How can anyone argue against the same theory?!

[MeDeFe]

If that is truly the case I can only say: Well, show me one of those beings that do not consist of anything physical.

Give me a physical instrument that measures spiritual things and I'll get right on it.

Plugging a pair of earphones instead of a microphone into a tape recorder is said to work pretty well.

[black elk speaks]

just that it has no bearing on the existence of spiritual beings.

how diminished would the experience of the spiritual being within me be if it did not have the benefit of speech or opposable thumbs. i would rather have the physical experience of a cat. i would argue that evolution of the physical being enhances the experience of the spiritual being greatly, therefore having great bearing on the spiritual (for better or for worse.)

[CrazyAnglican]

perhaps then, you can explain how it is that without the human brain, it is not possible for people, spirits encased within a physical body, are unable to process thought. take for example people with Alzheimer's. their physical brain deteriorates to the point where they are incapable of memory first, then slowly, the rest of their mental faculty fades over time.

I think I can see your point. A person with Alzheimer's still has a spirit/soul even with a reduced ability to process rational thought? Is that where you are going, or am I misunderstanding you?

i think of the physical body as a chance for the spiritual self to experience. not sure why other than to say that existence would be pretty boring without the chance to experience. but whether the spirit 'remembers' what it experienced after the body has died, i cannot say.

I don't think we're too far apart on that one.

just that it has no bearing on the existence of spiritual beings.

how diminished would the experience of the spiritual being within me be if it did not have the benefit of speech or opposable thumbs. i would rather have the physical experience of a cat. i would argue that evolution of the physical being enhances the experience of the spiritual being greatly, therefore having great bearing on the spiritual (for better or for worse.)

I'd tend to agree with you here too. The experience would be affected (personally) but not the existence of other spiritual beings, planes, etc.

[mandalorian2298]

Btw Dawkins is a idiot. Don't get me started on that one.

Please do. I am most interested in hearing how and why he is an idiot and I am sure that your wisdom is needed to illuminate the matter. Go for it!

[black elk speaks]

perhaps then, you can explain how it is that without the human brain, it is not possible for people, spirits encased within a physical body, are unable to process thought. take for example people with Alzheimer's. their physical brain deteriorates to the point where they are incapable of memory first, then slowly, the rest of their mental faculty fades over time.

I think I can see your point. A person with Alzheimer's still has a spirit/soul even with a reduced ability to process rational thought? Is that where you are going, or am I misunderstanding you?

i think of the physical body as a chance for the spiritual self to experience. not sure why other than to say that existence would be pretty boring without the chance to experience. but whether the spirit 'remembers' what it experienced after the body has died, i cannot say.

I don't think we're too far apart on that one.

just that it has no bearing on the existence of spiritual beings.

how diminished would the experience of the spiritual being within me be if it did not have the benefit of speech or opposable thumbs. i would rather have the physical experience of a cat. i would argue that evolution of the physical being enhances the experience of the spiritual being greatly, therefore having great bearing on the spiritual (for better or for worse.)

I'd tend to agree with you here too. The experience would be affected (personally) but not the existence of other spiritual beings, planes, etc.

I think that you and i agree on a lot, however i think that we disagree on the presence of god. i do not believe that god is approachable as defined in the context of the bible. i do not believe that there is a plan or consciousness inherent within the will of god nor do i believe that it is possible to have a relationship with him as we would have with our parents.

as such, evolution is, to me, simply the method that was formed as a means to preserve the physical state in which the spiritual being may exist.

[jonesthecurl]

And again, CA, your claim that evolution has no real bearing on the spiritual at the very least implies that these non-physical beings which you believe in in another plane are so important that, in comparison, the evolution of sentience, and a soul (if we have one) in humans is not important.

Evolution is not an unimportant detail to anything alive. It's how we got here. Unless everything but your spiritual realm inhabited by spiritual creatures is unimportant, it is important.

[MeDeFe]

Since it seems the valid debating tool of sarcasm is being ignored in this thread:

Why suppose there's some spiritual realm if there's no proof of it?

[jonesthecurl]

because, apparently, it's more important than anything we can actually see or experience.

[black elk speaks]

because, apparently, it's more important than anything we can actually see or experience.

agreeing for a moment that without the spirit, which may well be the engine of your life, you would not have the ability to see or experience anything at all, then you are correct. considering that you cannot see or experience a radio wave without the correct devices, i cannot rule out that the same is not true for the spirit.

[CrazyAnglican]

And again, CA, your claim that evolution has no real bearing on the spiritual at the very least implies that these non-physical beings which you believe in in another plane are so important that, in comparison, the evolution of sentience, and a soul (if we have one) in humans is not important.

We can go round and round jonesy, but that just isn't what I've said, nor did I imply it. If these places/beings exist (the point upon which we disagree) then our sentience or understanding of evolution has no bearing on that existence. Does it have bearing on human understanding and our physical attributes? Sure, why not. Where we seem to differ is that I realize that this scientific theory is focused on physical things. It was developed by observing and testing physical things. Now, from a scientific point of view, what can it possibly have to say about anything that by its nature cannot be observed in that manner?

I'm not in the least denying the theory of evolution nor am I saying that it isn't an important scientific theory. "No bearing", in my usage of it, means it doesn't affect. My statement has not changed. The existence of spiritual beings would not be affected by human knowledge of their existence (or human knowledge of anything) any more than the entire species of Bengal Tigers suddenly popped into existence the first time a human saw one. Humans and tigers may evolve, but our knowledge of evolution has little importance to the tiger.

