Scientists finally prove there IS life after death

FearGod said:

I didn't say so, that'snot true.

Click to expand...

Yes, you did and you repeated it here in this post where you directly say you currently do not believe what science teaches. I'll bold it for you momentarily so there is no mistaking it.

FearGod said:

If science can prove with no doubt that the universe had come to existence when there was nothing existing and
that matter became alive due to some known chemical reactions that we can do in the lab and that creating
organisms is very easy job, then at that point why not to believe science.

Click to expand...

Right here, you just denied science. At that point, you said, it's okay to believe science, but not right now, since they can't perform magic as you artificially set the standard for them. You do not believe science because you set a far, far distant, nigh impossible task for it. "At that point why not believe science", are your exact words. You are saying you currently do not.

And that is what I said before, despite your trying to pay feign lip service to it that you do, but qualifying it as that which agrees with your religious beliefs. It's not valid science, unless it agrees with what you already think you know to be true. That's rubbish. It's bad faith, and it's bad science.

FearGod said:

I investigated the holy book(the quran) and there's no single error,

Click to expand...

Did you now? Do you believe you know everything in the mind of the author and every point of reference, and every historical reality that existed? I wouldn't be one single bit surprised that if somehow you could be teleported back in time, and met the author in person, but did not know that is was Muhammad you were speaking with, but just "some guy" out of the thousands of people who lived back then, that you would probably find you have a great deal of differences with that person in your beliefs and points of view, You naturally would! He lived long ago in a culture and time far removed from your reality, and how he thought and believed would not have the same contexts of reality you live in and would subsequently sound quite foreign to you and in many cases you see him as wrong about things he believed.

What all that means is this, you cannot read an ancient text and force-fit your reality into it from where you live today, and expect it actually is the same thoughts in the author's mind as he wrote it. So for you to say there is "no single error" is completely erroneous. You would have a different interpretation of what was being said, and the only reality to "no single error" is that YOU have found a way, you managed to make the puzzle pieces fit the reality you believe in. However, since you deny evolution, that right there is proof there is at least one error in your thinking, and hence, an error in the Quran.

FearGod said:

for example if the quran challenged us that humans
will never be able to fly a thing as the birds do, then at that point I'll dismiss the quran because it was proven wrong,
so no, don't think we're blind believers and don't think that we're living in the dark ages.

Click to expand...

Does the Quran deny evolution? If yes, then you are safe to accept there is an error in it.

Windwalker said:

I missed this question before, but I want to address the error in your thinking. This response was to me asking if you need the bones of your 23rd great grandmother to accept that she existed, or do you rely on other proofs. You did not answer my direct question, but evaded it with this response.

But let's go with you logic here. No, what bacteria we have today is not necessarily the same bacteria that existed before. Life evolves. Previous life forms become extinct. There are countless cases of fossils of species that no longer exist today. But we know they did because we have evidence. Sometimes that evidence is not in the form of fossil proofs. Sometimes it can legitimately be inferred based upon what we are able to know about how things work. You can with great confidence say, "Yes, it is valid to say my 23rd great grandmother actually existed historically, despite the fact I have no physical evidence of her actual body. I exist, and I could not exist if she had not because babies require mothers in order to be born." So, how are you denying that we had a common ancestor shared with the chimps when we can see we are in fact genetically close together in the tree of life? We share a relatively close common ancestor.

Let's be clear about that. ALL life is related genetically, but not all life is closely related, like chimps and humans are. It's no different than you and I are related genetically too, but we are related very far back historically as opposed to my 2nd cousins. You and I are probably like 400th cousins. The chimp and the human are cousins too, but much more closely related to each other than we are to say a sea sponge. We are related genetically to the sea sponge too, but it's like a 100,000,000,000th relative, as opposed to a 20,000th relative, or 5000th relative, or a 1000th relative. The markers prove chimps and humans are closely related with a common ancestor. It's no different than if you and I compared our DNA tests and it show where in history our common ancestor may have lived. How far back did you and I share a common parent? Same thing with humans and chimps.

How is it you deny such things?

Click to expand...

The bacteria still existing regardless if different than the bacteria billions of years ago, IOW the bacteria didn't go extinct.

What we call as common ancestor didn't go extinct but they died and the next new generation were their grandsons that
were a little bit different than their grandfathers..

