4 ms·
It’s a big universe and there are a lot of years, so chemical evolution seems like a decent tool for God to use. Much like General Relativity is a more efficien
by lanstin 2mo ago
It’s a big universe and there are a lot of years, so chemical evolution seems like a decent tool for God to use. Much like General Relativity is a more efficient way to rule the world than assigning angels to push the planets thru the sky. And a passing familiarity with birth defects will prove to most hard hearted people that each specific fact of biology is not designed by a loving creator. Unless you believe this messy but gloriously complex universe to be the best of all possible worlds, right up till you lie to your friend, it is difficult to believe whole heartedly in a loving creator.
- rationalist 2mo agoI'm not a biblical scholar, but I think the "loving creator" thing was invented by people and not necessarily in the Bible. I'm pretty sure Old Testament God is pretty vengeful. Theistic Evolution is wide-enough belief, especially with Protestants.
- andrewflnr 2mo agoIt is definitely in the Bible. Cynically, God seems to swing wildly between mercy and vengeance, but it's clear he would feel justified in a lot more vengeance than he takes but doesn't because he loves people. Less cynically, he's planning for Jesus and salvation the whole time, and sorta trying to keep the evil from getting out of hand with the occasional smiting. You can make the logic work if you want to.
- xkcd1963 2mo agoThis is edging into religious debate, which the guidelines ask people to keep off HN
- pests 2mo agoThe guidelines do not mention religion a single time. What are you talking about?
- xkcd1963 2mo ago"Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity."
- pests 2mo agoI think that is saying something else. It says "battle" not "discussion" or "conversation". Then if religion is going to be lumped under "ideological battle", what about politics, culture, economics, and other "ideological" topics? The comment you replied to wasn't even religious. There was a claim that "loving creator" name was invented by people outside the bible, and a claim that theistic evolution is a wide enough belief, esp with Protestants. I'm not even religious, but those weren't even religious points. Its the difference between "bible history" (history as told by the bible), and "history of the bible" (history of how the bible itself).
- xkcd1963 2mo agoYou are right. I came to HN with the desire to make some usefulness out of me, and found the means to do so by policing around, pointing out to the guidelines, flagging random posts, and generally be obnoxious. All with the purpose to raise the standards rather than drag them down on this site. But it turns out I lived long enough to become the villain and if I look now in the mirror I see the very thing I was trying to battle.