Evolution is not an unimportant detail to anything alive. It's how we got here. Unless everything but your spiritual realm inhabited by spiritual creatures is unimportant, it is important.

You mean the Big Bang right? Let there be light? Evolution as I understand it is a process by which living things change over time. It's not a story of creation. Again, I don't deny that evolution is an important scientific theory. I'm not sure why you think I have.

Since it seems the valid debating tool of sarcasm is being ignored in this thread:

Why suppose there's some spiritual realm if there's no proof of it?

considering that you cannot see or experience a radio wave without the correct devices, i cannot rule out that the same is not true for the spirit.

I agree with black elk here. You are in effect demanding proof but in the same manner denying the proof that you seek because it doesn't come in the form that you expect. You yourself said that you had no idea how mtg and I turn around toward a threat (as honed by martial arts practice) even blindfolded and with our ears plugged. That alone given that I've done it and know that I'm responding to an inner feeling, gives some indication that there is something beyond just physical and observable experiences. In the martial arts we call it Ki or Chi which roughly means spirit.

[vtmarik]

Creation: God (or some other great and powerful force) created everything as it is today in 6 "days."

Evolution: Species develop according to the processes of natural selection and genetic drift. Those animals with traits that allow them to survive live on to pass those traits on (animals with less effective traits die and do not pass those traits on). Over the course of billions of years this leads to the differentiation of species and the development of biodiversity as life develops.


I fail to see how they are the same theory in any way, shape, or form.

Allow me to pull out the flow chart:

[black elk speaks]

Creation: God (or some other great and powerful force) created everything as it is today in 6 "days."

Evolution: Species develop according to the processes of natural selection and genetic drift. Those animals with traits that allow them to survive live on to pass those traits on (animals with less effective traits die and do not pass those traits on). Over the course of billions of years this leads to the differentiation of species and the development of biodiversity as life develops.


I fail to see how they are the same theory in any way, shape, or form.

Allow me to pull out the flow chart:

1. that isn't a flow chart its a time line, but i see where you are going.
2. take the part about 6 days out of the equation and you can fill in the first 2 blocks with an action set fourth by the creator, with the intended design of evolution to develop species over time. same page?

[sheepofdumb]

Really it's not so much a how did we get here but a is there a supernatural being that will judge us. Evolutionists want to think that there is no God and they can do whatever they please. Creationists think there is a God and there will be consequences for your actions once your gone.

[jonesthecurl]

Let me try it this way:

The thread is about somebody contending that the theory of evolution and the the bible story of creation are essentially the same - hence the name of the thread.

It was then contended that evolution is only about physical things, not spritual things.

My contention in response to that is that there would be no spiritual dimension to people if it were not for the evolution of sentience.

We appear to disagree on whether there is anybody else (apart from people) around. Whether there are or are not any others, the process of evolution is essential to the spiritual developement of human beings.

And you DID say that evolution "has no real bearing on the spiritual". That is exactly what you said, CA.

It follows from your contention that human beings (and their appearance, through evolution) has no bearing on the spiritual.

My point, to put it yet another way, is that if human beings have a spiritual dimension, they evolved it somewhere on the path to sentience. Therefore evolution does have a bearing on the spiritual

I'm not honestly clear whether my point has been understood. This is not like an argument where people keep denying what the other person says. This is just trying to explain what I originally said, or if you like, trying to understand whether what you origainlly said has a further meaning which I have not yet grasped.

Perhaps, for instance, our souls were in the spiritual realm as "radio waves" wating for our brains to evolve into "radios" ? IS that the idea? and if so, does it say so in the bible?

[black elk speaks]

Let me try it this way:

The thread is about somebody contending that the theory of evolution and the the bible story of creation are essentially the same - hence the name of the thread.

It was then contended that evolution is only about physical things, not spritual things.

My contention in response to that is that there would be no spiritual dimension to people if it were not for the evolution of sentience.

We appear to disagree on whether there is anybody else (apart from people) around. Whether there are or are not any others, the process of evolution is essential to the spiritual developement of human beings.

And you DID say that evolution "has no real bearing on the spiritual". That is exactly what you said, CA.

It follows from your contention that human beings (and their appearance, through evolution) has no bearing on the spiritual.

Or to put it yet another way, if human beings have a spiritual dimension, they evolved it somewhere on the path to sentience.

I'm not honestly clear whether my point has been understood. This is not like an argument where people keep denying what the other person says. This is just trying to explain what I originally said, or if you like, trying to understand whether what you origainlly said has a further meaning which I have not yet grasped.

I think I understand where you are coming from and I think that you are mostly right. there is a point that is largely unknown with regards to the spirit. that point being, what it is. what is this thing that we call spirit. there are some that believe that it is the essence of a living being, some even more specifically that it is the essence of a human being (dogs and cats don't count.) to understand what bearing that evolution would have on the spirit, one must first define the spirit and its characteristics, i would think. for example, and probably foremost, does your spirit have a cognitive mind? who could know? if it did, would a disease such as Alzheimer's have any effect on the human mind? the ability of memory is completely dependent on the physical being. having no memory or likely even a sense of self, the "spirit" that we are talking about, at least to me, is nothing more than the engine that compels our bodies to consume and convert a food source into something that it can use to fuel the physical. its that thing in us that animates us, or compels the body to want to be animated.

the argument should shift now to the capacity in which the spirit or soul actually exist (providing that, at least, we can come to a conclusion on the existence of that which we call spirit.)

[jonesthecurl]

elk - you speak rightly.

[black elk speaks]

elk - you speak rightly.

your previously posted remarks were clear. thus, the problem seemed clear and addressable.