Windwalker said:

Yes, you did and you repeated it here in this post where you directly say you currently do not believe what science teaches. I'll bold it for you momentarily so there is no mistaking it.


Right here, you just denied science. At that point, you said, it's okay to believe science, but not right now, since they can't perform magic as you artificially set the standard for them. You do not believe science because you set a far, far distant, nigh impossible task for it. "At that point why not believe science", are your exact words. You are saying you currently do not.

And that is what I said before, despite your trying to pay feign lip service to it that you do, but qualifying it as that which agrees with your religious beliefs. It's not valid science, unless it agrees with what you already think you know to be true. That's rubbish. It's bad faith, and it's bad science.


Did you now? Do you believe you know everything in the mind of the author and every point of reference, and every historical reality that existed? I wouldn't be one single bit surprised that if somehow you could be teleported back in time, and met the author in person, but did not know that is was Muhammad you were speaking with, but just "some guy" out of the thousands of people who lived back then, that you would probably find you have a great deal of differences with that person in your beliefs and points of view, You naturally would! He lived long ago in a culture and time far removed from your reality, and how he thought and believed would not have the same contexts of reality you live in and would subsequently sound quite foreign to you and in many cases you see him as wrong about things he believed.

What all that means is this, you cannot read an ancient text and force-fit your reality into it from where you live today, and expect it actually is the same thoughts in the author's mind as he wrote it. So for you to say there is "no single error" is completely erroneous. You would have a different interpretation of what was being said, and the only reality to "no single error" is that YOU have found a way, you managed to make the puzzle pieces fit the reality you believe in. However, since you deny evolution, that right there is proof there is at least one error in your thinking, and hence, an error in the Quran.


Does the Quran deny evolution? If yes, then you are safe to accept there is an error in it.

Click to expand...

I don't see that you're serious in your discussion and i have to retreat.

FearGod said:

I don't see that you're serious in your discussion and i have to retreat.

Click to expand...

What? I'm am absolutely serious. You just don't follow it because you want to believe what you want to believe contrary to evidence and facts. Your retreat is not about me and the presentation of the argument, but personal discomfort with what I am presenting to you, trying to blame me for that. As I said, "Bad Faith". I cannot respect a faith that denies science. It's not faith, but cowardice to face a challenge to one's own beliefs. That's not faith at all. It's a form of denial, burying our heads in the sand to protect our beliefs at all cost.

Windwalker said:

What? I'm am absolutely serious. You just don't follow it because you want to believe what you want to believe contrary to evidence and facts. Your retreat is not about me and the presentation of the argument, but personal discomfort with what I am presenting to you, trying to blame me for that. As I said, "Bad Faith". I cannot respect a faith that denies science. It's not faith, but cowardice to face a challenge to one's own beliefs. That's not faith at all. It's a form of denial, burying our heads in the sand to protect our beliefs at all cost.

Click to expand...

You're absolutely wrong, i said I'm with science if it can confirm with evidence that God doesn't exist and that my belief is wrong,
you're the one insisting that I ain't respecting science, so no and 100 "no"

I repeat you aren't serious and you're wasting your and my time.

FearGod said:

You're absolutely wrong, i said I'm with science if it can confirm with evidence that God doesn't exist and that my belief is wrong,
you're the one insisting that I ain't respecting science, so no and 100 "no"

I repeat you aren't serious and you're wasting your and my time.

Click to expand...

I absolutely am serious. Why would I take the time to compose lengthy posts that detail point after point to make my case here? I hear someone wanting to avoid the serious nature of what I am saying in your false accusation of me not being serious. I'm in the process of writing a book about things like this. You darned right I'm serious! I have currently over 100,000 words worth of my own material I'm sorting through and editing. How is that not serious?

Now to my point, again, you just said, "I'm with science if it can confirm with evidence that God doesn't exist". This is saying right now you are NOT with science. Period. Science cannot "disprove God" because that is not what science does, nor can that possibly be done. But my point is since science currently does not and cannot ever prove a negative (no human anyone can do that!), you are not currently with science. Moreover however, it currently does have countless mountains of evidence supporting the validity and power of the Theory of Evolution. If you do not believe Evolution is true, that our species evolved from earlier species, than you are simply denying and rejecting science. Period. Science has already proved your belief that evolution isn't real to be a false belief. The only thing lacking is you accepting it and owning that you are wrong - which you are.

If you say I'm not serious here, you are bald-faced lying to yourself and others.

