• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"if the Universe was a Godless Universe....."

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I suppose that I 'could' believe in Evolution...if I did not believe in a "Soul"...I just cannot get passed that point. I believe the Soul exists in mankind and hence, I cannot believe in total evolution. However, I do believe that some things "evolve" or "change" in time....

Correct. The concept of a soul is at odds with the concept of evolution by natural selection. Therefore, it is a sign of intellectual coherence if we choose only one of them, im my opinion.

Since there is a continuous lineage between us and something looking like an amoeba, under the evolutionary premise, it is not clear who was the first one to get a soul and why, if we exclude that amoebas have souls. And it is also not clear why that "lucky" first one got one, and her parents did not. That poor girl is probably still looking for her parents in heaven by now.

And it is even less clear why eventually everyone of us has a soul today, unless we invoke possessing a soul as something on which natural selection operates, which is fairly ridicolous.

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
My thought upon hearing that was this: Why are they discussing any possible notion that there is no God and that the Universe could be a Godless Universe on a Christian t.v. channel?

Honesty?

I know that certain discussions which pertain to the world's ideas of how things 'may' be are interesting to get involved with, but did they leave out all concerns towards any person which may be watching the show? A person who's faith may not be as strong as theirs may become confused when hearing such concepts on a Christian network. And to listen to the whole discussion may become very taxing on the hearer rather than edifying.
Is that so?

How troubling can or should it be for believers to be reminded that there are those who do not share of their belief?

What is more respectful, to presume that a believer must be kept shielded from any mention of the very possibililty of disbelief or to presume that there is no such need?

So my idea was this: instead of them saying that such ideas can be very 'persuasive', they might fare better if they say that such ideas can be 'very deceptive', instead. This way it separates and helps the hearer in understanding the differences between The Truth of God's Word over the 'deceptions' of the world.

Personally, I find such a suggestion insulting to Christianity. And I am no Christian.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
I suppose that I 'could' believe in Evolution...if I did not believe in a "Soul"...I just cannot get passed that point. I believe the Soul exists in mankind and hence, I cannot believe in total evolution. However, I do believe that some things "evolve" or "change" in time....
What if souls exist within all living things? Would that make evolution more plausible for you?
 

GreenKepi

Member
What if souls exist within all living things? Would that make evolution more plausible for you?

No...not really; however, this isn't to say that all living things do not have 'souls'. I believe in the Scriptures and they do say that even animals have souls. Rev. 16:3 - "And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea". (So...the animals may be in Heaven). I also believe Jesus when He said that God destroys souls (Matt 10:28 - "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul...."). I do not believe man is immortal (1 Cor 15:53-54) where it tells us that "This mortal must put on immortality...."). So...this really has nothing to do with how things supposedly "evolve".

Great question! You're making me 'defend' my beliefs...thank you!
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
I was watching 3ABN just a while back and several men were on the show discussing the persuasiveness of the theory of Evolution. The talk began with this notion. 'If there was no God and the Universe was a Godless Universe, the theory or Evolution and the things they teach in schools of Darwin and such, can be very persuasive.' (Please, this is NOT the exact quote)...

My thought upon hearing that was this: Why are they discussing any possible notion that there is no God and that the Universe could be a Godless Universe on a Christian t.v. channel?

I know that certain discussions which pertain to the world's ideas of how things 'may' be are interesting to get involved with, but did they leave out all concerns towards any person which may be watching the show? A person who's faith may not be as strong as theirs may become confused when hearing such concepts on a Christian network. And to listen to the whole discussion may become very taxing on the hearer rather than edifying.

So my idea was this: instead of them saying that such ideas can be very 'persuasive', they might fare better if they say that such ideas can be 'very deceptive', instead. This way it separates and helps the hearer in understanding the differences between The Truth of God's Word over the 'deceptions' of the world.

If there is no "God", the logic that "God" would represent would still be true.

"God" is essentially the personification of the most basic logic (or the logicalization of the most basic person) -which, in turn, created more complex logic/more complex person.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
If there is no "God", the logic that "God" would represent would still be true.

"God" is essentially the personification of the most basic logic (or the logicalization of the most basic person) -which, in turn, created more complex logic/more complex person.
Job 38 to 41 showed that god is not interested in logic or reality.

All he is interested is just his vanity of being worshipped. If he show anything in these chapters, is that he like to intimidate people into worship him...and even then he will sooner bite you than pat you on the back.

God, if he is anything like God in Job, is not someone whom I can admire or respect, let alone worship.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
Job 38 to 41 showed that god is not interested in logic or reality.

