and stellar evolution and planetary evolution occured, followed by the evolution of sapient life on this planet--and God knew when he initiated the big bang how it was going to turn out--isn't this just another elegant way to create man. Isn't the issue really the literal view of the bible vs the allegorical view. If God initiated the big bang--then there is no conflict between science and religion at all. Just a thot--thanks.
2007-10-09 08:15:22 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I agree with you. I believe in God and that God created the universe and our world. This was not just some giant cosmic accident (just my personal belief).
But I'm afraid Christians are somewhat trapped by the Bible, in that some feel if you treated part of it as an allegory, then you can treat all of it that way. To biblical literalists, that is unacceptable.
2007-10-09 08:21:32 · answer #1 · answered by Bookworm 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
nobody was there so all are guessing what happened when God SPOKE into the void. The first thing He said was, "LET THERE BE LIGHT". How do we know what the sound was? It could have been a bang. We also don't know exactally how long the creation took. We are guessing as to how long God's days are. Some feel that we have just started the eighth day? It is all very early in the plan and we are just going through the sorting out process. When God rested He let the creation that He put in motion take it's course to where we are at right now. Once the edges are all honed off and the man He created becomes whole, the creation will move on. ONLY god knows for sure..
2007-10-09 15:26:21 · answer #2 · answered by happylife22842 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Check out the article below especially the "Door of Compromise" section at the bottom. It basically sums up why this idea isn't anymore widely accepted by Christians.
2007-10-09 15:31:40 · answer #3 · answered by jwbyrdman 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very true. Just that there are so many, very loud people who insist that the bible (KJV) is literal truth and the inerrant revealed word of god. As if god spoke in Elizabethan English to the prophets and apostles.
2007-10-09 15:23:03 · answer #4 · answered by chasm81 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
There is a noted paleontologist, a woman whose name escapes me at the moment, who finds support for her profound belief in Christianity with every discovery that's made. That's the sort of Christian for whom I have a great deal of respect.
2007-10-09 15:22:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
hey, my mother believes just that! she says there are a lot of things that are in the bible that could not have actually happened, and therefore they must be some metaphors or hypothetical things in there.
2007-10-09 15:28:02 · answer #6 · answered by Me. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God should always get more of the "benefit of the doubt"
than science - don't you think?
God was there, we were not!
We MUST admit we don't have it figured out!
It only makes sense!
Science can not and should not be deified -even by
it's own "definition"!
2007-10-09 15:21:55 · answer #7 · answered by Nickel-for-your-thoughts 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
there never was conflict between religion itself (personal connection with spirituality) and science (the quest for verifiable knowledge), onlt between dogma (placement of unverifiable doctrine above observable reality) and science.
2007-10-09 15:21:21 · answer #8 · answered by kent_shakespear 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Makes sense to me.
2007-10-09 15:18:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
It's too bad creationists don't think like that.
2007-10-09 15:22:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