Survival of the Fittest

[Sir Gareth]

I suppose my question would be why do we have morals in the first place.

If Darwinian evolution is true and humans are just one more animal that happened to have evolved randomly, why are we the only animals to differantiate between right and wrong?

And please don't just write it off as 'morals evolved inside socities' because there would have to have been a reason those morals started popping up in the first place.

That is where God comes in - and sin entered the world- and Christianity can answer that one!

But why would God care about what happens to humans if we're just a freak biological accident and not created in His image?

[MorningGlory]

I suppose my question would be why do we have morals in the first place.

If Darwinian evolution is true and humans are just one more animal that happened to have evolved randomly, why are we the only animals to differantiate between right and wrong?

And please don't just write it off as 'morals evolved inside socities' because there would have to have been a reason those morals started popping up in the first place.

That is where God comes in - and sin entered the world- and Christianity can answer that one!

But why would God care about what happens to humans if we're just a freak biological accident and not created in His image?

Good question. I hadn't thought of it that way.

[CSLewis]

I suppose my question would be why do we have morals in the first place.

If Darwinian evolution is true and humans are just one more animal that happened to have evolved randomly, why are we the only animals to differantiate between right and wrong?

And please don't just write it off as 'morals evolved inside socities' because there would have to have been a reason those morals started popping up in the first place.

That is where God comes in - and sin entered the world- and Christianity can answer that one!

But why would God care about what happens to humans if we're just a freak biological accident and not created in His image?

Because God gave man a soul.

[CSLewis]

I suppose my question would be why do we have morals in the first place.

If Darwinian evolution is true and humans are just one more animal that happened to have evolved randomly, why are we the only animals to differantiate between right and wrong?

And please don't just write it off as 'morals evolved inside socities' because there would have to have been a reason those morals started popping up in the first place.

That is where God comes in - and sin entered the world- and Christianity can answer that one!

But why would God care about what happens to humans if we're just a freak biological accident and not created in His image?

Because God gave man a soul.

And we aren't an accident God knew before time what would take place in the evolutionary process.

[CSLewis]

Darwins work is based on biology and geology. Sorry it wasn't based on the pseudo-science/metaphysics/carnival freak show / made up lies and hoaxes that is creation "science" or "intelligent design"

If your evaluation is correct (and it is not) then you should be more than willing and able to present your scientific evidence that supports your bedtime story that all life on this planet in all of its complexity had a common ancestor. But guess what

[Sir Gareth]

What, in Darwinian theory, is wrong with one group trying to eliminate another group and take over the gene pool?

The theory of evolution describes what happens in nature. It makes no moral judgements about whether what is happening is either right or wrong.

Darwin presented a scientific theory, not a philosophical one.

So, it is natural for one group to try to eliminate another group and take over the gene pool.

Groups don't naturally try to eliminate each other and take over the gene pool, because aside from humans, no animal has the capacity to think in such abstract terms.

And really, if one were to properly apply the theory of evolution to society, then one would recognise Asians as the superior race (being the most numerous) and should follow their example. Really, I've never been able to understand why people take the concept of 'the fittest survive to reproduce more' and immediately leap to things like 'white supremacism'. It's pretty plain to see that in evolutionary terms, whites are not supreme, since they barely make up a sixth of the human population, with Asians clearly in the lead at 60%. Han Chinese alone make up nearly 20% of the world's population. Clearly this makes them the master race.

If your evaluation is correct (and it is not) then you should be more than willing and able to present your scientific evidence that supports your bedtime story that all life on this planet in all of its complexity had a common ancestor.

As for proof that all organisms evolved from a common ancestor, what exactly is sufficient proof for you? I would guess that it's not the fact that every organism on earth contains the same four nucleotide sequences (even though chemically speaking there's no reason that they couldn't be different) or the fact that every animal contains the same gene that determines the presence of eyes (showing that at the very least all creatures with eyes evolved from the same organism) or the fact that genetic mapping shows that related species have more dna in common than non-related species (supporting the 'family tree' model of taxonomy, which was the problem that the theory of evolution was designed to explain), since these things have probably been pointed out already.

Perhaps you could say what you would consider to be sufficient evidence to convince you that evolution is valid. I am perfectly willing to say what I would consider sufficient evidence to convince me of the existence of YHWH (and I will if you request - it just seems to be out of place in this thread), so I would appreciate it if you would show the same courtesy.

Thanks in advance.

What makes any of these similarities you've mentioned point any more to common ancestor than they do to common designer?

They have things in common, fine, so do cars which are made by the same company.

[Sir Gareth]

I suppose my question would be why do we have morals in the first place.

If Darwinian evolution is true and humans are just one more animal that happened to have evolved randomly, why are we the only animals to differantiate between right and wrong?

And please don't just write it off as 'morals evolved inside socities' because there would have to have been a reason those morals started popping up in the first place.

That is where God comes in - and sin entered the world- and Christianity can answer that one!

But why would God care about what happens to humans if we're just a freak biological accident and not created in His image?

Because God gave man a soul.

And we aren't an accident God knew before time what would take place in the evolutionary process.

I am sorry but I find a lapse in the logic your using.

If an all powerful, all knowing God knew what man would evolve into in the first place and knew that he would give this pinnacle evolution a soul why did he bother 'evolving' up to man and not just do as the bible says he did and create man already fully formed?

[CSLewis]

First of all God said he made man out of the dust of the earth and so it appears He did.

[CSLewis]

First of all God said he made man out of the dust of the earth and so it appears He did.

Again you are using the Bible as a science book which it is not.

[Sir Gareth]

First of all God said he made man out of the dust of the earth and so it appears He did.

The bible says that God formed man out of the dust of the Earth, it is like saying he molded us as a potter molds clay.

And I'm not trying to say that the bible is a science book, but I am asking, logically, why would an all-knowing, all-powerful God need to use evolution rather than just simply willing everything into existance.