As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Evolution and God
Lachoneus
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I have been thinking about this for a while. And it just makes sense to me. What I believe is this: All things in earth and heaven denote the existence of God (Alma 34:40-41; I'm of the same mind). This includes evolution. WARNING: This is a lot to read, but I would really appreciate the time it would take to read it all.
I love the magazine/website PopSci, and every week or so, I scroll through the different categories. Stuff like this amazes me:
Mosquitoes that are 100% Resistant to the Malaria Parasite
Self Replicating Artificial Cells
And many other things (I can't find all the stuff I was looking for atm; I'll update if/when I can find them). Seriously, take 10 minutes and you'll have a "nerdgasm."
Have you seen the Sam Neill Space series? One of my favorite episodes is "Star Stuff." There is one part of it that talks about a laboratory in Arizona that is studying and recreating the composition and effects of a supernova. Start watching at about 4 minutes. The slow-motion portion of the explosion is one of the most intense/amazing things I've seen.
Lets get back to the topic of this thread: Evolution and God.
I've always been a "standard/classical" Creationist. Meaning that dinosaurs and evolution boggled my mind (how does that coincide with Creationism), and the Big Bang was ridiculous. But the more I actually learn and study those things in conjunction with the scriptures and the knowledge that God is omnipotent, the more and more Alma's testimony rings true.
Look at the things we talked about previously.
I don't believe in "survival of the fittest" the way its taught in general. Do I believe in evolution? Yes. But, in designed evolution. With the limited science that we have in our time, plants, animals, insects, humans, etc., can we create animals or other organic life from scratch? Not yet. But look at what we can do already. We are on our way.
Look at all the things homo-sapiens can do. Homos that use only 7-11% of our brains' potential. If we can do all of this in the span of a few thousand years (most of the jumps have been in the last 200), what would happen with a society whose brains were completely unlocked? Its not too far fetched to imagine that, that society would have unlocked immortality. If we can push our lifespan to 75 years on average (its increased steadily for the past 100+ years), then it wouldn't be that surprising right? We are already on our way to becoming that kind of a society. The more we are able to use technology to purify the earth and air and food and seas, the cleaner and more efficient our food stuffs and sustenance should be; on top of that we are developing ways to keep our cells reproducing at a higher rate of purity (which increases life span).
So lets put this altogether. Imagine the next few evolutions of the homo line. homo-superior, homo-super-superior, homo-super-super-superior... a society that has unlocked, or evolved, the power of the brain to 100%, and has unlocked immortality. This society can create and design organic and non-organic things (from grass to planets/solar systems).
If you believe in evolution at all, or even designed evolution, you have to believe in God (I just believe the evolved "homo" line reach its pinnacle in God). Evolution denotes that God exists, or at the very least a God-like being or set of beings exist: A being that can do all the things the scriptures teach He can do and has done. And if you believe this life is a shadow (or dim glimmer of what could be) of the a life or existence to come, then the ability to create reproducing cells and cells with their own jobs is a shadow of a Being that can create whole animals and evolve them by changing the genetic code with certain environmental and other influences. Or simulating the big bang like CERN does, is a shadow of a Being that can actually create the real Big Bang.
Why cant God be an immortal, "unlocked" homo-super-super-superior? But this "unlocked" immortal and His society has figured out, through an eternity of learning, that the best way to exist, live, be, is how He has taught us (i.e. commandments, ordinances, faith and obedience to these laws). The laws of God aren't so much laws against doing certain things as helping us avoid sorrow from personal sin and sorrow from being sinned against. That pain would be eradicated in that type of a society: when the Golden Rules actually lived 100% by er'ryone. His way of living, what He and that society has discovered, after an eternity, is this is the best way to live: love your God and love your neighbor. That's the only thing He has taught. Loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself would encompass all other areas of societal life.
I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you can't believe in God and not believe in evolution and the other sciences; and you cant believe in evolution/etc and not believe in God: You can't deny one without denying the other.
I been told to provide proof of God's existence. This is my proof. You may not agree with the characteristics of the God I believe in, but, to me, evolution just points straight to God.
I realize this isn't well written and its close to being a blog post. But, I'm not sure how to say what I'm thinking/feeling that well in this respect. I hope my point got across to you all.
I really want to get a discussion going about this topic. Please, no flamming, no riduculing/derisive comments. This thread is for honest and open discussion.