FearGod said:

A team of British researchers have “confirmed” that consciousness can go on when someone dies but the study also uncovered some disturbing aspects of the so-called afterlife.
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/weird-news/scientists-finally-prove-life-after-7989503

Do you believe in the afterlife or still in doubt?

Click to expand...

The Bible is the only thing that we can rely on in the whole world, and it says that man is not conscious in death. "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Psalm 146:4. "The living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything." "Their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in anything that is done under the sun." "There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10.

Windwalker said:

I absolutely am serious. Why would I take the time to compose lengthy posts that detail point after point to make my case here? I hear someone wanting to avoid the serious nature of what I am saying in your false accusation of me not being serious. I'm in the process of writing a book about things like this. You darned right I'm serious! I have currently over 100,000 words worth of my own material I'm sorting through and editing. How is that not serious?

Now to my point, again, you just said, "I'm with science if it can confirm with evidence that God doesn't exist". This is saying right now you are NOT with science. Period. Science cannot "disprove God" because that is not what science does, nor can that possibly be done. But my point is since science currently does not and cannot ever prove a negative (no human anyone can do that!), you are not currently with science. Moreover however, it currently does have countless mountains of evidence supporting the validity and power of the Theory of Evolution. If you do not believe Evolution is true, that our species evolved from earlier species, than you are simply denying and rejecting science. Period. Science has already proved your belief that evolution isn't real to be a false belief. The only thing lacking is you accepting it and owning that you are wrong - which you are.

If you say I'm not serious here, you are bald-faced lying to yourself and others.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that evolution isn't a fact or can you tell me where did i say that evolution is wrong or false?

I meant to say "impending death". The damn autocorrect feature keeps making me embarrass myself.

FearGod said:

I didn't say that evolution isn't a fact or can you tell me where did i say that evolution is wrong or false?

Click to expand...

I have asked you if you accept or reject the Theory of Evolution. Which is it? Do you, or do you not? Everything you're saying is that you don't believe it is true because it doesn't agree with your beliefs. Am I mistaken? Do you believe we evolved from earlier species which are no longer in existence? Yes, or no? It's a very, very simple question. Yes, or no?

Windwalker said:

I have asked you if you accept or reject the Theory of Evolution. Which is it? Do you, or do you not? Everything you're saying is that you don't believe it is true because it doesn't agree with your beliefs. Am I mistaken? Do you believe we evolved from earlier species which are no longer in existence? Yes, or no? It's a very, very simple question. Yes, or no?

Click to expand...

Yes of course i believe life evolved from simpler forms to complex ones, where did i say that i don't
believe that life evolved on earth?

FearGod said:

Yes of course i believe life evolved from simpler forms to complex ones, where did i say that i don't
believe that life evolved on earth?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I thought you were saying things like science concludes we are related to chimps because of superficial similarities, that we cannot have a common ancestor because if we did it would still be alive, that you will trust science when it can prove God does not exist, and a long list of other typical lack of knowledge of science and science-denial arguments. I could go back and point to all the posts if I have to make that effort. Perhaps other members can point to them. Why do you think I have be disagreeing with what you having been saying?

So, you accept chimps and humans have a common ancestor and we are in fact closely related cousins on the tree of life? You understand and accept that to say we evolved from an earlier species, does not mean that species has to currently exist? You accept that humans were not created as humans magically out of thin air or some master design to make you you and me me, and that such stories are not scientific truths?

Windwalker said:

I'm sorry, I thought you were saying things like science concludes we are related to chimps because of superficial similarities, that we cannot have a common ancestor because if we did it would still be alive, that you will trust science when it can prove God does not exist, and a long list of other typical lack of knowledge of science and science-denial arguments. I could go back and point to all the posts if I have to make that effort. Perhaps other members can point to them. Why do you think I have be disagreeing with what you having been saying?

Click to expand...

I believe we are the new creation from the previous ones, it was planned and designed.
IOW new generations born from the previous ones, so the new generations were selected
not due to natural selections but they were just the new creation, it's explained in some verses in the quran.

Windwalker said:

So, you accept chimps and humans have a common ancestor and we are in fact closely related cousins on the tree of life? You understand and accept that to say we evolved from an earlier species, does not mean that species has to currently exist? You accept that humans were not created as humans magically out of thin air or some master design to make you you and me me, and that such stories are not scientific truths?

Click to expand...

