Creation vs. Evolution
Thursday, September 11, 2003 by grayhaze | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
I thought I'd pre-empt this discussion before Kona's comment in the other thread sparked it off there. There is concrete proof that we evolved, but no proof that we were created. What's you're opinion, and why?
To quote Phoebe from Friends: "I guess the real question is who put those fossils there and why?"
To quote Phoebe from Friends: "I guess the real question is who put those fossils there and why?"
 |
|
Page 3 of 56 | |
|
|---|
Zodiaq~
Reply #42 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:06 PM
Reply #42 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:06 PM
Thanks IPlural...Actually I don't have cable right now (don't really watch t.v. anymore)...except for the 'Broadband' of course 
I have been stuck on "Nova" here and there though
And as you said up above, "How do you know"? Exactly!!!
Some call it "Faith" could it be "Blind Faith"? It would be very 'Myopic' to believe that there are not other possiblities
I have been stuck on "Nova" here and there though
And as you said up above, "How do you know"? Exactly!!!
Some call it "Faith" could it be "Blind Faith"? It would be very 'Myopic' to believe that there are not other possiblities
The Rated PG
Reply #43 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:10 PM
Reply #43 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:10 PM
On a more serious note...
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/menu-life.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/home.html
Fast Facts...
on the origin of life
During all recorded human history, there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing.
As yet, Evolutionism has not produced a scientifically credible explanation for the origin of such immense complexities as DNA, the human brain, and many elements of the cosmos.
It is highly premature for materialists to claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet to discover how even one protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processes.
There is no scientific proof that life did (or ever could) evolved into existence from non-living matter. Further, there is substantial evidence that spontaneous generation is impossible. Only DNA is known to produce DNA. No chemical interaction of molecules has even come close to producing this ultra-complex code which is so essential to all known life.
How can we know there's a God?
How can a scientist recognize evidence for an intelligent Creator?
If God made everything, who made God?
Who created God?
Where did life come from? Is evolution really the best scientific answer?
Could life have begun through chance and natural chemistry? Have laboratory scientists proved that life evolved on its own? What discovery should have stopped the whole Creation/Evolution debate?
Can evolution be the source of life in all its complexity?
The more science reveals about life's complexity, the more doubtful it appears that life originated without intelligent help.
Why is abiogenesis impossible?
A scientist examines Evolution's claim that life originated spontaneously. The problems with this theory are so serious that the majority of evolutionists today tend to shun the whole subject. If you thought that an evolutionary origin of life had been proven, you need to read this definitive answer.
Second Law of Thermodynamics - Would this basic law of nature have prevented the natural evolution of life?
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/menu-life.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/home.html
Fast Facts...
on the origin of life
During all recorded human history, there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing.
As yet, Evolutionism has not produced a scientifically credible explanation for the origin of such immense complexities as DNA, the human brain, and many elements of the cosmos.
It is highly premature for materialists to claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet to discover how even one protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processes.
There is no scientific proof that life did (or ever could) evolved into existence from non-living matter. Further, there is substantial evidence that spontaneous generation is impossible. Only DNA is known to produce DNA. No chemical interaction of molecules has even come close to producing this ultra-complex code which is so essential to all known life.
How can we know there's a God?
How can a scientist recognize evidence for an intelligent Creator?
If God made everything, who made God?
Who created God?
Where did life come from? Is evolution really the best scientific answer?
Could life have begun through chance and natural chemistry? Have laboratory scientists proved that life evolved on its own? What discovery should have stopped the whole Creation/Evolution debate?
Can evolution be the source of life in all its complexity?
The more science reveals about life's complexity, the more doubtful it appears that life originated without intelligent help.
Why is abiogenesis impossible?
A scientist examines Evolution's claim that life originated spontaneously. The problems with this theory are so serious that the majority of evolutionists today tend to shun the whole subject. If you thought that an evolutionary origin of life had been proven, you need to read this definitive answer.
Second Law of Thermodynamics - Would this basic law of nature have prevented the natural evolution of life?
kona0197
Reply #44 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:17 PM
you dated dinosaurs by mans reasoning witch is absurb in the first place. in reality I think in my own mind dinosaurs were around less than 6000 years ago.
Again, mans idea that the earth is millions of years old is wrong.
Yes this is a good thought. the Bible does have the answers. If people refuse to believe them, thats their problems. I will continue to believe, until my death, that God created us (as well as all of the earth and everything in it) and you all will never compromise my faith... sorry!
Reply #44 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:17 PM
| Kona, we dated Dinosaurs 65,000,000 years ago? How can you possibly believe such a thing?! |
you dated dinosaurs by mans reasoning witch is absurb in the first place. in reality I think in my own mind dinosaurs were around less than 6000 years ago.
