2006-12-16 05:04:59 · 16 answers · asked by ? 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
well listen to both and look at the world which is more sensable to you. I trust God
2006-12-16 05:14:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Which to choose: 1) Evolution is based on scientific evidence that tends to prove that evolution occurred. Although there is no conclusive evidence, the evidence presented is much too substantial to ignore. You don't need to accept the conclusion, but you must accept the scientific evidence.
OR 2) Religion, in your case, is based on the text of the Bible. But the Bible is not the absolute truth, only partial truths, pasted together by men. Although very wise men and prophets, they were only men, and were not enlightened as God. So their interpretations of the prophesies, passed down for many generations by telling stories before they were written down, may have human faults. You must take the Bible for what it is, a compilation of stories that may have been exaggerated or altered by human mistake or for political and societal purposes. You will find truth in the Bible, but believing that the Bible is the absolute truth is Blind Faith, which really isn't a bad thing.
So learn the scientific evidence, read the Bible and other religious text and question how? and why? Hopefully through these struggles, you will find a common ground that you are happy to live with.
Strength in Faith, but submit to physical science.
2006-12-16 06:49:46 · answer #2 · answered by Smokin' Dragon 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
nicely on the grounds that maximum reasonable human beings no longer less than are agnostics - we've a real looking theory that there exists a a strategies better being with the means to impact. There exists hundreds if no longer hundreds of documented scientific impossibilites to added advise that Adam is definitely a real looking hypothesis - additionally study themselves have reported an unmarried pair originators for the human species - the project with evolution is that there is at present no longer living any middleman species nor have they got here upon the style of fossils - I mean statistically thats in simple terms impossible - the middleman species could have had to been sexually accessible and aggressive adequate to stay to tell the story - genes call for an significant length, and good judgment dictates that no longer all intermediaries evolve on the comparable fee. subsequently if intermediaries existed they a strategies outnumbered the "normals". And to have been aggressive they must have been in a position to stay to tell the story in the comparable climes by using fact the normals. subsequently any substantial catastrophe could have extra then in all probability wiped out the normals previously destroying each and all of the intermediaries. As to the guy who reported kinfolk-humping produces uniformly defected babies - ought to verify out some components of the U. S. - no longer all kinfolk-humping produces defects what it does is upload to our genetic rubbish - our genome is extremely full of issues that dont grow to be inevitably seen consisting of dispositions for affliction and such - If one makes the theory that Adam and Eve have been suited - it may take time for genetic rubbish to acquire to the element the place it could have a statistically sturdy probability of doping up. and those born with such impairments frequently wouldnt get to reproduce and as such their genes could be tossed out. evolution exists yet is barely interior of a species - we at the instant are not descended from apes - and the daddy of evolution - Charles Darwin on no account reported that guy developed from decrease life varieties
2016-10-15 01:45:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both explanations require faith. You need to read about both to make a decision. I can say that for me the theory of evolution has proved nothing but adaptation within a species. Changing from one species to another has never been proved. I don't see why the explanation of Our Creator intelligently designing organisms to adapt to their environment is so unbelievable. Humans being taller now is not evolution because we are still humans. Bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics is not evolution.
Merry Christmas.
2006-12-16 05:15:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess its a matter of your belief system ( or what you have been taught), I personally believe in creation ( God created heaven and earth) so, Adam.
But hey, if you believe in evalution then you come from ape,
then if you believe in Hubbard you were a mass that fell in a volcano and was blown all over creation and evolved to where we are today!
So My guess is that you go with what you believe, I'm not gonna try to sway you one way or the other, I know what I believe, I know how the spirit moves me, and I have seen the miracles God has done so I believe
2006-12-16 05:14:24 · answer #5 · answered by kathy h 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Be contrarian. Find an ape named Adam.
2006-12-16 09:28:59 · answer #6 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible supports the consept of evolution.
And God said, let the earth bring forth the creatures of the sea.
There is some truth in both. You have to seperate the physical self (evolution) from the Spiritual self.(created in Gods image)
2006-12-16 05:09:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hmmmm can you answer why the current ape sitting at the Zoo still hasn't evolved to man? hahaaha!
I have never been confused about one thing. I KNOW I WAS NEVER AN APE!
But to each his own.
2006-12-16 05:11:21 · answer #8 · answered by SecretFriend 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
God and Adam. Nothing from evolution has never been proven. It has always been rejected.
2006-12-16 05:08:38 · answer #9 · answered by PETER G 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
read all the literature from both sides, make your own mind up.
i had to add some more after reading the ignorant tosh above me. why doesn't he want you to see the other side evidence umm? make up your own mind
2006-12-16 05:08:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