They already exist but as the new generation, they aren't separated, they're the same.

Let me explain it with what we made, for example Mazda made their cars in simple form as in the photo and the same
company stopped producing the old and made more advanced ones.

This is Mazda 1960


Still Mazda, the year 2015

FearGod said:

I believe we are the new creation from the previous ones, it was planned and designed. IOW new generations born from the previous ones, so the new generations were selected not due to natural selections but they were just the new creation, it's explained in some verses in the quran.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand this how you translate evolution with your faith, as well as how you understand the science of evolution itself. First, I'm curious which verses in the quran you see that speak of evolution?

Secondly, when you say new generation were selected, what do you mean by selected? Selected for what? Do you mean they were specifically chosen to become that exact life form, that God specifically guided this process of evolution towards a specific form such as apes to humans, and apes to chimps, etc? What is your understanding of what "natural selection" means?

Thirdly, do you believe that all species of life on this planet came from a single lifeform, that all species are relatives to each other at some point in deep history?

FearGod said:

They already exist but as the new generation, they aren't separated, they're the same.

Let me explain it with what we made, for example Mazda made their cars in simple form as in the photo and the same
company stopped producing the old and made more advanced ones.

This is Mazda 1960


Still Mazda, the year 2015

Click to expand...

I understand that analogy, but that would be saying in terms of evolution that "humans" as we have them today are later "models" of humans. You have early humans, and later humans. Both chimps and humans share a common ancestor which was neither human nor chimp. Instead of speaking of different years and models of Mazdas, you should be speaking of different forms of "transportation vehicles". A Mazda and a Ford are different types of "cars" in this example.

For sake of analogy, a Mazda is a human and you had early less sophisticated models, and newer more developed models (early human to modern humans). Then you have a Ford which is a chimpanzee, a Chevy which is an Ape, etc. And each of those "brands" have differing models within them. But all cars had a common origin, the "wagon". Apes and chimps and humans were all at one point in history "wagons", before they evolved into Mazdas and Fords and Chevys, and so forth.

All cars are related to each other because they all once themselves were a "wagon". They share a common ancestor. And some forms in the way they evolved, or were designed, are very closely related sharing the same parts from the same manufacturer just put into slightly different order. This the case of humans and chimps. They are basically all "Japanese cars", as opposed to a Japanese car versus and American car.

Windwalker said:

I'm trying to understand this how you translate evolution with your faith, as well as how you understand the science of evolution itself. First, I'm curious which verses in the quran you see that speak of evolution?

Click to expand...

Let me start first with the verse which says that all livings things (including humans) were originated from water.
We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? (21:30)
Do you agree that this verse agrees with science?

Windwalker said:

Secondly, when you say new generation were selected, what do you mean by selected? Selected for what? Do you mean they were specifically chosen to become that exact life form, that God specifically guided this process of evolution towards a specific form such as apes to humans, and apes to chimps, etc? What is your understanding of what "natural selection" means?

Click to expand...

Natural selection means that the ones who are better adapted to the environment and having better chances to survive are
the ones who will pass their genes to the next generation, that's according to science which exclude a creator.

In our belief, the new creation came from the previous ones, so no selection was made as the new creation were the sons of the
previous ones with slight differences in their DNA and as planned by the creator .

Windwalker said:

Thirdly, do you believe that all species of life on this planet came from a single lifeform, that all species are relatives to each other at some point in deep history?

Click to expand...

Yes it started from simpler forms of life to more complex ones

Windwalker said:

I understand that analogy, but that would be saying in terms of evolution that "humans" as we have them today are later "models" of humans. You have early humans, and later humans. Both chimps and humans share a common ancestor which was neither human nor chimp. Instead of speaking of different years and models of Mazdas, you should be speaking of different forms of "transportation vehicles". A Mazda and a Ford are different types of "cars" in this example.

For sake of analogy, a Mazda is a human and you had early less sophisticated models, and newer more developed models (early human to modern humans). Then you have a Ford which is a chimpanzee, a Chevy which is an Ape, etc. And each of those "brands" have differing models within them. But all cars had a common origin, the "wagon". Apes and chimps and humans were all at one point in history "wagons", before they evolved into Mazdas and Fords and Chevys, and so forth.

All cars are related to each other because they all once themselves were a "wagon". They share a common ancestor. And some forms in the way they evolved, or were designed, are very closely related sharing the same parts from the same manufacturer just put into slightly different order. This the case of humans and chimps. They are basically all "Japanese cars", as opposed to a Japanese car versus and American car.

Click to expand...

Yes, except that in the real life we are the factories and changing models and kinds is done by natural means according to God's plan.

FearGod said:

Let me start first with the verse which says that all livings things (including humans) were originated from water.
We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? (21:30)
Do you agree that this verse agrees with science?

Click to expand...

I always proceed cautiously in interpreting texts, especially ancient ones. Though I could say, sure, we came from water, meaning all life originated in the sea, what exactly did he think it meant, how is it translated by other translators, and how else could that have been understood? When I looked up that Surah the translation there says, "We separated them and made from water every living thing? Which seems to agree with what you are using as a translation.

But what you are doing is interpreting "Made from water" as "Originating from water", suggesting the common modern understanding that life began in the oceans was known to Mohamad back then. You are however supplying an interpretation of what it "seems" to say to you, who are in fact actually aware of what science teaches. But Mohammad attributing to God, "We made from water" is not exactly the same thing as saying life originating in the water, or "that it emerged out of the water". Strictly speaking it sounds as if he believed that living things are literally made from water. That water was what all our bits are made out of. You see how that fits here and doesn't clearly suggest as you interpreted just now as "Originated from water".

Had it said "All life emerged from the ocean," now THAT would have been an expression of some actual scientific knowledge. That we're "made from water", is really not too much more than saying that the majority of our bodies contain water. Sticking a sword into someone and seeing all manner of fluids pouring out of them would quite easily lead someone to that conclusion! Other authors of that time and before we say things like "the life of every creature is its blood" (Leviticus 17:14) , expressing their interpretation that when you bleed someone out, when their blood drains, they die. That however is not really scientific, as "life" is actually not in the blood, literally. So "we are made of water" seems pretty much the same sort of thing, and very doubtful it is meaning to say, "All life emerged from the ocean". That is quite different than being "made from water".

You see?

FearGod said:

Natural selection means that the ones who are better adapted to the environment and having better chances to survive are
the ones who will pass their genes to the next generation, that's according to science which exclude a creator.

Click to expand...

Why does that have to exclude a Creator? Explain?

FearGod said:

In our belief, the new creation came from the previous ones, so no selection was made as the new creation were the sons of the
previous ones with slight differences in their DNA and as planned by the creator .

Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that you believe as humans evolved from an early primates, that is was just God who caused the evolution to happen? Evolution still happened, chimps evolved on one branch and we evolved an other from our mutual ancestors, but it was God who guided the selection process, not the force of natural selection? Is this a correct understanding of what you believe?

FearGod said:

Yes, except that in the real life we are the factories and changing models and kinds is done by natural means according to God's plan.

Click to expand...

Would you say you believe evolution is supernatural? I'm curious to understand here.

Windwalker said:

I always proceed cautiously in interpreting texts, especially ancient ones. Though I could say, sure, we came from water, meaning all life originated in the sea, what exactly did he think it meant, how is it translated by other translators, and how else could that have been understood? When I looked up that Surah the translation there says, "We separated them and made from water every living thing? Which seems to agree with what you are using as a translation.

But what you are doing is interpreting "Made from water" as "Originating from water", suggesting the common modern understanding that life began in the oceans was known to Mohamad back then. You are however supplying an interpretation of what it "seems" to say to you, who are in fact actually aware of what science teaches. But Mohammad attributing to God, "We made from water" is not exactly the same thing as saying life originating in the water, or "that it emerged out of the water". Strictly speaking it sounds as if he believed that living things are literally made from water. That water was what all our bits are made out of. You see how that fits here and doesn't clearly suggest as you interpreted just now as "Originated from water".

Had it said "All life emerged from the ocean," now THAT would have been an expression of some actual scientific knowledge. That we're "made from water", is really not too much more than saying that the majority of our bodies contain water. Sticking a sword into someone and seeing all manner of fluids pouring out of them would quite easily lead someone to that conclusion! Other authors of that time and before we say things like "the life of every creature is its blood" (Leviticus 17:14) , expressing their interpretation that when you bleed someone out, when their blood drains, they die. That however is not really scientific, as "life" is actually not in the blood, literally. So "we are made of water" seems pretty much the same sort of thing, and very doubtful it is meaning to say, "All life emerged from the ocean". That is quite different than being "made from water".

You see?

Click to expand...

God in verse (21:30) was speaking about the beginning of the universe (as being one piece before separating), then God didn't
say we created man or the living things from water, but God said we let all living things from water(not created), remember that God actually
said in other verses that he created us from a non living matter(clay)

Here's a link translating the actual meaning for the word جعلنا
http://context.reverso.net/translation/arabic-english/جعلنا

Windwalker said:

Why does that have to exclude a Creator? Explain?

Click to expand...

Because it depends on chances, who works will pass, if not will go extinct, it's all about luck and chance

Windwalker said:

Are you trying to say that you believe as humans evolved from an early primates, that is was just God who caused the evolution to happen? Evolution still happened, chimps evolved on one branch and we evolved an other from our mutual ancestors, but it was God who guided the selection process, not the force of natural selection? Is this a correct understanding of what you believe?

Click to expand...

No selection, it was always a new generation coming from the previous one and so on and so forth.

Windwalker said:

Would you say you believe evolution is supernatural? I'm curious to understand here.

Click to expand...

Planned by God by natural means, IOW no magic involved.

FearGod said:

Because it depends on chances, who works will pass, if not will go extinct, it's all about luck and chance

Click to expand...

Actually, it's not really about luck from my understanding, but statistics. It's a bit of a numbers game. If you have enough variables applied, some will survive. If you think about someone winning the lottery you may think that person was "lucky" to win. But in reality, someone inevitably had to win. It's not about "John" who won the lottery, but about the fact that somebody did. If you look at it from the species specifically in regards to evolution, the same as if you look at "John" winning the lottery, it's mind bogglingly improprabable. But if you look at it from the lottery in general to all players of the game, we are not so surprised that someone won that week. We expect it. So with evolution it's "Life" who is playing the game with some "forms" winning and others not. If you see that humans are like "John" as that one that won and now has the money, it's not quite so shocking. Someone had to win. Our species won, at that time, as have many others who are lottery winners.

What helps to shift the thinking here is not to view ourselves as "humans" whom the planet was created for, but rather that we are "Life" in this particular form that happened to win the lottery. It really doesn't matter if our bodies and brains as they are was the point. The point is Life creating itself in evolving forms, forms which win the lottery in order to be best fit to survive. The numbers game is how it keeps the game going. Again, it just takes a shift in how we view ourselves as humans, either as the pinnacle of God's creation with all the winnings being our pre-ordained destiny, or a winning contestant in the lottery for the sake of Life itself. It's not about us, but about God. Now with that shift in focus, this "randomness" doesn't seem quite so against the idea of God. It seems very much in favor of God.

FearGod said:

No selection, it was always a new generation coming from the previous one and so on and so forth.

Click to expand...

This still doesn't quite make sense to me what you are saying. A "new generation" applies as well to the Theory of Evolution. That does not exclude the fact at some point in time the human species did not exist but was another species which preceded it, a non-human species. It's the same with chimps. They came from a non-chimp species. And chimps and humans both came from that non-chimp, non-human species. However, who we are today, both chimps and humans contain that previous species in both of us, hence why we are so closely related genetically, the way my 2nd cousins and I share a common ancestor. The only difference is that the common ancestor in an evolutionary sense was a prior species, neither human nor chimp.

Do you accept that as true? Or do you believe that humans have existed from the first life that emerged on this planet? What is this previous "generation" to you? Is it a generation of humans? Explain?

FearGod said:

Planned by God by natural means, IOW no magic involved.

Click to expand...

I can go with "planned by God", in one sense of the word. The "plan" is to create life forms that evolve and adapt to survive and grow. But if we imagine the plan was for you or me specifically people to be born or created, or that humans as a species to evolve specifically in the form we are, then you run into some serious issues. Then you are dealing with "supernatural evolution". Would I call evolution "miraculous"? Sure. But the problem I have is when we try to say that next week's lottery is specifically for the sake of "John" winning it, then you run into to problems. Now you are talking magic, you are talking specific cosmic tinkerings from outside the system, "rigging it" so John will win. That's the issue I have with some ideas of "guided evolution", as some call it. It has God cheating the system, earmarking certain species to win and others to lose. Make sense?

FearGod said:

Let me start first with the verse which says that all livings things (including humans) were originated from water.
We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? (21:30)
Do you agree that this verse agrees with science?



