evolutin theory and genesis are all myth. theory of evolution is the way of man how to discover the creation of God and Genesis the responce of the sacred writer when God inpires him to tell people that He is existing its obvious that man`s intelligent cannot reach God`s intellectual no one can reach God`s intellectual but all wisdom intellegent and discovery of man cause by the effect of the primary cause which is God itself. were not creator were only the one who discover Gods creation
Another thing I was thinking is, if a infantecimal speck of matter of infinite density exploded with infinate force to create our universe, and then RNA came from that, well how the heck do we account for all the variety of rocks and gems in the earth? I was working in a mining company's head office and saw gems of brown, pink, blue, purple, green, coppers, golds, and diamonds etc. just puzzled as to why they're so bright and various!
Do you know that for generations to have variation, those mutations must happen in mitosis or meiosis (sex sells) only? So a mutation is completely blind and happens in your nuts.
With no direction, mutations would be predominately debilitating or just silly. Across the world in all the millions of kinds of animals numbering in the trillions I see nothing with a paper shredder on its forehead--never once.
Where does information come from? Evolution is not the right answer. Not for this world
It's my understanding that the gametes are produced from the somatic cells, so the mutation doesn't have to happen during meiosis because the mutation will exist within the body cells. I believe that's one of the ways in which ERVs are passed along.
New information can enter the genome by non-disjunction, polyploidy, or gene duplication. The superfluous genes can then be worked on by mutation and natural selection to produce more useful mutations.
So you're telling me that the new interpretation of a literal Genesis is true because the new guys tell you so and because they want you to do so, even though a literal Genesis goes against all common sense and rationality? If you haven't see lately, Science has crippled Young Earth Creationism, and to consider the church fathers like Augustine of hippo as people not preserving scripture compared to modern evangelicals is outrageous.
Nearly all Jews in the time of Jesus took Genesis allegorically, the ones that took it literally were considered heretics. If you do an extensive study on ancient history of judaism, it has and always have been taken literally. As for Christian thought, this went the same, the church fathers Oregon and St Augustine of Hippo also took Genesis allegorically. That's the nature of interpreting scripture, the new literal thing is relatively new.
The Theory of Evolution or its intrinsic principles, e.g., natural selection, applied to philosophical, sociological, linguistic, anthropological concepts?
Linguistics? Check again on that one. Linguistics may be a quasi-science but the evolutionary model falls short of anything but genetic variation: i.e., it falls short of explaining our languages.
Don't take my word for it though (as I am 100% positive you wont even give it a second thought)
No one is saying Jesus denied the story of Genesis, Jesus did take it allegorically, furthermore you haven't disproven me. All you have done is ad ominems, something Jesus would disapprove of.
instead of insulting me and calling me a liar and a fraud, prove it, you're a typical hypocritical YEC.
Yes, Agustine did mention what you said, but he gave many more interpretations of Genesis, and that was the whole point. He was making an emphasis on how the story of Genesis wil never be understood completely as literal context.
Furthermore calling me a liar and a fraud is disrespectful, attacking my opinion the way yuou do is not Christ like. Jesus would disapprove of what you do, especially because even Jesus took Genesis allegorically.
it's embarrassing to me that the neo cons and fundamentalist have yet to to come to grips with the reality of evolution, to me it's so blatantly clear.
though i believe that the emergent church is catching on rather quickly, hopefully soon enough to raise the consciousness of the body of christ before the greater mass sinks into complete denial.
Fundamentalist Christians are heretics, the orthodox church and early church fathers took Genesis alleorgically rather than literally. Go back to Jesus' time and take genesis literally and you'll get aughed at by even the most prominent theologians of ancient times. Look at St. Augustine for example.
Next, Evolutionary theory in fact helped religion, after the theory was published Religion actually grew more powerful, ironic huh? Darwin was also a Deist/Agnostic, and rejected Atheism.
I said that I agreed that temptations could be passed down from generation to generation, not that I believe in macro evolution. And yes, the council AGREED upon it, they did not DECIDE it though. Let me ask you this: In the New Testament, the disciples died for their belief that Jesus dies and rose again. If God is a metaphor for reality, why did they do this?
Some science definitely does explain the Bible more and back up the claims of the Bible more. Evolution doesn't though (and I don't call evolution science personally because enough research reveals that every thing it is backed up by is false).
Well I'm not gonna argue that temptations are or aren't evolutionary in the sense that they can be passed on. In fact I do agree with you to some degree. However that doesn't explain where the first ones came from. See if God is good and everything that he made was good, then temptations did not exist when he declared his creations "good". That is why there MUST be a start somewhere.
