Evolution, Atheism, and Religious Beliefs

[ecco]

I disbelieved in god years before I had even heard of evolution, so it played no part whatsoever.

GMTA. See above (post # 60).

 

[blü 2]

Only reason why you may reject theism once you've learned about evolution is if the only reason you held on to it in the first place was to merely explain the complexity of life.

A fair point.

But as a matter of impression I'd say most people belong to a religion for reasons other than a deep and central conviction that God exists in some relevant sense.

And I dare say they're the ones who are drifting away, not necessarily because they understand evolution and its implications for Genesis, but because it reinforces, even vaguely, an inner what's-the-point? about religion that they already feel.

 

[Estro Felino]

You are spot on here. And I find it amazing that those of us who were created for salvation are able to find within ourselves the tools we need to divine great spiritual insights from the very same words that leave those who were created for destruction throwing up their hands in confusion. What an amazing creation this universe is, indeed.

Omg....I dare not imagine what you think of free will...

Although...I still don't understand why it would be so humiliating to admit to believe in ID

 

[Axe Elf]

Omg....I dare not imagine what you think of free will...

Well, I believe in a God that created spacetime, so obviously, I don't believe in free will.

Although...I still don't understand why it would be so humiliating to admit to believe in ID

Because I am a man of science, and the "Intelligent Design" camp has set itself up to compete against science. I can admit to a watered-down version of ID, if by ID one simply means that I think there is a supernatural cause beyond the realm of science for those things that science does an excellent job of describing. But that's not what most people think of when you say "Intelligent Design"; they think of someone who denies the descriptions of science entirely, and that would be pretty humiliating for me. I would have to view myself with scorn and condescension thereafter.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, I believe in a God that created spacetime, so obviously, I don't believe in free will.



Because I am a man of science, and the "Intelligent Design" camp has set itself up to compete against science. I can admit to a watered-down version of ID, if by ID one simply means that I think there is a supernatural cause beyond the realm of science for those things that science does an excellent job of describing. But that's not what most people think of when you say "Intelligent Design"; they think of someone who denies the descriptions of science entirely, and that would be pretty humiliating for me. I would have to view myself with scorn and condescension thereafter.

I would not call that ID, especially since I know the history of it. Have you watched the video about the Dover trial? How the creationist movement tried to take on the identity of ID is made rather clear in it. It was a turning point of the trial itself.

 

[Axe Elf]

I would not call that ID, especially since I know the history of it. Have you watched the video about the Dover trial? How the creationist movement tried to take on the identity of ID is made rather clear in it. It was a turning point of the trial itself.

I have not, but I view the ID movement with basically the same scorn that I view the strict Creationist movement; ID is just Creationism with a white lab coat on.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have not, but I view the ID movement with basically the same scorn that I view the strict Creationist movement; ID is just Creationism with a white lab coat on.

Exactly . I should try to find a video for you on it. When it was shown that in a textbook by the creationists that they merely changed terminology after creationism was banned the judge supposedly lost his poker face for a second.

 

[ecco]

Well, I believe in a God that created spacetime, so obviously, I don't believe in free will.

Why do you believe a space-time creator would prevent you from having free will?

 

[Axe Elf]

Why do you believe a space-time creator would prevent you from having free will?

Because if space and time are merely two manifestations of the same thing, then if God created all of space, He also created all of time with it--every moment as structured and fixed as every millimeter.

Besides, I also believe God is omniscient, and omniscience is incompatible with free will all by itself--but the concept of spacetime reinforces it. And then there are the literally dozens of Bible verses that TELL us we don't have free will--but neither of those things have to do with what you asked.

 

[Estro Felino]

Well, I believe in a God that created spacetime, so obviously, I don't believe in free will.

Because I am a man of science, and the "Intelligent Design" camp has set itself up to compete against science. I can admit to a watered-down version of ID, if by ID one simply means that I think there is a supernatural cause beyond the realm of science for those things that science does an excellent job of describing.

Well...I understand your point and I guess that the belief in free will (or lack thereof) is essential to determine one's personal vision of God. In fact I understood only now what you meant by God's role in evolution.

I guess if I told you my vision, you would probably define me a semi-atheist, as many already did.
I believe God played no role in Evolution whatsoever. He left living beings free to adapt themselves randomly. I also think a good God would have never conceived the chaos of natural selection...I think Jesus told and showed us clearly He is not responsible for the chaos of nature.

 

[ecco]

Why do you believe a space-time creator would prevent you from having free will?

Because if space and time are merely two manifestations of the same thing, then if God created all of space, He also created all of time with it--every moment as structured and fixed as every millimeter.

