Happy Atheist Forum

I've noticed that an increasing amount of people say that they believe in God and Evolution. The claim is that these two concepts are compatible ideas.

What do you guys think about this novel idea?

Hmmm...

I can only see two routes for this line of thinking:

1) Intelligent Design / Intelligent Origin Theory (ID/IOT)

or

2) God created the universe and governing laws that control evolution, then he went "hands off"

I'm an Agnostic Theist, and I've got a major problem with ID/IOT.
Option 2 doesn't violate any physical laws, but that is only because it predates the universe as we know it.

Not sure I buy either one.
JoeActor

I think this is a great step forward. It means that people, even more conservative ones, are abandoning the 'universe was made in 7 days' ideology. This change is significant, because it shows a widespread departure from belief in ancient superstition to modern views based on scientific observation. In my opinion this is extremely encouraging that we're advancing further toward rationalism. As science continues to advance, hopefully more superstitious belief will be abandoned.

Quote from: "myleviathan"I think this is a great step forward. It means that people, even more conservative ones, are abandoning the 'universe was made in 7 days' ideology. This change is significant, because it shows a widespread departure from belief in ancient superstition to modern views based on scientific observation. In my opinion this is extremely encouraging that we're advancing further toward rationalism. As science continues to advance, hopefully more superstitious belief will be abandoned.

That's a very encouraging way to look at it - much appreciated!
BTW, I just noticed your avatar is Frylock (yeah, I'm a bit slow on the uptake...)

Shake-zula,
JoeActor

Quote from: "joeactor"

Quote from: "myleviathan"BTW, I just noticed your avatar is Frylock (yeah, I'm a bit slow on the uptake...)

Shake-zula,
JoeActor

Yep - I'm an Aqua Teen freak. I'm wearing an Er shirt right now.

It's really vague, but one could interpret Genesis as an introduction to the history of the universe.

QuoteIn the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Existence came into being.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the first day.

The Big Bang and formation of the first stars.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the second day.

Formation of planets and other heavenly bodies.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

Liquid water develops from the cooling of the crust and covers most of the surface of the planet.

QuoteThen God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the third day.

Abiogenesis, single cell organisms, aquatic multi-cellular life.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lightsâ€"the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the fourth day.

The atmosphere finally cleared of dust.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the fifth day.

Oops. Looks like the bible isn't familiar with the development of flying organisms.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Life moved from the oceans to land as the O2 in the atmosphere finally allowed for non-aquatic life.

QuoteThen God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Probably either cro-magnons or homo sapiens.

QuoteGod blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

Human's gained sentience.

QuoteThen God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the groundâ€"everything that has the breath of life in itâ€"I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

Humans shifted from hunter-gatherer to agrarian.

It's a big stretch, of course, but theists don't usually have trouble with stretching reality to it's breaking point and beyond in order to accommodate their beliefs.

wow water was created before light and the earth before stars.

"Waters" in this case could refer to the membrane of reality. I can't really explain the earth thing.

How about a cell membrane? The earth is the cell, man. Yeah. Funyuns!!

(Half-Baked quote in case you're wondering)

Quote from: "Willravel"

QuoteIn the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

water and puffy clouds

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the first day.

light diffused in the atmosphere independent of stars. light is turned on and turned off like a switch, no sun or stars needed.

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the second day.

ocean depths and the blue sky

QuoteAnd God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

land after water?  

QuoteThen God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the third day.

carbon dioxide?

QuoteAnd God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lightsâ€"the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morningâ€"the fourth day.

the moon does not create its own light. The sun was not created after the earth.

Quote from: "Martian"I've noticed that an increasing amount of people say that they believe in God and Evolution. The claim is that these two concepts are compatible ideas.

What do you guys think about this novel idea?

I think it's a pitiful compromise that serves neither religion, nor science. The idea exists, in my opinion, because religion, especially christianity, finds itself hemmed in more and more by scientific discovery. Some members of christian churches do realize that pure creationism is hopeless drivel, and are therefore trying to come up with a way to hold onto their god and live in a world where science continues answering previously unanswered questions regarding life and origins.

But it's a no-win situation. Their "expanded" views of creationism (I.D.) are already being shown to be a load of hooey. The idea of tying god into evolution is just another dead end.

By definition of either, god and science are mutually exclusive, so that's why think it's an untenable idea.

They aren't really compatible because one is a natural process and the other is a fantasy.  However, I feel encouraged by this step among religious folk.  After they start accepting reality in some instances they hadn't before it makes the distance to embracing reality a tiny bit shorter.  The more religionists think this way the fewer will be fighting the teaching of evolution, geology, and plate tectonics in schools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution)

Quote from: "Wiki"Theistic evolution, less commonly known as evolutionary creationism, is the general opinion that some or all classical religious teachings about God and creation are compatible with some or all of the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. Theistic evolution is not a theory in the scientific sense, but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to some religious interpretations. In this way, theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who deny the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science; that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not be contradictory.

The term was used by National Center for Science Education executive director Eugenie Scott to refer to the part of the overall spectrum of beliefs about creation and evolution holding the theological view that God creates through evolution. It covers a wide range of beliefs about the extent of any intervention by God, with some approaching deism in rejecting continued intervention. Others see intervention at critical intervals in history in a way consistent with scientific explanations of speciation, but with similarities to the ideas of Progressive Creationism that God created "kinds" of animals sequentially.[1]

Although I hate the "God" part, I like it that some christians started believing in evolution. At least its one small step forward in understanding the world as it is

Quote from: "Martian"I've noticed that an increasing amount of people say that they believe in God and Evolution. The claim is that these two concepts are compatible ideas.

What do you guys think about this novel idea?

