God created evolution

Your theory tha t God is growing and thus had to grow from something lesser in order to be able to create what we see now is not compatabile with a supernatural being. The God of Catholicism is a God existing outside of space and time. This God is all knowing and therefore cannot grow, God is God for all time as we know time. God's Providence provides us with what we need if we use our free will to follow God. Creation in the sense of life is God's plan being carried out in what is called evolution by man. We cannot know and will never know the reason why God does something. Creatonists must get beyond the literal intrepretation of the bible in order to accept this continuining plan of God's creation. Science must bet beyond the belief that all things will be known to man. Science will discover what God has determined it will discover.

DANEDOTCA writes

quote:

---

Let me propose the thought that god is growing and thus had to grow from something lesser to become the being capable of creating what we see around us. This leads us to the thought that an immature or inexperienced god could have created our planet in its most primitive form. This showing that creation is true but happened billions of years before our understanding. Now this childlike god continued with creation in an orderly form and continued to practice, as a any professional begins with tiny menial tasks in their trade to learn the more complex works that they will later be known for. In the time that it took for the earth to cool and life to spring forth and pass through it’s ages, our god was able to learn and mature.

---

I have seen reference on this board and in scientific writings by Richard Dawkins, Ernst Mayr and others that , if God designed the universe, God's design is defective etc. In your post you refer to God as being immature or inexperienced.
If you are discussing the Supernatural, then I believe you have to accept the definition of supernatural. A supernatual being is all knowing, all powerful, all loving and eternal. By definition that being cannot design defectively or be immature or inexperienced.
You cannot judge a supernatural being by human standards. I'm not saying you have to accept a supernatural being, but if you write about that being you must comply with the definition.
ThanksEdited by shadow71, : No reason given.

Granny magda wrote,

quote:

---

By which definition? The one you just made up? Oh sure. You can win any argument if you are willing to arbitrarily redefine the terms to encompass your conclusions. Round these parts though, we would call that "Begging the Question". It's an informal logical fallacy. It's not going to impress anyone.

​

Perhaps you would have more luck if you stuck to the generally recognised meanings of words in the English language.

---

Here is def of supernatural from Concise Oxford American Dictionary.
("of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature: a supernatural being."Based on that defilnition can man judge a supernatural being? Man may know of a supernatual being by words of revelation, actions made know to man etc. but man can never judge a supernatural. If the supernatural is beyond scientific understanding how can man judge this being?

ringo wrote,

quote:

---

Are you suggesting that we should judge a supernatural being by his own standards? That would be like judging a criminal by his own standards instead of ours.

---

No, I am suggesting that you cannot judge a supernatural being. See definition in reply to granny magda.

jar posts

quote:

---

Why not?

​

There are many supernatural critters that exhibit all of those traits, immature, inexperienced, unable to design as well as peckish, mean, vindictive, cruel, incompetent.

---

Can you give me an example of some of those "supernatural critters"?

[quote]There's nothing in the definition you provided that has anything to do with judgement.
We can - and do - judge the creation as imperfect. The question is why is it imperfect?[quote/]How can we judge what we cannot understand?[

granny magda writes,

quote:

---

Okay, you have provided one single definition. However, this is not the only possible definition of the term "supernatural", there are others. You know this already of course; you will have seen them there on the page when you cherry picked the one most useful to your argument. This is a trick known as "equivocation".
You don't get to enforce which meaning of a word you prefer to use. There are plenty of other meanings of the word "supernatural" that do not entail anything "all knowing, all powerful, all loving and eternal" as you put it. You've already been shown several examples of supernatural beings that do not fit these criteria.

​

It occurs to me, that if you mean the Christian God, you could just say so. it would mean that you wouldn't have to go into all this odd business over the definition of supernatural beings. What you really seem to be getting at is that the Christian God is beyond our judgement.

---

I gave the definition of a supernatural being from my belief in the God I believe in. I didn't think the defintion of a supernatural being was that important, assuming you would all know it was the God I believe in.
You challenged me and I gave the definiton of a supernatural being from the dictionary I cited.
I assumed that all would know I was referring to the God I have cited in the past, the God of Roman Catholicism.
I didn't for a moment imagine that my post would revert to a definition of a supernatural being.
Yes I do believe the God of the Roman Catholic church is beyond judgement by natural beings.
Dawkins and Mayr when judging the design of a supernatural being, a christian God, had no problem with stating that they as mere mortals, could judge the supernatual being. HUBRIS is the work I use for them and all who believe they can judge God.
Dawkins & Mayr fully knew who they were talking about when they judged God's design as defective.
I say to them "god is god, you are not" Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Dr. adequate posts,

quote:

---

And yet there are all these people who go about saying that God is good and the Devil is bad. Perhaps you should explain your new doctrine to them.

---

That is faith not judgement. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

ringo writes,

quote:

---

There's nothing in the definition you provided that has anything to do with judgement.
We can - and do - judge the creation as imperfect. The question is why is it imperfect?

---

The definition I posted from the dictionary states that a supernatural being is beyond the understanding of science. How can a natural being judge something he or she cannot understand, unless they are judging form their standards not a supernatural being's.So I am saying that a human cannot judge the creation of a supernatural being. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

coyote writes,

quote:

---

What evidence do you have that these "supernatural" critters even exist (other than in the human imagination)?

---

Please read my initial post on this forum. I said if you accept the idea of a supernatural being.

panda wrote,

quote:

---

So you have no problem with murderers, rapists, paedophiles, etc.?
You never judge any human?

---

I do not consider murders, rapists, pedophiles, etc. supernatrual beings. So yes humans can judge human action. I spent my whole professional life in law.
I think I am about posted out on this subject. Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

granny madga writes,

quote:

---

Right. So when Christians say that God is good, they are making judgement upon God, and thus committing an act of hubris. If we cannot judge God, then we can make no positive judgements, as well as negative. it cuts both ways.

---

No they are stating an act of faith. I look at the universe, molecular biology etc and I am convinced that nature coluld not do this on its own. Thus I believe a God created all that we have.

quote:

---

That pretty much leaves the whole of Christianity defunct. It leaves the Bible authors themselves guilty of enormous hubris. You keep ignoring this point. You tell Dr A that you do not judge God, but have faith that he is good. that strikes me as even worse. For all you know, God could be every bit the monster that the Bible portrays him as, but you have no way of knowing. All you have is faith that he is good. That is rather pathetic. It is reminiscent of apologists for dictators, like those who still seek to excuse tyrants like Stalin or Mao.

---

I see God's creation, I feel his love for me in what he has given me. If I beleved he wasevil I would not believe in God. What can I tell you?
If you do not have faith you don't know what a person of faith is feeling.
I may be wrong. But that is what I believe based on my life and experiences.
I suggest for everyone, that they make a retreat for a week. Think about what they believe, read someone like Thomas Merton, I suggest "thoughts in solitude" and " Seven strory mountain", and I would hope you would feel the peace, humility, and joy that I fell about my life and my belief in God.
I suggest a Trappist abbey, for a non directed retreat.
Ok, enough preaching for me. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning