if evolution is true?

Question

well then there would be no God, and space would have always had to of existed, atheists say "alright well if you can believe that there is a God, and he has always been existing, why can't space have been that way, instead of being created?" well, is it not true that life can only come from previous life? when scientists clone something , they take dna from something that was previously living or still is, so if space has always been there, and space is not living, how are we in existance today? i know some people will get hostile, even though this is a(n) honest question, but try to keep your calm

actually i asked in RS because there's quite a number of atheists here, and i want to know what they think about this thanks

to the people asking me if God is alive, can God die?

abiogenesis isn't a proven fact, but i'm looking up more details on it now, and no i am not giving any psycho my email

novangelis, do i even know you? thanks for not answering my questions and spamming you moron

Answer 1

You are incapable of distinguishing truth from your personal beliefs, which are incredibly weak, even for a Creationist.

If evolution is true, which it is, it does nothing to disprove God, just the worthless doctrines you mindlessly adhere to.

Since you link all your irrational claims to that, I could stop, but your lies are so easily picked apart, I will continue to have fun at your expense.

Space does not always have to existed. What we call space may have unfolded from the big bang. Since we have nothing from outside the universe to study, it can't really be said. If space is nothingness, it did not require any creation.

All life on Earth derives from other life. The chemical defenses of microbes make it impossible for new life to arise. It only had to arise from non-living chemicals once.

As for this being an honest question, you've lied in the past and you're lying now.

Answer 2

The theory of evolution does not imply that the universe must have existed forever. The formation of the universe has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Current science suggests that the universe is between 13 and 14 billion years old.
And no, it is not true that life can only come from previous life. Again this isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution, but look up abiogenesis if you want to learn about how the first life formed.

Answer 3

Even though evolution is true, God is the reason it happens.

God is what started the whole process going. God is Life!

It is because of God that everything happens the way it does.
We would be nothing without God. We wouldn't exist and there would be nothing to evolve from.

God created the heavens and the earth. He created all the creatures flying. swimming and on land, he created angels and he created people.

He is responsible for everything that ever was and ever will be! He made it possible for all of us to evolve. We must evolve in order to survive.

God is Life! Evolution is the process given each of us to help our future generations of animals, insect, birds, sea creatures & people to survive.

Who knows perhaps oneday humans will have wings and there won't be need for vehicles. Won't that be a blast!

God is Life therefore God cannot die! We could destroy our world but we cannot destroy God. Life is eternal, God is Life so he is Eternal.

If we destroy our planet God will make new life elsewhere and he will once again enable it to evolve, as it becomes necessary.

Evolution is a gradual process not a rapid one. It happens over several generations.

It happens in ways which aren't always observed. It happens because God allows it to happen, he designed all of us, humans and all other creatures in such a way, so that it can happen slowly and surely.

Evolution is God's miracle gift for us and our future generations to come!

Someday if our world doesn't end by our own hands. And if God doesn't decide to clear us off the planet and restart us.

Future generations will look back upon us and compare the changes that have taken place in the human race just as we can look back now and see the changes we have underwent since mankind was first created..

God and Life are one and the same. To quote from Shakespeare, "For a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

Answer 4

It is not true that life can only come from previous life. One of the more famous experiments on this subject was accomplished by Stanley Miller and Harold Urey in 1953, when they showed how early planet conditions can lead to the formation of critical compounds, such as organic molecules and amino acids (1). Further, it is possible that some foreign biological compounds, or even microbial life, entered Earth through meteroite(s) (2).

The debate will always continue, however, because we can not go back in time and show what actually happened. Scientific experiments show only the possibility of life's origins. It is up to people to consider both scientific theory and religious word, and decide which was more likely.