You're definitely right. I had forgotten about the passage of scripture where God opens the donkey's mouth. However I'm pretty sure that this was meant to be taken literally. I've never heard of someone dying in a vision and then being dead in reality just cause of the vision. Besides, if God is all powerful then he can make the donkey talk. I will google hermeneutics though! Thanks a lot for the tip! :)
Why not take the Genesis account literally? "Snakes don't literally talk in gardens." The Bible never mentions (as far as I know) any other animal talking. Satan either possessed the snake or he may have come in the form of the snake. Either way it would then be possible for the snake to talk. If you read in the New Testament where Demons possess men, it is the demons who talk and not the men. If this was personification of temptation, where did the temptations start?
I guess I'm a pantheist because I believe in Evolution but I also believe God or Energy or Consciousness is in every living thing. I don't believe God can be defined from some man-made book. I do believe in the linear process of evolution but that there is a recycling of energy all the time without time even existing in the process.
I'm not gonna try to get into a debate with you (unless of course you want to. It seems you're already busy with that though) but I would like to point out one thing. You mentioned that you don't see how creationism/intelligent design is spiritual and you said that you don't think it has anything to do really with the religion.Well, the reason it does (and I don't have enough room in this comment box to go in depth)is because if Genesis is open to errs, the entire Bible now is.Genesis=foundation
just agreeing when i see a good comment:) dont see many of those anymore so you gotta have somebodys back when they actually do say something good:) i dont like when i only get negative feedback so your welcome:) have a nice day:)
Myth and science approach the nature of reality from different angles. Science alone cannot give us a complete picture of human experience. Myth gives us the deep, archetypal structures that support the more detailed knowledge produced by science.
That still doesn't answer how the two can possibly work together any conflicts. Evolution requires millions of years. Creation says 6 days. That's a major conflict.
A lot of people think that maybe there was progressive evolution. Actually this causes problems in scripture. Had there been millions of years in creation so that evolution can take place, that would mean that by the time creation was complete, millions of animals would have died. According to scripture, death is the result of sin which came later after creation was complete and Adam and Eve ate from the tree they were commanded not to eat from. So this actually wouldn't work with scripture.
Maybe what that refers to is that death only became conscious for Adam after he had sinned. It's not that animals didn't die, its that death was no big deal until awareness of self developed in humans.
No the Bible's pretty clear that death didn't happen until after the fall of man (when Adam and Eve sinned). Besides, if you study the Hebrew language that the Bible was written in, it is quite clear that the 6 days of creation refer to a literal 24 hour day.
@0ThouArtThat0 I think it can be deeper then that, I'm not sure it was talking about physical death but a spiritual death in which we need to come back to god to heal and make stronger, and as fare as days go it can't be days as we know it I believe the bible says Adam lived for a 1000 years and God told him he would day that day so.
I find the concept is an overview of all religions.
I think God is not done, in a sense... he's done creating but still involved in his creation (the universe, not just "us")
I want your opinion on a post I made a while back before I ever heard of this book or it's author. It was an epiphany that came to me on my own, but I feel totally agrees with the book. I intend to buy and read it at some point.
1. Natural selection is a brutal and ruthless process. (Any "God" directing it is a capricious, blundering psychopath)
2. God is an absurd delusion.
3. We are all primates - narcissistic, ego-stroking, myopic, flawed, self-deceiving primates - and we have indulged in creation myths since the beginning of history.
I would rather face the truth than celebrate a lie, but I disagree with you about the nature of evolution. I don't think it is all ruthless, because natural selection, while an aspect of it, is not the only one.
I personally believe in the innate depavity of man. But don't forget - behind every cynic is a disappointed idealist.
RE evolution: The blindness to suffering exhibited by natural selection is breathtaking. (C.f. the ichneumonidae). Nature isn't nice. And homo sapiens is a nasty business - as much as all of us would like to think otherwise.
It's not always nasty, but there is simply too much inexorable pain, suffering, and tragedy inherent in the human condition and the animal kingdom.
Lambecome, so basically you decline any form of "God" based on your creed that "God" is pure and nature is not. Well, I tend to believe that IF God exists, he would be waiting to see if anything is BROKEN and needs serious fixing...Anything being made will not be perfect by the nature of being incomplete. So you look at a flawed world and see no God. But try looking broader into the realms of ideas. What if God exists? Then who says he isn't testing out what he made?
I'm sorry - I am so utterly sick of debating the topic of religion and "God" than I can only sigh. Believe in what you want, just be happy, have a nice life, and follow this commandment: thou shall keep thy religion to thyself.
I'm going to have to agree do disagree on the things you disagree with me with. :)
Jesus Christ died to save our souls from the inevitable separation from God. The revelation will be complete when God creates a new heaven and new earth. If there is no hell to save us from, Jesus died for nothing.
Hell (specifically Hades or Sheol) exist as a dwelling place ruled by the one who causes death; this is a place for torment of human souls. Death is torment of the soul. When God's revelation is complete; the final judgment for all that is apart from him will be thrown in the lake of fire; this is the true hell. Satan will soon be judged by God and he is jealous of all human souls and takes pleasure in misleading them so that he can have redemption in your torment.
The bible suggests the immanence of God living within us through Christ and Holy Spirit; meditation on his inspired word gives us a better understanding of the nature of his existence. Our bodies are destructible hosts to our indestructible soul. Meaning the body is of matter but the soul stays intact when the body is recycled.
Matter exists as the biggest grandfather clock that is set on a universal time scale; it is also a cocoon to protect us from Gods glory until we are ready to be in his eternal presence. In essence; you are still a fetus; if you do not live on God's word; you become malnourished and incapable of a healthy birth in death. God is not done actually; he will finish what he started after his revelation is complete.
I am rather playful with my use of religious metaphor. So far as I am aware, Christ and Satan are both metaphors for, simply put, Love and Hate respectively. I'll look that book up now.
Eternity can't switch, by why can't God be both good and evil? Why not see Christ and Satan as the right and left hand of God?
Without both good and evil, nothing would ever happen. Both of these forces are required for anything interesting to occur. Without strife, there is no harmony. Without suffering, there is no joy.
not just matter is a loop, all of reality is a loop. "before" and "after" have only relative meaning. the cosmos doesn't maintain itself; it constantly recreates itself, the same way bodies do, by constantly dying and being reborn.
Humans, in the flesh, have no direct way to continue to build on to the universe. Humans live in a huge sandbox of existing matter that God created. I believe that everything God created is complete; for now; he said "it's good."
My hypothesis is that matter has a static existence; it can not be destroyed or created by human. Nothing new will be created for awhile according to my theistic point of view; for now matter can only transpose into new things; this is why Eastern religions believe in reincarnation. Matter can be broken and reused over and over again in new material.
Everything that humans "make" is made out of something that already existed since the beginning of time.
I suppose I like my spirituality a bit more immanent than the standard Biblical story. If God's creation was complete, it would have no need for God anymore.
The material world is an ongoing creative process. That creativity is what I would call spirit. It is not separate from the matter, but serves to organize it. I don't know what you mean about nothing being eternal leading to nihilism.
I disagree with you about the relation between happiness and sadness.
There is no beginning or ending. Reality is loopy.
Why do you need a "creative process" for matter to change? There is nothing creative about mating, rocks crumbling into sand, supernovas, or black holes. Also, matter is not "in the process of being created" all matter has existed since the big bang, all it does is change form. It just doesn't pop up whenever it feels like it.
yes no energy can be created or destroyed, but it can transform, which it does through matter, which becomes life, which evolves and complexifies. The creativity is about new forms, not new substance.
0ThouArtThat0: But then where does creativity come in? And why call it spirit? You say that the spirit (creativity) is a part of matter which serves to organize it. The laws of nature serves to organize matter, where's the need for "creative spirit" in a process which is completely govenrned by strict laws?
We call them "laws," but they are better termed habits imo. Everything we know about the evolution of the cosmos tells us that "laws" are in a constant state of development from the big bang until today. The emergence of life is a great example. Nothing in physics tells us that atoms and molecules could come alive as organisms. And we have no way of predicting what life may become. We are part of an ongoing creative process where new levels emerge unexpectedly.
Habits can be broken, laws cannot. Do you find yourself released from the habbit of gravity occationally? Life was not created from atoms but from self-replicating molecules. Our existence relies entirely on the constancy of the laws of physics. "We have no way of predicting what life may become", yes we do. If two dogs mate the result is another dog, there I predicted what life became. You seem to assert that life consciously change itself from a desire to do so, why?
Habits can be broken, but some take quite a while to break free of. Gravity is being changed by "dark energy" (whatever it turns out to be) as the cosmos continues to evolve. No, I am not suggesting life can consciously change itself. I am suggesting that we cannot predict what forms life will take thousands, especially millions of years from now. Even Darwin knew this, as he talked about "preadaptation," which today is called exaptation. Physics consists of stable, but not eternal habits.
I don't explain the problem of evil. The perspective discussed in this video says quite explicitly that the material world has not been "created." Matter is still in the process of being created. It may never be finished, at least not anywhere else but where it began. Suffering is only possible because of joyful living. They are part of the bargain. Genuine creativity requires being vulnerable to tragic delusion. All marriages end in death. But death is not other than birth,
Interesting thoughts. I think you're right that the universe isn't done creating itself. All the energy and matter just keeps evolving over time. The god part is confusing, though. When you say god are you referring to a creator or to the universe itself?
Creationists don't see "creation" as mechanistic at all.They see God actively in involved in creation and in their lives i.e. miracles.Perhaps intellectual creationists make those arguments from their heads but are not part and parcel of the "spirituality" of "creation" of most creationists.From my view, trying to "marry" science and religion is going to end up in divorce and then a "remarrying" of new religion with a new science.Seriel Monogamy and seriel scienotoreligiousity together again!
But even creationists see nature as "created," as though it were an artifact which was designed from afar. God, in this view, is above and beyond nature, not immanent within it. This is similar to hard line materialism; all you have to do is replace God with transcendent physical laws.
God is not in nature. He is not to be found there. To God the universe hardly exists....he is only interested in personalities....that would be ...you.
Matt: You're on the correct path toward truth. Yes, the universe and you are evolving at this moment. Strange as it sounds, when I had contact with celestials beings in 1995 they confirm this fact. [It's all spelled out in extreme detail in the Urantia Book which is a huge work of celestial revelation.] Also, the spirit realm and celestial personalities are very real. When I found this out it was a big shock to me and still is.
Secondly, most people have no idea what is going on in the so-called invisible realms of this planet, yet alone the entire universe. When I found out the why of human life on this planet it was a big surprise but a good one.
5 star favorite. Thanks for the links and showing the book. Something deep within me relaxes as i hear you talk about this - it feels like truth, so refreshing.
Do you believe in God as in a creator? I'm really curious if you have a position and if you'd care to share your reasoning... if you've already covered it in video that still represents your position might save you some effort. You were kinda hedging in your g0at challenge vid. :-)
Let me clarify. I'm onboard with your view of immanent creation. But did something external create that which is immanently created? IE something that could change that process and with it our very physical laws and history?
I do not believe in a personal God. But I do relate very strongly to the idea that ours is a spiritual cosmos, and by that I mean it is a cosmos suffused with meaning, mystery, and creativity. Did something external create what is immanently created... short answer: I don't know. But like I said in the video, I do not relate to our world as though it were "created." It is still and for all I know will always be in a continual process of creation.
That said, of course there is something that can change this process, one we naively (I think) refer to as controlled by "physical laws." If you take evolution seriously, there is no such thing as a "law." There are only habits, whether genetic or atomic. The whole cosmos is evolving. The "something" that can change history is immanent; that is, every particle, every molecule, every organism, and especially every human being is capable of changing the world.
If you look at how the Universe appears, what we appear to be, and what we appear to be doing as societies, humans, animals, material forms, there seems to be something drawing us into particular habits. From this it might be possible to deduce what that might be outside of implicate orders. This path seems to lead to the simulation argument on top of a hyper-time co-creation. Dream within a dream. Turtles all the way down.
When dealing with these kinds of ultimate questions, like "what lies outside the cosmos?", I think the only reasonable way to discuss it is in terms of paradox. As Alan Watts put it, "the way in is the way out." I have a feeling (a vague one, though I'm working on sharpening it) that the perception of a vast and empty universe "out there" is rather misleading. Maybe when our human bodies die, we will find out how exactly it is that the only outside is inside, and the only inside outside, etc.
I'm not sure it has to be a paradox. It's definitely a puzzle. Entry and exit are definitely major clues, and study of that is a one way ticket to Mysticism. Real mysticism, not Nick's brand. The fact is that there are very real spiritual dynamics which are patently ignored by 98% of scientists because you can't measure a feeling, an intuition, or a whimsy.
Those who think the author of Genesis meant to assert that an external God created the Universe in a seven day period are the real problem with our culture. Both theists and atheists who believe this are misinterpreting it. Tragic ignorance.
very good video!
TheYoungTurds1 1 year ago
evolutin theory and genesis are all myth. theory of evolution is the way of man how to discover the creation of God and Genesis the responce of the sacred writer when God inpires him to tell people that He is existing its obvious that man`s intelligent cannot reach God`s intellectual no one can reach God`s intellectual but all wisdom intellegent and discovery of man cause by the effect of the primary cause which is God itself. were not creator were only the one who discover Gods creation
periot123 1 year ago
Another thing I was thinking is, if a infantecimal speck of matter of infinite density exploded with infinate force to create our universe, and then RNA came from that, well how the heck do we account for all the variety of rocks and gems in the earth? I was working in a mining company's head office and saw gems of brown, pink, blue, purple, green, coppers, golds, and diamonds etc. just puzzled as to why they're so bright and various!
drewsiferdrew 2 years ago
Keep studying! Just don't be afraid to ask any question to your profs or to yourself especially.
drewsiferdrew 2 years ago
Do you know that for generations to have variation, those mutations must happen in mitosis or meiosis (sex sells) only? So a mutation is completely blind and happens in your nuts.
With no direction, mutations would be predominately debilitating or just silly. Across the world in all the millions of kinds of animals numbering in the trillions I see nothing with a paper shredder on its forehead--never once.
Where does information come from? Evolution is not the right answer. Not for this world
drewsiferdrew 2 years ago
It's my understanding that the gametes are produced from the somatic cells, so the mutation doesn't have to happen during meiosis because the mutation will exist within the body cells. I believe that's one of the ways in which ERVs are passed along.
New information can enter the genome by non-disjunction, polyploidy, or gene duplication. The superfluous genes can then be worked on by mutation and natural selection to produce more useful mutations.
