The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Evolutionary conundrums for believers > Comments

Evolutionary conundrums for believers : Comments

By Glen Coulton, published 23/1/2013

If God wanted hordes of us humans hanging out in heaven with him, why didn't he just put us there from the word go?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Pericles wrote:
"I consider that these sneering, ultra-cheap shots against people with religious beliefs reflect poorly on the writer."

Well, that's one way of pointing out why my question to believers was illogical. Another way would have been to explain where the logic failed. Perhaps in your next post?

"I consider that Sneering and taking ultra-cheap shots is not a sign of great intellect in my book. More like the weapons of choice of supercilious bullies."

As you have not claimed that the question was unworthy of being asked, perhaps you might explain, or better still demonstrate, how it could have been asked unsneeringly and without bullying. Perhaps you could also explain why asking people who press incredible beliefs to justify them is taking a cheap shot. What might be taking a cheap shot is pointing out that when you start an accusation with "I consider", it's a bit tautologous to end it with "in my book".

"I wonder why they bother, when the chances of actually having an impact on their presumed targets, religious believers, are precisely nil…"

Partly it's because, as the recent small flood of books by relieved ex-believers shows, there are many hoping for reassurance that it's alright to question the stories they were indoctrinated with as youngsters in their church, school and home
Posted by GlenC, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 8:21:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I enjoy reading articles like this but I do have a few thoughts:

1) It seems to me that a post like this helps reinforce those whose belief is shares, while those on the opposite side automatically claim it as "more athiest hatemail". I think most people, if they are susceptible to changing beliefs or views, are more likely to have that change hearing it from a friend or a trusted associate rather than an online blog, unless looking for that.

2) I think the problem with the writers assertion, although accurate, that the majority or average Christian religous beliefs can be summed up in those few contradictory points is that there might be some, even perhaps only one, religion or faith that believes differently or has a belief that isn't contradictory and could be classed as "The Truth". It is like saying that all Medical Science is a failure because in the end everyone dies anyway.

3) I know of many who believe in evolution yet will not accept and evolve with climate change rather they fight carbon poisoning and want us as a society to go backwards or stagnate

4) Evolution has the issue that no-one I have heard of (please correct if I am wrong) has witnessed or "was there" when some form of primate evolution occurred, whereas people have claimed to see God. One based on fact or seeing, the other based on theory or conclusion.

Thoughts?
Posted by RandomGuy, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 8:48:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hooray! Another tedious kick-sand-in-the-Christian-face atheist bully.

Your "conundrums" only exist if you presume a literalist biblical interpretation.
As usual, the atheist has (re)made God in his image, presuming if he, the atheist, is logical and literal, God and the Bible must be too.

“Everything, including human beings, was created by God according to his design.”

Really? The Bible says "design"?
And the “design” is fixed, static?

Cannot evolution be part of the design itself?
We don't know if the creatures "created" are the same that exist today.

“Human beings began with two first parents who, from the word go, looked as we look today.”

Actually, the intention was one man, Adam.
Eve was an afterthought.

Really? It says we looked simultaneously Negroid, Caucasoid *and* Mongoloid?
Cite the biblical *description* of these first humans.

“The first parents, and all their ancestors, had immortal souls. Lesser animals (sub-humans) don't.”

Really? It says that?
1 Corinthians 15:44 says anything with a natural body has a spiritual body.

Did God intend animals to have immortality, thought, free will?
If not, there's a different situation for animals and talk of souls, sin and heaven are irrelevant to them.

“[human] immortal souls would not have been able to access the eternity in heaven that God had intended them to enjoy”

He did? Or did that come later, after the plan was changed by the actions of Adam and Eve under free will?

He created *Eden* for Adam, not heaven.
All that other stuff wasn't mentioned until after the Fall.

“God decided that the way to redeem humans was to produce a son and have him crucified.”

Jesus wasn't manufactured *for* sacrifice. He already existed and consented.
Humans became sinful through free will, surely they must reverse this through free will.
Tick a box: Jesus, Yes or Jesus, No.
(BTW I have, for now, ticked the No box. Or more accurately, Don't Know).

“humans' right to an eternity in heaven was reinstated.”

Or gained.

“modern youngsters easily see holes in this account.”

And in your presumptuous, distorted presentation.
Posted by Shockadelic, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 9:05:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“why, if God wanted hordes [he initially created *one* man] of us humans hanging out in heaven [in Eden] with him, he didn't just put us there"

He wanted angels in heaven (and even they had free will, see "Satan, demons"), Man on Earth (one man, Adam).

“why he needed to put us through a testing process called "life" to find out if we were worthy of him.”

Worthy of “paradise”.

He didn't want a robot.
He wanted someone to love and be loved by.

“children he causes/allows to die before they've had a chance to use their free will.”

Were children part of the plan? Eve wasn't.

You're presuming God has the same standards for naive children and aware adults. The bible say this?
Is says God is just and forgiving. I'm sure kids get a bit more leeway.

“make everyone other than the original offenders responsible for a sin committed before they were even born.”

We pass on a physical legacy (e.g. deformities), why not a metaphysical one?

“humans did not begin with two first parents who looked like us from the word go.”

It says we were made in God's image, not our contemporary image.

“evolving slowly over millions of years from ancestors we now happily categorise as sub-human.”

We know of primate fossil specimens (often only a tooth or toe to speculate about).
Are they “us” or just extinct animals?

“a creature who was the first to evolve enough to be classified by God as truly human and provided with a soul”

Maybe that's another way of interpreting the “creation” of Adam.
Did God set the evolution ball rolling and one day, hmmm, that one shows remarkable promise?

“how will God explain to that creature that there is no point joining the search [for] its parents?”

I'm sure Adam was aware of this “origins”.

“how do you explain it to your children today?”

Children want theological analysis?
They just like the pretty pictures of arks and angels.

Reminder Memo for Knee-Jerkers: I'm not Christian, I just can't stand pathetic atheist bullies.
Posted by Shockadelic, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 9:20:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Randomguy wrote:
'Evolution has the issue that no-one I have heard of (please correct if I am wrong) has witnessed or "was there" when some form of primate evolution occurred, whereas people have claimed to see God. One based on fact or seeing, the other based on theory or conclusion.'

If you are not prepared to believe evidence of what happened millions of years ago unless you hear it from someone who was there at the time, you will have to reject everything we know about our pre-history.

If you are not prepared to accept accounts of what Jesus said unless you have the written assurance of an eye witness, then you will have to reject every statement attributed to him in the Bible.

If you think that sightings of God are factual, then what about John 1:18 which says, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him"?
Posted by GlenC, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 9:24:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles. Your right on this one. "Modern" youngsters boned up on evolution disproving religion. Pity they do not Google BOTH sides.

Nominalist Catholics seem to think they do not cause evil in the world and everyone goes to Heaven. This is errant Catholic teaching from 1970s. Using Kantian Imperative, de Chardin and that baloney. Where is Thomistic philosophical and theological clarity of old? Never taught them. Reminds one of the Screwtape Letters.

How can it be fair play to make us responsible for other people's sins? You better hope its so, otherwise one might be in trouble oneself. Others put up with impacts of your sins, and bear suffering.

Sure we are not descended from two first parents? Heard of genetics or Mitochondrial Eve? (circa 1987) Religious have a strong scientific bone here. Even articles from 2013, for later relevance. How does later time factor make it more intelligent/truthful? Whig version of history? Ahh..1970s history curriculum.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v431/n7008/full/nature02842.html
http://io9.com/5878996/how-mitochondrial-eve-connected-all-humanity-and-rewrote-human-evolution
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/mitoeve.html
http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt109.html
http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt100.html

Pooh-pooh intelligent design all you like, but first read the scientific articles of Michael Behe, Antony Flew and co.
http://www.discovery.org/p/31
http://www.amazon.com/Answering-New-Atheism-Dismantling-Dawkins/dp/1931018480

God did put first parents in a perfect place of happiness originally. Garden of Eden, wasn't it? Heaven on earth?

The first parents in causing Original Sin gave us the life testing. There is Love. It requires free-will. We're also a race, not a bunch of individuals. I am happy to claim I am a member of the human race. In the words of Captain Kirk "I need my pain", at least for now.

With God all knowing, He can easily understand the state of a unborn child and their worthiness for heaven, before use of free will. What person does not believe in concupscience in any case?

Catholic Theology and Philosophy is actually logical, rational, and extremely well thought out. I think the author has not studied it fully. One cannot find reconciliation in lawsuits. We all need to learn to forgive, and to find and accept forgiveness. That is Human.
Posted by aga, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 9:39:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy