beastie wrote:Geez Louise, half the theists in this country believe in evolution, coggins. In fact, I would venture to guess at least half of the Mormon population believes in evolution, including the professors at BYU!! *I* believed in evolution when I was LDS. Theists simply believe that evolution was directed by God.
Now, admittedly, some of this doesn't make much sense. As Moniker said, it's difficult to reconcile evolution with a literal adam and eve story, but that's why people develop ideas about "pre-adamites". And some people interpret a certain phrase about "figurative as far as the man and woman are concerned" to possibly hint that the Adam and Eve story may not be as literal as many LDS believe, besides. And it's difficult to reconcile the bumpy and often erratic nature of evolution with an omniscient God directing things - but these challenges are no greater, generally, than other challenges believers regularly face in trying to reconcile their faith with logic and science.
As others have so clearly stated, evolution makes God superfluous in that it's no longer necessary to invoke supernatural intervention to explain the existence of complex organisms. Prior to the understanding of evolution, God of the Gaps managed to snatch quite a few people, who often called themselves "deists". They knew that they saw no evidence of the intervention of a godbeing in this world, but still were stumped as far as how complex organisms could come to be, so, voila, the deist god who creates it all and then steps back, invisible. That's why evolution threatened religion so much at its inception - believers could see the God of the Gaps getting smaller before their eyes. But human beings being the persistent religious beings they are manage, of course, to simply create a new story to allow for both evolution and God.
Really, even you believe in evolution, coggins. You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to deny it. Human beings deliberately manipulate evolution to our advantage all the time. Ever heard of breeding dogs? Evolution cannot be doubted by even the most fervent believer. They just believe that evolution has its limits and can't result in entirely different species (an opinion based on ignorance). So the real question is not whether or not evolution exists, it is just whether or not, given the vast amount of time spanned on this earth, evolution can explain different species and the origin of the species itself.
I bolded the phrase I believe most naysayers minimize.
Yep! I think you're absolutely correct with all of this beastie. The entire argument that you can't be a believer and believe in evolution is just false. Many people find a way.
Coggins7 wrote:"God creates dinosaurs, god destroys dinosaurs, god creates man, man destroys god, man creates dinosaurs,
Dinosaurs eat man, woman inherits the earth..."
Hi Coggins,
It is likely that you have not been reading my comments. I have not been reading yours.
But your truth by assertion fails here.
No evidence has established God. It’s a claim made by religions from ancient times (from our perspective).
I’m afraid you don’t make much sense in your posts. But you certainly have lots of them. You seem to have a major disconnect with information and historically known data.
Coggins7 wrote:"God creates dinosaurs, god destroys dinosaurs, god creates man, man destroys god, man creates dinosaurs,
Dinosaurs eat man, woman inherits the earth..."
Hi Coggins, It is likely that you have not been reading my comments. I have not been reading yours.
But your truth by assertion fails here.
No evidence has established God. It’s a claim made by religions from ancient times (from our perspective).
I’m afraid you don’t make much sense in your posts. But you certainly have lots of them. You seem to have a major disconnect with information and historically known data.
Moniker wrote:And Jak, let me add this: I agree with everything you stated above. I think? Pretty sure. Okay?
I don't even understand what Coggins is saying.
There are major syntax problems among other problems with what he/she is saying.
JAK
Ahahaa!!!!!!!! OMG!!!! This is the first time you've made me spew my soda on my laptop! WEEE!
Psst: No one understands what he's saying!!
I hate to break this to you but soda and lap tops don’t mix favorably.
I spilled a martini on my keyboard. It had to be replaced. Worse than that, it was a first martini, and I had yet to take a sip. (I generally have only one.)
Moniker wrote:And Jak, let me add this: I agree with everything you stated above. I think? Pretty sure. Okay?
I don't even understand what Coggins is saying.
There are major syntax problems among other problems with what he/she is saying.
JAK
Ahahaa!!!!!!!! OMG!!!! This is the first time you've made me spew my soda on my laptop! WEEE!
Psst: No one understands what he's saying!!
I hate to break this to you but soda and lap tops don’t mix favorably.
I spilled a martini on my keyboard. It had to be replaced. Worse than that, it was a first martini, and I had yet to take a sip. (I generally have only one.)
Good luck getting soda out of your laptop.
JAK
I know, I know, I try to abstain from drinking when I read this board. I often have outbursts of uncontrolled laughter! You were great though! Seriously, gave me the giggles so bad when talking about Coggies. And not in a mean spirited way. Just something about it made me guffaw and is making me giggle at the moment.
Sorry 'bout your martini mishap.
I wish us all less keyboard wetness (of any sort) in the future!