Again, mans idea that the earth is millions of years old is wrong.
| Scripture has the answer. Romans one informs us that unbelievers will devise systems of thought to suppress the truth about God from their consciences. |
Yes this is a good thought. the Bible does have the answers. If people refuse to believe them, thats their problems. I will continue to believe, until my death, that God created us (as well as all of the earth and everything in it) and you all will never compromise my faith... sorry!
kona0197
Reply #45 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:20 PM
Their likness was refering to God, Jesus, and The Holy Sprit. The 3 entities are the same but different.
Reply #45 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:20 PM
| In Genesis there's a story of creation, including the creation of man. The original Hebrew Bible says the Elohim (gods, plural) made man in "their" likeness. |
Their likness was refering to God, Jesus, and The Holy Sprit. The 3 entities are the same but different.
The Rated PG
Reply #46 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:23 PM
Einstein belonged to the category of liberal scientists. For many years his notion of God was akin to that of Spinoza. Yet, as recent studies on him have shown, he came, with the progress of age and reflection, to consider the existence of that personal God whom he first doubted as required by the way in which nature lends itself to the rationalization of phenomena operated by science. As he said in an interview in 1950, far from being an atheist he "believed on the contrary in a personal God."
You might also be interested in Robert N. Goldman's EINSTEIN'S GOD (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1997) which says (among other things): "As he aged, Einstein's concept of God seems to have become less remote from humanity. Peter Bucky, the son of one of his few intimate friends, grew up knowing Einstein and often chauffeured him -- writes that Einstein 'composed a number of songs to honor God, which I heard him sing to himself many times. I also heard him say that anybody who loves nature must love God. He also told me once that ideas, as such, stemmed from God.'" p. 118 (with similar material following it). Alice Calaprice's THE QUOTABLE EINSTEIN (Princeton Univ. Press, 1996) says 'Mere unbelief in a personal God is no philosophy at all.' -- Letter to V.T. Aaltonen, May7, 1952, on his opinion that belief in a personal God is better than atheism; Einstein Archive 59-059.
Reply #46 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:23 PM
| as far as I know einstein didn't believe in god... and thats just 1 of them |
Einstein belonged to the category of liberal scientists. For many years his notion of God was akin to that of Spinoza. Yet, as recent studies on him have shown, he came, with the progress of age and reflection, to consider the existence of that personal God whom he first doubted as required by the way in which nature lends itself to the rationalization of phenomena operated by science. As he said in an interview in 1950, far from being an atheist he "believed on the contrary in a personal God."
You might also be interested in Robert N. Goldman's EINSTEIN'S GOD (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1997) which says (among other things): "As he aged, Einstein's concept of God seems to have become less remote from humanity. Peter Bucky, the son of one of his few intimate friends, grew up knowing Einstein and often chauffeured him -- writes that Einstein 'composed a number of songs to honor God, which I heard him sing to himself many times. I also heard him say that anybody who loves nature must love God. He also told me once that ideas, as such, stemmed from God.'" p. 118 (with similar material following it). Alice Calaprice's THE QUOTABLE EINSTEIN (Princeton Univ. Press, 1996) says 'Mere unbelief in a personal God is no philosophy at all.' -- Letter to V.T. Aaltonen, May7, 1952, on his opinion that belief in a personal God is better than atheism; Einstein Archive 59-059.
kona0197
Reply #47 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:28 PM
yes but to get those unicelular lifeforms, the earth had to be created first by GOD...
Reply #47 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:28 PM
| believe in the evolution. I believe life started on this planet from unicelular lifeforms (ameabas, virii, bacteries, etc.), that slowly evolved into all the living creatures we have today |
yes but to get those unicelular lifeforms, the earth had to be created first by GOD...
The Rated PG
Reply #48 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:29 PM
Reply #48 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:29 PM
About the fossils
Fast Facts...on the fossil record
All the different kinds of animals appear abruptly and fully functional in the strata with no proof of macroevolutionary ancestors. At the very least, this is a strong indication that not all life evolved from a common ancestor.
There is no scientific proof that life has evolved.
Although scientists will continue to discover new varieties of fossil animals and plants, it is generally agreed that the millions of fossils already discovered and the sediments already explored provide a generally reliable indication of which way the evidence is going. That is, there will continue to be little or no fossil evidence found to support Evolutionism.
Most fossil animals and plants were buried in water-laid sediments.
There is no scientific proof that the fossils, the coal, or the Earth are billions of years old.
