A Question for the Theists who Believe in Evolution

Never mind tracing our ancestry back to earlier primates, thinking in terms of the totality of evolution on this planet starting from the beginning until we came into being, when did we get our souls?

 

When God decided we needed them. IMHO, that is what making us in His Image means.

 

The old "I can't explain the insane illogical beliefs of my religion so I'll just claim that god did it". Religion robs people of their intellect.
BTW, if we are made in "His Image", perdidochas, why does god need a penis and a belly-button (if we are made in his image, and our males have penises, then god would also, but he wouldn't need those two things in the first place, so the Bible is wrong about that so it's probably just a fairy tale)? Or did god, when he was in the womb, uh, need an umbilical cord (belly button)? It might be easier to try to explain why no bones/carcasses etc. of bigfoot/Nessie/Yetti have ever been found than to try to explain the absurdities of all religions.

 

He denied animals souls.....that doesn't seem fair. God is unfair. The moral Gandhi burns, but a repentant child-molester who finds Jesus (and doesn't molest again) will not burn, but will get access to Jesus' elitist segregated (not immoral black/white segregation, but immoral Christian/non-Christian segregation) country club in the sky.

 

Maybe he likes self satisfaction?

Hell, he could very easily make a female God on Saturday nights....or even be extremely flexible, I mean he can do anything he wants.

 

Hehe, good one. Yes, god gets lonely.

 

Well, some say that "god is blind", so that would maybe explain why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2ddIkDgBeY

 

They claim that, but as thinking people know that's not true at all.

He can't cure cancer. If he can't cure cancer, then he's not all-powerful (then the Bible is wrong), or he WON'T cure cancer and he enjoys seeing innocent children/adults die horrifically slow deaths like a recent late relative of mine (then he's not very loving like the Bible claims).....in either case the Bible is simply wrong.

He also can't build a stone so big that he can't lift it (or can he?).

He also can't defeat iron chariots:
Judges 1:19
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

He also can't forgive someone without giving them an ultimatum: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdxeqEoDXco

 

Even long before “The Origin of Species” was written different theists would have given you different answers to this question. Mine would be: I don’t know when and how you got it, but I’m pretty sure you’ve got a soul which is the essence of your being. Might be the first amoeba all else evolved from had one too, might be we just got it when our brains first developed consciousness and started being capable of transcending the world via art. Might be our souls were pre-existent, might be they got formed together with our bodies. Main thing is: you have one and it is precious.

Well, seems your issue isn’t with God but with what various theists thought of Him. I for once am not so sure whether Descartes was right when he said that animals don’t have souls and are mere biological machines. If you find Descartes' idea upsetting, you should find an ultra-materialist atheist worldview in which we are all but biological machines even more upsetting. I certainly do. Personally I think the theist Leo Tolstoy – whose writings on the Sermon on the Mount inspired Gandhi - was right when he said “As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields”. In the hope both can be overcome I stopped eating my fellow-creatures years ago. How about you?

 

In other words you don't know but you want it to be true?

 

When is that not the case with almost every question in regards to theism?

How do you qualify what's highlighted in green with what's highlighted in red?

 

I should hope that being an atheist does not turn people into perfect clones with a hive-mind.

There are things I’m pretty sure of and things of which I’m rather agnostic. I’m pretty sure this universe exists, but I certainly don’t know all there is to know about it. I’m also pretty sure I’ve got a soul. My whole being tells me so. And if I have a soul, it stands to reason that beings like me - such as you - have a soul as well. Of course I cannot prove that, just as I cannot prove that anybody but me thinks a single thought, but yet IMHO it stands to reason that you do indeed think thoughts and that you’re just as much of a person as I am and not just a figment of my imagination – which of course you (and all the universe) could be for all I know.

 

the English word "soul" was chosen for the Greek word, "psyke', by the King James people who translated the Greek Bible:


Soul also is translation from the Hebrew, "nesphesh," meaning "mind."
So, man got that entity when he was created.

