personaly i believe evolution to be fact and creationism a bunch of religious hog-wash , i base this belief due to a little something called science.
anyone elses opinion?
Printable View
personaly i believe evolution to be fact and creationism a bunch of religious hog-wash , i base this belief due to a little something called science.
anyone elses opinion?
agreed.
YES EVOLUTION
I believe in creationism and I feel evolution is hog-wash. Also, did you know that there have been a lot of scientist who have tried to disprove creationism and have ended up believeing in it and being converted? Just thought I would throw that tid bit in there. Peace.
well evolution is just a theory, but one thing I do know is that creationism is complete bollocks. Not to trample anyone's beliefs or anything, but creationism pretty much refutes scientific evidence.
Gravity is also a theory.
So was the fact that the world was flat, everyone believed it too. After all it was "science" that had "proven" so.
evolution of course
i dont believe we were created, and i dont know enough about evolution to believe it or disbelieve it
Your mistaken. Gravity is not a theory, it's a law. Hence: The Law of Gravity.
nnneevvermind
a theory in science is much diffeerent than a theory in any other field. A scientific theory, in order to become one, must pass several tests by many scientists and have a collection of supporting evidence for it and be reviewed and critiqued by many scientists in order to even become a scientific theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Encatuse
By the way gravity is a theory. as well as the theory of relativity. theory of electro-magnetism.
We can test everything. Aynthign and still not be 100% sure, we can be 99.9 percent sure. And then claim it's a law because we see no different.
But just because we soo no different doest mean there isnt. Scientific community sems to agree that nothing is %100.
We say things are law, but what if in a 99.9 percent probability that gravity is the was we've worked it out to be, isnt the way.
We can just speculate what little we know in this short lived civilization. Mabein a couple melenia. Right now gwe should concentrate on surviving for another couple hundreed years, forget a couple thousand or even 1 melenia.
EVOLUTION, BABY! That Bible-bullshit-hogwash is just that, hogwash
i wont argue with anyone here, thats fucking pointless but i do believe in God, Jah, allah, however one wishes to put it. And i believe that evolution is a naural process of life, the ultimate symblism of life striving to improve itself in imitaiton of a perfect god.
So im a creationist who understands and accepts that evolution is a real process of life.
~always in Jah~
~pura vida compadres~
~seeker~
Darwin said it so you all believe it. Just as the Bible says it so alot of us believe it. Two sides two different views. What does it matter what we all believe as long as we all believe in our opinion. Who are we all trying to convince. You folks don't believe as I do and I don't believe as you do. Lets move on. There is no proof on either side.
Rev. Michael T
Soldier for Christ
I don't see how y'all have so much trouble reconsiling religion and science... As Thomas Aquinas said, God is the unmoved mover.
amen bro
problem is there is proof on both sides but not enough to affirm what happened when life started because noone is still around from when it happened.
no observation, no scientific fact, its all faith in an idea, whenther in evolutionary theory or creationism.
the fossil record, the distribution of certain specise on certain contintents, and generally speaking a boat load of scientific facts supprt evolutionists, and to think the only reason people believe in evolution is because Darwin said it, thats bullshit we believe what darwin said because he had proof of evolution as in the fossil record and other materials, so theres actual hard evidence in the evolution camp while theres is a 2000yr old book in the creationists.Quote:
Originally Posted by meek mike
The way the influenza changes to a different strain every year, thats evolution. Bacteria developing resistance to anti-biotics, that is evolution. Insects build up tolerence to pesticides, again is evolution.
Null-
I never said evolution doesn't happen. I know it does because I am not the same as I was a year ago. I evolved into the person I am to day. Thats not the point. Evolution is pretty much adapting to surrounds.
Jugg-
You say there is proof. Please post the link so we (faithful) people can be proven wrong. But........ Don't post from some biast website. Just as you asked us (the faithful) to not post from a biast Christian site. Maybe a news paper that says "Proof evolution is where we all came from". Then you can say with out being biast yourself that evolution is in fact what happened. Thanks.