Zdrazy 2 years ago
@jedimasterbooboo:
So you're telling me that the new interpretation of a literal Genesis is true because the new guys tell you so and because they want you to do so, even though a literal Genesis goes against all common sense and rationality? If you haven't see lately, Science has crippled Young Earth Creationism, and to consider the church fathers like Augustine of hippo as people not preserving scripture compared to modern evangelicals is outrageous.
ogirv101 2 years ago
@jedimasterbooboo:
Nearly all Jews in the time of Jesus took Genesis allegorically, the ones that took it literally were considered heretics. If you do an extensive study on ancient history of judaism, it has and always have been taken literally. As for Christian thought, this went the same, the church fathers Oregon and St Augustine of Hippo also took Genesis allegorically. That's the nature of interpreting scripture, the new literal thing is relatively new.
ogirv101 2 years ago
The Theory of Evolution or its intrinsic principles, e.g., natural selection, applied to philosophical, sociological, linguistic, anthropological concepts?
Zdrazy 2 years ago
Linguistics? Check again on that one. Linguistics may be a quasi-science but the evolutionary model falls short of anything but genetic variation: i.e., it falls short of explaining our languages.
Don't take my word for it though (as I am 100% positive you wont even give it a second thought)
drewsiferdrew 2 years ago
Hehe.
What, exactly, is 'Evolutionism?'
Zdrazy 2 years ago
if we didn't evolve from monkeys or primates where did we come from???
stonekid156 2 years ago
You're an arrogant moron, no reason in talking with you.
ogirv101 2 years ago
No one is saying Jesus denied the story of Genesis, Jesus did take it allegorically, furthermore you haven't disproven me. All you have done is ad ominems, something Jesus would disapprove of.
instead of insulting me and calling me a liar and a fraud, prove it, you're a typical hypocritical YEC.
ogirv101 2 years ago
Yes, Agustine did mention what you said, but he gave many more interpretations of Genesis, and that was the whole point. He was making an emphasis on how the story of Genesis wil never be understood completely as literal context.
Furthermore calling me a liar and a fraud is disrespectful, attacking my opinion the way yuou do is not Christ like. Jesus would disapprove of what you do, especially because even Jesus took Genesis allegorically.
ogirv101 2 years ago
amen.
it's embarrassing to me that the neo cons and fundamentalist have yet to to come to grips with the reality of evolution, to me it's so blatantly clear.
though i believe that the emergent church is catching on rather quickly, hopefully soon enough to raise the consciousness of the body of christ before the greater mass sinks into complete denial.
antivirusdesign 2 years ago
i grox101a blive the same axact thing a world of god and eviloton
FunkyOrangeCats 2 years ago
Fundamentalist Christians are heretics, the orthodox church and early church fathers took Genesis alleorgically rather than literally. Go back to Jesus' time and take genesis literally and you'll get aughed at by even the most prominent theologians of ancient times. Look at St. Augustine for example.
Next, Evolutionary theory in fact helped religion, after the theory was published Religion actually grew more powerful, ironic huh? Darwin was also a Deist/Agnostic, and rejected Atheism.
ogirv101 2 years ago 5
I said that I agreed that temptations could be passed down from generation to generation, not that I believe in macro evolution. And yes, the council AGREED upon it, they did not DECIDE it though. Let me ask you this: In the New Testament, the disciples died for their belief that Jesus dies and rose again. If God is a metaphor for reality, why did they do this?
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Some science definitely does explain the Bible more and back up the claims of the Bible more. Evolution doesn't though (and I don't call evolution science personally because enough research reveals that every thing it is backed up by is false).
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Well I'm not gonna argue that temptations are or aren't evolutionary in the sense that they can be passed on. In fact I do agree with you to some degree. However that doesn't explain where the first ones came from. See if God is good and everything that he made was good, then temptations did not exist when he declared his creations "good". That is why there MUST be a start somewhere.
jesusismighty 3 years ago
You're definitely right. I had forgotten about the passage of scripture where God opens the donkey's mouth. However I'm pretty sure that this was meant to be taken literally. I've never heard of someone dying in a vision and then being dead in reality just cause of the vision. Besides, if God is all powerful then he can make the donkey talk. I will google hermeneutics though! Thanks a lot for the tip! :)
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Why not take the Genesis account literally? "Snakes don't literally talk in gardens." The Bible never mentions (as far as I know) any other animal talking. Satan either possessed the snake or he may have come in the form of the snake. Either way it would then be possible for the snake to talk. If you read in the New Testament where Demons possess men, it is the demons who talk and not the men. If this was personification of temptation, where did the temptations start?
jesusismighty 3 years ago
I guess I'm a pantheist because I believe in Evolution but I also believe God or Energy or Consciousness is in every living thing. I don't believe God can be defined from some man-made book. I do believe in the linear process of evolution but that there is a recycling of energy all the time without time even existing in the process.
wilburyaya 3 years ago
I'm not gonna try to get into a debate with you (unless of course you want to. It seems you're already busy with that though) but I would like to point out one thing. You mentioned that you don't see how creationism/intelligent design is spiritual and you said that you don't think it has anything to do really with the religion.Well, the reason it does (and I don't have enough room in this comment box to go in depth)is because if Genesis is open to errs, the entire Bible now is.Genesis=foundation
jesusismighty 3 years ago
right on thats exactly right jesusismighty
chunktuff 3 years ago
Thank you chuncktuff!!
jesusismighty 3 years ago
just agreeing when i see a good comment:) dont see many of those anymore so you gotta have somebodys back when they actually do say something good:) i dont like when i only get negative feedback so your welcome:) have a nice day:)
chunktuff 3 years ago
Genesis can be interpreted in many ways. If you have an imagination, there is no conflict between the story of Genesis and the science of evolution.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Okay, let's hear it. How can the two go together without conflicting?