 

You might find this interesting.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=324058

 

Why...?

 

An island popped up out of the sea after and earthquake.

 

That's because atheism doesn't make a claim it is the rejection of a claim. When a claim is made it makes sense for that claim to have some kind of standards, some kind of model to based the idea around. When everthing is valid nothing is valid.

In other words you have no idea. Your examples are contradictory as we can study and observe the biology and functionality of the brain but there is no way to observe or study a soul. It is beyond metaphysical because unlike consciousness it doesn't serve a function to the human condition that isn't explained through other means. Our personalities, our behavior, everything that makes us-us is just as valid without this concept of a soul. In fact the concept of the soul is just as outdated as the idea of freewill and both are spawned from an age of scientific ignorance.

If everything is valid nothing is valid. Not really much to work with there.

 

pretty sure I’ve got a soul. My whole being tells me so.

Interesting line, "my being tells me so".

its the basic 13 yr old girl mentality, that how one feels is primary.

The lack of any evidence of any sort, any logic, anything at all but how one happens to choose to feel is the refined essence of self indulgence, here raised to a value, a source of knowledge, superior to science, bringing knowledge of something standing above all else in the Universe short of "god"; the human 'soul". sheeeeeeeesh.

 

If you ever care to look into theism/atheism with more debt you may find that different atheists reject different claims on different grounds. As for theist claims: as I have put to you before the best thinkers of all major religious traditions from all parts of the world do in fact make strikingly similar claims. (the best thinkers of course being those who think along my lines )

I other words: I tend to employ some good old philosophical skepticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_skepticism). You may want to try it one day: while it may not make you a theist it may help you to overcome your scientism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism).

As for the wishy washy reasons that make you deny that we have free will: at the moment I’m even less inclined to follow you down that road than I was in our previous discussion. Since then I’ve given up smoking: cold turkey from 40 (*)(*)(*)(*) a day down to zero. It still takes me considerable willpower to abstain. So my reality is oozed with bloody free will at the moment.

Are you even remotely aware how funny it is that you of all posters should have a problem with relativism and accuse theists of it? Probably not.

 

So does the 13yr old girl thing also apply to Buddhists, or only to Christians or only to me?

Well, even when I was just 13 years old I was aware that – whilst they had different questions and methodologies - my biology teacher and my religion teacher were not in conflict.
So how on earth did your superior logic lead you to think I have a problem with science? I certainly would not claim to be very good at logical thinking, but – seing that I’ve got the site still open - I’m good enough to understand this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

 

Because there are various reasons for making non evidential claims there are various reasons for rejecting non evidential claims.

So would you say you and these thinkers represent 0.07% of the religious people on this planet? 10%?

Which means you have no idea and like to think no one else does either?

Lol, scientism. You're funny.

So you still don't know what "the illusion of freewill" means then?

Enlighten me. This should be fun.

 

Younger kids feel there really is an alligator under the bed.

Why bring in "scientism"? Its got nothing to do with me, or the topic. Why try to force that in?
Nor did I say you have a "conflict with science" something you seem to have just made up.

Topic:

You feel that "feelings' are what counts in determining that the undetectable "soul" really really exists.

Thats ok, if you want to think that way, but it has zero evidentiary value with anyone else, and its a bit strange how it could with you. It speaks to very low standards for what is accepted as valid evidence.

It doesnt take much logic to be superior to no logic at all.

 

Hey, you cant have "Scientism"! She said that about me!

I dont think anyone but the fundies here is dimbulb enough to go for something on the level of "scientism". I hope our friend here will show the grace to drop it without further resort to such calumny.

 

She seems to add it into every conversation she can. She like every other theist has some "knowledge" she discovered through "research" and now her perspective seems bound by it.

 

Maybe she just recently learned of it, like some noob internet warrior who just discovered the "Ad hom", now sees it everywhere, and triumphantly calls "ad hom!" with a definition and link to "ad hom" on wiki!