were evolutionist trying to dispute creation when they first came up with the idea?

Question

I am sorry if i offended anyone with my last question. Someone really made me upset so i may have miss spoke.
help me to understand. I don't want to take anything away from Gods creativity.

Answer 1

The big mistake here is in thinking that creation is an old idea it most certainly is not - in fact it is only a few thousand years old!!

There were many countries and societies with a wide variety of ideas on how life came about well before anyone thought of Christianity!

Evolution does not conflict with the bible!!! Only with fundamentalists and ideologues!! Even the Pope a few weeks ago recognised that science had shown evolution but added that as it took place over millions of years final proof would probably never be found.

For fundamentalists and ideologues to blindly say that evolution is wrong is for them to suggest that God was too inept or stupid to use it as a tool of creation!!!

"One day to you is a thousand years to me" so that makes six thousand years creating and a thousand years resting does it not? Time scales, ego, taking a one hundred percent one sided view all confuse the issue.

Both creation and evolution can be true as one and the same thing.

Answer 2

First of all, the term "evolutionist" is a propagandist buzzword designed to make it seem like a belief or that it's only equal footing with beliefs. It's not your fault, it's very common for people to be taken in by such clever wordplay, but that's why they're used so often by creationists (who generally use fallacies, distortions, and wordplay because they don't have any real arguments). The correct term would be "scientists."

Secondly, no, they were not trying to dispute creation - at least not directly. They also didn't just "come up with the idea" the conclusion was carefully and cautiously drawn from the evidence and it fit perfectly with what we'd been questioning before. Essentially science is trying to understand reality....

That reality necessarily contradicts what people speculated 2000-3000 years ago as they were living in grass huts is probably a given, and should be expected. The bible also mentions the world is a flat, immovable oval built on 4 stone pillars. Does NASA set out to prove the bible wrong? No, they are trying to better understand reality, the fact that it disproves the bible isn't a concern.

And I really recommend you actually study what evolution really is (the majority of Americans polled can't even identify the real definition of evolution if given a list - here's the kicker: not a single pastor or apologist even knew what evolution was, not one) and you'll be taken in by the wonder and splendor and understand exactly how it came to be - which is more impressive than the result itself. If you really understand evolution, you'll see that the cop-out of "god done it" really takes away from the creativity of nature. The god hypothesis is a cheap mental cop-out that betrays the elegance of the truth.

Answer 3

The purpose of religion (well at least for me) is the pursue to fill a spiritual need that most human have. It also covers human behavior, some culture and some history. Again, mostly to feel the spiritual need.

The purpose of science is to try to explain the world around us through a structure dicipline of experimentation and observation. That is all.

There are people from both camps that use either of the two to promote their case or themselves. So is the way of humans being. My way is better than yours because (fill in the blank). Ocasionally science come across an explanation to a phenomena that was wrongly attribute to for lac of a better word "a sort of magic" by certain religion or religious groups. An example, is that the world is not flat and that the earth revolve around the sun not the other way around. However, the purpoce of science is not to disprove religion. Science and religion cover two different fields that do not contradict each other. This is because science does not deal with the human condition well, excetp maybe in psychology right. Religion does deal wit the human condition. Two different things. I say let the farmer be a farmer and the carpenter be a carpnter.

Answer 4

No, absolutely not. The theory of evolution was built from scratch, as it were, and is based on planet Earth's fossil records and observations of presently-living populations of organisms. For example, if you look at fossils of animals 55 million years old, you will not find any modern horses. However, you will find a creature built along the basic plan of a horse - same number of ribs, similar teeth, similar overall proportions - but it's much smaller than a horse, perhaps the size of a large dog. Other than the size, this creature, called eohippus, could be the modern horse's cousin, much like the zebra is the horse's cousin.

Looking at modern animal populations, we know that similar creatures can be found on islands and on the closest mainland. However, the island creatures tend to be smaller, sometimes even half the size, of their otherwise identical mainland cousins. There are fewer available resources on a small island (food, habitat, etc.), so it stands to reason that smaller creatures would be better able to live there than large creatures which require more resources.