Why do you think that space or time are fixed?

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia
"A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space"​

Besides, I also believe God is omniscient, and omniscience is incompatible with free will all by itself

That's something that a mere mortal human might say. When you say that, you are diminishing the powers of an all powerful god. An omnipotent god can be omniscient and mere human mortals can still have free will. That you cannot comprehend that just proves that you are human and not godlike.

And then there are the literally dozens of Bible verses that TELL us we don't have free will--but neither of those things have to do with what you asked.

There are also bible versus that purport to claim that man does have free will - Eve eating the apple.

 

[Axe Elf]

Well...I understand your point and I guess that the belief in free will (or lack thereof) is essential to determine one's personal vision of God. In fact I understood only now what you meant by God's role in evolution.

Cool, I'm glad that makes sense to you now in the context of predestination.

And you are damned close when you say that the belief in free will (or lack thereof) is essential to determine one's personal vision of God. So close, in fact, that you may actually be spot on for some people. I do believe that we end up defining God by those things that we would accept God to be--deciding ahead of time what attributes would be important for a God worthy of our worship to have--and so there are probably people who define their God by whether or not He allows them to have free will.

For me, though, not having free will was not itself an axiom that I looked for in a God, but a logical consequence of the axioms that I DID choose to define my God by--which were:

1. God exists.
2. God is omnipotent.
3. God is omniscient.
4. God is omnipresent.
5. God is omnibenevolent.

Since I define God to be omniscient, I'm logically constrained to accept predestination. And then there's the whole spacetime thing. And the dozens of Bible verses.

But you are totally right in the general sense that people could define their God in at least one way by His sovereignty (or lack thereof).

 

[Subduction Zone]

Cool, I'm glad that makes sense to you now in the context of predestination.

And you are damned close when you say that the belief in free will (or lack thereof) is essential to determine one's personal vision of God. So close, in fact, that you may actually be spot on for some people. I do believe that we end up defining God by those things that we would accept God to be--deciding ahead of time what attributes would be important for a God worthy of our worship to have--and so there are probably people who define their God by whether or not He allows them to have free will.

For me, though, not having free will was not itself an axiom that I looked for in a God, but a logical consequence of the axioms that I DID choose to define my God by--which were:

1. God exists.
2. God is omnipotent.
3. God is omniscient.
4. God is omnipresent.
5. God is omnibenevolent.

Since I define God to be omniscient, I'm logically constrained to accept predestination. And then there's the whole spacetime thing. And the dozens of Bible verses.

But you are totally right in the general sense that people could define their God in at least one way by His sovereignty (or lack thereof).

What if a God exists but he does not meet all of your requirements?

 

[Axe Elf]

Why do you think that space or time are fixed?

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia
"A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of empty space"​

​

Quantum fluctuations have nothing to do with it, they're just things that happen, like any other thing that happens.

Pick a moment. Everything in the universe is fixed in that moment. Nothing moves, nothing changes, nothing becomes. Every moment before that, and every moment after that, is just like that moment--fixed in time and space, absolutely unalterable. We can see in three dimensions; if time is the fourth and we could see in it too, we would see all of these moments, chained together and laid out like a mountain range, fixed and immobile--as God sees them; no, as God CREATED them, no less. Nothing happens that is not now, has not always been, and will forever be, fixed in time and space like a fly in amber, frozen in the eternal "now" of its moment.

That's something that a mere mortal human might say.

Compliments on the keen powers of observation; it was indeed said by a mere mortal human! You should buy a lottery ticket or something...

When you say that, you are diminishing the powers of an all powerful god. An omnipotent god can be omniscient and mere human mortals can still have free will. That you cannot comprehend that just proves that you are human and not godlike.

What, you have to be godlike to comprehend nonsense? Well, that explains my confusion, then.

You seem to be laboring under the common apperception that being "omnipotent" means that God can do anything whatsoever--even things that may seem contradictory to mere mortals, like making a rock so big that He Himself cannot move it. The word "omnipotent," though, simply means "all-powerful"; God has access to all power, or, He can do anything that can be done with power. But there are things that cannot be done with ANY amount of power, such as drawing a four-sided triangle, introducing me to a married bachelor, making a one-sided coin (and therein lies part of the solution to the Problem of Evil), or be omniscient and still not know what's going to happen.

Basically, you're suggesting that God could have created that mountain range of moments, and have the ability to look at any part of any one of them at any time He wants--and still not know what's going to happen in them.

Obvious poppycock.

There are also bible versus that purport to claim that man does have free will - Eve eating the apple.

