Is it safe to say that evolution and 'God created the earth' are both theories??

Question

If so, then why devote your life to a theory, by praying to god, going to church, believing in books and magic stories, etc?

People that believe in evolution and/or atheists don't devote their life to Charles Darwin and pray to him, go to church with fossil-rosaries, and make holy monkeys as the disciples.

If it's a theory, you don't know. People need to get in touch with reality, humanity, real-life in-the-now experiences, so we can all learn to appreciate THIS world for what it is.

Thoughts?

Answer 1

I love it when they say it takes more faith to believe evolution. Ummm let's try this:

- God made man from dirt
- Was pleased
- Wasn't pleased
- Was even less pleased floods the earth
- Was somewhat pleased spreads Red Sea after killing egyptian babies
- Wasn't pleased made Israelites walk 40 years in desert with water in stones
Skip Ahead
- Son of God born in virgin birth
- Turns water into wine, multiplies loaves of bread, walks on water
- Dies, goes to hell, comes back to earth, ascends to heaven
- We can be saved, but not by good deeds, but by asking nicely

Ummmm evolution maybe?

Answer 2

This again? No, evolution is a scientific theory. This is profoundly different from what a theory in common language means.

In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements that would be true independently of what people think about them.

In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation.

For evolution/natural selection there is a vast body of cross-discipline evidence. For god, none which can be objectively verified (and that is putting it mildly).

But I like your idea of holy monkeys.

Answer 3

A theory is something that can be experimented on. And for that theory to be true more than one person, or more than one group of people, must get the same results. So "God created the Earth" is not a respectable theory. Evolution, though, has been proved.

And, yes, I agree with you. It isn't safe for someone to devote their life to something like that. Anyone who does believe in it would also probably bring up Pascal's law and ask you this: "Well..what do you have to lose?" And to that I would have to say that you would lose your Faith, and Hope. Not to mention countless hours of Worship and whatnot.

Answer 4

Charles Darwin said,

"To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

And God said in the Bible "Do not conform to this world."

So, to me no; the theory of evoltion and creationism do not mix. I believe with my whole being that God created all things in, on, and around this planet. And that the Bible is His inspired word.

IF you do not believe that, you will have to live for all eternity with that decision.

George Gallup, the famous statistician, said,

"I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity."

The declaration "There is no God" is what is known as an absolute statement. For an absolute statement to be true, I must have absolute knowledge.

Here is another absolute statement: "There is no gold in China."

For the statement to be true, I must know that there is no gold in China, or the statement is incorrect. To say "There is no God," and to be correct in the statement, I must be omniscient.

Let's say that a circle represents all the knowledge in the entire universe, and let's assume that you have an incredible 1% of all that knowledge. Is it possible, that in the knowledge you haven't yet come across, there is ample evidence to prove that God does indeed exist?

If you are reasonable, you will have to say, "Having the limited knowledge that I have at present, I believe that there is no God." In other words, you don't know if God exists, so you are not an "atheist," you are what is commonly known as an "agnostic." You are like a man who looks at a building, and doesn't know if there was a builder.

Answer 5

A great deal depends upon how you define the word "theory." In common conversation a theory is an informed guess, while in the parlance of science a theory is a hypothesis supported by sufficient evidence to be a reliable reflection of how some natural phenomenon works.

Answer 6

Definitely not. Evolution of species is an indisputable fact-Darwinism is an evolutionary theory that accounts for the biological mechanisms involved in the process of evolution i.e. natural selection. This is basic stuff-the difference between the fact of species evolution and the theory should be common knowledge. I blame creationists and their deliberate spreading of misinformation for the fact that there is so much ignorance about evolution.

Answer 7

The primary difference is that Evolution is backed up by evidence and is considered a "theory" in the scientific use of the word. Religion has no evidence and is considered a "theory" in the more dictionary-type use of the word. Actually, though, religion might be better characterized as a "guess" than a "theory".

Answer 8

That you need to learn what the word Theory means to a scientist. Evolution isn't a theory in the way regular people understand it.

Answer 9

In a conversational sense, yes. In the aspect of science, no.

There has to be supporting evidence (and lots of it) to be classified as a theory.

Answer 10

The atheist usually acknowledges that all knowledge is provisional, thats the main difference.