Evolution & Reincarnation

[zimmer80203`]

Would evolution take place if reincarnation didn't exist? In other words, is reincarnation a vital part of evolution? If it is not, what are the factors that produce evolution?

[John]

Do you mean reincarnation in the sense that it is described in the Bible relating to Jesus?

[chaz wyman]

Would evolution take place if reincarnation didn't exist? In other words, is reincarnation a vital part of evolution? If it is not, what are the factors that produce evolution?

Reincarnation is meaning less.
Your question is empty.

[zimmer80203`]

What do you mean my question is meaningless? Either evolution would or wouldn't take place if there wasn't for reincarnation.

[chaz wyman]

What do you mean my question is meaningless? Either evolution would or wouldn't take place if there wasn't for reincarnation.

As there is no such thing as re-incarnation (except in your imagination) the question has no meaning.
Evolution has happened, without re-incarnation, so the answer is clear.

[zimmer80203`]

You sure have a closed and opinionated mind. I am curious as to what you think stimulates or causes evolution.

[chaz wyman]

You sure have a closed and opinionated mind. I am curious as to what you think stimulates or causes evolution.

Natural Selection of course.
Maybe you should read something?

[zimmer80203`]

Natural selection is the product of reincarnation. The following questions point out that reincarnation is a possibility. The fact that man hasn’t been able to prove that reincarnation doesn’t exist makes the existence of reincarnation just as much a possibility as it not existing. Personally, the following indicates there is a greater possibility that reincarnation is more of a viable reality than it not existing.

What was the purpose of Jesus appearing numerous times to a variety of individuals after his crucifixion if it wasn’t to illustration reincarnation? Why did he reappear so often? Why was his physical body different each time he appeared?

If God is a non-judgmental and loving God, the only individual who can forgive our sins or errors is the individual who created them. How does one do that in the absence of reincarnation?

Organized religions claim that God is a non-judgmental and loving God.
If this is true, God would treat everyone the same as Nature does. Nature has no favorites or enemies. So how do you explain the great disparity that exists among the people of the world?

What would be the purpose of living only one physical life? Wouldn’t the spirit or soul of an individual gain more by having a variety of life experiences?

If the spirit or soul of an individual is eternal, what can it do for eternity without getting bored? Surely, incarnating from time to time would be more interesting and less boring.

How do you explain evolution in the absence of reincarnation?

How do you explain child prodigies in the absence of reincarnation?

How do you explain the documented cases of various individuals in numerous countries who have experienced one or more of their previous incarnations?

[John]

Natural selection is the product of reincarnation. The following questions point out that reincarnation is a possibility. The fact that man hasn’t been able to prove that reincarnation doesn’t exist makes the existence of reincarnation just as much a possibility as it not existing.

Utter nonsense. So because I can't disprove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster or unicorns or Russell's teapot orbiting the sun they should be considered as likely to exist as not exist?

Organized religions claim that God is a non-judgmental and loving God.

What organized religions would this be? Christianity certainly doesn't present God as non-judgemental.

If this is true

Well it's not true.

None of this reincarnation gibberish is needed to explain evolution.

[chaz wyman]

Natural selection is the product of reincarnation.
Rubbish
The following questions point out that reincarnation is a possibility. The fact that man hasn’t been able to prove that reincarnation doesn’t exist makes the existence of reincarnation just as much a possibility as it not existing.
You cannot prove an invisible thing not to exist that does not exist. That does not mean that you can assert any fantasy you like and assume it might exist.
Personally, the following indicates there is a greater possibility that reincarnation is more of a viable reality than it not existing.

What was the purpose of Jesus appearing numerous times to a variety of individuals after his crucifixion if it wasn’t to illustration reincarnation? Why did he reappear so often? Why was his physical body different each time he appeared?

The bible is a Story. There is no verified example of ANY resurrection ever occurring. I understand that Gandalf also resurrected.

If God is a non-judgmental and loving God, the only individual who can forgive our sins or errors is the individual who created them. How does one do that in the absence of reincarnation?