I love the magazine/website PopSci, and every week or so, I scroll through the different categories. Stuff like this amazes me:
Mosquitoes that are 100% Resistant to the Malaria Parasite
Self Replicating Artificial Cells
And many other things (I can't find all the stuff I was looking for atm; I'll update if/when I can find them). Seriously, take 10 minutes and you'll have a "nerdgasm."
Have you seen the Sam Neill Space series? One of my favorite episodes is "Star Stuff." There is one part of it that talks about a laboratory in Arizona that is studying and recreating the composition and effects of a supernova. Start watching at about 4 minutes. The slow-motion portion of the explosion is one of the most intense/amazing things I've seen.
Lets get back to the topic of this thread: Evolution and God.
I've always been a "standard/classical" Creationist. Meaning that dinosaurs and evolution boggled my mind (how does that coincide with Creationism), and the Big Bang was ridiculous. But the more I actually learn and study those things in conjunction with the scriptures and the knowledge that God is omnipotent, the more and more Alma's testimony rings true.
Look at the things we talked about previously.
I don't believe in "survival of the fittest" the way its taught in general. Do I believe in evolution? Yes. But, in designed evolution. With the limited science that we have in our time, plants, animals, insects, humans, etc., can we create animals or other organic life from scratch? Not yet. But look at what we can do already. We are on our way.
Look at all the things homo-sapiens can do. Homos that use only 7-11% of our brains' potential. If we can do all of this in the span of a few thousand years (most of the jumps have been in the last 200), what would happen with a society whose brains were completely unlocked? Its not too far fetched to imagine that, that society would have unlocked immortality. If we can push our lifespan to 75 years on average (its increased steadily for the past 100+ years), then it wouldn't be that surprising right? We are already on our way to becoming that kind of a society. The more we are able to use technology to purify the earth and air and food and seas, the cleaner and more efficient our food stuffs and sustenance should be; on top of that we are developing ways to keep our cells reproducing at a higher rate of purity (which increases life span).
So lets put this altogether. Imagine the next few evolutions of the homo line. homo-superior, homo-super-superior, homo-super-super-superior... a society that has unlocked, or evolved, the power of the brain to 100%, and has unlocked immortality. This society can create and design organic and non-organic things (from grass to planets/solar systems).
If you believe in evolution at all, or even designed evolution, you have to believe in God (I just believe the evolved "homo" line reach its pinnacle in God). Evolution denotes that God exists, or at the very least a God-like being or set of beings exist: A being that can do all the things the scriptures teach He can do and has done. And if you believe this life is a shadow (or dim glimmer of what could be) of the a life or existence to come, then the ability to create reproducing cells and cells with their own jobs is a shadow of a Being that can create whole animals and evolve them by changing the genetic code with certain environmental and other influences. Or simulating the big bang like CERN does, is a shadow of a Being that can actually create the real Big Bang.
Why cant God be an immortal, "unlocked" homo-super-super-superior? But this "unlocked" immortal and His society has figured out, through an eternity of learning, that the best way to exist, live, be, is how He has taught us (i.e. commandments, ordinances, faith and obedience to these laws). The laws of God aren't so much laws against doing certain things as helping us avoid sorrow from personal sin and sorrow from being sinned against. That pain would be eradicated in that type of a society: when the Golden Rules actually lived 100% by er'ryone. His way of living, what He and that society has discovered, after an eternity, is this is the best way to live: love your God and love your neighbor. That's the only thing He has taught. Loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself would encompass all other areas of societal life.
I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you can't believe in God and not believe in evolution and the other sciences; and you cant believe in evolution/etc and not believe in God: You can't deny one without denying the other.
I been told to provide proof of God's existence. This is my proof. You may not agree with the characteristics of the God I believe in, but, to me, evolution just points straight to God.
I realize this isn't well written and its close to being a blog post. But, I'm not sure how to say what I'm thinking/feeling that well in this respect. I hope my point got across to you all.
I really want to get a discussion going about this topic. Please, no flamming, no riduculing/derisive comments. This thread is for honest and open discussion.
"No women. No kids."
Lachoneus on
0
Posts
I was just about to post this, too.
well, despite that being true or not. it doesn't change the point/argument of the topic. whether its 7 or 100 percent. evolution would still increase our species' line of brain potential.
No I don't. And I say this as a deist.
Yes, we can imitate nature. Doesn't mean nature didn't do it first.
Dude.
It's God.