Natural selection means that the ones who are better adapted to the environment and having better chances to survive are
the ones who will pass their genes to the next generation, that's according to science which exclude a creator.

In our belief, the new creation came from the previous ones, so no selection was made as the new creation were the sons of the
previous ones with slight differences in their DNA and as planned by the creator .




Yes it started from simpler forms of life to more complex ones




Yes, except that in the real life we are the factories and changing models and kinds is done by natural means according to God's plan.

Click to expand...

99% of those brilliant plans are now extinct.

Ciao

- viole

Windwalker said:

Actually, it's not really about luck from my understanding, but statistics. It's a bit of a numbers game. If you have enough variables applied, some will survive. If you think about someone winning the lottery you may think that person was "lucky" to win. But in reality, someone inevitably had to win. It's not about "John" who won the lottery, but about the fact that somebody did. If you look at it from the species specifically in regards to evolution, the same as if you look at "John" winning the lottery, it's mind bogglingly improprabable. But if you look at it from the lottery in general to all players of the game, we are not so surprised that someone won that week. We expect it. So with evolution it's "Life" who is playing the game with some "forms" winning and others not. If you see that humans are like "John" as that one that won and now has the money, it's not quite so shocking. Someone had to win. Our species won, at that time, as have many others who are lottery winners.

Click to expand...

Evolution doesn't work like lottery, the gamblers are knowing what they're doing, they pay money to participate in the game, they play the game
and all of them are qualified to win by luck.

For your metaphor to work then the gamblers should found themselves competing to gain the money while not knowing who is offering
the money and for what reason.and the gamblers themselves have no choice but to play, does it really make sense to you.

Windwalker said:

What helps to shift the thinking here is not to view ourselves as "humans" whom the planet was created for, but rather that we are "Life" in this particular form that happened to win the lottery. It really doesn't matter if our bodies and brains as they are was the point. The point is Life creating itself in evolving forms, forms which win the lottery in order to be best fit to survive. The numbers game is how it keeps the game going. Again, it just takes a shift in how we view ourselves as humans, either as the pinnacle of God's creation with all the winnings being our pre-ordained destiny, or a winning contestant in the lottery for the sake of Life itself. It's not about us, but about God. Now with that shift in focus, this "randomness" doesn't seem quite so against the idea of God. It seems very much in favor of God.

Click to expand...

Were the gamblers in the lottery playing according to their choices and knowing what they're doing? that isn't the case with evolution,
it isn't a planned process compared to the lottery.

Windwalker said:

This still doesn't quite make sense to me what you are saying. A "new generation" applies as well to the Theory of Evolution. That does not exclude the fact at some point in time the human species did not exist but was another species which preceded it, a non-human species. It's the same with chimps. They came from a non-chimp species. And chimps and humans both came from that non-chimp, non-human species. However, who we are today, both chimps and humans contain that previous species in both of us, hence why we are so closely related genetically, the way my 2nd cousins and I share a common ancestor. The only difference is that the common ancestor in an evolutionary sense was a prior species, neither human nor chimp.

Click to expand...

He was the grandfather of humans and chimps, you may call him chimpyman, he didn't went extinct, but his next generations
were humans and chimps.

Windwalker said:

Do you accept that as true? Or do you believe that humans have existed from the first life that emerged on this planet? What is this previous "generation" to you? Is it a generation of humans? Explain?

Click to expand...

Humans started with the new creation of Adam, Adam came similar to Jesus by developing in a womb and not by magic, it was clearly
stated in one verse that Adam and Jesus came to earth by the same process, and we know how Jesus came, by virgin Mary.

Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, "Be," and he was (3:59)

Windwalker said:

I can go with "planned by God", in one sense of the word. The "plan" is to create life forms that evolve and adapt to survive and grow. But if we imagine the plan was for you or me specifically people to be born or created, or that humans as a species to evolve specifically in the form we are, then you run into some serious issues. Then you are dealing with "supernatural evolution". Would I call evolution "miraculous"? Sure. But the problem I have is when we try to say that next week's lottery is specifically for the sake of "John" winning it, then you run into to problems. Now you are talking magic, you are talking specific cosmic tinkerings from outside the system, "rigging it" so John will win. That's the issue I have with some ideas of "guided evolution", as some call it. It has God cheating the system, earmarking certain species to win and others to lose. Make sense?

Click to expand...

But how did John participate in the game, did he choose to come and to participate in the game or someone
magically put him to play.