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Myth and science approach the nature of reality from different angles. Science alone cannot give us a complete picture of human experience. Myth gives us the deep, archetypal structures that support the more detailed knowledge produced by science.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
That still doesn't answer how the two can possibly work together any conflicts. Evolution requires millions of years. Creation says 6 days. That's a major conflict.
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Evolution requires billions of years. the sun goes around the galaxy every 225 million years. Maybe the author of Genesis was talking about Sun days.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
A lot of people think that maybe there was progressive evolution. Actually this causes problems in scripture. Had there been millions of years in creation so that evolution can take place, that would mean that by the time creation was complete, millions of animals would have died. According to scripture, death is the result of sin which came later after creation was complete and Adam and Eve ate from the tree they were commanded not to eat from. So this actually wouldn't work with scripture.
jesusismighty 3 years ago
Maybe what that refers to is that death only became conscious for Adam after he had sinned. It's not that animals didn't die, its that death was no big deal until awareness of self developed in humans.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
No the Bible's pretty clear that death didn't happen until after the fall of man (when Adam and Eve sinned). Besides, if you study the Hebrew language that the Bible was written in, it is quite clear that the 6 days of creation refer to a literal 24 hour day.
jesusismighty 3 years ago
@0ThouArtThat0 I think it can be deeper then that, I'm not sure it was talking about physical death but a spiritual death in which we need to come back to god to heal and make stronger, and as fare as days go it can't be days as we know it I believe the bible says Adam lived for a 1000 years and God told him he would day that day so.
MrMohjong 1 year ago
I find the concept is an overview of all religions.
I think God is not done, in a sense... he's done creating but still involved in his creation (the universe, not just "us")
I want your opinion on a post I made a while back before I ever heard of this book or it's author. It was an epiphany that came to me on my own, but I feel totally agrees with the book. I intend to buy and read it at some point.
I'll mail you...
Atoyota 3 years ago
Interesting! :)
ablheza 3 years ago
1. Natural selection is a brutal and ruthless process. (Any "God" directing it is a capricious, blundering psychopath)
2. God is an absurd delusion.
3. We are all primates - narcissistic, ego-stroking, myopic, flawed, self-deceiving primates - and we have indulged in creation myths since the beginning of history.
Pitiful.
Iambecome 3 years ago
sorry you feel this way about yourself.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
I'd rather face the harsh, unpleasant truth than indulge in a romantic untrue vision of human nature.
Also, apologies for the other comment, which was uncalled for - especially when it was a response to an earlier video and not your direct opinion.
Iambecome 3 years ago
I would rather face the truth than celebrate a lie, but I disagree with you about the nature of evolution. I don't think it is all ruthless, because natural selection, while an aspect of it, is not the only one.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
I personally believe in the innate depavity of man. But don't forget - behind every cynic is a disappointed idealist.
RE evolution: The blindness to suffering exhibited by natural selection is breathtaking. (C.f. the ichneumonidae). Nature isn't nice. And homo sapiens is a nasty business - as much as all of us would like to think otherwise.
It's not always nasty, but there is simply too much inexorable pain, suffering, and tragedy inherent in the human condition and the animal kingdom.
Iambecome 3 years ago
Lambecome, so basically you decline any form of "God" based on your creed that "God" is pure and nature is not. Well, I tend to believe that IF God exists, he would be waiting to see if anything is BROKEN and needs serious fixing...Anything being made will not be perfect by the nature of being incomplete. So you look at a flawed world and see no God. But try looking broader into the realms of ideas. What if God exists? Then who says he isn't testing out what he made?
**Only one side of my ideas
onijester56 3 years ago
The name is "I am become".
I'm sorry - I am so utterly sick of debating the topic of religion and "God" than I can only sigh. Believe in what you want, just be happy, have a nice life, and follow this commandment: thou shall keep thy religion to thyself.
Iambecome 3 years ago
0THouArtThat0. yo. have u read any of Arthur Young books? if u do could u do a review please. coz he seems like a dude worth reading.
LimpLoser 3 years ago
I'm going to have to agree do disagree on the things you disagree with me with. :)
Jesus Christ died to save our souls from the inevitable separation from God. The revelation will be complete when God creates a new heaven and new earth. If there is no hell to save us from, Jesus died for nothing.
If Jesus is not the way, we are already dead.
We all have sinned at least once.
iceylittle 3 years ago
Hell (specifically Hades or Sheol) exist as a dwelling place ruled by the one who causes death; this is a place for torment of human souls. Death is torment of the soul. When God's revelation is complete; the final judgment for all that is apart from him will be thrown in the lake of fire; this is the true hell. Satan will soon be judged by God and he is jealous of all human souls and takes pleasure in misleading them so that he can have redemption in your torment.
You are on his bucket list.
iceylittle 3 years ago
I think you make a very good point and I will deff check this book out man. Nice work, I think you're a really smart guy.
JitterBob 3 years ago
The bible suggests the immanence of God living within us through Christ and Holy Spirit; meditation on his inspired word gives us a better understanding of the nature of his existence. Our bodies are destructible hosts to our indestructible soul. Meaning the body is of matter but the soul stays intact when the body is recycled.
iceylittle 3 years ago
Matter exists as the biggest grandfather clock that is set on a universal time scale; it is also a cocoon to protect us from Gods glory until we are ready to be in his eternal presence. In essence; you are still a fetus; if you do not live on God's word; you become malnourished and incapable of a healthy birth in death. God is not done actually; he will finish what he started after his revelation is complete.
iceylittle 3 years ago
I am rather playful with my use of religious metaphor. So far as I am aware, Christ and Satan are both metaphors for, simply put, Love and Hate respectively. I'll look that book up now.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Eternity can't switch, by why can't God be both good and evil? Why not see Christ and Satan as the right and left hand of God?
Without both good and evil, nothing would ever happen. Both of these forces are required for anything interesting to occur. Without strife, there is no harmony. Without suffering, there is no joy.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
fuck me u read a lot of shit books. Read some Fiction, stop reading these shit books.
LimpLoser 3 years ago
not just matter is a loop, all of reality is a loop. "before" and "after" have only relative meaning. the cosmos doesn't maintain itself; it constantly recreates itself, the same way bodies do, by constantly dying and being reborn.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
ill get on that, thanks.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Humans, in the flesh, have no direct way to continue to build on to the universe. Humans live in a huge sandbox of existing matter that God created. I believe that everything God created is complete; for now; he said "it's good."
iceylittle 3 years ago
My hypothesis is that matter has a static existence; it can not be destroyed or created by human. Nothing new will be created for awhile according to my theistic point of view; for now matter can only transpose into new things; this is why Eastern religions believe in reincarnation. Matter can be broken and reused over and over again in new material.
Everything that humans "make" is made out of something that already existed since the beginning of time.
iceylittle 3 years ago
I suppose I like my spirituality a bit more immanent than the standard Biblical story. If God's creation was complete, it would have no need for God anymore.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
The material world is an ongoing creative process. That creativity is what I would call spirit. It is not separate from the matter, but serves to organize it. I don't know what you mean about nothing being eternal leading to nihilism.
I disagree with you about the relation between happiness and sadness.
There is no beginning or ending. Reality is loopy.
Eternity is the loop.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Why do you need a "creative process" for matter to change? There is nothing creative about mating, rocks crumbling into sand, supernovas, or black holes. Also, matter is not "in the process of being created" all matter has existed since the big bang, all it does is change form. It just doesn't pop up whenever it feels like it.
task2k 3 years ago 2
yes no energy can be created or destroyed, but it can transform, which it does through matter, which becomes life, which evolves and complexifies. The creativity is about new forms, not new substance.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
0ThouArtThat0: But then where does creativity come in? And why call it spirit? You say that the spirit (creativity) is a part of matter which serves to organize it. The laws of nature serves to organize matter, where's the need for "creative spirit" in a process which is completely govenrned by strict laws?
task2k 3 years ago
We call them "laws," but they are better termed habits imo. Everything we know about the evolution of the cosmos tells us that "laws" are in a constant state of development from the big bang until today. The emergence of life is a great example. Nothing in physics tells us that atoms and molecules could come alive as organisms. And we have no way of predicting what life may become. We are part of an ongoing creative process where new levels emerge unexpectedly.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Habits can be broken, laws cannot. Do you find yourself released from the habbit of gravity occationally? Life was not created from atoms but from self-replicating molecules. Our existence relies entirely on the constancy of the laws of physics. "We have no way of predicting what life may become", yes we do. If two dogs mate the result is another dog, there I predicted what life became. You seem to assert that life consciously change itself from a desire to do so, why?
task2k 3 years ago
Habits can be broken, but some take quite a while to break free of. Gravity is being changed by "dark energy" (whatever it turns out to be) as the cosmos continues to evolve. No, I am not suggesting life can consciously change itself. I am suggesting that we cannot predict what forms life will take thousands, especially millions of years from now. Even Darwin knew this, as he talked about "preadaptation," which today is called exaptation. Physics consists of stable, but not eternal habits.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
I don't explain the problem of evil. The perspective discussed in this video says quite explicitly that the material world has not been "created." Matter is still in the process of being created. It may never be finished, at least not anywhere else but where it began. Suffering is only possible because of joyful living. They are part of the bargain. Genuine creativity requires being vulnerable to tragic delusion. All marriages end in death. But death is not other than birth,
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
and so the "problem" of evil is dissolved.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
Thank God for Evolution
Sounds like an observation of the truth.
j
teamhumanity 3 years ago
that is what i always thought
rd1999 3 years ago
Interesting thoughts. I think you're right that the universe isn't done creating itself. All the energy and matter just keeps evolving over time. The god part is confusing, though. When you say god are you referring to a creator or to the universe itself?
