Evolutionism and Creationism?

[Om]

Scienctific principles and the belief in a Creator are not mutually exclusive ... except when the "Creator" is defined by strict religious doctrine, as with the literal interpretation of Genesis.

Scientists, and anyone else, can believe in a Creator, yet see the myriad competing, contradictory constructs of Man-made religious doctrines for what I personally "believe" they are: unprovable theories, fables, allegories, myths.

Science is a fluid thing; through trial and error, repeated experimentation, and withering critique and cross-examination from other qualified scientists, it seeks Truth.

Religion, on the other hand, is generally static. Set in stone. It purports to KNOW Truth, is NOT open to interpretation (there, how's that for an open door?), and is supported by FAITH, not testable, objective evidence.

Religions says, "Trust us; we Know."

Science says, "Trust, but verify."

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by SkinsFan2456


I do believe in miracles though. I think it is most definitely a miracle that so many people still buy that $hit.....word for word no less. It is an indication to me that our education system is shot to hell......or that many people are so stubbornly ignorant, they refuse to open their eyes. Do you really think God would create a world where people form armies behind their spiritual beliefs, and sacrifice their own lives to quell the messages of other faiths?

...OR feed the poor, help the sick and wounded, build and finance hospitals and orphanages, and...and...and...and...FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. The list is endless.

I'm having trouble thinking up a charitable organization that is known to have been started by atheists. Maybe you could help me?

Now, I KNOW atheism was the moving force behind Nazism and Communism and every other evil "ism" in the last 125 years. Should we count the MILLIONS of deaths those movements have caused and STILL cause?

[Painkiller]

"It puzzles me that anyone who would call themselves a Christian would believe in evolution. No offense, but it's a stain on the church. The Bible's account of how we all came to be is in stark contrast with evolution. They cannot be married. Otherwise, major doctrines of the Bible are compromised."


Yes, creationism, and evolution due contrast starkly, but only if you believe the old testament is meant to be taken literally. Sure a person can be a "christian" without having to believe in the old testament teachings. "Christianity" was born of the new testament, the teachings of Jesus Christ...so yes, I believe that a person can be a "christian" without believing in creationism. The two don't nessesarily have to go hand in hand in my opinion.

[MrWill]

Originally posted by G-Train


This attitude is EXACTLY what I'm talking about OM, to answer your earlier question. How exactly has Science "crushed" Religion?

Science has provided actual research and observation.......which is impossible when jabbering about tall tales that were probably told for years before the bible was even written. How can a creationist even HAVE an arguement when all you can do is refer to ONE book. That book is NOT fact....I'm sorry, it is just NOT. If you think it is you have been brainwashed. Again.....I think the bible has credence, but only as a guide of how you should live your life, surrounded by tales that attempt to illustrate this.

[Bushman]

Originally posted by skinsfan51


Ok, Bushman, I have to respond to this because it's a comment based upon total ignorance. You can't just make statements like that and not expect to be challenged.

Do you know that in the 1970s this issue of creation and evolution started heating up? Those on both sides were having debates with each other on university campuses all over the country. After a very short time it was quite evident that the evolutionists weren't faring too well against these Christian scientists who presented the clear facts about their religion (the evolutionist's religion, that is). So what were they to do? They were getting whipped in front of hundreds and sometimes thousands of people in every debate (they NEVER win debates on this subject--NEVER). The answer: stop debating. That's right. Creation-hater, Eugene Scott, stepped in and said to all the evolutionists: "Stop debating. It looks bad for us."

Call your local university today and ask the Ph D in charge of the biology department if he or she is willing to debate a Ph D creationist. See what tell you. Most of them will tell you, "No, I'm not interested." Then they try to chalk it up to a "meaningless debate about something that is already settled." HA!! NICE TRY. Translated that means: "I know I'll get my butt kicked, so I'll refrain for now. Where's my microscope?"

Science has NOT crushed religion over and over. That is just plain incorrect.

I made the statement on purpose. By saying something extreme, I hoped to get an extreme response. It's the only way I can get an answer. It's the only way I will learn about Religion vs. Science.

