Evolution Vs. Creationism

[Father Heathen]

I get what you are saying, however...

if i was to accept the ToE to the point of believing that animals evolved on this earth rather then were created, and that humans are products of that evolution, then i would have to logically discard my belief in a creator

it would just logically flow from evolution to atheism for me. Im not going to worship something that has been proven to not exist... i dont fly that way

It's funny that you believe in god yet would think so little of him, as if god would be limited to your cartoony perception and presumptions of him.

 

[Pegg]

How is it that science and evolution couldn't simply be guided by god's hand? And even if god existed/exists religion would still be nothing but a construct of man. Religion tries to bring god down toward man's level rather than trying to lift man up toward god's level.

well if it is, then I would have to accept that the bibles account of creation is false. It tells us that God created a number of types of animals...they went forth fully formed and functioning and reproduced

that is quiet contrary to the current theory of evolution as far as I can tell

 

[LuisDantas]

well if it is, then I would have to accept that the bibles account of creation is false. It tells us that God created a number of types of animals...they went forth fully formed and functioning and reproduced

that is quiet contrary to the current theory of evolution as far as I can tell

That I agree with. Except that what is false IMO is the literal interpretation of the creation of types of animals, not the idea of a Creator God.

Then again, every time I try to put myself in the shoes of a Christian I conclude that there is no point in attempting a literal interpretation of the Bible, regardless of the origin of animals. It is simply too problematic to take the Bible literally, for moral reasons among others.

 

[Pegg]

It's funny that you believe in god yet would think so little of him, as if god would be limited to your cartoony perception and presumptions of him.

well its just that i would expect him to be truthful in how he made us (or didnt make us) and if I am to believe the account of creation, i'd have to believe that he made mankind separate from the animals. he didnt use existing monkeys to make us... according to him he personally created man and woman.

and i dont have a cartooney perception of God at all... far from it.

 

[Pegg]

That I agree with. Except that what is false IMO is the literal interpretation of the creation of types of animals, not the idea of a Creator God.

I take the creation account as quite literal... Jesus took the creation of man and woman literally too.... and the apostles of Christ took the account of Noah and the flood literally

so I see no reason not to take these accounts literally.

 

[Valjean]

well if it is, then I would have to accept that the bibles account of creation is false. It tells us that God created a number of types of animals...they went forth fully formed and functioning and reproduced

that is quiet contrary to the current theory of evolution as far as I can tell

It also says that pi = 3.0. The bible's not a science book and was never intended to be taken literally.
Your dispute, as I understand it, is with God's mechanism? Science saying He used natural selection and you saying He used magic?

And how was God created?

 

[Looncall]

I take the creation account as quite literal... Jesus took the creation of man and woman literally too.... and the apostles of Christ took the account of Noah and the flood literally

so I see no reason not to take these accounts literally.

The reason is that these writings were made thousands of years ago by ignorant savages.

Would it not be better to live in the world as it has has been found to actually be?

 

[averageJOE]

I am curious as to the facts each side claims. I am going to be neutral on this and I am looking for a debate between people using facts.

Questions for Debate:
1. What evidence is there for evolution?
2. What evidence is there against evolution?

What about question #3: What evidence is there for creation?

 

[outhouse]

What about question #3: What evidence is there for creation?

LOL good one

there is no evidence for the creation myth nor will there ever be any evidence

the religious dogma that used to cold blooded murder people into belief is now gone buts it effects can still be seen in society.

a mind is like a umbrella, it works best open. religion still holds minds closed so tight new information is not accepted at all.

 

[McBell]

i'd like to, but the OP specifically says only 'evidence' can be used and 'the bible is not considered a valid source'

so hey, that kind of leaves creationists out of the debate.

:sarcastic

Nice back peddling.

 

[McBell]

how about the part that shows us how life began?

And now you try a blatant change of subject.
Sad really.

In case you have already forgotten, this thread is about evolution, not abiogenesis.
One wonders if you know the difference?

 

[McBell]

but creationists have an origin to life...the bible states 'in the beginning God created' ...

so thats not an issue for us.

Yet here you are making it an issue in a thread that is about something else....

 

[Father Heathen]

well its just that i would expect him to be truthful in how he made us (or didnt make us) and if I am to believe the account of creation, i'd have to believe that he made mankind separate from the animals. he didnt use existing monkeys to make us... according to him he personally created man and woman.

Surely you can see how easy it is to put words in the mouth of god, to presume to speak on his behalf? There are thousands of religions that claim to represent god but you obviously don't think they're all true, do you? And the bible does portray god in a rather ridiculous, cartoony manner.

 

[McBell]

because if the universe and living things originated by pure chance or undirected causes, then it removes the need for a creator all together.

Removes the NEED, not the creator.
Seems to me that your argument is because it removes the need for a creator that said creator must not exist.
One wonders why you would make that leap in logic without anything to support it.

The God who is said to be the creator of all things (whoever the God may be to you) is no longer the creator at all...

Why?
I never did understand this obsession some people have with false dilemmas.

if he's not the creator, then why worship him, why adopt his views and why give him any acknowledgment at all?

So you only worship your chosen deity because you believe on merely say so that said deity created the universe?
Seriously?

Religion, any religion, becomes the construct of man because there is no creator.

Considering that the available evidence already points to this, I fail to see the problem.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

how about the part that shows us how life began?

The OP is asking about evolution not abigenisis.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

organisms can adapt to their environments, adapt their eating habits and modify themselves as needed...this is all within the realms of possibility

This is called evolution...

but genetics and dna will never allow the organism to become something its not... it cannot change so much that it becomes something entirely new.

But the ToE NEVER says one thing can become a completely different thing.....:sad:

 

[McBell]

But the ToE NEVER says one thing can become a completely different thing.....:sad:

Gotta Catch Them All!

 

[painted wolf]

It's interesting that creationists will insist that "in the beginning God created"...

But refuse to consider that evolution was the method of that creation.

It's not like the Bible says specifically how it was done... it's only creationists insistence that since they don't understand how evolution works, it can't be true... which limits God to only what the creationist can, or chooses to, understand.

wa:do

 

[PolyHedral]

It's interesting that creationists will insist that "in the beginning God created"...

But refuse to consider that evolution was the method of that creation.

It's not like the Bible says specifically how it was done... it's only creationists insistence that since they don't understand how evolution works, it can't be true... which limits God to only what the creationist can, or chooses to, understand.

wa:do

Well, God doesn't create the microbacterial life at any stage...

 

[dallas1125]

I would like to repeat the question, Is there any evidence against evolution?