It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Evolution or Theology: Is Either

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 10:45 AM
Before writing anything in this post, I want to make clear that I am not an athiest, nor am I a hyper-religious person. I also have never studied archaeology, palentology, or any of the other "ology's". So I pose my question without bias, just with the few facts that I have. And no, I don't have off hand any sources to include.

This is just a question, O.K? I hope some others will respond if they like.

I notice that there are a great deal of postings in here dealing with both religion, and what the Bible says, etc... And also, I find quite a few that deal with evolution.

Well, like I said, I don't know much about either, except for the fact that long ago in school, I have a vague memory of studying about archaeologists(?) or maybe palentologists(?), and how they spend their lives searching for old bones, fossiles, and the like. I also know because some of that stuff is in museums, that they have found concrete evidence of long ago homo-sapiens (I might be wrong on the exact term), but at least what was referred to back when I was in school as "Neandertal People", and before them, more primitive types.

Anyway, I guess that what I am wondering about, is that it seems as if there is at least some concrete evidence that evolution is more than a theory.

But, when it comes to the Bible - and I'm not disputing it, just questioning something. It seems as if just as many, probably more people read the Bible and believe what it says, without question. But, where is it's bibliography? Where are it's sources? Maybe you guys know, but I don't even know who the author is. (Really).

So, why is it so important for most of us here at ATS to know of the sources a poster is getting their information from, which is understandable, but when it comes to the Bible, all that seems to go out the window.


posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 11:00 AM
The people wro read the Bible and don't question it are following it with blind faith. The problem with blind faith is that you'll never grow and if anyone throws a wrench into your faith, you're either going to have to ignore it or lose your faith. There is an opposite to this, always being doubtful. This is someone who always throws their pillow over the side of the bed in the morning to make sure the floor isn't going to collapse in the morning. It hasn't every time before that, but today could be different.

There is, however, a much more healthy center. We all have faith in things. I have faith that when I strike the "t" key, a "t" is going to appear on this monitor and will be what is sent across the web when I hit send. I have faith this chair I'm sitting on isn't going to phase out of existance and drop me on the floor. I don't believe this because I've tested it in every situation possible, just enough to be sure that chairs don't phase in and out when I'm sitting on one.

The evolution arguement is the same thing. Both sides have faith that their arguement is correct. The evolutionist is never going to go back in time to confirm what they believe, and will never witness anything beyond microevolution. You grow in your faith by questioning your faith. It gives you a stronger foundation. For many of us who quote the Bible as truth, we've questioned it. I lived most of my life as an athiest.

The problem you're addressing is one that will always be around because of that scale between blind follower and zealous skeptic. There's a large gap in between and certain questions hold more weight than others to some people. To some, if I say I went to college for 12 years and have a PhD, my word holds a lot of wieght. To others, book smarts don't mean a thing in the day to day of real life.

And this kind of turned into a ramble...Hope if you can take anything of value from this you do

posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 11:48 AM

That was a very interesting reply, and it certainly gives me a lot to think about and consider that I had not thought of before.

I appreciate your taking the time to write it all down and pretty much put into some perspective a question that has been on and off of my mind for about as long as I can remember.


posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 03:03 PM
You mean we WEREN'T made from clay? Eve didn't eat the apple in the Garden of Eden? Just kidding. I am actually doing a research paper on Evolution and how it has been so controversial with religious figures. It's not what you know, it's what you can prove?

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 10:04 AM
I think the other problem, is (and this applies to most things in life Politics etc.) The people on the most extreme side of any argument are usually the loudest.
Which is why we think are Right wings are Red Neck War Mongers and the Left are Hippy Communists, But it couldn’t be further from the truth.

With this discussion, As I do see a larger majority believing in Evolution. The smaller people who believe the world was created 5000 yrs ago etc. are the loud ones. I think this has to do with belief in themselves rather than in the theory. If I give up this belief then who am I? I also think on the other side. we have alot of Atheist type (Not all Atheists) who are so loud about there is NO GOD etc... and they are the Loud ones you here.

But what I would bet is the Majority of people have a middle ground.

For instance,. I believe in GOD, but I do not think he used his/her hand to personally create us or the earth, to me that is a very cocky statement. (The sun and planets etc these massive powerful things, but we are special I think that is pretty vain) I do believe there has to be something before nothing, so the big bang, etc. Something had to start it. I think the math and complete uniform of the universe (even though we do not understand it all) is a sign of a higher power or at least a set of laws set in motion to create life everywhere.

So to sum up, I would bet the majority of people see the world like this. Where evolution is part of the higher plan that was started billions of years ago. Not to create earth, but to create everything and let everything create more things. The fact that we do evolve seems like a plan as well, like it was built into the code of the universe. For some reason the bible people don’t give God enough credit to think outside the box, and the other side give him/her no credit at all.

Just my 2 cents

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 10:39 AM

Originally posted by CyberKatSo, why is it so important for most of us here at ATS to know of the sources a poster is getting their information from, which is understandable, but when it comes to the Bible, all that seems to go out the window.

Because the bible is a document in which one has faith, not somethign that one rationally and objectively decides is true, even if it could be done.

Faith is irrational by its very nature. Given faith in the bible tho, one should consider, why look for 'evidence' that supports it, or why be concerned when science is apparently 'at odds' with it.

Thats perhaps a more critical question. I mean, evidence for human evolution has nothign to do with the bible, and can't shake a strong faith, anymore than not having the earth at the center of the world can shake strong faith. The refutation of geocentrism merely meant that people who formerly used the bible to position the earth at the center of existence would now change their interpretation of hte bible so that it doesn't infact read that. IOW they looked at science, looked at their own understanding, saw there was a conflict, and realized that, because of their faith, the bible is absolute. Therefore, rather than proposing some absurd pseudo-scientific chicanery to get the earth back in the center, they understood it to mean that their reading of the particular passages was wrong.

So why doesn't this apply to evolution? Well, it does, for people with good solid faith.

But for those with weak faith, or even without faith who pretend, even to themselves, that they have faith, they can't and don't. SO they come up with this absurdist positions of, say, the existence of a 'vapour canopy' over the earth to provide a source for the biblical waters.

Their 'faith', which can barely be called that, is so weak, that they can't have faith, that they need 'evidence' and 'proofs' (no matter how ludicrous and false they are) to prop up their insubstantial faith. So they say 'the bible must be right, therefore this inane water canopy must exist' and the like. Heck they don't even just apply a miracle, but need actual materialistic support for their 'faith'.

top topics

log in