|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: God and Evolution..
Damn, I get busy and take a break from the boards and this thread explodes. Took me an hour to catch up.
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Even when the argument is about God or Hitler? 
Oh and about that montie, I have a lot of questions about the story of Adam and Eve as well. Among them:
- Why would Adam want a companion, when he was technically a hermaphrodite and had no concept of man or woman?
- Why would God create Eve from Adam's rib, when he was an all-powerful being that could have created her instantly from dust?
- Having given Adam and Eve the gift of Free Will, what was the purpose of making that tree? Simply to prove that they truly did have Free Will? If so, why the need for extravagance, why not just pick an ordinary "placebo" apple tree and watch the results?
- How could Adam and Eve have understood that it would be wrong to disobey God's orders, prior to them having any knowledge of what right or wrong was? Following that, how could God have logically expected them to obey those orders?
- According to the story, Adam and Eve hide their privates in fig leaves after discovering right and wrong. Considering that they were the only two humans on the planet and that clothes hadn't been invented yet, how was their nakedness shameful?
- Where was the Garden of Eden - surely we must have some vague info on its geographical location?
- Doesn't an eternity of damnation for all humanity seem a bit harsh when they didn't understand the rule they were breaking? How can God call himself forgiving under these circumstances?
- Through what medium did God communicate with Adam and Eve?
- Why should we be forever grateful to a God that has punished us for all eternity because of the mistakes our 50,000-year-old ancestors made? |
anyway, Diginut you posted this awhile ago and since I can't answer those all those questions from the Catholic perspective (Its been a couple years since I took theology), I sent them to one of my old teachers who is a theologan and monk and this is his response...
:lots of these questions are based on trying to read Genesis 2-4 in a historical mode
: thats basically not possible.
: the second creation account in genesis is an ancient myth that tries to make sense of the known reality of sin in the world.
dombedeprice: sin is the historical reality, the story in genesis is an attempt to describe how that reality came to be.
: therefore it has inconistencies and things which don't make sense in a strictly historical sense.
: Only protestant fundamentalist believe that genesis represents actual history.
: consider for instance, the fact that the first account of creation and the second account are different.
dombedeprice: genesis 1 was written by a different author than genesis 2-3.
: your last three questions are more interesting.
: first, the whole purpose of the genesis story is that God created all things from nothing. He is the creator of all things, time and space included.
: secondly, sin is a reality however you want to explain it. Its something which comes from us the creature and keeps us from fully understanding God our creator. God doesn't sit around in heaven looking for opportunities to punish us.
: our sins are the thing that causes us to see God as more and more distant. It is actually an illusion. God is just as close to us as he always has been. We are the ones who have turned away from him.
dombedeprice: the key text to understanding god's attitude toward us after the fall is in genesis 3:15. this is called the proto-evangelium
: even at the very moment of the fall, God is already working out a way to make things better again.
: Jesus is the offspring that Gen. 3:15 is talking about, which is one of the reasons that Mary is called the New Eve.
thought that would also be interesting for all the christians out there who hold onto creationism.
anyway theres alot i want to respond to but i'm tired and need to go to sleep.
but
| quote: | Originally posted by moth
Chew on this:
When you are playing golf, you will look at the slopes around the path to the whole, and base how you hit the ball on those slopes to get your desired outcome. Say something out there did want to create the universe, with no mental limitations could you not agree that every desired event for all time could be calculated down to an interaction of subatomic particles?
Would you agree that if you knew the exact stage of everything in the universe, you could predict every single event to come for all time? Some of these ideas are hard to comprehend. In simpler terms, you push a ball toward another ball straight on, on a frictionless surface, no angle of incline, air resistance ignored, you know exactly what is going to happen to the other ball when they come in contact. If the conditions never change, and the ball is always rolled the exact same, the result will never change. They ways an organism react due to a certain stimulus are vastly complex and are based one thousands of conditions. BUT, could you not agree it can be calculated? Every single thing in the universe can be traced back to its origin through calculation, possibly converging on a single point in time and space, to a single event on a molecular level?
Such an event is 'god'.
|
excellent point. thats an idea of god i have been thinking about quite a bit. not sure if i necesarily believe in predetermination tho.
one of the concepts i consider as a god as the summation of all particles in the universe or all matter. just as we are made up of cells and particles and molecules and atoms and whatever, we are just a small particle which help make up the major being which is god. and the "big bang" was god creating itself. we are just of gods existance.
too tired to give a good thought out explanation or arguement now tho.
|