It really is not a novel idea. Outside the USA, theistic evolution is the norm, and has been for well over a century. In fact, it is polarisation that is novel, and the strange thing is that it is not long since atheists rejected American fundamentalists as mere 'liars for Christ'. It is pretty plain that nobody believes in evolution like an American Young-Earth Creationist, so transparent are the lies they put into print.

The Anglican Darwin saw no conflict, neither did his Presbyterian botanist friend Asa Gray. Evolution was a much mooted idea even before Darwin set sail. His grandfather Erasmus Darwin had without controversy proposed that evolution had taken place, and had supposed that 'the Great Architect' was responsible. It was only after publication of 'The Origin' that controversy developed between scientists and senior Anglican churchmen. The reason for this much-publicised spat is uncertain. It may be that it was feared that a non-literal interpretation of Genesis 1 jeopardised the Anglican reliance on Sunday observance, which was still then used as means of social influence on working English people. And perhaps it did, because the influence of the CoE certainly gradually waned thereafter, though there were undoubtedly other contributory factors. But the CoE had come to terms with evolution within two decades, as had continental Protestantism. It is just over-religious America that has the problem now.

Quote from: "rdm"It really is not a novel idea. Outside the USA, theistic evolution is the norm, and has been for well over a century. In fact, it is polarisation that is novel, and the strange thing is that it is not long since atheists rejected American fundamentalists as mere 'liars for Christ'. It is pretty plain that nobody believes in evolution like an American Young-Earth Creationist, so transparent are the lies they put into print.

(I probably should have mentioned that I'm talking about the Christian God when I use the term "God".)

This is a strange phenomena. I've been searching on the web for explainations that justify the belief in the Biblical God (as divinely inspired from God)  and evolution, but I have not found anything other than the usual "God can use evolution to create." This seems like a direct contradiction. It's like saying God used gravity to create rain.

There are usually other points which are made that confuse the argument.
It's true that the bible isn't a science book. But who's asking it give scientific explainations?
It's true that evolution is compatible with Deism (and maybe some other god concepts that I don't care to discuss). But we're talking about the Biblical God concept, which isn't compatible with evolution.
It's true that the bible uses allegory. But Genesis serves no allegorical purpose.
It's (possibly) true that the majority of Christians around the world believe in evolution. But where's their justification for doing so?

The contradiction between the bible and evolution exists and I want an explaination of how the two ideas can be accepted at once. You seem to be knowledgeable of the history of evolution and Christianity. Could you explain what's going on here?

Quote from: "Martian"

Quote from: "rdm"It really is not a novel idea. Outside the USA, theistic evolution is the norm, and has been for well over a century. In fact, it is polarisation that is novel, and the strange thing is that it is not long since atheists rejected American fundamentalists as mere 'liars for Christ'. It is pretty plain that nobody believes in evolution like an American Young-Earth Creationist, so transparent are the lies they put into print.

(I probably should have mentioned that I'm talking about the Christian God when I use the term "God".)

This is a strange phenomena. I've been searching on the web for explainations that justify the belief in the Biblical God (as divinely inspired from God)  and evolution, but I have not found anything other than the usual "God can use evolution to create." This seems like a direct contradiction. It's like saying God used gravity to create rain.

There are usually other points which are made that confuse the argument.
It's true that the bible isn't a science book. But who's asking it give scientific explainations?
It's true that evolution is compatible with Deism (and maybe some other god concepts that I don't care to discuss). But we're talking about the Biblical God concept, which isn't compatible with evolution.
It's true that the bible uses allegory. But Genesis serves no allegorical purpose.
It's (possibly) true that the majority of Christians around the world believe in evolution. But where's their justification for doing so?

The contradiction between the bible and evolution exists and I want an explaination of how the two ideas can be accepted at once. You seem to be knowledgeable of the history of evolution and Christianity. Could you explain what's going on here?

There are many believers who are scientists, often biologists, and they are often good scientists, and able to argue cogently about their beliefs, too. They believe in evolution for the same reasons that everyone else does. Now they do not believe that there is any conflict between ET and Genesis, because it is plain, to them, that early Genesis is not a literal account. They say it is a collection of 'story myths'. Story myths were universal in all civilised societies of the ancient world, from China to the Americas, and they dealt with such things as creation, great feats by gods, great human feats, floods, wars, monsters, etc. They persisted into relatively modern times with such epic tales as Beowulf. Now if regarded as science, or history, none of them make any sense at all. The ancients just did not care about science, because they did not have any. We are very concerned with it, because we rely on it for our very survival. They were entirely at the mercy of primitive agriculture and technology, prone to whatever the elements might throw at them, drought and flood, and pestilence and dangerous animals also. Because of their helplessness, they got guilt feelings, and thought that they were responsible when things went wrong, and answerable to various gods, gods that they had of course invented. Hence all these attempts to come to terms with a dangerous world, through stories. They could tell their children these stories and give them a sense of stability and order, and to explain how things came to be as they were. These stories and their telling acted as social 'glue'. That was their real meaning. Whether anyone really believed them is hard to say. There is not too much evidence that they did. There were rarely wars to decide which story myth was the right one.

So it is inappropriate to suppose that these ancient creation accounts and other accounts are to be taken as literal truth, because it is to apply anachronism.

Now if, as believers claim, there is a true deity who adapted some of these story myths for his own purposes, and if they can claim that there is moral or religious significance in these myths, objections from evolutionary theory, or indeed from any scientific field, will fall on deaf ears- and they do. Because, despite your comment, they do find moral and religious significance in them. The creation of light and dark represent good and evil, the seventh day represents an eternal rest, a serpent represents Satan, a tree represents eternal life, the ark of Noah represents Christ saving souls, and so on.

To believers, then, a concept of a deity who creates matter/energy in space-time which then evolves into the universe as we find it brings no difficulties.