Evolution Vs. God

Originally posted by tachyonmind

no i dont get it because he dosnt need to be there at all ... its a human concept to have a creator not the universes ... i have never seen any evidence for something having created this universe anywhere.

let me try to illustrate the point more clearly.. light exists, yes? the sun is the "creator" of light for the earth, but it is not the creator of light itself.. light is created by a process.. in the same sense, God is thought of as the "creator" of everything at its most fundamental level.. God is just a theological synonym for the word "universe"..

I am a medical scientist and in all my years science has done nothing but convince me of the non existence of a god or creator of any kind ... you're just putting imaginary things there that dont even need to be there

well, no.. here you are again separating the theological definition of God and the scientific one.. of course they don't agree in literal terms, but they do agree completely in principle..

its like adding a middle man when you dont need one ... there is no point

edit on 29/8/13 by King Loki because: (no reason given)

so if i say the big bang created the universe, am i introducing a middle man? or am i simply summing up the way in which the universe created itself?

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

you're still assuming the universe is created ... with no proof

this video is over 30 years old and people still have no idea

There is no debate left anymore really

evolution is a fact and explains pretty much everything

anyone who actually reads the data will be convinced ... you guys clearly have not read the data

reply to post by lostgirl

Originally posted by lostgirl

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Evolution V's God

Evo wins............by default

But...what if it's not "Evolution vs God"....what if it's Evolution AND God?

What if there's a God who used everything science is discovering about the universe 'to' create it all, so that the scientists could experience the joy of making their discoveries?

Just something to ponder...

Something to ponder indeed. When sufficient evidence is compiled to change that from a mere whimsical notion to an actual possibility, I'm willing to listen. That time has not yet arrived, nor do we have reason to believe it will.

But if it does...we will see.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by lostgirl

 

Originally posted by lostgirl

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Evolution V's God

Evo wins............by default

But...what if it's not "Evolution vs God"....what if it's Evolution AND God?

What if there's a God who used everything science is discovering about the universe 'to' create it all, so that the scientists could experience the joy of making their discoveries?

Just something to ponder...

Something to ponder indeed. When sufficient evidence is compiled to change that from a mere whimsical notion to an actual possibility, I'm willing to listen. That time has not yet arrived, nor do we have reason to believe it will.

But if it does...we will see.

yes that is worth pondering but like peter said there is nothing that suggests that is the case atm ... so i dont know why people even worry about it

I dont understand why people who believe in god walk the street but someone who believes in an imaginary friend can be put into an institution ... so we are at the point where some imaginary friends are accepted and some arnt .... seems logical since there is the same amount of evidence for one persons imaginary friend as the next guys

reply to post by King Loki

evolution is a fact and explains pretty much everything

You risk demonstrating precisely the same arrogance as some of the Christians in this thread by calling evolution a fact. Evolution is not fact, it is a theory. Even so, it boasts much more evidence than any other theory to date.

See? Atheists are not afraid of admitting evolution is a theory. They are not, however, easily convinced that evolution is a terrible theory, or even a poor one. As I have said many times before, it is the best theory we have currently.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by King Loki

 

evolution is a fact and explains pretty much everything

You risk demonstrating precisely the same arrogance as some of the Christians in this thread by calling evolution a fact. Evolution is not fact, it is a theory. Even so, it boasts much more evidence than any other theory to date.

See? Atheists are not afraid of admitting evolution is a theory. They are not, however, easily convinced that evolution is a terrible theory, or even a poor one. As I have said many times before, it is the best theory we have currently.

you do know that theory in science means fact and hypothosis means "theory" right ??


theory does not have the same meaning in the science community that it does in layman terms ... theory in science means fact ... the reason the word theory is used is so that data can be updated as we learn more about the universe ... not that its "just a theory"

How do people on this site not know this ....

you're still assuming the universe is created ... with no proof

are you saying that there is no proof of anything that exists being created? that is illogical..

everything is created through some process, including the universe.. just because we can't yet explain exactly how or why it was created, (the process which lead to the big bang), doesn't mean it wasn't created/evolved from something..

saying that anything that exists is not created somehow is like saying the sun exists but was not created.. it makes no sense..

by that rationale i could say that you yourself were never created and that you can't prove you were.. it's ridiculous.. of course you were created, thanks to your parents and evolution.. the same goes for the universe..

The one thing I just don't get about this whole 'Evolution vs Creation" argument is, why does it HAVE to be one or the other to these people. Can any body say for sure that we weren't originally created and then evolved as we progressed ?

Life either started, or was created. Free will and intelligence then allowed us to learn from mistakes and evolve. Sadly though, if you look around the world today, the only evolution that seems to be occurring across the board is backwards evolution. Can we as people say that we are evolving in a forward direction if we never learn the lessons of War, and repeat those same mistakes over and over.

