Evolution != Atheism (re: the Rejection of Theism in Evolution)

There is a series of connections that bring about the thought that we (humans) could not have evolved.From Paul's letter to the Romans (chapter 5)where he describes the way to Salvation: Then add John 3:16 --- "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."The idea of sin being the cause of all death (God's curse on the earth) throws out evolution because death is required for "desirable" traits to become dominant in the animal populations.Therefore, if you don't believe that death was part of the curse for Adam's sin, then you believe that Paul was wrong about the need for Christ to overcome death. Paul, then, might be wrong about other things concerning Christ, like salvation.This, in their mind, strikes at the very foundation of their faith. Therefore, belief in evolution is disbelief in the saving power of God's Son. So, if you believe in evolution, you don't believe in their God, or at least His Son.This explanation is a little simplistic and I believe their are more Bible references that I could have used to more clearly provide the logical connections.This, of course, presupposes that the "death" referred to by Paul is death of the body and not death of the soul. Confusing since many fundamentalists say the "on that day you will die" warning to Adam meant that his soul would die on that day not his body (since it didn't).

---

Soul, sole, Sol...pick one.

Using the definitions given in the first post, I have no choice but to come to the conclusion that the two sides should be diametrically opposed.If God created us then we didn't evolve and vice versa. How can it be any other way?I was brought up in a strictly religious household where it was all but forbidden to even think about the "evils" of evolution. Any thoughts that even came close to questioning the "truth" of the bible were quickly suppressed with statements like "We aren't supposed to ask those questions" or "God never meant us to know those things". Theye were never answered.I was always bombarded with stuff like "Just look at all the wonders of creation! Don't you think it is ridiculous to say that all this just happened on its own? It must have been created"Then I thought of the BIG question.If all this stuff had to have been created simply because it is so complex and wonderful, then what does that say about the creator? He would have to be even more complex and wonderful. Right? "Of course" say all the preachers and religious people.OK then. Who made God then?What do you think was the answer? The usual crap that's what.
"You aren't supposed to ask that!" WHY NOT? He must have created me with an inquisitive mind.
"God was always there!" HOW? WHY? "It says so in the bible!"My conclusion is that if God does indeed exist and he did create us all then he must have come from somewhere initially. Therefore he too must have evolved! Or maybe he was created by something even more complex and wonderful?I just can't accept any of it.
Evolution works. I've personally seen it happen in test tubes and petri dishes. I have modelled it on computers. It makes predictions that always work. It makes sense!
Conversely, God makes no sense at all. He can't be proved and his existance would make a mockery of science as I know it.In my view evolutionist = Atheist and I cannot understand how anyone can rationalize beleif in both systems.PYThis message has been edited by PurpleYouko, 12-22-2004 02:11 PM

people find something hard to belive because it is something that they find offensive... why? one could say conditioning from ALL thouse constant bombardments of things every sunday and being told to do it by the parents. read brave new world the book touches at that.hell these religions have been around for thousands of years they have perfected the art of converting and conditioning... at one time i had some old guy come by my house right after my parents left and he would talk to me and try and shift the topic to what his panflet was about... and what i find amazing is that one of thouse quotes were saying that atheists are trying to take over and convert everyone... BS!! I DON'T TRY AND CONVERT OTHERS THEY TRY AND CONVERT ME!!AND WHAT IS THIS CRAP ABOUT DARWIN? darwin was a christian he belived in God he just seen something that he belived God did. Natural Selection does not say there is no God is just goes against the literal meaning of the bible... hell Darwin was scared shitless of going to hell. so i don't know why they said that Atheists treat Darwin as a spiritual leader... i consider him a scientist who saw something and tried to understand it rather than say "it was God!"understand your opposition before attacking.

sorry for the double post but i was typing my last post when purple youko posted.annyway, that is quite the ironic statment you posted because i've always been asked "well what made thouse molecules and the particles?""were did they come from" but no one asks "were did God come from" or annything like that... athiests usualy say "well they were allways there"the thing is is that we never look at the problems with what WE belive... because what WE belive is perfect... thats why i belive in science because it is does not explain everything because we are too stupid to figure it out.

I think if we mean "God" in the Judeo-Christian sense, and if you take evolution to include the idea that there is no such thing as the "human mind" (that it's all physical) then you would also have to be an atheist (a disbeliever in the Judeo-Christian version of God).Why this might be the case:If there is no mind, there is no free will.If there is no free will, there is no sin.If there is no sin, the concept of God as the Judger of humans would be meaningless.

Hey PerfectDeath A non-scientist atheist might say that but they would be wrong.The precise origins of the universe may well be a hotly debated subject (on another thread I might add) but just about nobody will ever try to tell you that the particles that make it up, were "always there"Science just doesn't work that way.You think about a problem, you suggest a mechanism, the mechanism is tested and compared to all other known theories and models, if your mechanism stacks up and is able to make accurate predictions then it will likely be accepted as a "theory" by the scientific comunity."They were always there." is not a testable and falsifiable theory and is therefore not science. Just as "God was always there." is not science.I guess I just see the whole thing as a black and white (which is indeed ironic if you read some of the other threads that I have been involved in).If science is true as a whole (TOE included) then God is either

• not there
• not omnipotent
• just taking the piss

I will take the first option given the choice.PY

Take a step back for a moment. Using my definitions in my OP, I was never trying to say that it was possible for someone to be both a Biblical/Genesis Creationist and an Evolutionist. That just dosen't make any sense. I mean, I am sure there might be someone who does but in my opinion they would be crazy.What I am asking is why would it be invalid to be Theistic and still believe in Evolution. My claim is that one can still be a Christian, believe that the bible has truth despite its errancy, and accept the TOE. I still believe that we are a product of creation, just not the creation myth spelled out in Genesis. Why do some consider this an invalid position?

We are actually going over this a bit in the 'Can Death be "Very Good"' thread in the Faith and Belief forum. If you want to specifically talk about this I will respond to you there since it is the topic of that thread.As for this thread, if I DO think that the death we recieved during the fall is spiritual then why can't I still be a Christian and accept Evolution?

I don't follow your logic. I believe there is a "human mind" and it is more than the sum of cells and pathways in my brain.Are you trying to say that if you believe in Evolution that you must believe that we are all souless animals? If so where does it say this?Even if you do come up with some kind of 'tenent' of evolution that requires this I personally reject it. I can believe in the biological evolution of species and still believe that I have a "mind" and a "soul" and believe that there is a greater power through Christ that caused all this to happen.

Trying to prove the non-existence of God just might be a bit more than we can chew in this thread. Granted if you could do it then a lot of what is talked about in at this whole site would be moot.I think your position is interesting though because you are arguing the opposite of what I was trying to discover. I was wanting to get feedback from Biblical Creationists about why the think being a Theistic Evolutionist is wrong and here we have you seemingly arguing the same thing from the opposite camp.How is your Atheism plus acceptance of evolution valid while my liberal Christianity plus acceptance of evolution not?

I guess that my problem is that the only kind of "Creationist" that I have ever had any kind of dealings with, has always been of the literal genesis kind.That viewpoint seems to me to be diametrically opposed to TOE. The only way that the two could co-exist is if God deliberately created the Earth and the whole universe to appear old.This would have to include a fake fossil record (to make us think that evolution was real), fake evolution in the short term (that we can actually observe and further conclude that evolution was real), Fake rocks with artificially modified isotope ratios (presumably put there deliberately to make us think the Earth was old), fake photons of light continuously being created all around us so that we can see disatant galaxies millions of light years away. The list goes on and on.
This kind of God would definitely be of the "taking the piss" variety.However if you beleive in a God who is not the Judeo Christian OT Despot then I guess it is feasible that he might have created the entire Universe 5 billion years ago and then kind of sat back to observe everything happening. He could have watched life evolve on this and other planets and kept a "benevolent" (I use that term very loosely) eye on our progress.In this context I could understand the possibility of theism and science in general (not just TOE) co-existing. This model isn't particularly appealing to me though as it would make us all just a bunch of lab rats in a gigantic experiment. Maybe we are all in an immense computer simulation and God is a game programmer and is about to release "SIM Universe" on an unsuspecting public of other Godlike beings. Heck! It is just as good a theory as any other involving God.This kind of thing also makes me think that God would not be omnipitent. If he knows the past, future and present then what is the point of an experiment when he already knows the outcome.Either way I look at it I cannot see any way to beleive in the reality of an omnipotent God at the same time as TOE (or any mainstream science)I just don't have a great deal of "beleif" of any kind to throw around.PY

I was always good at throwing a spanner in the works As I said in my last post (that you probably haven't got to yet), I just don't understand a way for the concept of an omnipotent God to co-exist with any kind of science (not just TOE). Just about everywhere I look, I see science and religion clashing head on.I also don't know your definition of "liberal Christianity". How much of the Bible being true does that include?It is a difficult question, I admit. And of course, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.PY

Now we are getting to the heart of the matter in my opinion.When did this human mind/soul come to be? Did the human mind/soul "evolve"? Or did God install it at some point?If it evolved in a natural way, it's hard to see, from a scientific point of view, how it could have. (Perhaps we can assume that "mind" and "soul" are the same thing, for the sake of simplicity).--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, the details of all that belong in your thread about the mind. This thread should be about why my belief that we do have a "mind" because/in spite of evolution is or is not invalid.

OY i'm no Bio-Chemist or nothing i'm a high school student and because of that i lack experience in meeting scientist atheists... either that or in my youthfullness i interperetied it wrong... one of thouse.
but i was trying to get at how one person doesn't realize that what they said about someone is actually what they are saying to others... not trying to summarize on what atheists say... maybe i should be more specifice (i'm startin to lern to do that here... everyone takes mistake you say/make and use them against you >_< dam literalists)and inno takin a piss kinda seems intreaging to me >.> should i take A or C ??? >_<