If I may inquire: In what way exactly? That life MUST have come from inert materials seems obvious to me. The how is the mystery. Are you opposed to a particular hypothesis, to all?
Something I have always wondered: just how does this god DO anything? The simple creation myths are just that, they are simple, they describe a sort of old-man-with-a-long-white-beard sorta guy who takes a handful of clay or a giant seashell or something of that nature and makes “every living thing”. Nice stories, I like them.
But we have these “modern” type gods. Who “nudge” evolution along. HOW? By what means? In a lab? Does god step onto the actual planet Earth and pick up an amoeba and, I don’t know, aim Magic Genetic Transforming Rays at it and then go back to the clouds, or what? Does he sit up there somewhere and think, “Gee, an eye would be useful. I will do this here zapping thing and lo and behold, there is the Eye in all its useful glory.” You know, because there “are no transitional fossils” for the eye, etc. Does he get really small and go into a living creature at the celluar level and fiddle with the genes?
In all honesty, and I am being all honest, abiogenesis is a piece of cake compared to sort of godly activity.
Not only is there not a third choice, there really isn’t even a second choice. This is question we already know the answer to.
If you want to be different just for the sake of being different, you could try reviving Lamarckianism–evolution by acquired characteristics rather than by natural selection. You have to discard a mountain of evidence that acquired characteristics aren’t inherited, but what’s a little evidence among friends?
I’m not opposed to any particular hypothesis (although rather undereducated on what’s out there scientifically), just agnostic on the matter of the how.
Do you find it likely that a Harvard Law School grad would have never done any reading on evolution?
Has anybody mentioned Last Thursdayism yet? (Or is that just another variant of creationism?)
Sure, why not. Lots of people haven’t read up on biology, and many more haven’t thought about it seriously.
Solipsism is an alternative. I don’t particularly care whether or not you find it a plausible one, as none of you really exist, outside of my imagination.
Sure. Especially if he’s agnostic about it. First, he probably does tons of reading for work and may prefer fiction for recreational reading, or history, or sports, or even physics. Unless there is some religious factor, which I’m not assuming, I have a hard time understanding why someone with access to the evidence and with a proven ability to think logically would be uncertain.
Evolution can - and has - prevailed in a court of law, after all.
But how did you evolve? Anyhow, it is clear that you are a figment of my imagination.
Actually I’m only imagining that you both are imagining that you have a history - in actuality I sprang into existence ex nihilo a little while ago*, artificial memories fully intact to complement my artificial perceptions, and have hit the ground running. Both evolution with all its evidence and you lot talking about it are all figments of my overactive imagination.
- Sometime last thursday, as it happens.
Sister Coyote beat you to it.
Actually, I think we both got dreamed up by my dog last Thursday. Given everything, I think he has a better life. Except for the being neutered part, and sometimes I’m not even sure about that.
In this thread? Where?
Why is that not the topic. If I understand the OP he’s looking for alternatives to either strict creationism or evolution. Then again, I’m not sure what he is expecting those theories to explain, as they are not equivalent. One takes into account our history from T=0, the other does not. Still, the areligious theist view you describe seems to answer the OP, no?
Actually, I’ve belonged to a church which taught this explicitly. As a denomination, they don’t have a name, but you’ll find them in the phonebook under “The Church in [your city here].”
I can’t find a cite online for this particular doctrine being taught in that church, but they did indeed teach it, to me, when I was a member.
Evolution was guided by God in this case, though, which may not count in some people’s book. But anyway, it was the same general idea.
-Kris
It does. I guess I was trying to say that I didn’t think the OP would be interested in that view because it’s not strictly creationist. But we haven’t really defined creationism in this debate - I used it to mean Young Earth Creationism, which is definitely not compatible with evolution.
I never understood why anyone had a problem with Genesis. Sure, in Gen 4:17, Cain “knows” his wife and some details of Cain’s life follow, but by 4:25, the story goes back to Adam, talks about him and Eve producing Seth, and by Gen 5:4, Adam’s other sons and daughters get mentioned. Any of these daughters could be Cain’s wife. At worst, the chapters are slightly out of order. Basing a whole line of theology on the origin of Cain’s wife has gotta be one of the sillier pursuits in an overall silly occupation.