which theory is more beliavable: darwin's theory (with monkeys), or religion theory (adam & eve)?

Question

is a "fight" between science and religion? there are some evidences that adam or eve existed?

Answer 1

I personally believe in Darwinisim, but to be honest if you look at web sites like answersingenesis or other creationist websites you will see that it is very difficult to change the minds of some people (on either side, but atleast scientists have a system to change and overturn previous ideas. Religious people do not have such a framework)

I mean how can you experimentally prove something to someone who is conditioned into believing something that cannot be proved through experimentation.

This link shows research that proves some form of evolution,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6896753.stm

I recently finished the God Delusion (by Richard Dawkins), not a brilliant book, but some of the most interesting points I took from it are, 1. The founding fathers of the US, were predominately atheist/agnostic and believed very strongly in not letting religion into politics (hence the secular government found, and defended by the Judiciary)
2. Atheists would be the most powerful lobby in the US if atheists got together and used their voice (but it is more like herding cats, as atheists are so individual in thinking, unlike conditioned group responses of religious lobbyists)

Hope this does not offend anyone

Answer 2

Adam & Eve is just a myth for which there is no scientific evidence at all. Some creationists try to add bad science and pseudo-science to to it to evade the First Amendment's prohibition of a state religion. Darwin's theory is outdated, so modern biologists do not follow it. The updated theory and fact of evolution is accepted by all reputable zoologists, and it has no logical rivals at all. This is knowledge, not mere belief. Check on this monkey business. You need more study here.

Answer 3

It depends on how you use the word "theory". According to Science a theory requires a substantial amount of proof in the form of facts. These facts are arraigned into a logical order to explain those facts. The Theory of Evolution (there is nothing in Science called "Darwin's Theory" or "Religion Theory") uses fossils to show that one organism changed over time into another organism. If someone doesn't like this theory they can obtain three degrees in Science (i. e. a Bachelor's Degree, a Masters Degree and a Doctor of Philosophy Degree) to show the flaws in the Theory of Evolution. Any attempt to turn a Religious Doctrine into a theory without explaining facts is met with contempt since it runs counter to scientific methods.

Answer 4

There are theories that declare that the two can coincide. for my section i don't consider any faith suitable now. i don't think there's a god or the different form of deity. I additionally do not consider any modern scientific theories. Dinosaurs do kinda throw a pebble interior the religious ideals yet faith continuously unearths a imprecise thank you to describe issues. you should in basic terms be christian nevertheless. pass with the religious path as a results of fact at this 2d i think there is extra to the religion area than Darwin's concept of evolution if those are the only recommendations for you.

Answer 5

Darwin's theory. At least it's based on scientific research as opposed to some story spread by word of mouth for a few decades before being written down. Even a kindergartener understands how a story can change from person to person.

But then, how exactly was what created the universe created? How was God created?

Answer 6

I believe Islam has the best theory because it does not conflict with evolution but still involves a higher power "Allah" who is NOT a human or a thing but something bigger than the universe. However it teaches against man evolving from apes, we humans were created independantly, but other living things were here long before us. Whereas the Christian theory is completely against any belief of evolution, which is like saying "I dont think the sky is blue" I mean evolution is obvious, but we did not necessarily evolve from apes as in Darwin's theory.

Either way you look at it there has to be some sort of faith in whatever you chose to beleive because there is always mystery and unanswered questions. As far as I know Bhuddism does not conflict with the theory of evolution either.

What I'm trying to say is that some believers in religous thoecracy also believe in evolution as well, just not Darwins theory of it....

Answer 7

No evidence for Adam and Eve.
Creation by relation is not a theory but a belief related to your faith.
Darwin theory is not any more a theory. Evolution is a fact.

Answer 8

Christian "theory" as mentioned above (correct term here is "theology") is not against the theory of evolution unequivocably. The Catholic Church (believers in Christ) has held for a long time (since the 50s) that evolution is a valid explanation for the creation of human beings. And in 1996, Pope John Paul II affirmed what Pius XII knew in the 50s: "the theory of evolution isn't necessarily inimical to Christianity."

If interested:
http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html

Answer 9

I'd say Darwin's theory. And it's more than "we come from monkeys" (apes by the way, not monkeys).

Even jewish people don't believe in Adam and Eve.

Answer 10

Science is not supposed to be religion's enemy. Why should it be?

As long as we're playing the Speculation Game, we can say that God really DID create the Universe and all the marvels in it in less than one Earth-week, but in doing so planted evidence that would suggest that the Universe is billions of years old. You know, just to see if human intelligence would ever get to the point where we could detect such clues, you know? Wooooaaahhhh.... *lol*