Creation vs Evolution

Started by JesusIsAlive221 pages

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Ah, the classic "God works in mysterious ways" - so that is basically the veto to everything, and there is everything, that doesn't point to God?

And you were missing the point I feel. The whole "The Universe is so perfect for us to exist, it could only have been God's work"

God created the sun? So why are suns still ebing born, has God put on an automated creation process?

God created the Earth? What about all the other planets out there, being born and dying naturally? The mass of elements that exist are not native to earth. And there were planets and stars around long before the earth, and will be long after. Our sun is average.

And there are so many. Probability of things get better when there is such a large number. Astronomers can worlds with no life because of many reasons. But they are also finding ones that look like there could be chances.

That whole "God works in mysterious ways" garbage is not in the Bible and I didn't say that, you did. I said there are certain things that God has and has not yet revealed to us because He apparently does not deem it necessary for us to know in order to get saved.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That whole "God works in mysterious ways" garbage is not in the Bible and I didn't say that, you did. I said there are certain things that God has and has not yet revealed to us because He apparently does not deem it necessary for us to know in order to get saved.

Then God does not understand the minds of his creation, because there are masses of people to whom such is important, to whom research has revealed things that seem to lead them away from the claim of a God behind the universe.

There is no devil trickery in this - just the very nature of the universe itself, and the way it works. You would think if there was a God, and he had information that could put him in context with the universe workings (other then "God created stuff"😉 then he would do so.

But rather it is "There are things God knows, but doesn't think we need to know." Which does sound a little like "God works in mysterious ways.

Ohhhh so just cause its not in the bible, it is garbage? So books, computers, showers, Soap, TP they are not in the bible, so should they be not considered nor used by man? Sooo tell me which new version of the bible will god reveal to us that the internet is real, that space travel can be done, that we can make synthetic materials, diseases like Aids can be cured with his word etc etc etc

Listen to yourself and see if it makes sence.

AND this NONESENCE that God does not want us to know what is going on!!!! HE gave us the ability to use this brain, so that we CANT use IT? OH come on man, for the love of god think on your own please. Tell me where in the bible "God says to swim in the filth of ignorance in MY name!"

God is the parent of alllll of us, isn't a parent happy to see that their child learns something????? Dont you think that god would be very happy to see that we are utilizing our complex brains to understand the world and universe around us? OR do you think god is happy with seeing you spreading the word of some biased people who skew all that is good in the bible to fit their own needs?

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Then God does not understand the minds of his creation, because there are masses of people to whom such is important, to whom research has revealed things that seem to lead them away from the claim of a God behind the universe.

There is no devil trickery in this - just the very nature of the universe itself, and the way it works. You would think if there was a God, and he had information that could put him in context with the universe workings (other then "God created stuff"😉 then he would do so.

But rather it is "There are things God knows, but doesn't think we need to know." Which does sound a little like "God works in mysterious ways.

Samura I don't have time for this I'm out. I guess you could argue with yourself though, I just can't spend all of my time going back and forth with you to no avail. You exemplify the typical unbeliever who has no spiritual vantage point from which to understand the things of God. Everything has to makes sense to you because if it does not then your type (the unsaved type) get all flustered and start accusing God of being irrational and not making sense--to you. We have had similar discussions and you know what came of it: I stopped corresponding with you. I kept trying to get you to see that God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours as high as the heavens are higher than the earth (their actually higher than that God just gives us an analogy that we could understand). In times past I reiterated this truth to you but you kept saying things to the effect that, "But I just don't understand why...how come this.. why that." Do you remember what I told you back then: I said bro if you don't believe the things of God then just press on. Remember that? I don't know why no one else makes me say that. You are the only one that I gets me to that place because I have to exercise more patience and gentle understanding with you. But you still don't get it.

Isaiah 55:9
“ For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts .

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Samura I don't have time for this I'm out. I guess you could argue with yourself though, I just can't spend all of my time going back and forth with you to no avail. You exemplify the typical unbeliever who has no spiritual vantage point from which to understand the things of God. Everything has to makes sense to you because if it does not then your type (the unsaved type) get all flustered and start accusing God of being irrational and not making sense--to you. We have had similar discussions and you know what came of it: I stopped corresponding with you. I kept trying to get you to see that God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours as high as the heavens are higher than the earth (their actually higher than that God just gives us an analogy that we could understand). In times past I reiterated this truth to you but you kept saying things to the effect that, "But I just don't understand why...how come this.. why that." Do you remember what I told you back then: I said bro if you don't believe the things of God then just press on. Remember that? I don't know why no one else makes me say that. You are the only one that I just gets me to that place because I have to exercise more patience and gentle understanding with you. But you still don't get it.