There are... and these ideas are complex indeed--just look at how confusing they are even to the people here who are willing to devote a good deal of time to sorting them out! The Bible speaks in terms that the simple can understand, and also in more abstract terms that can be understood by people who can deal in more abstract terms. Both Hebrews 6 and 1 Corinthians 2 speak about the "milk" used to feed immature believers and the "meat," or the higher wisdom, that can be discussed among the more mature Christians. The Bible speaks to everyone on the basis of what they have been created to understand.

So if all you can do is follow rules, there are rules to follow. If you can live by higher principles, there are higher principles to follow. And if you can think rationally about abstract concepts so that you find yourself going, "Hey, wait a minute! If God is omniscient, then I can't have free will!" then the Bible is right there to say, "I knew you'd figure it out eventually."

 

[Axe Elf]

What if a God exists but he does not meet all of your requirements?

If there is some "superbeing" out there that might be "godlike" in some ways, but is not omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent, then God does not exist for me.

I'm ok with that possibility.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If there is some "superbeing" out there that might be "godlike" in some ways, but is not omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent, then God does not exist for me.

I'm ok with that possibility.

I can understand that. If such a being does not meet all of your criterion it is not worthy of respect or worship. Meanwhile I withhold my judgement. I will not say that such a being does not exist, I simply do not see a reason to believe in it.

 

[Axe Elf]

I can understand that. If such a being does not meet all of your criterion it is not worthy of respect or worship. Meanwhile I withhold my judgement. I will not say that such a being does not exist, I simply do not see a reason to believe in it.

And I can't argue with that. It is simply a choice on my part to assume those axioms, much like the choice one makes between two competing parallel postulates, depending on what kind of work one wants to do. I want to do my work in a universe where the omni-God exists, so that is how I define Him.

 

[ecco]

​

Quantum fluctuations have nothing to do with it, they're just things that happen, like any other thing that happens.

Pick a moment. Everything in the universe is fixed in that moment. Nothing moves, nothing changes, nothing becomes.

So far, so good.

Every moment before that ...is just like that moment--fixed in time and space, absolutely unalterable.

So far, so good.

, and every moment after that, is just like that moment--fixed in time and space, absolutely unalterable.

That's an unsubstantiated assertion based on nothing more than your belief system. Insofar as the future is concerned, quantum fluctuations have everything to do with it. And as you said, "they're just things that happen. There is substantial evidence to support the view that they truly are random. If they are random, there is no predestination.

 

[ecco]

That's something that a mere mortal human might say. When you say that, you are diminishing the powers of an all powerful god. An omnipotent god can be omniscient and mere human mortals can still have free will. That you cannot comprehend that just proves that you are human and not godlike.

You seem to be laboring under the common apperception that being "omnipotent" means that God can do anything whatsoever--even things that may seem contradictory to mere mortals, like making a rock so big that He Himself cannot move it.

That is not a "common apperception", that is the definition of omnipotent. If you don't like it, make up a different word for the powers you attribute to your deity. However, since you attribute omnipotence to your god, then you have to accept the common definition and usage.

The word "omnipotent," though, simply means "all-powerful"; God has access to all power, or, He can do anything that can be done with power. But there are things that cannot be done with ANY amount of power, such as drawing a four-sided triangle, introducing me to a married bachelor, making a one-sided coin (and therein lies part of the solution to the Problem of Evil), or be omniscient and still not know what's going to happen.

An ant cannot comprehend man's Golden Gate Bridge. It cannot comprehend the size of it. It cannot comprehend the usage of it. It cannot comprehend the construction of it. Yet the Golden Gate Bridge does exist.

You, and many others, cannot comprehend that a god can be omniscient and omnipotent while his creations have free will.

There are things that humans and ants cannot comprehend.

 

[ecco]

There are also bible versus that purport to claim that man does have free will - Eve eating the apple.

The Bible speaks in terms that the simple can understand...The Bible speaks to everyone on the basis of what they have been created to understand.

So if all you can do is follow rules, there are rules to follow. If you can live by higher principles, there are higher principles to follow. And if you can think rationally about abstract concepts so that you find yourself going, "Hey, wait a minute! If God is omniscient, then I can't have free will!" then the Bible is right there to say, "I knew you'd figure it out eventually."

So, people who interpret the bible in the way you do, are people who "can think rationally about abstract concepts" and conclude "If God is omniscient, then I can't have free will!"

To the contrary...

• People who conclude "If God is omniscient, then I can't have free will!" are taking a very simplistic view.
• People who can think rationally about abstract concepts would would have to acknowledge that godly omniscience and human free will are not mutually exclusive regardless of how illogical it may seem to the human mind.