Creation vs. Evolution: What side are you on?

[AJLove]

This is an everlasting debate. What side are you on and why?

[andrewlittle]

I chose undecided because "doesn't matter" wasn't an option.

What I believe to be the origins of the universe will not change the universe. "Knowing" what the origins are would not change me. "Knowing" what the origins are would not change God.

In any serious discussion, I ask "what is at stake". Except for pissing rights for the extreme participants over their opinions, I see nothing at stake in this question. The argument is about power, pride and building followers of human beings - and I could not care less.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I'm with Andrew on this one--but I'm not even going to vote. I think the question is kind of an insult to one's intelligence (sorry)?

Yesterday, Trinity Sunday, the lectionary happened to include the first chapter of Genesis. I did the children's sermon yesterday. I presented an orange, a platter and a punch bowl, and I asked which of these was most like the earth.

My point was that we now believe the world to be round kind of like an orange, but the authors of Genesis described a flat earth (like a platter) with a dome (like the upturned punch bowl) for the sky.

For people to insist that the world was created in six days, six thousand years ago with no more "evidence" than Genesis chapter one is just too foolish for us to waste any time on. (And people go to court and waste taxpayers money on this craziness??!!!).

Sorry, that's my opinion of the matter.

Steven Webster

[matthewspeed]

To me, God created everything, so if He uses evolution as part of His plan, then so be it.

[Steven E. Webster]

So I believe that the theory of evolution provides an adequate explanation of how life emerge and developed on planet Earth. I believe that God was at work in that process. Does that make me an intelligent design person? hmmm... I don't know... probably not since that position seems just to be creationism in disguise. I believe that God is an eternal being (lives outside of time) who eternally creates the universe and all its processes and is pretty pleased with himself and the universe and its processes... including evolution.

Friends,
I like U-dog's response. I do not believe U-dog is supporting "Intelligent Design." Intelligent Design claims, falsely, that evolutionary theory does not explain the development on earth of life as we know it. It claims that the existence of something as complicated as the human eye, for instance, could not have developed in nature without some "Intelligent Designer" Quite the contrary, evolutionists have shown how extremely complex organisms have developed from much simpler forms.

"Intelligent Design" isn't really a scientific explanation at all. There is no empiricle way to test the "theory" of "Intelligent Design"--it isn't even really a theory in the scientific sense.

Like U-dog, I believe in God whom I call the Creator, and whom I believe cares and provides for his/her creation---but that is my religious faith, I don't claim it to be science and I certainly do not want it taught in public schools with my tax dollars!!!

I still don't know how to "vote" on the alternatives provided. The question still seems to suggests that "evolution" and "creation" are both merely "beliefs" or "opinions." My position is that one is science and the other is not.

I have a religious faith that includes a Creator, and at the same time I insist we should approach scientific questions scientifically without appeals to unscientific concepts like God, magic, or fairies. How should I vote on the alternatives given?

Steven Webster

[Zerbie]

Now that there is a conversation going on here, I may as well say what I've been thinking since this poll appeared.

I've been thinking: Why is this a question?

The mere question positions creationism (the blind adherence to a belief about the origins of life on earth that flies in the face of all evidence and observation that has been accumulated over centuries of observation and cross-analysis) as on a par with a major, guiding scientific theory that has been cross-examined, studied, re-studied, and refined with careful adherence to impartial observation. One is how the world works, observably so. All you need to do to see it is look. The other denies that the world works as it does, and in order to see it so, you need to close your eyes to the evidence that is all around you every day. In short? There is NO WAY that creationism (or it's fancy-named sibling, Intelligent Design) is on a par with evolution. To claim that it is is to misunderstand entirely what scientific theory is.

Now. I'm not voting on this poll either, b/c it's ridiculous to imply that a "belief in" evolution is somehow parallel to a 'belief in' creationism.

The gentlemen have stated my essential reasons for not voting very eloquently, so just count me in.

I like very much what U dog said - it's my own feeling, and always has been, that no power but that of God could be behind the wondrous exploration of life and its possibilities. It would not surprise me at all if all the mysteries of evolving life over the aeons turn out to be the driving force bringing us ever closer to the God who animates all living beings. But that is not scientific, that's just a personal speculation.

There is no reason at all to believe that evolution in any way 'removes' God from sovereinty over the universe. None at all.

Life evolves. Choose to deny it if you wish, but you are only closing your eyes to the very ways in which life expresses itself.

