I don't believe in evolution or creationism. I know things evolve. I know the other is synthetic.
Evolution Debate ...
- Thread starter Planet_EN
- Start date
Nothing other then my belief in Him. I think each person must make this decision up for themselves, nothing I can offer would prove it to you anymore than anything you would say would prove to me there isn't a God.
Exactly, there is no proof, only a beleif in him, so whose to say this(organized religion) was created long ago as a form of hope?
In my opinion all religions are just that, hope.
With no scientific facts for me to determine that there is a higher power, then i must go the knowledgable way and follow the facts.
I do hope, but not pray toward anything.
In my opinion all religions are just that, hope.
With no scientific facts for me to determine that there is a higher power, then i must go the knowledgable way and follow the facts.
I do hope, but not pray toward anything.
Well, as I said, it's a useless debate. There's no proof there isn't a God either.
The problem I have with God in so far as evoution is concerned is how the creation story is built up. If we take the Genesis account of how life came to be, it appears that God usurps natural phenomenon such as evolution. God's will separates the life on Earth in a very direct manner. God tells us that he made animals of the sea, land and air. He doesn't say that he created a small form of life and that he willed that form of life to diversify and flourish over the various ecological niches. The creation account also negates the free will that humans have, the fact that our own choices can and do influence how life evolves, which would be out of the realm of God's control, unless we submit that we have no free will and thus are wiling to accept that our free will is not in fact free which leads to more questions regarding topics such as sin and God's forgiveness of those sins.
Actually there's no reason why not. There's nothing in evolutionary theory that precludes a creator. Richard Dawkins thinks evolution leads inevitably to atheism, but that's one of the few points I'd disagree with him on. Evolutionary theory has nothing to say either way about the existence or non-existence of a creator, and it is, as you say in a later post, a useless debate anyway. Science is never going to prove or disprove anything about a creator.
But when it comes to the contemporary movements like Intelligent Design and Scientific Creationism, led by the likes of Michael Behe, Duane Gish, Philip Johnson, and William Dembski, then there *is* a debate, because those people are simply wrong.
I could "never" believe in such a fantasy, I am far too realistic and "down to earth", I respect your
right to believe whatever you want, but the idea that there is some invisible "whatever" floating
around, in charge of our world, is something I could never ever connect to.
I am a person "of the earth", totally dedicated and respectful of our earth, and science is gradually
putting all the pieces together which will explain our existence, and it will never have
anything to do with "angels and other things fluttering around".
For me noone has to prove there isn't a god, I am not waiting for that, as I know there is no such thing, I am just sorry I won't be here to know the final pieces that the scientists will join together,
but what they have allready is vast, and makes sense for me.
But, if the scientists had "no" proof as yet, I still would not believe in any kind of a god, it's just too
silly for me to connect to whatsoever.
A waste to try and divide the two: Evolution and Creation
They are one and the same - if people would stop denying that evolution of the species we today call humans took lengthy planning and development, and it is still taking place whether we argue or not.
Humans are nowhere near a finished product.
They are one and the same - if people would stop denying that evolution of the species we today call humans took lengthy planning and development, and it is still taking place whether we argue or not.
Humans are nowhere near a finished product.
Last edited:
That's what most of the "faithful" think. Either way, that pice of scripture has atrocious English in it.
In the very least.
It's intolerant to accept facts rather than fantasy? What unavoidable suspicion? Seems to me that I managed to avoid suspecting there may be some mythical "supreme" power. What's unavoidable about the issue is that an awful lot of people that believe there are unbelievable things to believe in.
It's based on fantasy, not fact and has no place in a science class. It's place would be English Lit. or something like "Constructing Novels of Fantasy". Science deals with reality and to this date there is nothing to even remotely suggest that creationism has anything to do with reality.
Yes. It has no place in a science class.
Chuck Dawrin was not perfect. There are scientists that believe in the fantasy, too, although I can't fathom why.
We are quite far along the evolutionary scale, just try having a baby with a bigger head, and if you check out the state of the planet we could be considered nearly finished.:wave:
It's been said that anything is possible, but to date there's absolutely no evidence to suggest any such things as gods exist or existed: not a smidgeon, an iota, a whiff, an atom, a nucleon, etc. If science were to start examining every little "if" that bounced around in someone's noggin then spewed itself into the world from the gaping crater under the fella's beak, we'd have all science slowed to something less than a parameceum's gait.
Nope, but there's no proof that a lot of stuff doesn't exist. Vampyres, tooth faeries, etc. Against logic and reason (inductive, deductive, and emporical), sciences of many kinds, etc. flies the face of "faith". IOW, it is unreasonable and illogical and irrational.
But I know there are no such things as gods because a book told me so.
imho, you guys waste allot of time with this sort of thing. no one can prove anything about god anyway so why is it a big deal? i mean, it dosent hurt if people believe in god and it dosent hurt anyone if they dont.so what does each side care. i believe in god. i recently joined the catholic church. so, what the hell of a difference does that make to how the world got here. gilbert dosent believe in god, so what difference does that make to how the world got here. see what i mean?
roflmao
Creation = evolution? Hardly. Perhaps life needed to be created, but there's nothing to say that the universe and life in it needed to "start" in the first place. For that matter, there's nothing that says there isn't a myriad of universes. But things definitely and unequivocally evolve.
Perhaps "creation" had a basis in science at one time and was initially designed to describe to uninformed people how things came about, but in the past couple and a half thousand years it has evolved into a fantastic and incredible story of "ifs" and "how abouts".
If there was such a thing as a creator, initially it would have to create nothing. In that creation of nothing, it would have created itself into oblivion. Then it would have to recreate itself in order to create things to fill the nothing so it would cease being nothing. Friggin ridiculous unless the creator had a creator: that would be we homosapiens.
rofl
Now there's a really limited point of view.No-one can predict what we can evolve into any farther than we can see into the future and predict lottery numbers. As a single celled organism you probably couldn't see being any higher a form of life than you reached as a single scelled organism either.