Taking the two previous observations together, in conjunction with the wide variety of other horse-like fossils that have been found between Eohippus and the modern Equus (horse), it stands to reason that, while the basic plan of the horse has remained constant, it has undergone changes in size, hoof construction, brain size, and so on, to better equip it for survival in its environment as time has progressed. It is from observations and deductions like these that the theory of evolution was constructed.

One thing that should be made very clear: The theory of evolution says NOTHING about God. The only thing the theory seeks to do is explain the evidence we have of creatures long dead and what became of their descendants and to serve as a good predictive model of what will happen to the descendants of creatures presently alive. It's up to each individual to decide IF God created the world and all the creatures in it. Science is only concerned with HOW it was done, whatever the ultimate cause.

Answer 5

No, evolution was arrived at by the scientific method. That is, certain things were observed, and an explanation hypothesized, which was then tested against further research and facts. It's stood up to over a hundred years of scientific scrutiny and has produced a theory which enables us to predict outcomes.

I don't mind admitting that perhaps we don't fully understand everything about it, but it makes a lot of sense given what has been observed in the world.

Evolution: facts came first, then the idea. Creation: the idea came first, and support looked for later (this leads to bias).

Answer 6

The short answer is no.

In fact, Darwin himself was rather devout and was uncomfortable with the implications of his own theory. So much so that he delayed the publication of his theory of natural selection for about a decade.

In truth, I don't really think that any serious biologist, geologist, paleontologist, etc., really is trying to dispute Genesis but rather to simply explain what they observe from the evidence at hand. That's really what science is about - evaluating evidence. Sometimes conclusions are reached that seem to contradict a literalist interpretation of the Bible.

You know, the Bible also states that the sun revolves around the earth. We know that this is not the case, however. So, one does have to wonder what makes evolutionary theory so very offensive. Then again, wasn't Galileo put on trial for daring to champion the Copernican model of the solar system?

Answer 7

No,evolution doesn't attempt to disprove a god. Evolution is a theory to explain the incredible diversity of life on this planet. It does a wonderful job,it has mounds of evidence to support it. Whether or not you believe in god after learning the overwhelming evidence for TOE,in multiple fields of science,remains up to you. But evolution is fact,the only modern civilization where it is even much disputed is the U.S. It's true,it happened. It doesn't address how the first life got here,it has no relevance to the big bang. You may even believe god "poofed" the first organism into existence(although there are simpler explanations)but evolution is fact.

Answer 8

No, they weren't trying to dispute creation. They were trying to understand the way that the world works, and the evidence they found said that animals (and people) evolved over time. The evidence they have still makes more sense to me and accounts for more of the evidence than creationism, which throws out entire scientific disciplines because they can't be made to agree with Christian dogma.

Answer 9

If they "KNOW" that Jesus is "GOD" and Jesus used to be in the world for 33 years, then we all know approximately how lengthy the Genesis day used to be, otherwise it could were acknowledged someplace within the NT. They upload up each and every identify within the OT. With Average Life-spans -- say forty-60 years. They then estimate that it's approximately 6000 years ancient. When anybody reads GEOLOGY, we learn the universe is thirteen.7 billion years ancient, the Earth is approximately four.five Billion years ancient, however Geology is not followed via Genesis. How might anybody nonetheless suppose within the OLD and OLDER testomony, it used to be written via guy. Fuzzy Logic does not paintings. I discover every new discovery of primative human fossils in Africa fascinating. Most end up that the human species one million. Evolved two. that people were right here longer than 6000 years.

Answer 10

Scientists go about their work looking for answers. I'm sure they don't even have religion in their minds when they study the billions of fossils at their disposal.
You will never understand evolution if you're determined to take nothing away from the theory of creation.
The mind should be left open to any idea that sounds reasonable and sensible to you.