[Pablo Rafael]

I'm sure everyone was just waiting for me to post on this thread so that I could enlighten everyone with an intelligent and contrasting opinion. You were waiting, weren't you? :confused: Actually I will pretty much have to go with the group on this one.

I don't see a conflict between creation and evolution. God created the universe and he also created the scientific laws by which the universe operates.

I believe that God is in charge of all creation. I also think that he created the universe by the power of his word. Whereas we humans are capable only of making something new, God is capable of making a universe fully formed with the process of evolution already in full force. Could God have created a universe that was 15 billion years old and created it only a few thousand years ago? I am certain that he could. (Although trying to figure out when God created the universe is a pointless endeavor.)

There is solid scientific evidence for evolution. Believing in evolution does not in any way negate my belief in creation. The Bible is not a scientific textbook. I believe the purpose of the creation account is not to give us scientific details about creation, but to show the wonder and majesty of God in his creative work.

I would vote for a "both" category if there were that choice.

[Rick336]

I believe in evolution because the mountains of evidence convinces me that natural selection is a reality. The complex human eye was not designed by a superior being but instead evolved over millions of years.

All of us evolved from the same atoms that formed the universe 14.5 billion years ago. The same atoms that are in our bodies are also in rocks and trees and planets and stars.

Rick

[sailaway58]

about evolution. Then I got wrapped up in the gay thing, (reading about it not doing it) ;)
For me evolution makes sense, I really liked Andy's answer but in bible study groups it is much more fun to say you are an evolutionist.

[BruceChris]

I don't see any necessary conflict between creation and evolution.

Also, science is about things that we can have knowledge of, and religion is about things that we have to take on faith. If I had absolute knowledge of something, I could not, by definition, be able to take it on faith.

Q.E.D., Bruce Chris

[Unmasked]

I chose undecided because "doesn't matter" wasn't an option.

What I believe to be the origins of the universe will not change the universe. "Knowing" what the origins are would not change me. "Knowing" what the origins are would not change God.

In any serious discussion, I ask "what is at stake". Except for pissing rights for the extreme participants over their opinions, I see nothing at stake in this question. The argument is about power, pride and building followers of human beings - and I could not care less.

Abso-bloody-lutely! Don't know, don't care, and nobody else should either. It's a stupid argument. Creationists need to give it a rest. Teach your own kids your beliefs and stop insisting that schools take on the task of parenting. Evolutionists...it's a theory that's not provable. As long as we've got that clear, I've no problem with it.

We are here. Let's stop worrying about how we got here and just enjoy being.

[sailaway58]

Abso-bloody-lutely! Don't know, don't care, and nobody else should either. It's a stupid argument. Creationists need to give it a rest. Teach your own kids your beliefs and stop insisting that schools take on the task of parenting. Evolutionists...it's a theory that's not provable. As long as we've got that clear, I've no problem with it.

We are here. Let's stop worrying about how we got here and just enjoy being.
Except that evolution is a fact.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I think this link is both funny & informative:

http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html

Steven W.

[BruceChris]

Please note, something can be both a theory and a fact. For an example, lets take gravity. The Law of gravity defines for us what we know about the force of attraction between two objects. F=Gx(M1xM2)/r squared.

The Theory(s) of gravity attempt to explain just how gravity works. There are theories based on Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Gravitational Waves, to name some of them. None of these theories has been proven, but all of them offer us possible understandings that the above equation does not.

In evolution, survival of the fittest has been observed countless times. I take it as a basic law, a fact, that helps me understand evolution better. The exact mechanism of the origin of new species has to be called a theory. We know that it works, we just don't know exactly how. So the *Theory* of evolution contains many facts that are not open to serious question.

So the next time someone tells you that we do not understand the Theory of gravity, if you really believe that theories are automatically unproven, you could express your disbelief by jumping off of a tall building.

Peace, Love, and don't say I didn't warn you, Bruce Chris

[Unmasked]

Sometimes that sounds like a good idea...the building thing.

[tymejumper]

This is not an easy question to answer. I just think that Evolution has its flaws, but that we will learn more as we find about our world. I think that Creationism, is just the Conservative Rights way of trying to put religion back into our schools and trying to get us to believe as they do. To not be open minded and think.

I think that the Creator, I do believe there was one, is both male and female or else how could there be the 2 sexes? I think that maybe we were started and that evolution took over. I don't see a conflict about meshing the 2 ideas. Do I want my children taught that in school? No, I want them taught Evolution, because even though it is flawed in some respects, it is the best explanation we have at the time. Schools should only be teaching scientific fact, not religious ideas about a creator or whoever. ave it for homeschooling or church.

[Gregory_de_Bois]

I am currently on the side of Theistic Evolution, not to be confused with Deistic evolution. I believe essentially that God guided the process of evolution and is in a continual process of interacting with that creation. I am still trying to understand my theology of creation, though, and I doubt I will ever come to a conclusion until I meet the Creator.

[tdogg]

What if the infinite universe is God?

[andrewlittle]

What if the infinite universe is God?

Then that would make the prayer in "The Meaning of Life" (Monty Python) very accurate:

Let us praise God. Oh Lord, oooh you are so big. So absolutely huge. Gosh, we’re all really impressed down here I can tell you. Forgive us, O Lord, for this dreadful toadying and barefaced flattery. But you are so strong and, well, just so super. Fantastic. Amen.

[Emproph]

What if the infinite universe is God?Then that would make the prayer in "The Meaning of Life" (Monty Python) very accurate:Let us praise God. Oh Lord, oooh you are so big. So absolutely huge. Gosh, we’re all really impressed down here I can tell you. Forgive us, O Lord, for this dreadful toadying and barefaced flattery. But you are so strong and, well, just so super. Fantastic. Amen.So then you agree that evolution is indeed the natural 'effect' of God’s consciousness upon physical matter, and that we, as humans -- outside of stars, and other such stellar phenomena -- are the pinnacle of that ‘God consciousness,’ in physical matter?

[andrewlittle]

So then you agree that evolution is indeed the natural 'effect' of God’s consciousness upon physical matter, and that we, as humans -- outside of stars, and other such stellar phenomena -- are the pinnacle of that ‘God consciousness,’ in physical matter?

Right with you - up to a point.

We could be the "pinnacle" of God consciousness in physical matter.

But, then again - if we believe we are "mde in the image" of God, and we suffer occasionally from brain farts, then God may have the capacity also for brain farts. We could be the unfortunate effect of one such gaseous expulsion of divine grey matter.

[Emproph]

But, then again - if we believe we are "mde in the image" of God, and we suffer occasionally from brain farts, then God may have the capacity also for brain farts. We could be the unfortunate effect of one such gaseous expulsion of divine grey matter.

Any "God" we conceptually point to, is still smack dab in the middle of infinity. Meaning that any and every God we conceive of to worship, would still be prone to the flaw of less than total perfection.

[tdogg]

So, if the Bible is the inspired word of God, and God is indeed prone to the occasional brain fart, then that would certainly explain some of the more confusing verses. :p

[BruceChris]

However, I think that the game is much larger than that. First of all, we are told that there are about 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars out there, give or take a factor of 10 or so.

Next, let's remember that the universe is about 14,000,000,000 years old. If we assume that all of recorded human history is, say 14,000 years, then the human race as we understand it has only been around for 1/1,000,000 of the age of the universe. So we're not the only game in town. Far, Far from it.

Personally, I suspect that God is out there multi-tasking on a level incomprehensible even to an Einstien. - - "And yet even the smallest sparrow may not fall without His knowing" - :eek: :confused: :eek: :confused:

Gotta run, I'm starting to get a headache, Bruce Chris

[Emproph]

So, if the Bible is the inspired word of God, and God is indeed prone to the occasional brain fart, then that would certainly explain some of the more confusing verses. :p

Not to mention inspiring humans to attempt to put infinite perfection into words. ;)

[tdogg]

Not to mention inspiring humans to attempt to put infinite perfection into words. ;)

Supposedly there is no perfect human (save Jesus Christ but he is a deity right?). So how can people believe that numerous humans wrote down every word of God exactly how God wanted it? It would take nothing less than an absolutely perfect human to full off that feat. :confused: :D

[Emproph]

Supposedly there is no perfect human (save Jesus Christ but he is a deity right?).
A Course in Miracles (supposedly written by Jesus), describes Jesus as the "elder brother."

Which would then make us deity too.

Imagine the implications if that were actually true.

Imagine the implications if that were actually true.

So how can people believe that numerous humans wrote down every word of God exactly how God wanted it? It would take nothing less than an absolutely perfect human to full off that feat. :confused: :D
Congratulations grasshoppa, you have officially reached full Biblical enlightenment..

[tdogg]

A
Congratulations grasshoppa, you have officially reached full Biblical enlightenment..

Awwww, thanks Patrick. :o:D:love:

[BishopIoan]

I believe there was a creative being but that he/she used evolution as the method. So with that in mind, I would say I am an ID beliver, but once life came to be I believe that evolution was the force which shaped it. There is simply too much eidence to back volution.