English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I want to make this a no thumbs down question. Just to see if you can do it. So no tumbs down... or like i expect someone will... but can we try?

2007-06-14 11:38:52 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Not Even Two Minutes... tsk tsk

2007-06-14 11:43:19 · update #1

26 answers

Creation.

I didn't think it would last. Nice Try though.... and before i leave... Jesus Rocks, and we're not made from them

2007-06-14 11:41:12 · answer #1 · answered by Chris 5 · 6 7

I believe in creation, but I also believe that God could have used any method to bring everything into existence. For example he could have very well created the earth by causing things to bang together to form the earth and water, etc. I hope this isn't thumbs down, i personally don't believe in ALL of evolution (monkey to man, etc) but I do believe that there are aspects of both that can mesh together. :D

2007-06-14 18:44:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Creation is essentially fiction. Much of the bible is early man's interpretation of what was going on around him, and his interpretation of how we got here. Before Al Gore invented the internet, before computers, before infrastructure we take for granted, people passed down stories.

The Bible is largely made up of such stories. Sure, like the Koran and the Iliad & the Odyssey some of it is rooted in fact, but a lot of it is (made up sounds too harsh) interpretation of how we got here by people who didn't have a lot of means at their disposal to explain it.

No one had excavated dinosaur bones, so they didn't factor that into their interpretation.

At the end of the day, however, we, as intelligent human beings, who do have the means to more accurately interpret our origins, simply can't ignore that there simply is no way that creation is plausible, and evolution is not only plausible, but there's irrefutable proof of it, which is 100% lacking in the case of evolution.

I understand that many people turn to religion out of fear of the unknown, particularly the unknown after we die, and that fear drives them to faith, and that in many cases, this faith drives them to be better human beings, which is a great thing. I also am not an atheist, as I do believe we are here for a reason and I believe there is a higher intelligence at work.

But creation simply never happened and the more people fight that, the more they fight the truth, and shunning the truth has never led to anything good.

2007-06-14 18:49:17 · answer #3 · answered by whiskeyman510 7 · 0 3

Evolution is quite useful if one wants to reject the idea of God!
Genocide is an alternative name for ' the process of natural selection by which one gene replaces another.

Adolf Hitler applied the Darwinist concept of the " survival of the fittest " to the human race. And we all know well of Hitler.

As long as evolution -with its implications of amorality and the survival-of-the-fittest mentality among superior and inferior races -is accepted and believed, genocide, as sporadic ethnic cleansings in various parts of the globe show, will have a scientific justification, even though most believers in Darwinist theory would object to this conclusion.

But undeniable these events, which happened barely a generation ago, could happen again, especially in a world in which so many have adopted a belief in moral relativism and the survival-of-the-fittest outlook!
.............................................................
Creation.....of course!

2007-06-14 19:33:20 · answer #4 · answered by trieghtonhere 4 · 0 2

If you read Genesis, the order listed is the same as Darwin's order. In Genesis, we read that God created the earth and all of its creatures in seven days. No one knows how long God's days are. Each of His days could be millions of our years. I don't understand why this is an either or question. Why can't the two ideas exist together? I combined the two years ago and am dumbfounded that it is such a controversy now.

2007-06-14 18:46:20 · answer #5 · answered by karen wonderful 6 · 3 1

I can agree to Micro-evolution because it really doesn't conflict with Creation that much. (Going off the Nebular and Common Theory) But I disagree with Macro-evolution, due to the idea of man being a descendant from an Ape.

2007-06-14 18:46:05 · answer #6 · answered by Da Mick 5 · 1 2

Evolution, survival of the fittest. Oh, wait, George Bush is president of the united states... Hum, I'd have to say that this debunks the theory of the fittest rising to the top of the food chain so I guess I'be better start investigating whether or not there's any value in Creationism...

2007-06-14 18:42:36 · answer #7 · answered by brazilexile 2 · 1 3

Everybody tries to separate the two functions - creation and evolution; put them together - one the act, and the other the
process by which the act was accomplished. Time and space are all governed by the laws of physics - which were also "created" by the master of those laws - and by which He abides also.

2007-06-14 18:44:15 · answer #8 · answered by Kelly T 5 · 2 2

Evolution!!

Wow they didn't last 1 minute before the thumbs down started.

2007-06-14 18:41:14 · answer #9 · answered by taristidou 3 · 3 3

Creation.

Pastor Art

2007-06-14 18:55:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Both. The allmighty god like thing (god, big bang , FSM, giant monkey man, complex alternate dimentionally reaction, ect) created some spark of life then it evolved.

2007-06-14 18:46:41 · answer #11 · answered by ? 5 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers