AN opportunity for the religious to provide their evidence

[Walter]

Walter,

It's also something of a misnomer because people sometimes think that "fittest" must mean "fastest", "sharpest-eyed" etc whereas in fact it means something closer to "best adapted to the environmental niche it occupies". Thus previously sighted species will become blind when they live underground, while other characteristics will enhance.   

and even that environmental niche is at the molecular level , I think.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Walter,

and even that environmental niche is at the molecular level , I think.

Yes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_evolution

[Alan Burns]

give us a chance to evaluate your claims once and for all, we might even get some converts.

off you go..

Just looking at our new grandson, I have to say that surely the miracle of new life is all the evidence you will ever need.

[Nearly Sane]

Just looking at our new grandson, I have to say that surely the miracle of new life is all the evidence you will ever need.

And when my cousin died at 7 hours after she was born? Your god likes to kill children.

[Alan Burns]

And when my cousin died at 7 hours after she was born? Your god likes to kill children.

The one thing that is certain is that we all have to die at some time.  The timing and manner of our death may not be what we would expect or hope for, but we cant see the bigger picture.  We tend to put much emphasis on our earthly existence, which is all we can perceive with our physical senses.  But God has given us a spiritual sense which many of us try to suppress, but our spiritual perception may help us to see that there is far more to our existence than our short earthly life.

[Nearly Sane]

The one thing that is certain is that we all have to die at some time.  .  timing and manner of our death may not be what we would expect or hope for, but we cant see the bigger picture.  We tend to put much emphasis on our earthly existence, which is all we can perceive with our physical senses.  But God has given us a spiritual sense which many of us try to suppress, but our spiritual perception may help us to see that there is far more to our existence than our short earthly life.

Mmm so what you take from my  cousin dying, is that I'm lying about my 'spiritual perception'. Sorry, Alan, but wrong.

[torridon]

... We tend to put much emphasis on our earthly existence, which is all we can perceive with our physical senses.  But God has given us a spiritual sense which many of us try to suppress...

Why would anyone want to suppress their spiritual sense ?

... but our spiritual perception may help us to see that there is far more to our existence than our short earthly life.

Is the same true for giraffes and haddock ?

[bluehillside Retd.]

torri,

Is the same true for giraffes and haddock ?

No, because to make it all work he's magicked up a little man at the controls he calls a "soul" that is in some unexplained way free of the constraints of cause and effect, but that also has a hotline to this "spiritual sense". So far as I can tell, he's also decided that people have these "souls" but that other creatures don't, though how for example elephants can show every sign of grieving for their dead without souls of their own he's yet to tell us.

All he has to do to complete the picture is to look for examples of sugar and spice and all things nice and to claim them as evidence for "God", but suddenly to remember he has an appointment elsewhere when someone points out that we also experience lots of things that aren't very nice at all.

Job done! 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

torri,

No, because to make it all work he's magicked up a little man at the controls he calls a "soul" that is in some unexplained way free of the constraints of cause and effect,

But somehow, according to you, we have Nature which seems to be free from the constrains of cause and effect....oh, sorry, we're waiting for science to invent the machine which has the answers......which favour your ideas.

Seems to me you are trying to sneak 'memes' in again

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I do credit you though with the invention of 'The Hillside Device'' a hypothetical machine, technique or means which will, in the future, confirm whatever proposal you put forward.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

torri,

No, because to make it all work he's magicked up a little man at the controls he calls a "soul" that is in some unexplained way free of the constraints of cause and effect, but that also has a hotline to this "spiritual sense". So far as I can tell, he's also decided that people have these "souls" but that other creatures don't, though how for example elephants can show every sign of grieving for their dead without souls of their own he's yet to tell us.

All he has to do to complete the picture is to look for examples of sugar and spice and all things nice and to claim them as evidence for "God", but suddenly to remember he has an appointment elsewhere when someone points out that we also experience lots of things that aren't very nice at all.

Job done!

I rather think you are caricaturing the position here.
I don't think the Bible elevates mankind above the creation and we are only ever taken to that level as ''adopted sons of God''.

That said even Dawkins admits that through intelligence and creativity in it's broadest sense we have transcended evolution which you either see as the key and overarching driver of human change or you don't.

[wigginhall]

Just looking at our new grandson, I have to say that surely the miracle of new life is all the evidence you will ever need.

Well, congratulations on that, but by the same token, the spectacle of young children dying all over the world, could be taken as evidence for an evil God, could it not?

[wigginhall]

The one thing that is certain is that we all have to die at some time.  The timing and manner of our death may not be what we would expect or hope for, but we cant see the bigger picture.  We tend to put much emphasis on our earthly existence, which is all we can perceive with our physical senses.  But God has given us a spiritual sense which many of us try to suppress, but our spiritual perception may help us to see that there is far more to our existence than our short earthly life.

So, let me get this right, your spiritual perception is alive and well, and giving you plenty of information about God's beneficence, but other people's spiritual sense has been suppressed, so that they object to young children dying.    But you know better.  Gosh, this theology business is clever, isn't it?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So, let me get this right, your spiritual perception is alive and well, and giving you plenty of information about God's beneficence, but other people's spiritual sense has been suppressed, so that they object to young children dying.    But you know better.  Gosh, this theology business is clever, isn't it?

And yet on another thread another laddy is proposing that true human courage is found in an acceptance of life's unfairness. Gosh this atheism business is clever isn't it?

Of course we want all children to survive and no doubt all that is wanting is redistribution of resources for that and the political will for that.

[SusanDoris]

... we have transcended evolution which you either see as the key and overarching driver of human change or you don't.

The word 'transcend' and its various forms seems to crop up quite a lot both here and on other forums. Can you say what you are thinking of here when you use it?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The word 'transcend' and its various forms seems to crop up quite a lot both here and on other forums. Can you say what you are thinking of here when you use it?

Here I am using the definition ''No longer subject to the rules and regulation of Darwinian evolution....changes in the human condition due to factors which are other than Darwinian....for instances rapid changes and innovations due to intelligence''.

[wigginhall]

And yet on another thread another laddy is proposing that true human courage is found in an acceptance of life's unfairness. Gosh this atheism business is clever isn't it?

Of course we want all children to survive and no doubt all that is wanting is redistribution of resources for that and the political will for that.

I can't see any connection between my criticisms of AB's points and your post.  I know that you start to talk about atheism as a kind of reflex gesture, but I wasn't.   I was talking about AB's argument that a good spiritual sense will tell us how God is good, and childbirth manifests this.   But what about children dying?   What does that tell us about God - that he is evil, maybe.

[Enki]

Just looking at our new grandson, I have to say that surely the miracle of new life is all the evidence you will ever need.

For you, perhaps. For me, and I have two children(one of whom I helped deliver) and 5 grandchildren, no evidence at all.

[wigginhall]

For you, perhaps. For me, and I have two children(one of whom I helped deliver) and 5 grandchildren, no evidence at all.

Interesting that AB said 'all the evidence that you will ever need'.  But this is not true, as you say.   Plenty of people will not see a new child as evidence of God.   AB then says that some people's spiritual sense has been suppressed.   That sounds like the old Christian arrogance, that I know these spiritual truths, but you are blind to them.   However, I can help you with this, if you would just accept my ropy old arguments which were second hand when Aristotle was a nipper.

[Enki]

Interesting that AB said 'all the evidence that you will ever need'.  But this is not true, as you say.   Plenty of people will not see a new child as evidence of God.   AB then says that some people's spiritual sense has been suppressed.   That sounds like the old Christian arrogance, that I know these spiritual truths, but you are blind to them.   However, I can help you with this, if you would just accept my ropy old arguments which were second hand when Aristotle was a nipper.

Yes, I know. I also love the way he hives off the word 'spirituality' exclusively for his own use and people who think like him, assuming, quite incorrectly I would say, that in some peculiar way anyone who doesn't think like him is somehow suppressing their own 'spirituality'. Personally, at the moment, I'm listening to the Graceland LP by Paul Simon, and find its effect to be quite'spiritual' in a homely kind of way.

[Brownie]

And when my cousin died at 7 hours after she was born? Your god likes to kill children.

How do you see the hand of God in this sad occurrence?

Or do you believe that the fact there was no divine intervention to save her life, means that God killed her?

We're back to, "Why doesn't God stop...?".

Christians, and others, accept that we live in a world where good and bad things happen.
That isn't going to change.   

How we deal with both is what is important.

[wigginhall]

How do you see the hand of God in this sad occurrence?

Or do you believe that the fact there was no divine intervention to save her life, means that God killed her?

We're back to, "Why doesn't God stop...?".

Christians, and others, accept that we live in a world where good and bad things happen.
That isn't going to change.   

How we deal with both is what is important.

Yeah, but this is in reply to AB, who claims to see God's love in the birth of a child.   It seems reasonable then to ask about the death of a child - what does this show?  That God killed her, or just let it happen, or what?

I think it's a lucky dip - God sort of spins the roulette wheel, and your kid may live or die.   It's more exciting this way. 

[Brownie]

I can't see it quite that way, Wigginhall.

[wigginhall]

I can't see it quite that way, Wigginhall.

Well, neither do I.  But once somebody says, 'I see God's love in situation X', then surely they are faced with other questions about situations Y and Z.   So once AB says that a child's birth is evidence of God, the questions are bound to come, e.g. about a child's death.   If you say that God is not involved there, then that suggests that sometimes God is involved, and sometimes is not.   OK.  God is hit and miss.

[Alan Burns]

Well, neither do I.  But once somebody says, 'I see God's love in situation X', then surely they are faced with other questions about situations Y and Z.   So once AB says that a child's birth is evidence of God, the questions are bound to come, e.g. about a child's death.   If you say that God is not involved there, then that suggests that sometimes God is involved, and sometimes is not.   OK.  God is hit and miss.

Some people seem to see other people's misfortunes as a reason not to believe in God, because He is expected to intervene to prevent such misfortunes, if He exists.  But if God did intervene to prevent all misfortunes, it would not be seen as intervention, but something natural.  Intervention by definition can only be defined or detected when compared with things which are allowed to occur naturally.  And if God did intervene in every case of potential misfortune, human ingenuity would no doubt come up with some theory as to how everything happens naturally.   I do not claim to know what ultimately causes other people's misfortune, or why they are allowed to occur, but I know that God can help bring something good from them if we put our trust in Him.