Do you know there is NOTHING in science/evolution that says that there is no God?
That's right... evolution says nothing about the existance of God and his role in a creation. It may not be possible to believe in an exact literal interpertation of Genesis, but do you really believe EVERY word of the Bible is ment to be read literally? Evolution even allows for the Christian God who answers your prayers and performs miracles.
I ask this question as the final in my little series. Almost every creationists who responded FALSELY believed that evolution denied the existance of God. Furthermore, no one gave a decent answer to ANY of my previous 12 questions. Answer them if you like; I will leave them open for as long as I can.
If you want to read more about what I'm talking about, I suggest you read the book "Finding Darwins God," by Ken Miller. He is a Christian (Cathloic) who fully understands evolution and theology and has found a way to fully believe in both.
2007-01-11 08:02:23 · 12 answers · asked by skeptic 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
MY fellow Athiests: Sorry, I never said I agree with Miller's theology, but I can't find any holes in it either. He is NOT a Biblical literalists and he belives their are parabales and stories in the Bible. He knows it is a matter of faith and for him, science comes first.
2007-01-11 08:21:23 · update #1
anthonypa: you did give some good information in #12 - everyone should take a look at it.
2007-01-11 08:52:51 · update #2
I agree.
Unfortunately when you have people like Dawkins and the unreformed crude-postivisitsbanging on about science being able to answer everything it can be difficult to make the point.
With friends like those.........
PS - What do you mean "no one gave a decent answer to ANY of my previous 12 questions"? My answer to question 12 introduced the formost philosopher of science of the last century Professor Sir Karl Raimund Popper! That man was the goods I tell you!
2007-01-11 08:41:54 · answer #1 · answered by anthonypaullloyd 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really believe that, on a level we may never understand, science [including evolution theory] will bear witness to the fact that there is a supreme creator. The Bible doesn't specify how God created everything and what it looked like here on Earth. It says God spoke and there it was. I believe that to be true, but there is probably more to it if you had been here on Earth observing. We may never know. I don't totally write off evolution. I believe the Bible to be the truth, and I don't see it as diametrically opposed to evolution theory. There is much on both sides of the fence that is simply not known.
2007-01-11 08:21:07 · answer #2 · answered by Char 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science believes in two basic principles. That theory's must be testable, and falsifiable. You must be able to test a idea. You must be able to prove a theory false. To null the hypothesis.
So you cannot test a God, so there fore it would be in none of the scientific literature.
I did read the book by Ken Miller. He also wrote another book, I am sorry I lost the tittle. There is also the book, "The case for God" These books are wonderful for Christan's to read because they give them some scientific backing for their beliefs. But these books are poorly done and do not stand up to even the most basic scientific requirements.
Put simply they are poor science.
B
2007-01-11 08:08:52 · answer #3 · answered by Bacchus 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First: Evolution is a perception. there is not any scientific information for it. do no longer combination it up. ok, there could be no longer something in Evolution with regard to the non-life of a god, yet there is not any question that the Bible and creation does no longer combination with evolution. the hollow concept does no longer artwork (an afternoon is an afternoon and God does no longer use death to make issues greater beneficial). definite, i've got faith the Genesis tale actually. that's why i'm creationist. there is technology at the back of creationism.
2016-12-12 09:21:54 · answer #4 · answered by fette 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus accepted Genesis literally, so I do too.
That was the whole idea of Christ coming to earth, to break the curse of sin. and the effects of it on creation. [meaning death and destruction in the natural world] Proponents of evolution assume millions or billions of years of survival of the fittest which is NOT the teaching of Genesis.
How can two things so diametrically opposed establish a compromise? I say it cannot be done rationally.
2007-01-11 08:12:19 · answer #5 · answered by Jay Z 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Skeptic, I don't really care if evolution allows space for a God or not. I am against evolution because of science, not because of religion necesarily. Talk to tony for the religious response to any questions you may have. I need theories that have ample space to become laws in the future. Not anything that has any kind of shade what so ever.
2007-01-11 08:10:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why bend over backwards to appease the theists? We all know that evolution contradicts biblical scripture and not just the creation - we were supposed to be made in God's image - so did he evolve from simpler life forms? Does that make sense? One day truth and science will tear down the corrupt, polluted edifices to which religion clings to!
Phew, I had my own fundie moment!
2007-01-11 08:09:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
So Ken Miller has found a way to convince himself of the lies of religion by mixing them with science and known facts....and you go and promote that?
Thanks for nothing.....
2007-01-11 08:06:27 · answer #8 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hey. Did you know Ken Miller is my brother
2007-01-11 08:05:37 · answer #9 · answered by Sean 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Read Julian Huxely and Carl Sagan. Naturalism assumes that there is no God and nature is all there is.
2007-01-11 08:12:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