HaleyMary 3 years ago
here here
SilverPheonix360 3 years ago
great thoughts
squitmaa 3 years ago
Creationists don't see "creation" as mechanistic at all.They see God actively in involved in creation and in their lives i.e. miracles.Perhaps intellectual creationists make those arguments from their heads but are not part and parcel of the "spirituality" of "creation" of most creationists.From my view, trying to "marry" science and religion is going to end up in divorce and then a "remarrying" of new religion with a new science.Seriel Monogamy and seriel scienotoreligiousity together again!
armando3210 3 years ago
the intelligent design movement seems to me to have more in common with deism than theism. I suppose I was talking more about ID than creationism.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
But even creationists see nature as "created," as though it were an artifact which was designed from afar. God, in this view, is above and beyond nature, not immanent within it. This is similar to hard line materialism; all you have to do is replace God with transcendent physical laws.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
God is not in nature. He is not to be found there. To God the universe hardly exists....he is only interested in personalities....that would be ...you.
DouglasUrantia 3 years ago
Matt: You're on the correct path toward truth. Yes, the universe and you are evolving at this moment. Strange as it sounds, when I had contact with celestials beings in 1995 they confirm this fact. [It's all spelled out in extreme detail in the Urantia Book which is a huge work of celestial revelation.] Also, the spirit realm and celestial personalities are very real. When I found this out it was a big shock to me and still is.
DouglasUrantia 3 years ago
Secondly, most people have no idea what is going on in the so-called invisible realms of this planet, yet alone the entire universe. When I found out the why of human life on this planet it was a big surprise but a good one.
DouglasUrantia 3 years ago
5 star favorite. Thanks for the links and showing the book. Something deep within me relaxes as i hear you talk about this - it feels like truth, so refreshing.
debswildhoney 3 years ago
Do you believe in God as in a creator? I'm really curious if you have a position and if you'd care to share your reasoning... if you've already covered it in video that still represents your position might save you some effort. You were kinda hedging in your g0at challenge vid. :-)
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
Let me clarify. I'm onboard with your view of immanent creation. But did something external create that which is immanently created? IE something that could change that process and with it our very physical laws and history?
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
And this isn't rhetorical, I don't have a well formed view on this. Thanks. :-)
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
I do not believe in a personal God. But I do relate very strongly to the idea that ours is a spiritual cosmos, and by that I mean it is a cosmos suffused with meaning, mystery, and creativity. Did something external create what is immanently created... short answer: I don't know. But like I said in the video, I do not relate to our world as though it were "created." It is still and for all I know will always be in a continual process of creation.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
That said, of course there is something that can change this process, one we naively (I think) refer to as controlled by "physical laws." If you take evolution seriously, there is no such thing as a "law." There are only habits, whether genetic or atomic. The whole cosmos is evolving. The "something" that can change history is immanent; that is, every particle, every molecule, every organism, and especially every human being is capable of changing the world.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
If you look at how the Universe appears, what we appear to be, and what we appear to be doing as societies, humans, animals, material forms, there seems to be something drawing us into particular habits. From this it might be possible to deduce what that might be outside of implicate orders. This path seems to lead to the simulation argument on top of a hyper-time co-creation. Dream within a dream. Turtles all the way down.
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
When dealing with these kinds of ultimate questions, like "what lies outside the cosmos?", I think the only reasonable way to discuss it is in terms of paradox. As Alan Watts put it, "the way in is the way out." I have a feeling (a vague one, though I'm working on sharpening it) that the perception of a vast and empty universe "out there" is rather misleading. Maybe when our human bodies die, we will find out how exactly it is that the only outside is inside, and the only inside outside, etc.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago
I'm not sure it has to be a paradox. It's definitely a puzzle. Entry and exit are definitely major clues, and study of that is a one way ticket to Mysticism. Real mysticism, not Nick's brand. The fact is that there are very real spiritual dynamics which are patently ignored by 98% of scientists because you can't measure a feeling, an intuition, or a whimsy.
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
Those who think the author of Genesis meant to assert that an external God created the Universe in a seven day period are the real problem with our culture. Both theists and atheists who believe this are misinterpreting it. Tragic ignorance.
patternsinchaos 3 years ago
Good post.
Iambecome 3 years ago
"irreducibly complex" that is, not "infinitely..."
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago