10:01 AM Ihategod has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024