Answer 5

Evolution is a proven fact. (Proof details are available on request; please provide an e-mail address.) This does not address the question of how the universe began, which occurred nine billion years before the earth formed and life began. The big bang theory of the universe's beginning fits the known facts, however, and is becoming more solid with most every astronomical observation. As for the initial origin of life, we simply don't know; certainly life coming from non-life nowadays is infrequent if it ever happens at all. But the evidence is persuasive that some sort of life arose rather early in the earth's history, and once you have some life, evolution will do the rest. For a history of evolution on the planet, see:

Answer 6

it is observed today that all life comes from previous life. but there is no reason that this always had to be the case. life is apparently no more than a complex coupled system of chemical reactions. without existing life to gobble up all the energy and raw materials, the formation of life may be quite a straightforward event in the right conditions. yes, i'm talking about abiogenesis. i freely admit that no one knows what the right conditions are - it's a question for further research. undersea hydrothermal vents seem to be quite promising:

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/vent/review6.php

Answer 7

Life is nothing but a chemical reaction. Your body is a giant chemical reaction. Nothing was created, it evolved. Don't believe in evolution? Here's a few questions for you. When was the last time you used your appendix? What was the average height of a man 30 years ago? Not to mention the way bacteria can evolve. They are now finding some bacteria that are now resistant to antibiotics. How did they change if there was no evolution?

Answer 8

Your trying to dig to deep. There are numerous theories that go back to the beginning but that really is irrelevant here. Im an agnostic, and the point is Im ok with not knowing what the answer is, Im ok with trying to find a deductive conclusion through science, rather than needing some form of comfort to bring me my answers through irrationality. If you believe in a religion, that fine, just keep it to yourself and your supporters, nontheists should do the same. And to the person above me, there are many signs of error in our body, such as the vestiges of a tail, numerous organs that serve no purpose, oversized adrenal glands, undersized frontal cortex, and our eyes are extremely primitive and unevolved.

Answer 9

Evolution can never be proven but can only be really well supported--and neither can God's existence. So when atheists say theres no god they just made a grave mistake, cause the universe is infinite, meaning invite possibilities. I rather believe in something then fall for anything. Live happily then live miserably. Think that the glass is half full then half empty.

Answer 10

Posting a science question in the religion and spirituality section often means the asker does not really want an answer. His goal is to ask a question that he believes proves some scientific knowledge to be wrong, or that science does not yet answer, and make the implicit claim that the only other explanation is a god, and specifically, the same god he happens to believe in.

It's the "god of the gaps" - intellectually bankrupt, since it favors ignorance instead of knowledge, and because of the contained logical fallacy.

However, on the off chance that you really want to know the answer:

Claim CB000:

Pasteur and other scientists disproved the concept of spontaneous generation and established the "law of biogenesis" -- that life comes only from previous life.

Response:

The spontaneous generation that Pasteur and others disproved was the idea that life forms such as mice, maggots, and bacteria can appear fully formed. They disproved a form of creationism. There is no law of biogenesis saying that very primitive life cannot form from increasingly complex molecules.

Claim CA601.1:

Evolution's materialism or methodological naturalism denies a role for God. "Methodological naturalism asks us for the sake of science to pretend that the material world is all there is" (Dembski, 1996).

Response:

This is simply a lie. There are numerous scientists who embrace both evolution and God. They believe not only that God created a universe in which evolution occurs naturally but that God works constantly in their and other people's lives. The claim otherwise by Johnson, Dembski, and others is an overt rejection of other people's religious beliefs.

This claim applies not only to evolution; it logically should apply to people who believe in materialism or methodological naturalism in any science or any aspect of life. All people who believe that God does not intervene to keep planets rotating, cause winds, or make sodas fizz, according to this claim, must be atheists. It is obvious that they are not. Many famous scientists were and are devout Christians who use, in their work, exactly the same sort of naturalism that evolutionary science uses.

From a practical point of view, the people who make this claim are denying more than advocating a role for God. They say that theistic evolution is no different from atheistic evolution because it does not show God acting directly. For them, a God that does not act supernaturally is equivalent to no god at all. But nothing supernatural is happening around me right now; in fact, I have never seen anything supernatural occur. Does that mean God is not around? According to Johnson and others who believe his claim, God is irrelevant for almost all of our lives.
Links:

Isaak, Mark. 2002. A philosophical premise of 'naturalism'? http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/naturalism.html
References:

Dembski, William A. 1996. What every theologian should know about creation, evolution and design. http://www.arn.org/docs/dembski/wd_theologn.htm