There is increasing evidence that many sedimentary rocks, which some thought took thousands or millions of years to accumulate, almost certainly were deposited in only months, days, or hours.
In almost all cases, the very existence of the fossils, in the types and numbers discovered, strongly indicates catastrophic conditions were involved in the burial and preservation of these animal and plant remains. Without such conditions, there seems to be no plausible way to explain their existence.
Fast Facts...on the fossil record
All the different kinds of animals appear abruptly and fully functional in the strata with no proof of macroevolutionary ancestors. At the very least, this is a strong indication that not all life evolved from a common ancestor.
There is no scientific proof that life has evolved.
Although scientists will continue to discover new varieties of fossil animals and plants, it is generally agreed that the millions of fossils already discovered and the sediments already explored provide a generally reliable indication of which way the evidence is going. That is, there will continue to be little or no fossil evidence found to support Evolutionism.
Most fossil animals and plants were buried in water-laid sediments.
There is no scientific proof that the fossils, the coal, or the Earth are billions of years old.
There is increasing evidence that many sedimentary rocks, which some thought took thousands or millions of years to accumulate, almost certainly were deposited in only months, days, or hours.
In almost all cases, the very existence of the fossils, in the types and numbers discovered, strongly indicates catastrophic conditions were involved in the burial and preservation of these animal and plant remains. Without such conditions, there seems to be no plausible way to explain their existence.
kona0197
Reply #49 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:37 PM
Reply #49 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:37 PM
If you guys out there do not believe in God or Jesus...
explain to me why...
After people pray and lay hands on each that...
crippled people are healed and walk
blind people see again
Cancer cures itself
Tumors shrink and dissappear
Cronic smokers are freed of the habit
Those who use drugs are freed from the habit
Colds, flus, and common sickness is gone and those people healed
Broken bones heal themselves...
I have seen all of this happen before my eyes. I believe in God because of what I have seen him do through those who have faith and believe.
I have also seen demons exorcisted from people in the name of Jesus. I hate demons.
My faith is the reason I know the earth, man, animals, and universe was created by GOD.
Where did God come from? He was always here. Maybe if you get lucky and get to Heaven you can ask the almighty where he hails from.
explain to me why...
After people pray and lay hands on each that...
crippled people are healed and walk
blind people see again
Cancer cures itself
Tumors shrink and dissappear
Cronic smokers are freed of the habit
Those who use drugs are freed from the habit
Colds, flus, and common sickness is gone and those people healed
Broken bones heal themselves...
I have seen all of this happen before my eyes. I believe in God because of what I have seen him do through those who have faith and believe.
I have also seen demons exorcisted from people in the name of Jesus. I hate demons.
My faith is the reason I know the earth, man, animals, and universe was created by GOD.
Where did God come from? He was always here. Maybe if you get lucky and get to Heaven you can ask the almighty where he hails from.
Sugaree
Reply #50 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:56 PM
Reply #50 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:56 PM
This is so fascinating.....NOT!
I believe what I believe and nothing that I read here, will ever change my mind
Dor, Isn't being "jealous" one of gods little no-no's?
I believe what I believe and nothing that I read here, will ever change my mind
Dor, Isn't being "jealous" one of gods little no-no's?
Matt Janx
Reply #51 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:06 PM
Reply #51 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:06 PM
My friend is a screenplay writer for films (he says America is great too). He is writing a feature film on this topic called "Mercury". He believes in a lot of his own theories though. He said something like "Creation is a start-point to our perception". He was backing up how everything was created using the 'Energy cannot be created nor destroyed' phrase. For anyone who wants to know about his film. you can ask him to send you drafts of his script. But don't be disappointed if he refuses too since... he will only send it to people he trusts (not sure why, maybe he hasn't patented it or something.)
bakerstreet
Reply #52 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:23 PM
Reply #52 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:23 PM
Both creationism and evolution are suspect. Why? because 99.9% of people who formulate opinions and hypothesis about them do so because of their angst toward the opposing view. No one who seeks to *disprove* something can ever be unbiased. The moment you do you taint your perception of the evidence. That's why creationists and evolutionists can often point to the same evidence and draw completely disparate conclusions. There are as many blind skeptics as there are blind believers.
One can study evolution without tainting their empirical research with 'faith'. One can study religion without ever pondering the 'truth' of a given belief system. Paleontologists, geologists, historians and other such scholars can go about their work without ever allowing the idea of a factual 'God' to enter into it. "This exists, therefore God (can/can't)" is a leap that defies the objective spirit of science itself. Science, by its definition, cannot address God, by his religious definition, unless He appears in some tangible form that can be studied.