Remember that the earth was the center of the Universe.
The Sun revolved around the earth.
The earth was flat.
All these were the beliefs of the Church. All were wrong. Religion failed. Can you deny that religion was wrong here. Therefore how can religion be infallible? How can Creationism be correct?
Evolution, I have seen evidence of. For example, in Pakistan the fossils of the land living ancestor of whales have been found. THe ancestors of birds were found in dinosaurs.
But science isn't infallible. It's based on hypothesis.
Stephen Hawkins, the world's smartest man, admitted he was wrong about blackholes. Nothing's infallible.

Why is religion opposed to science?? I want to know why.

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by SkinsFan2456


Science has provided actual research and observation.......which is impossible when jabbering about tall tales that were probably told for years before the bible was even written. How can a creationist even HAVE an arguement when all you can do is refer to ONE book. That book is NOT fact....I'm sorry, it is just NOT. If you think it is you have been brainwashed. Again.....I think the bible has credence, but only as a guide of how you should live your life, surrounded by tales that attempt to illustrate this.

SkinsFan,

I'm sorry, but the more you post the more I see that you are just trying to pound Christians without substance. Shouting that Bible is "NOT fact" doesn't make it so. There are a LOT of facts that support the Bible (archeology, science, history, and on an on). But you are not interested in that. Facts just get in the way. So rant on... (But try to stay away from statements like the above that don't resemble truth in any way.)

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by Bushman


I made the statement on purpose. By saying something extreme, I hoped to get an extreme response. It's the only way I can get an answer. It's the only way I will learn about Religion vs. Science.

Remember that the earth was the center of the Universe.
The Sun revolved around the earth.
The earth was flat.
All these were the beliefs of the Church. All were wrong. Religion failed. Can you deny that religion was wrong here. Therefore how can religion be infallible? How can Creationism be correct?
Evolution, I have seen evidence of. For example, in Pakistan the fossils of the land living ancestor of whales have been found. THe ancestors of birds were found in dinosaurs.
But science isn't infallible. It's based on hypothesis.
Stephen Hawkins, the world's smartest man, admitted he was wrong about blackholes. Nothing's infallible.

Why is religion opposed to science?? I want to know why.

The Bible doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth, or that the earth is flat, etc. Religion is not infallible. But the Bible is, and true biblically-based Christianity is not opposed to science at all. On the contrary, we feel that it agrees quite well with the biblical account. We don't run from science; we love seeing what proof will be dug up next that supports the Bible.

When you have time please do yourself a favor and browse around two websites:

www.icr.org
www.answersingenesis.com

You'll learn a lot. I mean that. I know I do.

[Bushman]

Originally posted by skinsfan51


SkinsFan,

I'm sorry, but the more you post the more I see that you are just trying to pound Christians without substance. Shouting that Bible is "NOT fact" doesn't make it so. There are a LOT of facts that support the Bible (archeology, science, history, and on an on). But you are not interested in that. Facts just get in the way. So rant on... (But try to stay away from statements like the above that don't resemble truth in any way.)

Science supports the Bible, but does it support God? Does science support the idea that the earth is thousands of years old? Where are the Dinosaurs in the Bible? Where are the animal that came before?

[Painkiller]

Originally posted by Om
Scienctific principles and the belief in a Creator are not mutually exclusive ... except when the "Creator" is defined by strict religious doctrine, as with the literal interpretation of Genesis.

Scientists, and anyone else, can believe in a Creator, yet see the myriad competing, contradictory constructs of Man-made religious doctrines for what I personally "believe" they are: unprovable theories, fables, allegories, myths.

Science is a fluid thing; through trial and error, repeated experimentation, and withering critique and cross-examination from other qualified scientists, it seeks Truth.

Religion, on the other hand, is generally static. Set in stone. It purports to KNOW Truth, is NOT open to interpretation (there, how's that for an open door?), and is supported by FAITH, not testable, objective evidence.

Religions says, "Trust us; we Know."

Science says, "Trust, but verify."

Agreed. Especially the part about religion not being open to interpretation. That's the problem I have with religion. My way of thinking is that both are possible, but both have hardly been prooven. Could you convict somebody based on the evidence that we have of the so called "Big Bang," and for that matter who says "God" didn't cause the Big Bang?