[B]Isaiah 55:9
“ For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts .
[/B]

Nice way to forfeit the debate. You even managed to imply it was my fault you were quiting it. Personally I don't understand why you are so adverse to rational problems in religion. After all the Deists managed to embrace the concept of an ultimate God with the importance of mind and rational.

And since when have I argued with myself? I can't remember the last time I quoted myself in order to debate what I had written.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Nice way to forfeit the debate. You even managed to imply it was my fault you were quiting it. Personally I don't understand why you are so adverse to rational problems in religion. After all the Deists managed to embrace the concept of an ultimate God with the importance of mind and rational.

And since when have I argued with myself? I can't remember the last time I quoted myself in order to debate what I had written.

It is not a debate if I have to keep going back and forth with you. I mean at some point aren't we each supposed to concede something? But neither of us do so then we are at a standstill. So tell me: you are not going to convince me of anything, and I will not persuade you of anything, what then is the point of persisting a deadlock situation?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
It is not a debate if I have to keep going back and forth with you. I mean at some point aren't we each supposed to concede something? But neither of us do so then we are at a standstill. So tell me: you are not going to convince me of anything, and I will not persuade you of anything, what then is the point of persisting a deadlock situation?

Actually that is the point of a debate. One person is usually on one side, the other on the, well, other. One person makes a claim, the other counters this, and maybe makes a counter claim, and back and forward. Of course the hope if that people people are open minded and prepared to accept it when a person makes a point they can't counter.

Now, I believe that is what I was doing, countering the point made, and counter claiming. It was not I who decided they were not enjoying the debate, nor did I call anybody a crony for making a good point (as my friend did.)

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/imageofgod.html

Man, Created in the Image of God: How Mankind is Unique Among All Other Creatures on Earth

by Rich Deem

Introduction

Is Mankind Unique?

Evolutionary biology proposes that humans evolved from ape-like ancestors. If this is true then we are nothing more than glorified apes. However, compared to our closest "relatives", scientific research indicates that humans are unique on many fronts, including creativity, personality, abstract thinking, and moral judgment. --Rich Deem

The Bible makes the claim that humans alone are "created in the image of God."1 What exactly does this mean? Some have equated the image of God as being the physical characteristics of our bodies that make up the way we look. In fact, the Mormons have taken this interpretation to extreme by saying that God is just an exalted man, who has "a body of flesh and bones."1 However, the Bible says that both males and females are created in the image of God.2 Unless God were a hermaphrodite (having both male and female sexual organs), this phrase could not refer to just physical characteristics. In addition, there are various verses in the Bible that describe God as having non-human physical characteristics, such as feathers and wings.3 Should we think of God as being an overgrown chicken? Certainly not! God is so unlike humans physically, that the Bible often paints word pictures to give us a glimpse of what God is like.

Creativity: So if the "image of God" does not refer to physical characteristics, what does it refer to? It is certainly likely that part of the "image of God" refers to the ability of humans to be creative. Anthropology tells us that sophisticated works of art first appeared in the fossil record about 40,000-50,000 years ago,4 at the time that moderns humans first appeared. No other species of animal, including the apes, are able to create and understand images of art and drawing.

Consciousness: Human consciousness is a mystery that has evaded decades of intensive research by neurophysiologists. According to a recent article:

When an organism's neural pathways grow sufficiently complex, materialists insist, their firings are somehow accompanied by consciousness. But despite decades of effort by philosophers and neurophysiologists, no one has been able to come up with a remotely plausible explanation of how this happens--how the hunk of gray meat in our skull gives rise to private Technicolor experience. One distinguished commentator on the mind-body problem, Daniel Dennett, author of Consciousness Explained, has been driven to declare that there is really no such thing as consciousness--we are all zombies, though we're unaware of it.5

PersonalityAnother thing that makes humans unique is personality. According to Joseph LeDoux, a neuroscientist at New York University:

"We have no idea how our brains make us who we are. There is as yet no neuroscience of personality. We have little understanding of how art and history are experienced by the brain. The meltdown of mental life in psychosis is still a mystery. In short, we have yet to come up with a theory that can pull all this together."6

Abstract thinkingIs the human brain that much different from that of our closest "relatives," the chimpanzees? According to Daniel J. Povinelli, from the University of Louisiana's New Iberia Research Center

"Humans constantly invoke unobservable phenomena and variables to explain why certain things are happening. Chimps operate in the world of concrete, tangible things that can be seen. The content of their minds is about the observable world."7

Insight into how chimpanzees really think can be seen in some recent experiments performed by Dr. Povinelli. In these experiments, the researchers used the chimps' natural begging gesture to examine how they really think about their world. They confronted the chimps with two familiar experimenters, one offering a piece of food and the other holding out an undesirable block of wood. As expected, the chimps had no trouble distinguishing between the block and the food and immediately gestured to the experimenter offering the food. Next, the researchers wanted to see if the chimps would be able to choose between a person who could see them and a person who could not. If the chimpanzees understood how other animals see, they would gesture only to the person who could see them. The researchers achieved the "seeing/not-seeing" contrast by having the two experimenters adopt different postures. In one test, one experimenter wore a blindfold over her eyes while the other wore a blindfold over her mouth. In the other tests, one of the experimenters wore a bucket over her head, placed her hands over her eyes or sat with her back turned to the chimpanzee. All these postures were modeled after the behaviors that had been observed during the chimpanzees' spontaneous play. The results of the experiments were astonishing. In the tests involving blindfolds, buckets and hands over the eyes--the apes entered the lab and paused but then were just as likely to gesture to the person who could not see them as to the person who could. In several cases, the chimps gestured to the person who could not see them and then, when nothing happened, gestured again, as if puzzled by the fact that the experimenter did not respond. In the case of experimenters facing with their backs to the chimps, they performed as if they knew that those facing way from them could not see and offer them food. However, subsequent experiments proved that the chimps had merely responded to conditioning from the initial experiments, since they had only received food from those experimenters who faced them. This was proven by having experimenters facing away from the chimps, but then turning to look over their shoulders. The chimps were just as likely to gesture to the experimenters facing away as the one who turned to look at them. Chimpanzees have no clue that humans must face them in order to see. It is obvious from these experiments that chimpanzees lack even a simple understanding of how their world works, but merely react to conditioning from directly observable events.8

Other researchers have noted that chimpanzees do not understand the cause and effect of their actions. Apes will climb onto a box to reach fruit, but if the box is absent, will place on the ground beneath the fruit a sheet of paper and stand upon it.9

A more recent study examined the ability of human infants and young chimpanzees to help human adults.10 18-month-old human infants and young chimpanzees were presented with four categories of problems: out-of-reach objects, access thwarted by a physical obstacle, achieving a wrong (correctable) result, and using a wrong (correctable) means. While human infants could perform all four tasks, chimpanzees could only perform the first task. As in previous studies, chimpanzees were unable to discern when an individual failed at a simple task and how he could help. The researchers concluded:

"A number of theorists have claimed that human beings cooperate with one another and help one another (especially non-kin) in ways not found in other animal species (26–28). This is almost certainly so, and the current results demonstrate that even very young children have a natural tendency to help other persons solve their problems, even when the other is a stranger and they receive no benefit at all."10

Body, soul, spirit: Besides the rather obvious differences in the way animals process information in their brains, the Bible (and science) confirm that there are major differences in the ways humans make moral judgments (animals don't make such judgments, as we shall see). Part of what is meant by the term "in the image of God" can be found in chapters immediately following its first usage (Genesis 1) in the Bible. Both Adam and Eve had a personal relationship with God in the Garden of Eden. Such a personal relationship is not described, nor seen, for any other animal species. It is the presence of a spirit that was instilled into humans 11 that separates us from the animals. There are three kinds of life that God has created in this universe:

Creature: Examples:

Lower life forms, including reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrates: Body only

From the Hebrew nephesh, or soulish creatures, including birds and mammals: Body and soul

Humans 12 and angels: Body, soul and spirit

The soul is best described as the characteristics that make up the advanced brain, including mind, will and emotion. Only birds and mammals exhibit these characteristics, which is why humans can form mutual relationships with birds and mammals.

Spirit: The spirit is that part of humans that is able to love and experience God directly.13 It is found in no other animal species, since no other species can experience God or form a relationship with Him.14 Is there any evidence that humans possess a spirit? Recent attempts have been aimed at trying to identify the part of the brain involved in "religious" experiences. Unfortunately, the current studies are restricted to an examination of meditative experiences,15 since the specific subjects used in the research were Tibetan Buddhist meditators. During meditation, the goal is to completely divorce oneself from external sensory stimulation. The ability to do so, apparently leads to some sense of "oneness with the universe", since the brain is deprived of sensory input while still remaining active.

The leaders of these studies, Andrew Newberg M.D., Eugene G. D'Aquili Ph.D., and Vince Rause, claim to have discovered the biological basis for belief in God.16 However, according to Daniel Batson, a University of Kansas psychologist:

"The brain is the hardware through which religion is experienced. To say the brain produces religion is like saying a piano produces music."15

The problem with the theory is that such "religious" experiences do not apply to Christianity, although Newberg tries to make the connection through the reported experiences of a few Christian mysticists. The plain fact is that Christianity does not teach any kind of meditation that leads to the kind of experiences taught in the Eastern religions. Even in prayer, I have never experienced the kind of things described as occurring during Buddhist meditation. God does answer my prayers, but the answer is in the form of fully formed, specific ideas - not any kind of "oneness with the universe". Any kind of non-specific feelings would be completely useless, since it does not provide advice that would be necessary to help one's spiritual walk with God.

Even if there were an area of the brain that might be involved in religious experiences, this idea does not prove that God is a creation of our brains. If God did create us, we would expect that He would provide a means by which we could experience Him. This area of the brain might be part of God's design to make us realize that we are more than just physical creatures. The Bible says that God has given us this knowledge of eternity, possibly involving some sort of "hard-wired" knowledge.17

Moral judgments: After Adam and Eve had sinned, they became like God in that they could distinguish good from evil.18 The ability to make moral judgments is also a characteristics that is found only in humans. Even the higher apes cannot make moral judgments about the behavior of other animals. As Dr. Jerome Kagan points out in Three Seductive Ideas, "Not even the cleverest ape could be conditioned to be angry upon seeing one animal steal food from another."19 In addition, there are no non-human animal models for human pride, shame, and guilt.20

Conclusion: In conclusion, it seems likely that "in the image of God" refers to the characteristics of the human spirit and the ability to make moral judgments - things that are not found in any animal species, even those to whom we are said to be closely related . Even evolutionists are beginning to recognize the uniqueness of human beings. Dr. Ian Tattersall, in Becoming Human - Evolution and Human Uniqueness, says humans represent a "totally unprecedented entity" on Earth, and "Homo sapiens is not simply an improved version of its ancestors - it's a new concept." It is the ability to make moral judgments that convinces us of our inability to "measure up" to the intended moral standards laid down by God.21 However, it is the spirit of man that allows us to communicate with God's Spirit through Jesus Christ22 so that we can once again be in fellowship with a Holy God23 and experience the ultimate relationship in the universe.

My cat is less evolved then I, but she is made in the image of God just as much as I am, or you.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
My cat is less evolved then I, but she is made in the image of God just as much as I am, or you.

That is blasphemy Shak.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That is blasphemy Shak.

You are out of your mind. Is that also blasphemy? All living things are precious in the eyes of God.

BTW thanks for giving the site also. 😄

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are out of your mind. Is that also blasphemy? All living things are precious in the eyes of God.

The preciousness of all living things is not what I describe as blasphemy nor is the preciousness of all living things the issue. But saying that an animal is created in "God's" image IS BLASPHEMY.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The preciousness of all living things is not what I describe as blasphemy nor is the preciousness of all living things the issue. But saying that an animal is created in "God's" image IS BLASPHEMY.

God is not outside of us or anything. Humans are animals like all animals, we are the same. So, all things are made in the image of God.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
God is not outside of us or anything. Humans are animals like all animals, we are the same. So, all things are made in the image of God.

Humans are not animals according to the Bible; therefore, animals are not created in the image of God.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Humans are not animals according to the Bible; therefore, animals are not created in the image of God.

The bible is wrong.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The bible is wrong.

You are entitled to your opinion. But I believe the Bible. Conversely, you believe in Buddhism.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You are entitled to your opinion. But I believe the Bible. Conversely, you believe in Buddhism.

But long ago I studied the Bible. I have read the bible from cover to cover. So, I know it well, or at least I used too.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The bible is wrong.

And animals have civilised conversations too i bet don't they 🙄

The Bible in this case is right, as always, for humans are the only 'animals' who can actually communicate and actually are intelligent, it's strange that after humans have been around for so long other animals haven't 'evolved' to be smarter, to fight back against the most killing creatures on earth.

Originally posted by O Green World
And animals have civilised conversations too i bet don't they 🙄

The Bible in this case is right, as always, for humans are the only 'animals' who can actually communicate and actually are intelligent, it's strange that after humans have been around for so long other animals haven't 'evolved' to be smarter, to fight back against the most killing creatures on earth.

My cat communicates with me all the time.