Creation or Evolution - Which side are you on?

[Narnian_Princess]

Pardon the analogy but I was a math major and this is kind of the way I think of God. God to me is a bit like parallel lines. We can't prove parallel lines don't cross. We just believe they don't and even though it does not make sense in our physical world for them to cross (because then triangles have more or less than 180 degrees, squares cannot exist, etc.) that does not mean they don't in some plane. I can't prove that God exists or does not exist. I choose to believe he does even if everything does not make perfect sense to me in this physical world.

Well said!

I believe in both as well. I believe that God created the world, but that He created it to adapt through microevolution. Macroevolution is totally nonsensical to me; if everything in the world evolved from the same primordial ooze, why can't humans mate with plants and so on?

 

[DawnCt1]

So who intelligently designed God? If you can't answer that, intelligent design is just a self defeating argument.

Everything which has a beginning has a cause.
The universe has a beginning.
Therefore the universe has a cause.
The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space. Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time—God is ‘the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity’ (Is. 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause.

 

[Aisling]

I believe in both

I couldn't vote, because I also believe in both.

 

[kendodd]

Macroevolution is totally nonsensical to me; if everything in the world evolved from the same primordial ooze, why can't humans mate with plants and so on?

But again, you can't accept we evolved from the primordial ooze, but you can accept that God, who apparently materialised from nowhere, created us from nothing. Bizarre.

 

[kendodd]

Everything which has a beginning has a cause.
The universe has a beginning.
Therefore the universe has a cause.
The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space. Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time—God is ‘the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity’ (Is. 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause.

That's far more believable than evolution.

 

[Bust*A*Stitch]

So who intelligently designed God? If you can't answer that, intelligent design is just a self defeating argument.

who says you hafta have the answer?

Some questions we simply dont have enough facts to even attempt to try and get a solution.

Creationism is faith, nothing more, you ethier beleive it or you dont.

Evolution as it is taught to be a fact, is fiction. There are way to many holes in what we actually know and what we hypothisize to be fact.
Look it up.

Im pretty sure that a lot of what current sience has found is right I just think most of the time lines are off. Remember most of the timelines we use as fact where made up in the 1850-1900 era, BEFORE modern science.

The scientist of the time came into the data with a pre consieved notion against a quick creationism style begining so what happened these guys started playing with very long term ideas and those ideas stuck, and at least in the scientific comunity they were really never tested.

The whole dinosaur thing, they exsisted. thats all we know. we dont know what they looked like, we dont know how they died ( certain areas of the globe show contradictory evidence to famin or astroid or both). My point is they do a time-line to what type of dirt is around the bone.

Things sink people, they found a intact aircraft from a forced landing in italy from WWII. 36 feet beneath the surface. It weighed around 3 tons and had to have sunk at a constant 6 inches a year to do so.

This goes against what we normally percieve, but it happened.

I'm not a bible thumper, I like being an iritant to those who think they know EVERYTHING, but in my research it is cool on how much history is correct in the bible.

as for the story on the plane it was cool too.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,145909,00.html?wh=wh

Later,

Busta

 

[Chloe'sMom]

Evolution as it is taught to be a fact, is fiction. There are way to many holes in what we actually know and what we hypothisize to be fact.
Look it up.

Actually Evolution is not taught as fact. It is called "The THEORY of Evolution" or Evolutionary theory. In the world of Science that means there is evidence to support the theory but not enough to make it Scientific fact.

 

[Narnian_Princess]

But again, you can't accept we evolved from the primordial ooze, but you can accept that God, who apparently materialised from nowhere, created us from nothing. Bizarre.

Yeah, this is the real "thing" about faith. I believe that God created the universe, it makes sense to me, so I think I'm right. You believe we evolved from pools of goo, it makes sense to you, so you think you're right. Neither one of us will change our minds... so who's REALLY right? Nobody knows.

I find it easier to believe that God created the universe, you ask how He came to be. You find it easier to believe that the Big Bang created the universe, and I ask how the atom that exploded came to be. So it's a vicious cycle really. Each of us believes what is in his or her own heart to believe, so I think it's actually pointless to try to show others the "error of their ways" because, in reality, nothing will change the others' mind because the other thinks they're right. This goes for me too, by the way, which is why I've basically stopped arguing about politics and religion issues: it's pointless. I believe what I believe and that's that, and you believe what you believe and that's that.

 

[DawnCt1]

That's far more believable than evolution.

It allows for evolution. God put the universe and all that is in it, in motion.

 

[ZachnElli]

Another both here, so I didn't vote.

 

[Liberty Belle]

You need a "both" option. That would get my vote.

 

[Mnementh]

I normally would stay out of such a thread as this, but after that Flying Spaghetti Monster thread, I had to leave a comment. I 100% believe in creation. I don't believe there is such a thing as evolution, only adaptation which is what people wrongly give the term "evolution".

 

[Bust*A*Stitch]

Actually Evolution is not taught as fact. It is called "The THEORY of Evolution" or Evolutionary theory. In the world of Science that means there is evidence to support the theory but not enough to make it Scientific fact.

Honey, I know the definition of a THEORY. Most people do, its just an appalling fact that its NEVER taught that way.

You can split hairs in your favor all you want, but I haven't been in a science class yet HS or college that had the balls to teach you everything out of the book then say "oh well its just a theory."

I'd get counted off anytime I got the THEORETICAL question wrong. Because in THEORY I could be right, and the book be wrong, its science, its supposed to EVOLVE with new data, but apparently not data that goes against the known book.

They don't have enough time in the day to teach it correctly, so they just shove it down your throat, and now my kids throat like it was fact, so even though it is a THEORY, they teach it as fact.

Prove me wrong, or pull your panties out of were ever they got puckered up into.

I love sarcasm,

PEACE!

Busta

 

[lemondog]

I believe in both

Ditto. I have always believed that the Adam/Eve story was representative of scientific evolution. Basically, God created everything, but I don't believe that all of a sudden a man and woman just appeared. JMHO.

 

[JMD]

I have never seen any evidence to support creation, but planty for evolution. So my vote goes with evolution.

Plenty of evidence? Feel free to share it with the rest of us.

As someone already pointed out, it is the "theory" of evolution. Its not proven fact.

 

[DawnCt1]

Evolution is both FACT and THEORY.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html

 

[kendodd]

Remember most of the timelines we use as fact where made up in the 1850-1900 era, BEFORE modern science.

And the Bible was written when? Scientific research into evolution didn't start and finish between 1850 and 1900, it's still ongoing.

 

[kendodd]

Plenty of evidence? Feel free to share it with the rest of us.

As someone already pointed out, it is the "theory" of evolution. Its not proven fact.

Read DawnCt's link.

 

[JMD]

Read DawnCt's link.

I read it, did you? It really isn't relevant to this discussion.

Microevolution within a species has been proven and documented. But that does not refute creationism. Its does not prove that humans evolved from tadpoles.

Still waiting for you to share your information with us.

 

[Scornelius]

I believe in both, I guess. I do believe in a Creator, and definitely believe we have evolved as a species, but don't necessarily think we descended from apes.

The Theory of Evolution doesn't say we evolved FROM apes, it says we evolved ALONGSIDE apes and share a common ancestor. Think of it like apes are cousins, and you share a distant relative wayyyy back. You didn't descend from your cousin, but you're related to them. KWIM?

Honey, I know the definition of a THEORY. Most people do, its just an appalling fact that its NEVER taught that way.

You can split hairs in your favor all you want, but I haven't been in a science class yet HS or college that had the balls to teach you everything out of the book then say "oh well its just a theory."

Every prof I ever had made it clear that it was a theory. And Creationism was also taught. And when you get to human evolution, it's not even 1 theory any more. Some taxonomic structures put us closer to orangutans, some closer to chimps. It changes, literally, as new research papers are published.

Im pretty sure that a lot of what current sience has found is right I just think most of the time lines are off. Remember most of the timelines we use as fact where made up in the 1850-1900 era, BEFORE modern science.

I don't know what text books you're using, but mine had much more current information. Just because the 'science' (and I use the term loosely) began with Darwin, doesn't mean that's all we go by now. That's why new editions of texts are put out almost every, much to the dismay of the frugal university student.