grayhaze grayhaze

Creation vs. Evolution

Creation vs. Evolution

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?"
211,750 views 1,102 replies
Reply #551 Top
Is it possible that something set it up to be random? Set it up to be a possibility for life?

Evolution shouldn't be the reaons why someone does not believe in God or a spirit of sorts that made or worked on the Universe.

For me the same 'proof' that there is no God can be turned around to say that there is one.



I think the word god is a loaded word. We all fall under the rules of this Universe and it is our care giver whether it is what we call alive or not.
Reply #552 Top
God created evolution....
Reply #553 Top
simple as ^ that


Reply #555 Top
God is... gone????

How did I missed that? Why am I still here?







When you die, does your life live on in your creations?
Reply #556 Top
I wonder if treetog will like living in one of his skins...
Reply #557 Top
heres a question.how could there be evidence of creation when they were just created on the spot? thats the point in my opinion.where as there is "evidence" of evolution there can be none of creation since god would have JUST created them.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #558 Top
If God made every species on earth, why didn't he make them all reproduce the same way?


Simple, he likes variety.
that's why you find different type of flowers, variations in the big cats: Lions, Tigers, Jaguars, and your common house cat. Same type, just a little variation.
Reply #559 Top
I don't know.
Say you're a programmer and make a bunch of different applications. They may all be very different and accomplish different things, but I'm pretty sure that the "save as" command for all of these would be the same. Why make them different if one way works?
Reply #560 Top
OK, so here's the ultimate creation question everyone's been avoiding:

If God created us etc, who created God?
Reply #562 Top
Among the many Christians who accept evolution is….Pope John Paul II. Yep. The Big Guy himself. On October 7, 1996, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Rome, he declared [the Church's] acceptance of evolution as a scientific fact, and noted that there is no war between religion and science: "Consideration of the method used in diverse orders of knowledge allows for the concordance of two points of view which seem irreconcilable. The science of observation describes with ever greater precision the multiple manifestations of life…while theology extracts the final meaning according to the Creator’s designs."
Reply #563 Top

Yah, well he's a nutcase anyway.

Two recent events come to mind:

1- The legality of civil homosexual marriage (not religious marriage of course) was voted a couple of months ago, but just before the vote, JP2 warned the deputees (equiv to the US congressmen) that voting in favor of homosexual weddings could close them the doors of heaven.  WTF? It's a CIVIL marriage is was about. I though the church didn't even recognise civil marriages as valid, so what does he care?

2- A recent propaganda against the use of condoms.  The Vatican even claims that condoms do nothing to protect against AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.

Did I say that I hated religions? Retards!
Sure, believe in God, I'm ok with that. But organised religions should be illegal!


[Message Edited]
Reply #564 Top
Heres one I came across...

Without religion, where is your basis for morality?
Reply #565 Top
It is based in your humanity...
Reply #566 Top
Let me expand on this....

I can only speak for myself because I only know my own reality and how I face it day to day.

My commandments revolve around the premise that I should do as ittle harm as possible for the greater good,. Whom would fall into the grouping of the greater good you may ask, well it is expansive but layered.

My wife and children come first.
Others come next.
Animals and earth next.
then followed up by my person.

The order is subjective in the fact that it is applied on a mean base line consisting of intent, results and acceptable loss or gain.

For instance, I have walked in front of traffic to pick up two different dogs at two different times, one of which chewed my arm up pretty good. The first time is when that happened in fact. It did not stop me from doing the same thing the next time around.

I put my life on the line for someone elses animals.

I stop and push cars out of traffic when they are broken down instead of layingon the horn which is as stupid and ignorant as you can get in my opinion, the horn blowing, why make someones already messed up day even more so or at least attempt to to justify you anger at their expence?

I'll give of myself to anyone in need who might ask, or I see is in need but would not ask and yet I would break someone and not think twice about it if they decided to take from me or mine or anyone else.

I think that murder is the worst thing in life a person could do and yet I think that someone who does in fact murder, rape or molest a child, woman or another has removed them self from the human race and has decided to become an animal of prey.

I also think that Bush lied his ass off and his people still keep lying their asses off. Yet I also feel that something shoulsd have been done back when Ray Gun was telling daddy Bush to get Ashcroft to sell them Weapons of Mass destruction was and is criminal and something that people in the USA really need to wake up and look at.

Did he have WMD's yes, we know because we kept the freaking paper trail all the way to our coffers.

anyway...

like I said, personally I feel that I do not need the crutch (my opinion only applied to myself) of God or religion to know what is right or wrong....

By the way...

My Brother was an alter boy and my mother taught Sunday school...
I just spent time on my knees in front of the priest and chewing stale crackers and drinking darkred un-sugared koolaide....


[Message Edited]
Reply #567 Top
Facinating read IP, especially the last paragraph.
Reply #568 Top
However, I'm not saying you can't be moral without God; atheists can be better people than some "Christians." It's just that without God, morals are subjective; they're no more important than the type of music you listen to. Without God, we can't criticize others for being immoral; we can't criticize Hitler, Saddam Hussein, or Jack the Ripper. Without God, life is as meaningless as the action figures children play with. Without God, we're meaningless molecules that just so happened to come together and be intelligent.
Reply #569 Top
Among the many Christians who accept evolution is….Pope John Paul II.


Cathlics and Christains are different religions. PJP2 is a cathlic.

1- The legality of civil homosexual marriage (not religious marriage of course) was voted a couple of months ago, but just before the vote, JP2 warned the deputees (equiv to the US congressmen) that voting in favor of homosexual weddings could close them the doors of heaven. WTF? It's a CIVIL marriage is was about. I though the church didn't even recognise civil marriages as valid, so what does he care?


Quite simple IP: Marriage is defined AS A UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN, and in God's eyes it is written that homosexuality is wrong.

Reply #570 Top
Kona,

Catholics ARE christians, by definition.

You're probably thinking of the difference between Protestantism and Catholicism, which are different sects of christianity (but both still christian, by all definitions of the word).

EventHorizon,

Even *with* God, morals are subjective. You may have the argument that you can point to a definitive source for your moral structure, but the interpretation of what that structure means is still supremely subjective. Different people in the same religion (let alone different people in different religions), can and do interpret their moral imperatives from God in a very subjective, and often differing manner.

Even the observance of commandments are interpreted subjectively, in accordance with what the interpreter wants it to mean. For example, 'Thou shalt not kill' is routinely interpreted to allow killing criminals, enemies, and people not of one's faith. If you accept it as a moral imperative, then it means exactly what it says, and one cannot kill *at all*, for any reason. The mere existence of a moral structure does not remove the existence of subjectivity.

It is possible to have a well defined moral structure that does not require God. One example is the form of projected self interest, in that as we do not wish to be killed, or robbed, etc., and given that we can recognize that others have the same kind of desire in that respect, we can create a moral framework based on recognition of the integrity of ourselves and others.

In such a structure, it is quite possible (and even defensible) to despise and crimilize the acts of those you mention.
[Message Edited]
Reply #571 Top
Kona,

Even if you believe that the differences between catholics and protestants are so great that the decision of the pope is not meaningful, there are clear cut cases of *many* protestant clergy (some of whom I know personally) who have no problem with the science of evolution. They recongnize that there is nothing about the existence (or veneration) of God that precludes the idea of evolution (or anything else discovered by science, as well).
Reply #572 Top
I think the improtant thing is to keep a God like image in mind, as the goal of evolution, and to be able to recognise parts of that mental image in each other as we travel the evolutionary path
Reply #573 Top

Quite simple IP: Marriage is defined AS A UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN, and in God's eyes it is written that homosexuality is wrong.

Kona, you didn't understand my point. Try to follow the logic bellow.

1. The Christian religion doesn't recognize civil marriage. If two people get married in a couthouse not in a church, they are not considered married in the eyes of the Church.

2. The government legalizes homosexual CIVIL marriages.

3. The Church is outraged and says what you said, that Marriage is defined AS A UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN.

Where's the logic? Is a civil marriage considered a valid marriage for the Church or not?  If a civil marriage is not valid in the first place, therefore the new homosexual marriages are not valid anyway.  So why should the Church care?

Reply #575 Top
Without God, we're meaningless molecules that just so happened to come together and be intelligent.


Sounds good to me...

Without religion, where is your basis for morality?


Many other creatures on this planet have rudimentary morals, and generally know the difference between right and wrong in issues that their brains are equipped to understand. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen a group of dogs going to church to pray, and yet they will generally fight to the death to protect their owners. For that matter, I've never seen dolphins building an underwater church...