According to progressive creationism, God created the universe, life, and humanity, but he did it over a period of time billions of years long. As various species evolved from earlier species, God intervened periodically to give the process a helping hand. Without God's assistance, evolution would never have progressed as rapidly as it did on our planet.

Theistic evolutionism maintains that God only created the universe and simple life, not any complex form of life, including humanity. The idea is that after God created a very simple life form on our planet about three billion years ago, he departed the scene and allowed evolution by means of natural selection to take over.

Either way, it is GOD who is responsible for evolution and science does not tell this to us! Was Darwin wrong to neglect god's contribution to evolution?

Views: 414

Replies to This Discussion

MADHUKAR KULKARNI,

Just what was the offending remark other than the subject contents leave much to be desired, apparently I am not alone in this belief. Religion and evolution in the same sentence creates an oxymoron. If you wish to comfort dead head Christians that is entirely up to you, and if this is the type of material which can be expected at this site, I shall soon be on my way. Your a rather nasty fellow aren't you------lol!!

Your a rather nasty fellow aren't you

Please let me know what nasty word or sentence I have used. If you do not like a subject, just leave it alone, Whats nasty in saying this?

You need to develop a sense of humor, is English your second language, that might explain the confusion here. I was joking about your inference that I perhaps  am not a gentleman, according to your subjective judgement. Perhaps you might read my message before this over again.

According to your profile you describe yourself as a "strong atheist" so I am going to assume that you are being ironic here. If that is the case why did you not add a qualifying remark such as "according to believers in a God directed  process of evolution this is how we began to evolve etc etc ...." then the responses you have recieved may not have been so (understandably) hostile. And it may have lead to a rather more interesting discussion around the issue of how best to counter the spurious claims of religious evolutionists.

However, if you were'nt being ironic why are you here ?

jeremy belcher

Cool down! It is ironic and knowing that I am  a strong atheist, I haoped you would easily understand it! So, cool down.

 Seriously ? "cool down "!!!!!, if you think that was me losing my cool  then you have yet to face really hostile questioning. And if you do not expect to be questioned about your O.P. and your motivation for posting it, why post in the first place ?

jeremy belcher

'Cool down' are not offensive words. I thought that you are a bit annoyed so I used these words. What is so offensive about these words? What doubt do you have about my motivation?

No I am not annoyed if I was I would have said so, and at no point did I even intimate that I found cool down offensive, you have assumed I am offended, thats all.

 As to your motivation for the original OP I still have no idea what that might be

Jeremy, I quite agree with you. Madhukar has used this strategy before ... writing as a christian would write, and it upsets me every time he does it. He claims to do it to jar our thinking but jarring doesn't do it for me; I just feel disgust. If he would qualify his statement as you suggested, I could just laugh and remember Madhukar has an ineffective way of making a point. 
Madhukar, I didn't like it before and I don't like it this time. And by the way, I am mad! Think of a little banty chicken with ruffled feathers and we can both laugh.   
OK! I will make a deal with you, Madhukar, I will know you are atheist even when you write as a believer, and you can know I am a little banty hen clucking about the sky is falling. Maybe we can both lighten up a bit.  

Hi Joan

 I think the problem Madhukar has is that he underestimates the reasoning power of his target audience and seems to assume that we have never read a book or participated in a discussion about the problems posed by religion. Which I believe is a little bit patronising to say the least.

 As far as I can see he also assumes that when he writes as a believer and is questioned about it he feels that a legitimate defence is  to play the hurt feelings card "eg you know I am an Atheist so why are you annoyed with me?" even when we are'nt particularly.

If he is going to continue to post provacative material he should at least stand up and explain why ? That in itself may produce some constructive dialogue. He may also find that people would be less inclined to call him out as a troll.

Just religion trying to 'fit it' and trying to make the claim for a God more substantial by agreeing with scientific views and putting "God did it" to make it suit them. When we create things we design them to carry out a function with minimal resource usage and wastage. So, I highly doubt a God would have made the human body so irrefutably complex to the point where important functions are being carried out on a very sub-microscopic level.

Creationists are desperate to involve god in the evolution process as they know that otherwise god's very existance will become questionable.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

Latest Activity

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service