He can be literally whatever you want.
Nope. I can do it very easily. Doing it right now, in fact. I mean, it's my personal belief that there's probably something Goddish out there, but it has nothing to do with hard science. Kinda the opposite.
Mostly I don't agree because it isn't proof.
Not true. Evolution doesn't mean improved brain capacity. It mostly just means change.
How does this follow anything you said?
"Since Evolution is true, that means that god exists!"
lol wut?
You're right, whose to say nature didn't do it first. But even if nature did it first, why couldn't we do it again?
Again, you're right about brain capacity not being guaranteed in the next evolutionary step, but what about in 30 steps in our species' line?
We could evolve greater intelligence, but only if it is being selected for. It's not, as evolution is really about "the survival of the good enough", rather than "the survival of the fittest".
And not even necessarily good change. You can evolve yourself into extinction. In fact, most shit does if you take a broad enough view of the timelines we're talking about.
The point is that then you don't really have proof that evolution, big bang, etc mean there's a god if there's just as much, frankly more evidence that it was just nature/physics.
If you make assumptions, anything is possible!
If.
There's no actual proof that there is.
Or survival of the horny. Look at cicadas.
Actually, don't look at cicadas. Damn noisy bugs.
There's no reason to believe that anything is in charge of evolution. And even if there is and humans are its pet project, why did it waste so much time on the dinosaurs? Also, why didn't it design the human body better (standing upright is murder on your back).
Now combine that with evolution and the infinite-ness of the universe.
Or it'd evolve them into something cute and dumb, like we did to dogs.
Just to get this out of the way:
"Survival of the Fittest" doesn't mean "Survival of the 'Best' Individual"; "Survival of the Fittest" is more or less "Perpetuation of Whatever Mates the Most"
Evolution isn't about progress; it's about survival (specifically, survival just long enough to reproduce). Intelligence is just a strange quirk and is probably an exceedingly unlikely product of evolution.
So I am not being flippant- I don't necessarily think that evolution can be used as a case for or against the existence of a creator or a god (as someone who is an evolutionary biologist!), and the "teleology" I speak of is the idea that the process of evolution has either a "goal" or is a process of "betterment".
Evolution is not an idea that things are becoming "better" over time- in fact many organisms can get "worse" by many metrics.
The idea that evolution is a process toward some end goal of "perfection" is a problem that stems from two things- the old "decent of man" images (that show an ape turning into a man) and a misunderstanding of the biological concept of "fitness".
Given that this is sort of central to your argument, I am having a hard time accepting as definitive the claim that a god or god-like being is simply a "super evolved" human. For all we know, evolution could favor "stupidity" after a time, and end up with something like the Morlocks and Eloi from The Time Machine.
There is no progression towards perfection in evolution, as what is "perfect" is completely subjective based on environment- right now humans seem to favor increased brain power, but this has not always been the case, and may not always be the case.
You are right about at least one thing- modern evolutionary thinking has largely abandoned the idea of "survival of the fittest", or at least accepted that fitness is both hard to measure and relatively subject to the certain environment. There are also alternate evolutionary mechanisms at work that shape diversity on earth (such as random genetic drift, sexual selection, and even feedback from phenotypic plasticity).
I am amused and confused that you don't believe in "survival of the fittest", yet subscribe to a view of evolution that claims that things are always, and will always get "better".
I could probably say more about this whole post, but I am really jet-lagged and worn out from interviews today.
I've always found different mythologies fascinating. It's interesting to look at which things get an explanation, which things are merely taken for granted, and so forth. You can get an interesting view into different cultures this way. For example, the whole "creation of the universe" thing: before we got a good solid evidence-based theory of How Stuff Works, you had some cultures that took it for granted that "In The Beginning etc. etc.," and some that never had the idea of the universe being "created" at all, it was just "always there".
Another interesting thing, while we're going down the "creation" leg of this tree, is the automatic assumption that a creator is all-knowing, all-powerful, incapable of making any mistakes, omnibenevolent, genuinely interested in your personal well-being, and the like. Some of these are stated outright and some are implicit, but they're all there.
I often joke that people who advocate "intelligent design" as an alternative to evolution have never actually designed anything themselves. The process of design is an inherently evolutionary one; you can't just start working and end up with a product. You create, you see how the results interact with the rest of the market, you modify and build on that and so forth.
In addition, you don't necessarily give a shit about all of the tiniest details in what you're creating. When I'm writing software, I don't worry about every electron in the microprocessor. I couldn't even if I wanted to. Also, there are fundamental limits to what I can do: I'd love to write a debugger that'll catch all of my infinite loops, but I (provably) can't; there are laws of mathematics in the way.
So it's interesting that there's an automatic assumption among creationists that because the universe was created by an actual conscious being that that being necessarily has a plan for you personally, gives a damn what you're doing or even is aware of your existence. I don't see how the one automatically follows from the other.
Why is it pseudoscience?
All I'm saying is that if we can do what we are doing now, as imperfect and, really, un-knowledgeable as we are... why can't there be an evolved version of us somewhere in the universe that knows what we don't?
We make scientific discoveries every day. All day long. More and more about physics and biology and chemestry, all the time. We are finding out new things that make old theories/assumptions obsolete. We can make helium think its hydrogen. We are still at the beginning of our evolution if you look at the age of the universe vs the time humans have been using tools. And we can do all that stuff. What if we figure out how to keep going instead of evolving ourselves to extinction?
Humanity on the other hand, pushes towards progression and improvement. Survival of the fittest holds true in the realm of human evolution.
Those are all very interesting things. They are not, however, proof of gods or god like beings.
Uhhh, no? You don't have to be exceptionally smart or strong to survive to maturity in modern civilization. Pretty much anyone can survive to maturity in many countries now. I don't think we have any sort of selection process at work on humans.
Maybe if we had stuck with eugenics (damn Nazis ruining everybody's fun!), but I'm not sure if eugenics would have even worked.
Also, the trachea should just wire directly to your nose. That way eating delicious things wouldn't also be a choking hazard.
How come dolphins get blowholes and we don't? Lousy evolution.
Look, I get what you're saying. Hell, it's not too far off from the "Singularity" stuff you'll hear from many of the atheists on this board. I'm just saying it's one hell of a leap to go from "Hey, if people keep advancing, we'll be as powerful as the gods of our own mythologies! What if somewhere else this already happened?" over to "All of Joseph Smith's self-serving crap was actually true!"
But then again when you get a stuffy nose you die.
Frankly the air should just be denser to allow for cockroach overlords.
"Fittest" in the context of biology, which is the only way you can describe it if you are talking about evolution
does not mean better, faster, stronger, smarter, sexier, tastier
Fitness is a measure of reproductive success, NOT a measure of how "good" at something is OTHER than simply passing on its genetic information.
Something can be stupid and weak, but happen to reproduce a lot, and it would be more "fit" than, say, the human race.
Really? I don't see humanity heading towards a Wall-e type future. If anything humanity in general is seeking improvement and betterment. Technology alone is proof of that. Parts of humanity that lag behind in progression are left behind.
edit: For the purpose of this post: fittest = most intelligent.
Why do you think it doesn't hold for humanity?
Tom Waits fan?
You don't have to be exceptionally smart or strong to survive to maturity in modern civilization. Pretty much anyone can survive to reproduce in many countries now. I don't think we have any sort of selection process at work on humans. Maybe if we had stuck with eugenics (damn Nazis ruining everybody's fun!), but I'm not sure if eugenics would have even worked.
It's true that our technology is improving, but it's not because of some species-wide apotheosis. It's more that scientists are coming up with neat stuff and everyone else is mooching off of their work.
Someone being "in charge" of evolution defeats the entire purpose of evolution. If some force was controlling evolution to make us stronger, that would mean that this force would be systematically killing people, or causing them to be killed, for being stupid.
But, survival of the fittest doesn't really apply to humans anymore. You could be a complete moron and have no problem reproducing because we have no natural predators anymore. Unless you go camping in the wilderness and get eaten by a cougar or something, but that could after you pass on your stupid, cougar-startling genes.
FOR EXAMPLE I HAVE RELATIVELY LOW FITNESS, YET AM KIND OF SMART AND HANDSOME
I HAVE ZERO FITNESS BECAUSE I HAVE NO OFFSPRING
Technology doesn't have anything to do with evolution except inasmuch as vaccines and eradication campaigns have made it easier to not die from horrible diseases and other advancements in civilization have reduced the infant mortality rate.
And biologically fittest =! most intelligent. Like, at all.
That you know of...
bow chicka bow bow
So fitness doesn't refer to a creature's attributes at all, not even the ones that deal with its ability to survive to sexual maturity?