When I hear someone use the Gilgamesh Epic to place the existence of God into doubt, it affects me in the same way that it would were I to hear an Egyptologist reference "alien astronauts". You can refute tradition, folklore, even the Bible itself, but as a concept God is irrefutable, and can only be accepted or rejected on a personal level. Conceptually, God exists independently of the concrete evidence that mankind uses to formulate opinions about Him. You can disprove a particular relic or work of folklore, but it leaves the essence of God untouched. Better yet, it cleanses the concept of something that was misleading. Skepticism, itself, is a servant of God, in my personal opinion. Others will differ, of course.
So, when someone says "Look at all these wars, how can there be a God??" one might as easily say "If it weren't for God, think of how long mankind might have lasted before it destroyed itself." Let's not forget that our continued survival, our ability to overcome the animalistic, to drag ourselves up an evolutionary ladder without anything more than opposable thumbs, is as much proof of the existence of God than that which we overcome disproves Him.
How you explain it is your own affair. I would, again, suggest reading Marcus Aurelius. I find great comfort in the beliefs of the later Stoics. God created the world and everything in it by whatever method He chose to. God is what God is independent of what I think or feel. He gave me a mind and judgment to move about the world and better it in an virtuous way. Speculation on the spiritual origins of such things has relevance of diners pondering how a delicious dessert was made. Fun to ponder, but all it does is distract you from actually eating the dessert.
We have a great task simply living justly in this world, and such dissension and bitterness just makes people want to fly planes into buildings.
One can study evolution without tainting their empirical research with 'faith'. One can study religion without ever pondering the 'truth' of a given belief system. Paleontologists, geologists, historians and other such scholars can go about their work without ever allowing the idea of a factual 'God' to enter into it. "This exists, therefore God (can/can't)" is a leap that defies the objective spirit of science itself. Science, by its definition, cannot address God, by his religious definition, unless He appears in some tangible form that can be studied.
When I hear someone use the Gilgamesh Epic to place the existence of God into doubt, it affects me in the same way that it would were I to hear an Egyptologist reference "alien astronauts". You can refute tradition, folklore, even the Bible itself, but as a concept God is irrefutable, and can only be accepted or rejected on a personal level. Conceptually, God exists independently of the concrete evidence that mankind uses to formulate opinions about Him. You can disprove a particular relic or work of folklore, but it leaves the essence of God untouched. Better yet, it cleanses the concept of something that was misleading. Skepticism, itself, is a servant of God, in my personal opinion. Others will differ, of course.
So, when someone says "Look at all these wars, how can there be a God??" one might as easily say "If it weren't for God, think of how long mankind might have lasted before it destroyed itself." Let's not forget that our continued survival, our ability to overcome the animalistic, to drag ourselves up an evolutionary ladder without anything more than opposable thumbs, is as much proof of the existence of God than that which we overcome disproves Him.
How you explain it is your own affair. I would, again, suggest reading Marcus Aurelius. I find great comfort in the beliefs of the later Stoics. God created the world and everything in it by whatever method He chose to. God is what God is independent of what I think or feel. He gave me a mind and judgment to move about the world and better it in an virtuous way. Speculation on the spiritual origins of such things has relevance of diners pondering how a delicious dessert was made. Fun to ponder, but all it does is distract you from actually eating the dessert.
We have a great task simply living justly in this world, and such dissension and bitterness just makes people want to fly planes into buildings.
Doomgaze
Reply #55 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:41 PM
Reply #55 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:41 PM
just remember
fossils exist to test your faith
fossils exist to test your faith
grayhaze
Reply #56 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:46 PM
Reply #56 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:46 PM
We're certainly seeing a broad range of beliefs here, and as usual this subject stirs up some strong feelings.
I think it's pretty obvious from my initial post that I don't believe in God. I actually place about as much faith in there being a God as I do in there being a Santa Claus. I believe both concepts pertain to a similar thing.
I won't argue that the idea of God and creation gives those people who believe in it a sense of importance and comfort, and it's therefore not a bad thing in itself. If it helps to enrich a person's life, then I wouldn't want to take that away from them. It's when those people start to push their ideas as the only truth, and make the assertion that in not believing I am somehow less of a person, that I become angered. You'll find a lot less people who try to spread the 'word' of science than you will those who try to spread the 'word' of God.
As for evolution, there is certainly proof of evolution in a smaller scale, as it has been shown that certain creatures adapt their bodies over generations to cope with changing climates and their needs for survival. Nobody can say for sure exactly where it all started, and you won't find a single scientist who will give you a definitive answer for how life started. That's what sets scientists apart from followers of religion. Scientists try to keep an open mind until they have adequate proof to believe, whereas a religious person will believe in something simply because they read it in an old book and think that in not believing they are damning themselves to an unpleasant existance after death. Which sounds the most rational to you?