One thing that I have a problem with though is what you refer to as "testable, objective, evidence." What evidence has arisen that conclusively disproves religous doctrine? How can the "Theory of Evolution" disprove something, when it is a "theory" in and of itself. How do we verify? What I'm saying, is that what in Science is indisuputable, and if it is indisuputable, how does this disprove religion teachings? Example?

[Painkiller]

Originally posted by Bushman


Science supports the Bible, but does it support God? Does science support the idea that the earth is thousands of years old? Where are the Dinosaurs in the Bible? Where are the animal that came before?

Does the Bible have to answer ALL of these questions to be valid? The Dinosaurs predate man by thousands of years, so says science. If this is the case, why would it be important for the Bible to mention them, as they are of no consequence?

[MrWill]

Originally posted by skinsfan51


...OR feed the poor, help the sick and wounded, build and finance hospitals and orphanages, and...and...and...and...FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. The list is endless.

I'm having trouble thinking up a charitable organization that is known to have been started by atheists. Maybe you could help me?

Now, I KNOW atheism was the moving force behind Nazism and Communism and every other evil "ism" in the last 125 years. Should we count the MILLIONS of deaths those movements have caused and STILL cause?

Nice try....get your facts straight....Hitler used the words of Luther (who was king of all religious figures who were Jew haters). He most certainly DID use religion to gather support. Religion is THE backbone of MOST conflicts. And stop twisting the conversation all around. I never said that religious groups don't assist society in some ways.
The funniest thing I have seen concerning religion is how people of any given faith look to their ministers (Deion is one by the way....yikes) as demi-gods themselves......as people who can tell them specifically what to do to be in good standing with the lord. What happens when decades of child sex cases uncovered? You're still there, hanging by every word. This is because you have only that to cling to.....without it your fear would consume you.
My advice, learn a couple more things about life while you are here. And remember, it doesn't matter how religious you are, or how often you attend church.....if you are a big, fat, evil, cigar-smoking, wealth-hoarding scumbag, you will burn too.

[Bushman]

Originally posted by skinsfan51


The Bible doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth, or that the earth is flat, etc. Religion is not infallible. But the Bible is, and true biblically-based Christianity is not opposed to science at all. On the contrary, we feel that it agrees quite well with the biblical account. We don't run from science; we love seeing what proof will be dug up next that supports the Bible.

When you have time please do yourself a favor and browse around two websites:

www.icr.org
www.answersingenesis.com

You'll learn a lot. I mean that. I know I do.

But science does not support Creationism. Science does not support miracles, like walking on water.
The Bible is not a Christian book either. It is the history of the Jews. Jesus is Jewish. No a Christian. Science proves that events in Jewish history did occur. But it disputes if the events happened as stated. Did Joshua and the Jews slay the Canaanites, or was there instead a merging of the two peoples? Evidence has been found that supports both claims. According to the History Channel.

[Painkiller]

Originally posted by SkinsFan2456


That book is NOT fact....I'm sorry, it is just NOT.

Where is your proof that it isn't. Provide me some. I'm not saying that it is, I'm not saying that it isn't, but To say that it is NOT fact is arrogant presumption IMO. (Don't take that personally Just a discussion here.) What's the farthest you have ever been from home? Yet you know, with absolute certainty that the Bible is NOT fact? How can you know this?

[skinsfan51]

Originally posted by G-Train



Does the Bible have to answer ALL of these questions to be valid? The Dinosaurs predate man by thousands of years, so says science. If this is the case, why would it be important for the Bible to mention them, as they are of no consequence?

I think the Bible does mention them. See "Levithan" in the Book of Job. I also think there is evidence that some are still alive today--especially water dinos. Wouldn't that throw a wrench in evolutionary dating methods? Wow!!! I'd love to see it.

[smsmith40]

Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

You have a confident belief in evolution. That is faith.

51

I was enjoying debating with you but I was disappointed that you felt you needed to post only half of the definition of faith.


I think the reason you might have done that was the second part of the definition

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=faith

I have faith in the first part. You have faith in the second. Same word different things.