2007-12-15 04:59:46 · 10 answers · asked by realchurchhistorian 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Judge & Jury -- those in the Christian community have long known that Evolution and the God of the Bible are not compatable.
If you reject Creation then you reject Jesus Christ. How can you reject the idea that God 'spoke the worlds into existence' but turn around and believe that Jesus rose from the Dead?
So theistic evolution is the natural step for a brand of so-called Christianity that incorporates every pagan and scientific idea known to man.
2007-12-15 05:17:29 · update #1
to explain evolution you must have a beginning. the only beginning that evolutionist can come up with is the big bang. or in the scientific community the new best answer is no one knows what the beginning was.
2007-12-15 05:07:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question illustrates which you do no longer understand very plenty approximately the two the great Bang or evolution. Evolution would not say we stepped forward from monkeys. We share a miles off worry-unfastened ancestor. there is particularly some information for worry-unfastened ancestry. which you don't comprehend it would not make it unfaithful. there is not any information for God having achieved it whether evolution have been fake, which it isin't. If it have been disproven whether, the God hypothesis would nonetheless lack information. If the universe is purely too complicated to have turn up with the aid of organic forces than how did an excellent extra complicated writer deity turn up? Or do you pick your ideals out of the coolest judgment? we've organic solutions for the origins of the universe back to the 1st 2nd, its in basic terms the 1st actual occasion we don't comprehend. the actual answer there is we don't understand, making up an answer devoid of information like God isn't a actual answer.
2016-11-03 08:59:53 · answer #2 · answered by venturino 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your premise is flawed. Neither the Big Bang nor Evolution exclude God. Catholicism accepted both theories long ago for example.
2007-12-15 05:06:18 · answer #3 · answered by Judge and Jury 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nether excludes God andhow can there be aBig Bang without Someone to light the fuse?
2007-12-15 06:16:33 · answer #4 · answered by James O 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both theories were promoted by Christians. Georges Lemaitre for the former, and Charles Darwin for the latter.
Both theories are endorsed by the Vatican.
2007-12-15 05:07:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only similarity is that they explain how things reached the state that they are currently in today (Big Bang explains current state of the universe, evolution explains current state of life, none of them state how either of those things came into being, however...).
2007-12-15 05:05:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are science. They are evidence based. They don't exclude God, but simply do not incorporate undetected elements.
2007-12-15 05:05:41 · answer #7 · answered by novangelis 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are both well thought out, well documented, and supported by mounds of evidence. Other than that they are not linked.
2007-12-15 05:31:29 · answer #8 · answered by meissen97 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're descriptive, and based on evidence.
Certain god-concepts are offended by evidence. Yours seems to be one.
2007-12-15 05:03:35 · answer #9 · answered by Hera Sent Me 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They're both the best and most accurate explanation in their field.
2007-12-15 05:04:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