I always wonder whether 2000 years from now there will be people walking around preaching the great word of J.K. Rowling and following the faith of Potter.
I think it's pretty obvious from my initial post that I don't believe in God. I actually place about as much faith in there being a God as I do in there being a Santa Claus. I believe both concepts pertain to a similar thing.
I won't argue that the idea of God and creation gives those people who believe in it a sense of importance and comfort, and it's therefore not a bad thing in itself. If it helps to enrich a person's life, then I wouldn't want to take that away from them. It's when those people start to push their ideas as the only truth, and make the assertion that in not believing I am somehow less of a person, that I become angered. You'll find a lot less people who try to spread the 'word' of science than you will those who try to spread the 'word' of God.
As for evolution, there is certainly proof of evolution in a smaller scale, as it has been shown that certain creatures adapt their bodies over generations to cope with changing climates and their needs for survival. Nobody can say for sure exactly where it all started, and you won't find a single scientist who will give you a definitive answer for how life started. That's what sets scientists apart from followers of religion. Scientists try to keep an open mind until they have adequate proof to believe, whereas a religious person will believe in something simply because they read it in an old book and think that in not believing they are damning themselves to an unpleasant existance after death. Which sounds the most rational to you?
I always wonder whether 2000 years from now there will be people walking around preaching the great word of J.K. Rowling and following the faith of Potter.
craeonics
Reply #57 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:53 PM
Reply #57 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:53 PM
craeonics takes a random pick from The Big Bag of Religions
Beginning? End? What a limited view you Westerners have. There is no beginning, there is no end, all is Brahmin. When Vishnu will rest, Shiva will dance his dance of fire and obliterate all. Brahma will bring order into chaos once again. Vishnu will reawaken and sustain, until the next cycle begins.
Beginning? End? What a limited view you Westerners have. There is no beginning, there is no end, all is Brahmin. When Vishnu will rest, Shiva will dance his dance of fire and obliterate all. Brahma will bring order into chaos once again. Vishnu will reawaken and sustain, until the next cycle begins.
grayhaze
Reply #58 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:58 PM
Reply #58 Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:58 PM
By the way, I would just like to emphasise that I only don't believe in a God because I have no reason to believe. I have experienced nothing in my life to push me in that direction, and I feel no need to attribute my existance to a higher power. I like to keep an open mind in so far as that if God were to suddenly appear in front of me I would admit I had been wrong and become a believer. I just don't see the point of blindly following a faith 'just in case', which I think happens so much these days.
Doreen
Reply #59 Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:07 PM
Reply #59 Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:07 PM
China he is God he can do what he wants??? hehe!
(I have no answers China only opinions and my own possibly crazy thoughts and beliefs)
Grayhaze
I think the reason more ppl that believe in God are more pushier than the ppl that believe in Science is cuz they "think" if they save a few souls they will make it themselves into Heaven (I doubt that will work)
If you're a believer you plant a seed and then it's thier own decision after that if they will let it grow I guess, you cannot do anything else.
In the past I planted a few seeds that apparently grew into trees but do I think that will save me? nope I think a few of my friends and family may see God while I might be needing a Fan and a really tall glass of water.
cuz I "believe" I know the difference.
another words don't base your Faith on other ppl or their actions or you'll be dissappointed quickly and lose your Faith in God...
(I have no answers China only opinions and my own possibly crazy thoughts and beliefs)
Grayhaze
I think the reason more ppl that believe in God are more pushier than the ppl that believe in Science is cuz they "think" if they save a few souls they will make it themselves into Heaven (I doubt that will work)
If you're a believer you plant a seed and then it's thier own decision after that if they will let it grow I guess, you cannot do anything else.
In the past I planted a few seeds that apparently grew into trees but do I think that will save me? nope I think a few of my friends and family may see God while I might be needing a Fan and a really tall glass of water.
cuz I "believe" I know the difference.
another words don't base your Faith on other ppl or their actions or you'll be dissappointed quickly and lose your Faith in God...
Doreen
Reply #60 Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:08 PM
Reply #60 Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:08 PM
hehe uh oh there is dutchy...
what is that wooden shoe land Religion?
what is that wooden shoe land Religion?
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 3 of 56 | |
|
|---|
Reply #41 Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:04 PM
and something diffrend, ask yourself why 'less advanced' populations are believers in god, and the 'more advanced' people don't?
as far as I know einstein didn't believe in god... and thats just 1 of them