All he is interested is just his vanity of being worshipped. If he show anything in these chapters, is that he like to intimidate people into worship him...and even then he will sooner bite you than pat you on the back.
God, if he is anything like God in Job, is not someone whom I can admire or respect, let alone worship.
Lucifer was the most powerful, beautiful, talented and wise creature God had made -but he did not have experience and had not yet made himself perfect inwardly. As we are individuals, we must choose to do right, and be able to do so under any circumstance.

Where he did well, it was acknowledged and praised.
He eventually decided to be destructive and all sorts of mean, nasty, ugly things.
Should he get a pat on the back for that?

I think that when Job and all the loved ones he lost are together in the future -which will have been created by those things described in the book of Job and others -they will not feel as you do.

You are considering temporary states which will change.
What God was and is considering are perfected spirits who will never depart from righteousness -and a future state which will only change for the good forevermore.

Whether or not Job "deserved" all of that is not actually the point. God gave him evils which he may not have "deserved" -but also that which would give him more good than he ever could deserve. It just happened to be extremely unpleasant temporarily -but even that will eventually no longer enter his mind.

When God asked if Satan had considered Job, he already knew the end of the matter. God was creating a situation for both Satan and Job to experience and consider. Satan will consider those things -and the future Job will inherit.
Job will consider those things -and what will become of Satan -and inherit that future.

The immediate situation was horrible -but God not only gave Job more than he had before in earthly terms, but will return to him his lost family members later.
However, later they will be returned when the overall situation is indescribably better.

It may seem that God was being egotistical, but God simply told the truth about himself. It is important we understand, because that allows for correct perception -and therefore correct action.
It may seem that God was belittling Job, but he was actually making job a perfect god from an imperfect human. Job was perfect in all his ways except one -and that one was thereby removed. Job will be worthy of being given an incredibly powerful, mobile and invulnerable body -and God will know that he can be trusted anywhere in the universe without having to micromanage.

God was not saying "I'm awesome" for no reason. He was saying "I am awesome, and I am going to make you awesome."

Job 40:6Then answered the LORD unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
7Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
8Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?

God was essentially telling Job to put on his big boy pants.
God could indeed have left Job the be a very content and happy flock keeper -but he brought him into a situation which involved powers far greater than himself -because God purposed to make him far greater than himself.
He pointed out that condemning God would not make Job righteous -but that God was making Job righteous by this experience.

Job 40:10Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.
11Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.
12Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.
13Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.
14Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

In the above, God describes what he does -and why he does it -to save them from imperfection -to make them perfect -because they themselves are not able. An individual must ultimately willingly make a correct decision based on logic, but also the experience which both proves and personalizes that logic. Rather than allow us all to hopefully eventually "get it", however, God fast-tracks the process -manages and directs our overall and personal experiences -brining us to the point of decision.

Isaiah 65:17For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
18But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create:
for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy.

Even the best of human fathers are often hated by their children when they give them what they need rather than what they want -but later they love them more for it. God being God, it is his place to do that which human fathers should not -but he will still be loved all the more for it.
It is understandable that you feel as you do now -but even you will not feel that way later.

None of us -all born innocent -deserve this experience -and neither will we deserve by our own works that which it makes possible later. Perhaps it could be said that because we endure this experience, we deserve a good experience which will nullify this one and replace it -but this experience is what must take place to cause the other -and that is exactly what has already been planned.

Isaiah 46:10Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yetdone, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
 
Last edited:

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
I was watching 3ABN just a while back and several men were on the show discussing the persuasiveness of the theory of Evolution. The talk began with this notion. 'If there was no God and the Universe was a Godless Universe, the theory or Evolution and the things they teach in schools of Darwin and such, can be very persuasive.' (Please, this is NOT the exact quote)...

My thought upon hearing that was this: Why are they discussing any possible notion that there is no God and that the Universe could be a Godless Universe on a Christian t.v. channel?

I know that certain discussions which pertain to the world's ideas of how things 'may' be are interesting to get involved with, but did they leave out all concerns towards any person which may be watching the show? A person who's faith may not be as strong as theirs may become confused when hearing such concepts on a Christian network. And to listen to the whole discussion may become very taxing on the hearer rather than edifying.

So my idea was this: instead of them saying that such ideas can be very 'persuasive', they might fare better if they say that such ideas can be 'very deceptive', instead. This way it separates and helps the hearer in understanding the differences between The Truth of God's Word over the 'deceptions' of the world.
Persuasive in the academic and scientific world means that an idea has merit and worth. So much so that it can change minds that consider and weigh evidence. The theory of evolution is incredibly persuasive. This is most likely due to the fact it most accurately models the universe by all measurable evidences and observations in terms of biology and life.

I also think this is a profound and incredible point to be made that was summed up rather simply by this very same dialogue is that the only thing stopping people from believing in evolution is dogmatic axioms dealing with god. It isn't in contrast to evidence we observe but what faith they believe.
 
Top