Evolution vs. Creation

[Redzeppelin]

Interesting poll.

I'm guessing by the almost 50% seeing creation that most posters are from USA? Amazing how many people have trouble separating fact (evolution) from fantasy (creation).

As an atheist, I have no problem with religion - live and let live is my motto - but creationism flies in the face of too many facts to be treated seriously.

Your assertion that creation if "fantasy" expresses an opinion and nothing else but - an opinion you cannot substantiate. Feel free to give examples of what "facts" creation "flies in the face of" so I can seriously consider them; then I'll throw out at you some of the sheer absurdities that science requires me to accept to explain reality without the causal agent of God. The only "fantasy" being entertained here IMO is the idea that we're the products of random, faceless chance - the odds of which occurring are so astronomical as to approach zero probability.

[hyperborean]

Your assertion that creation if "fantasy" expresses an opinion and nothing else but

Creation is not physical, and we live in a physical realm. Creation is fantasy...it's imagined.

[Redzeppelin]

Creation is not physical, and we live in a physical realm. Creation is fantasy...it's imagined.

Why do you force me to repeat to you what I just told another poster? Re-read my post above and pretend its addressed to you, because you basically said the same thing The Atheist said. How about adding something new?

[Adudaewen]

Howdy Adu,

Your last sentence, particularly the part in parentheses, proves hyper's point in my opinion. Why use a gun when you're omnipotent, omnicient, and eternal? Didn't the Christian god know it was going to eventually have to send its human form to earth to get nailed to the cross--even before it created the world?

I'm sure you got my sarcasm, but just to clarify that my sentence was meant very glibly.

How I understand God is that He gave us free will, so yes, I do believe He did know what could eventually happen. It was up to the decisions of Adam and Eve and all other offspring how it would all play out. He knows all roads, but it is up to us which road we take. That is my understanding of it.

[Matrim Cuathon]

the odds are not astronimical. you are looking at it the wrong way. tell me all the odds that you think add up to an astronomical chance.

[Wintermute]

I'm sure you got my sarcasm, but just to clarify that my sentence was meant very glibly.

How I understand God is that He gave us free will, so yes, I do believe He did know what could eventually happen. It was up to the decisions of Adam and Eve and all other offspring how it would all play out. He knows all roads, but it is up to us which road we take. That is my understanding of it.

Good Morning Adudaewen,

So, It (He) didn't know that Eve would take a bite of the apple? He (It) didn't know that it would be necessary to flood the entire world, killing an uncountable number of presumably innocent babies? He doesn't know whether I will eventually wind up in heaven or hell? I thought that was the definition of omicient. It's precisely these kinds of questions that keep me up here on the fence. In my 50 years on this planet, I've discussed this idea of 'free will' combined with an omncient creator on countless occasions with (mainly) Christians. I've yet to understand the reasoning. Perhaps I'm just doomed to a life of uncertainty

[hyperborean]

Why do you force me to repeat to you what I just told another poster? Re-read my post above and pretend its addressed to you, because you basically said the same thing The Atheist said. How about adding something new?

I repeat what is right. You can squirm around the truth as much as you want. Heaven and God are imaginary...they are imagined by man. We don't really know if it exists; faith tells us that it's there.

[B-Mental]

Hmm, there are some people here that haven't figured out...you aren't changing either of your opinions, and keep going around in circles. Rationality and debate don't exist on this thread. Hyp and RZ, should just agree to disagree. You both seem to have a love/hate relationship. Its almost as if this thread stays alive because you bicker...just my opinion.

[Adudaewen]

Good Morning Adudaewen,

So, It (He) didn't know that Eve would take a bite of the apple? He (It) didn't know that it would be necessary to flood the entire world, killing an uncountable number of presumably innocent babies? He doesn't know whether I will eventually wind up in heaven or hell? I thought that was the definition of omicient. It's precisely these kinds of questions that keep me up here on the fence. In my 50 years on this planet, I've discussed this idea of 'free will' combined with an omncient creator on countless occasions with (mainly) Christians. I've yet to understand the reasoning. Perhaps I'm just doomed to a life of uncertainty

Actually that is not my meaning at all. I posted "He knows all roads, but it is up to us which road we take." That's where free will comes into play. He knows all the paths we can take through our lives, He knows the outcomes of each. So, yes He did know all of those things, and does. Re-read my post, and I hope you'll better understand my meaning.

[Wintermute]

Actually that is not my meaning at all. I posted "He knows all roads, but it is up to us which road we take." That's where free will comes into play. He knows all the paths we can take through our lives, He knows the outcomes of each. So, yes He did know all of those things, and does. Re-read my post, and I hope you'll better understand my meaning.

Hey Adu,

No, I understand your meaning, and appreciate it. It just doesn't make sense to me. Why slaughter all those innocent babies when you already know you're gonna need to do it? Why not just start the universe from that point? Why force folks to go through all the pain and agony if you already know what the end result will be? I'd like to believe that if a universal creator exists, that it is nicer than the one we've been talking about--I sure hope so anyway.

[Adudaewen]

I certainly understand your point of view. I don't pretend to understand everything that has happened, nor do I have a crystal clear understanding of why God has done some of the things that He has done.
However, if you really break it down, the suffering and agony of humanity has been caused directly by humanity. Blaming God is a pretty understandable human reaction to the horrors and tragedy of the world. However, hate and fear, pain and suffering, all of these things are direct byproducts of sin.
I don't think that it is unreasonable for God to ask us to follow Him. All of the commandments He has given us keep us safe, allow us to live a good, full, productive life filled with love from Him and others. People in general have a habit of wanting do to whatever they want whenever they want it, and then complain about the consequences. If we just realize that everything we do is intimately connected with every other living being on this earth, we may start to rethink our desires. Sure, in theory, it would be great to just go out and drink and drug and have sex whenever the desire strikes us, and eat ourselves stupid, kill whoever annoys us and take whatever we want whether it belongs to someone else or not, but that doesn't really sound like a world I want to live in. I would rather live in a world guided by God than by man. As a species, we really don't make the best choices.
Along with free will comes responsibility. If we deny that responsibility, or abuse it, it leads to pain, loss and suffering.
The idea of a God that expects us to show responsibility, empathy, and love doesn't sound so bad to me.

[Redzeppelin]

the odds are not astronimical. you are looking at it the wrong way. tell me all the odds that you think add up to an astronomical chance.

In The Creator and the Cosmos, astrophysicist Hugh
Ross lists 25 parameters that must each fall within a very narrow range in order to make life possible (I have not time to list them all here); as well, Ross has a list of 32 other specific parameters that deal with out sun-moon-planet system. All of these parameters cannot exceed certain narrow limits if life is to be possible. Please tell me what you think the odds are that all these parameters happen to coincide and be just within the proper limits?

[Matrim Cuathon]

the universe has hundreds of billions of chances. there are theoretically at least

4x10^22 stars in the universe. (i think i got the notation right anyhow.)

[Lustandwine]

The unfortunate thing about probabilety is that, they cant be used to deny things. if there is a chance, it could have happened, if it could have happend in an Einstinian infinite universe it probably has happend somewere and hear could be that somewhere.

where as creation has no basis in epirical fact only in the bible and the harts of beleavers.

Christinas should not use maths to defend there stance, it is untenable. use Love, it is the one and only savign grace of the faith. logic falls apart when built on faith becuse it requies epirical evidence to be truly safe, somthing Creation can't provide.
a book writen by 100s of authors translated though aramaic to greek to latin to engish and german then to hundreds of other languages over centurys canot be used by a logical person as a fair representation of the facts, and as such should be used as a fable to explain the world.

Love x

[Redzeppelin]

The unfortunate thing about probabilety is that, they cant be used to deny things. if there is a chance, it could have happened, if it could have happend in an Einstinian infinite universe it probably has happend somewere and hear could be that somewhere.

So then why don't you tell me what the odds are that God exists/doesn't exist, so I can quote your statement above right back to you - since the same argument that allows the astronomical odds of big-bang/evolution should be comparable to the odds that a Divine Being exists.

where as creation has no basis in epirical fact only in the bible and the harts of beleavers.

Yes, let's talk "empirical facts," shall we? Evolution cannot be tested; it lacks real "evidence" and relies on circumstancial evidence that can be interpreted to mean a number of things; it must ultimately account for the existence of matter; both evolution and creationism require a "miracle" of sorts. In contrast, the complexity of life and "fine-tuning" of the solar system indicate the presence of a "designer" - a conclusion that is much more logical than the idea that blind force and random chance created such complexity and finely balanced conditions.

Christinas should not use maths to defend there stance, it is untenable. use Love, it is the one and only savign grace of the faith. logic falls apart when built on faith becuse it requies epirical evidence to be truly safe, somthing Creation can't provide.

The "safety" of empirical evidence is an illusion at worst, and only a reasonably stable foundation at best. Empiricism cannot encompass the entirely of reality.

a book writen by 100s of authors translated though aramaic to greek to latin to engish and german then to hundreds of other languages over centurys canot be used by a logical person as a fair representation of the facts, and as such should be used as a fable to explain the world.

Have you done your research, or is this hearsay? Your comment suggests you are passing along rumors. The integrity of the Bible is only questioned by those with clear agendas of anti-scriptural bias. Many reputable scholars have examined the texts and verified their impressive levels of textual integrity and reliability. The only fable being seriously absorbed these days is the entertaining tale that we came from pond scum that mutated eventually into a monkey, and SOMEHOW humans eventually developed. That's good science fiction, you betcha.