2007-04-22 20:39:48 · 8 answers · asked by i_dr2000 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
I see, it's one or the other for you. I believe that in most cases, people don't reject the concept of evolution because they disagree with the science. Rather, they refuse to consider it because it contradicts their religious beliefs. After all, to believe that the species living on Earth today evolved, is to believe that much of the Bible does not represent the literal truth. In the minds of religious fundamentalists, that cannot be considered! Even many religious people who are not fundamentalists, see evolutionism as incompatible with their religious faith.
In contrast, many religious organizations accept evolution. For example, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes evolution as an accepted scientific theory, supported by a great body of evidence.
Please don't try and pit science and religion against each other. Science is backed up by evidence, whereas religion is founded on faith. They are two separate disciplines.
2007-04-22 23:57:53 · answer #1 · answered by Niotulove 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Your question starts from a false choice ... it's Darwin *or* the "Messegers of Lord."
Darwin is no more in opposition to religion than Newton, or Einstein, or Galileo.
To believe so is to put people in a position to reject religion for no good reason.
This is precisely why the Catholic Church (which has a little more than half the world's Christians) does not force the kind of either-or choice that you are proposing. They learned a hard lesson from forcing people into that choice with Galileo. It was "do you believe Galileo or Messengers of Lord?" and a *lot* of people said "to oppose Galileo is to oppose reason ... and there is no proof that the Church represents 'Messengers of the Lord' just because they proclaim themselves as such ... so I choose Galileo." And people left the church in droves.
Do you really want to force people who accept the logic and evidence of evolution, to have to abandon your church?
2007-04-23 00:26:17 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since Charles Darwin studied Theology, maybe he is a Messenger of the Lord as well?
I don't believe in Darwin's theories as an act of faith, I believe them because the majority of scientific evidence supports them.
2007-04-22 20:59:15 · answer #3 · answered by Tim N 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yipe! This is a fairly belligerent question.
It's not just Darwin. He lived and worked in the 1800s, and he is not entirely responsible for the ideas of evolution. In fact, evolution was thought about, researched, written about, and talked about way before he was born. In fact, his own grandfather Erasmus Darwin wrote about evolution before Charles Darwin was ever born.
Many of us believe in data and trust science, all the time understanding that science changes as we discover new details about nature and life. That's how science is. We have to go with the best information that we have at the time.
If the forecast calls for rain, I'm going to take my umbrella. I'm going with the best information that I havel.
2007-04-22 20:53:20 · answer #4 · answered by ecolink 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Darwin's theory has been overly proved. I personally believe that there are no "Messengers of Lord". I think this was invented by man for confort.
2007-04-22 20:44:40 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those who believe in Messengers of Lord to the exclusion of the evidence of evolution are mentally too lazy to do any factual research and prefer to wallow in safe feeling mythical beliefs which have no basis in fact.
2007-04-23 02:27:59 · answer #6 · answered by Joan H 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe Mr. Darwin, evolution has proof.
2007-04-22 20:43:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i believe in messengers of LORD.
2007-04-23 01:07:45 · answer #8 · answered by sweety 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