I hate posing this question, but, thought it could spark some debate for the thinkers here. By the way, it is a valid question!
2006-10-28 14:09:51 · 22 answers · asked by Cogito Sum 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i think until we know for sure truth of either ... then discussion is not only needed but i welcome it
only in sharing what we know about both can we come to some understanding until science gives us something with more validity
2006-10-28 14:13:10 · answer #1 · answered by Peace 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Pardon me?
You are presuming that the origins of life, once proven, will prove that God is not the origin of life?
I mean, if the origins of life are someday proven to be God himself, then how does this make God unnecessary, exactly?
I find this question confusing.
In any event, the origin of life is a valid debate.
2006-10-28 21:15:44 · answer #2 · answered by Gestalt 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the 150 plus years that scientists have studied evolution,they STILL haven't been able to prove it beyond ANY and ALL doubt. That in itself should be evidence enough for people to realize that it will NEVER be truly proven.If it takes that much time and effort to try to prove a scientific theory,chances are it never happened to begin with.It's all just a clever excuse to keep God out of the equation,and many have been deceived by it.Science will never be able to explain,in their own terms,how the universe and all life was created,because God is the Great Creator of all things,and He is the ultimate scientist.Noone can outwit God.They may think they are getting away with something by trying to keep God out of the scientific equation,but ultimately God will prove Himself to be the Creator when He decides it is time.And then noone will be able to hide from the truth.For now,there is a reason science can't prove evolution ,and that's because God made us,and He's not going to allow someone or SOMETHING else take the credit,at least not for long.
2006-10-28 21:47:08 · answer #3 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
All that "science" has now is THEORIES of the origins of life.
Nothing wrong with discussing/debating the origins of life; but just don't restrict the possibilities.
When the "origins of life" are proven to be God ... then how do you think that would make God "unnecessary"?
2006-10-28 21:20:15 · answer #4 · answered by kent chatham 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm assuming what you're asking is this "If evolution is proven to be a hard fact, then wouldn't that prove God doesn't exist?"
Well, it would prove that the world wasn't created the way that some Christians and other people believe.
But for me, I believe that however the world was created and came to be about, God had a part in it.
2006-10-28 21:14:48 · answer #5 · answered by R.Wings 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Whether it is a valid question should be left up to someone other then your self. It's not valid, read it again and you will see why. I don't know if you have re-read your question, but I will edit my answer and explain why your question is not valid. You asked if god would become unnecessary if the origins of life were proven. What if it were proven that god was the origin of life?
2006-10-28 21:18:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
When we see God He will have all the answers for us.
Probably much faster than we could do on our own.
The debate is whether science can link their findings without creating more questions.
It is getting complicated
Until then God is necessary.
2006-10-28 21:14:36 · answer #7 · answered by dyke_in_heat 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Say the primordial ooze is proven correct. Ok, fine, and evolution was 100% correct. Alright, but who's to say that God didn't have a hand in these to create life. Think of God as the ultimate scientist.
2006-10-28 21:14:03 · answer #8 · answered by Coool 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Origin of life is NOT proven, mate.
It may have begun with a bang but what banged and how did it bang?
Our earthy physics do NOT explain it. Science is replete with corrections.
And G-d can not be dismissed.
Best wishes,
pup
2006-10-28 21:25:35 · answer #9 · answered by . 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a valid question, in a sense, but only in a sense: to assume god leads to no useful conclusions (this is provable), so why bother debating it? Even if it were true that God exists (and that is possible), if the idea leads to nothing useful (which it doesn't), there is little point in bothering with it.
2006-10-28 21:16:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
how would "proving the origin of life" make god unnecessary?
how do you know that god did not create the physical laws etc that enabled life on earth to form?
2006-10-28 21:14:07 · answer #11 · answered by Nick F 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