Rev. Micahel T
Soldier for Christ
i hope we can agree national geographic is unbiased and onlly concerned with scientific facts.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...podfossil.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ominiddna.html
heres a good one, it shows how evolution and religion can co-exist, just not evolution and creationism:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._religion.html
^thats a good one even though i dont believe in god.
Jugg-
Those are good. It doesn't prove that we all came from monkeys and what not all it shows in a new kind of fish (speaking of the fisrt link) that went from water to land. I believe I've seen on the Discovery channel that there are still fish that do that. They discovered a new fish not the missing link to humans. But that was a good link to look into. I will do some research myself and see what else I can find. Please keep looking into it as well and we can talk more about it next weekend when I'm done with mine. Thanks.
Rev. Michael T
Soldier for Christ
Did you guys know that the flood in the bible that noah's ark had in it has been scientifically proven? There is evidence on both sides of the park... its just that people believe what they want to believe... if one side had all the evidence to support it noone would believe the ladder... so there is no point in argueing about it because there isn't enough support on either side to say that it is the correct one... you just believe what you believe.
what proof? and just because people believe in the flood doesnt make it legitimate( people believe in ufos as well, and big foot, theirs also plenty who believe Elvis is alive), one argument for the flood which i find plauseable is that it was a localized event and later exagerated into a world wide calamity. There is in fact much evidence that proves it didnt happen. The most important question is where did all that water go, in the bible it says even the mountains were covered, so where did it go? So the fossil record shows no such event as happening, why are fossils layered from simple organizisms to more complex and not all mixed up as would happen if a world wide flood occured?Quote:
Originally Posted by FrenchInhale
Yeah just because there was a massive flood at some point in history doesn't mean it was actually Noah's ark. In fact, most historians believe that this event may have served as inspiration for the story, but not as the actual historical event. Say there is a huge disaster that affects a certain area and a few decades later you want to write a religious text that people would believe. You might use that event in your story, so your readers would say "oh yeah, i have vaguely heard about that, so it must be true." And while everyone has the right to believe what they want, that doesn't make them right or justified. I have the right not to believe in the law of gravity, but if I jump off the roof of a tall building, gravity is still going to be there.
As far as evolution goes, however, perhaps some misunderstood what I was saying when I said that it's just a theory. I think that if you look at the entire history of science, scientific discovery has basically meant doing away with old ideas and replacing them with new, better ideas. Take physics for example: Galileo was eventually proven wrong, Newton was eventually proven wrong, Einstein will eventually be proven wrong because his theory doesn't take into account quantum mechanics. I think that, with this pattern evident, it's not the best idea to accept evolution wholeheartedly. While I think that evolution does exist, it's only an important piece of a larger puzzle. It will have to stand up to many years of scientific process before it can be accepted as a law.
i dont think einstien will be "done away with", i just think that eisnteisn theiry of relativity and quantum mechanics will some day be unified and they will be seen as one/;... but i dunno, im drunk as hell :D
I'm not entirely sure but I think einstein's theory is wrong for the whole quantum mechanics thing but will be correct if a theory (such as string if you believe in it) comes along and tweaks it, so I think we're talking about the same thing. But I'm stoned as hell, so who knows, really.
At the end of the day Creationism is such a weak theory, it's not even worth talking about. Evolution is the best we have.
I'm going to offend some people, but I don't really care.
Creationism was born in the Early Middle Ages when the Church had control over EVERYTHING. It is a form of control that the Church has established over people (mostly Americans today).
Throughout history, the Church, the popes and all those people constantly hid the truth from people from fear that they would one day wake up and realize the world as it is taught by the Church is a huge sham. You can draw a direct parallel between this and the way communist or otherwise totalitarian regimes hide or distort the truth from their own population so that they can keep control.
Creationism is a sham, and only people who are afraid to realize that the Bible was NEVER meant to be taken literally refuse to accept it.
(I'm sorry to double post, it took too long to add this on the edit screen :D)
P.S.: To say that evolution is 'just' a theory s the weakest counter-argument ever. As others have pointed out, relativity is 'just' a theory, sub-atomic particles are 'just' a theory, yet physics today bases itself on the existence of these particles. Everything that is not immediately concrete and tangible in science is a theory, yet that doesn't mean that they are useless.
You say that some scientists converted to creationism while trying to disprove it. How about the thousands of people who wake up with an open mind one day and realize that evolution is a beautiful theory, which puts us in harmony with each other and with nature? For that matter, why is it such an abhorrent thought for Christians to be so close to Nature and the Earth? Is it really so bad to think that we all descended from common ancestors if you go far back in time?
To me, evolution is beautiful, and it is so much more in tune with general spirituality than to simply say "3,885 years ago (or whatever) God created us, and we are better then everything else." Here's a lesson, guys: we are not better than anything else, and we do not have more of a right to this planet than anything else living here, be it a fly or a lion.
Amen! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by F L E S H
Ok first let me say i agree with you that creationism is intellectualy unacceptable, but you do have some facts wrong buddy. First you say creationism was born in the middle ages, thats wrong, creationism or the literal interpretation of the first chapters of genesis was around since it was written by the jews centurys ago. Also i greatly doubt the pushers of creationism, the churches know what they are spreading is a lie, i think they honestly believe they are right. I also wouldnt say theres a parrallel between the church and communism, people like lenin and stalin knowingly distorted history to paint themselves and their movement as always in the right, the church and its adhearants honestly believe their version of history is correct. Also communism promotes atheism, and the pope in fact helped with the fall of the soviet union. Again i will state i dont believe in god. Well im gonna stop babbling now.Quote:
Originally Posted by F L E S H
Juggalo, you misread my post in some parts, and in others, you're wrong. It is a FACT that at the very beginning of Christianity, the first church fathers such as St Augustine, St Jerome and others explicitly hid certain truths from the public in order to be able to control them. How do we know this? There are ancient texts, handwritten by these Church fathers, that clearly state that they had the intention of making people believe that these stories were factual, when most pagans of the time understood them to be myth, and nothing else. Being an historian, I've read up a lot on this kind of stuff, and sometimes ignorance is bliss, because when I found all this stuff out, it scared the shit out of me. Believe me, all I write here is true, and corroborated by most scholars. In fact, one of the books I read was written by a former priest who was completely disillusioned by the Anglican Church. Of course, after many centuries of making their flocks believe this crap, church officials eventually forgot that what they were preaching were lies, and began to believe it themselves. This is part of the explanation of why the Dark Ages were dark.
And my comparison of the Catholic Church and Communism involved only the distortion and withholding of truth. Of course, in all other ways, they're completely different, but my point was that they both use the same techniques to control the people they dominate, so that they will not rebel against them.
FLESH i would love to read where st. augstine or any other early churh leader knowingly hid certain truths, any links or names of such books would be greatyly appreciated, such info i would glad;y use when debating any christians
peace
Quote:
Originally Posted by F L E S H
whats the author and title?..id like to pick that up.
Isnt that The Dead Sea Scrolls or something??? I'm not sureQuote:
Originally Posted by juggalo420
The Dead Sea Scrolls are word for word the book of Isaiah.Quote:
Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR
It was a book I randomly picked up at the library, the author's name I think was Tom Harpur. I'll check it out tomorrow and report back. His book is very informative especially about the debate we're having here, it's really interesting.
I think it's called The Pagan Christ, but like I said i'll check it out tomorrow and tell you guys
:D
GHoST, the Dead Sea scrolls are ancient biblical texts. What I'm talking about is the creation of Christian dogma, by people such as St Augustine (he wrote City of God sometime in the 300s A.D.) and St Jerome (the dude who translated the Bible into LAtin from Greek for the first time) who wrote around the 450s A.D. I think you should be able to find their writings, especially St Augustine (not to be confused with Augustine, the first British bishop, also around the 500s A.D.)
okay, cheers F L E S H!
I've been wanting to find stuff like that, ever since I read The Da Vinci Code (lol I know its just a novel, but ya).. Im just always either too busy or too stoned to go to the library :p