What god, which god. Where is god. You don't get to prove a thing that does not exist, with another thing that does not exist.

Organized religions claim that God is a non-judgmental and loving God.
No they don't.
If this is true, God would treat everyone the same as Nature does. Nature has no favorites or enemies. So how do you explain the great disparity that exists among the people of the world?
Not with god, nor with re-incarnation. But with evolution.

What would be the purpose of living only one physical life? Wouldn’t the spirit or soul of an individual gain more by having a variety of life experiences?

You don't get to prove a thing by asking questions. You have not yet said any thing to help you case.

If the spirit or soul of an individual is eternal, what can it do for eternity without getting bored? Surely, incarnating from time to time would be more interesting and less boring.

More questions. if if if if if. What soul? You do not get to prove a non existent thing, by asserting another non existence thing

How do you explain evolution in the absence of reincarnation?

You already asked that, and I told you to read Darwin.

How do you explain child prodigies in the absence of reincarnation?

Re-incarnation does not help explain them. Child Prodigies are born with no knowledge of previous learning.

How do you explain the documented cases of various individuals in numerous countries who have experienced one or more of their previous incarnations?

The same way I explain the cases of UFOs, fairies sightings, and 'miracles'.
People believe what they want to believe.

[zimmer80203`]

Evolution by natural selection applies to the plant and animal kingdom, not to humans. And the evolution of everything in Life is dependent upon reincarnation. Yet, I can see that you're mind is unwilling to even examine that possibility. It is unwilling or unable to see everything as a possibility rather than a absolute. Any attempt to continue this dialogue would be counter productive and useless.

Your unable to see that once you say, think or believe that you "know" something all investigation of it ceases.
Nothing new is learned. You merely accumulate more of the same which supports what you think and believe.

[chaz wyman]

Evolution by natural selection applies to the plant and animal kingdom, not to humans.

Then how do you account for the change from EMH to modern Humans? WHere are all the homo erectus?


And the evolution of everything in Life is dependent upon reincarnation.

You do not make a case by endlessly repeating the same unsupported mantra. You need to demonstrate reincarnation and how it is supposed to help life and evolution. Then you have to explain your contradiction which says that humans don't evolve and yet they supposedly evolve.


Yet, I can see that you're mind is unwilling to even examine that possibility.

I am happy to consider possibilities, not impossibilities. Your mind is too closed to know what the fuck you are talking about.

It is unwilling or unable to see everything as a possibility rather than a absolute. Any attempt to continue this dialogue would be counter productive and useless.

Yes, you are talking nonsense, and do not have the ability to support your idiotic ideas.

Your unable to see that once you say, think or believe that you "know" something all investigation of it ceases.
Nothing new is learned. You merely accumulate more of the same which supports what you think and believe

Try me! You have said nothing is support of your case.
I won't hold my breath.



.

[John]

Evolution by natural selection applies to the plant and animal kingdom, not to humans.

Utter rubbish.

And the evolution of everything in Life is dependent upon reincarnation.

More rubbish.

Yet, I can see that you're mind is unwilling to even examine that possibility.

All you've offered a proposition so what's to examine?

Any attempt to continue this dialogue would be counter productive and useless.

Probably the sensible thing you've written in this thread.

Your unable to see that once you say, think or believe that you "know" something all investigation of it ceases.
Nothing new is learned. You merely accumulate more of the same which supports what you think and believe.

You're not learning anything new you're just indulging your fantasy by thinking "this sounds nice so I wish it were true so I'll believe it is true".

Apply some bloody rigour to your thinking.

[zimmer80203`]

John, do you ever question or challenge what you think, know and believe? If you don't, how do you know with abosolute certainity that it is valid or accurate? And if you do, what do you use to challenge what you think, know and believe?

[John]

John, do you ever question or challenge what you think, know and believe?

Yes.

If you don't, how do you know with abosolute certainity that it is valid or accurate? And if you do, what do you use to challenge what you think, know and believe?

Evidence.