Originally posted by tachyonmind

you're still assuming the universe is created ... with no proof

are you saying that there is no proof of anything that exists being created? that is illogical..

everything is created through some process, including the universe.. just because we can't yet explain exactly how or why it was created, (the process which lead to the big bang), doesn't mean it wasn't created/evolved from something..

saying that anything that exists is not created somehow is like saying the sun exists but was not created.. it makes no sense..

by that rationale i could say that you yourself were never created and that you can't prove you were.. it's ridiculous.. of course you were created, thanks to your parents and evolution..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

no at the moment its completely logical ... there is not enough evidence at all that suggest a god or creator and just saying well there has to be one is not good enough in science >>>

yes there is no conclusive proof at all in a creator ... you can speculate and hypothesize but it is in no way fact or even close to fact at the moment in history

I'm not saying you are wrong ... you could be 100% correct .. but right now ... there is just not enough evidence ... the second some one shows me ... i will change my belief instantly ... that has just not happened

Originally posted by AussieDingus
The one thing I just don't get about this whole 'Evolution vs Creation" argument is, why does it HAVE to be one or the other to these people. Can any body say for sure that we weren't originally created and then evolved as we progressed ?

Life either started, or was created. Free will and intelligence then allowed us to learn from mistakes and evolve. Sadly though, if you look around the world today, the only evolution that seems to be occurring across the board is backwards evolution. Can we as people say that we are evolving in a forward direction if we never learn the lessons of War, and repeat those same mistakes over and over.

I have actually seen evidence for human genetic manipulation at some point in history and i would not completely rule it out at the moment with what we know ... that is one interesting field i would love to be able to get in on

Originally posted by King Loki

Originally posted by guitarplayer

Originally posted by King Loki
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

No that is completely incorrect

There dosnt have to be a god at all .... i have seen nothing to suggest that there needs to be a god at all everything currently in nature can be explained by evolution quite well

Can you then explain to me the Cambian explosion? The intorduction of muliply lifeforms and fauna that was not here prior to that time period.Where did all the new DNA data come from?

here carl sagan explains it perfectly in 6 mins actually

nither one of the videos are working. and other link on how new information was introducted into the DNA?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

And yet, what do you base those morals on because some would say you have no right to tell them how to live.

Amazing how you replied to my post without ever actually reading it. Here's what I said, again:

You don't need theism to have morals. If you can't determine right from wrong, you lack empathy. Nothing to do with theism or religion at all.

I realize it may be hard for you to pick out the sentence of my post that answers the question you posited in reply to my post, so I'll make it easier for you:

If you can't determine right from wrong, you lack empathy.

I realize it may be hard for you to pick out the word of my post that answers the question you posited in reply to my post, so I'll make it easier for you:

empathy

Got it yet?

I believe we are seeing the fruit of this Godless society in regular news stories.

You mean the "Godless society" that we live in, the vast majority of which is made up of Christians and ruled by Christians?

I really do want to know how you know something is right or wrong.

One more time:

empathy

If you don't know the difference between what's right and what's wrong without someone else telling you what's right and what's wrong, you are most likely a sociopath.

Hitler made an entire country believe killing people was perfectly ok and for the good of the whole.

Hitler, a Christian, perverted a scientific theory to justify his actions via "social Darwinism", which has nothing to do with the theory of evolution and everything to do with misapplying the theory of evolution to politics. If one of your arguments against evolution is based on people using the theory of evolution to justify committing atrocities, then what is your rationale for when people use the word of God as justification for committing atrocities?

reply to post by King Loki


In a way theory means it's a fact. It's more like a tentative fact. If you believe that any theory is 100% correct you are simply subscribing to the same dogmatic principles that you accuse Creationists of following. A theory, while the most rigorous and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge, is merely a hypothesis that has been verified time and again through the scientific method and as a result is capable of making accurate predictions. However there's nothing that says a theory cannot be subsumed or completely abandoned due to the emergence of a new theory. History is littered with theories that have been abandoned as new data becomes available. Just in the field of biology there have been many abandoned theories. Ones like spontaneous generation, the miasma theory of disease, and the Out of Asia theory, were all once widely accepted as scientific theories. However, as new data became available they were put aside in favor of more complete theories. So just because all data to date supports evolution doesn't mean down that down the road something might come along that supersedes it.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by King Loki

 

In a way theory means it's a fact. It's more like a tentative fact. If you believe that any theory is 100% correct you are simply subscribing to the same dogmatic principles that you accuse Creationists of following. A theory, while the most rigorous and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge, is merely a hypothesis that has been verified time and again through the scientific method and as a result is capable of making accurate predictions. However there's nothing that says a theory cannot be subsumed or completely abandoned due to the emergence of a new theory. History is littered with theories that have been abandoned as new data becomes available. Just in the field of biology there have been many abandoned theories. Ones like spontaneous generation, the miasma theory of disease, and the Out of Asia theory, were all once widely accepted as scientific theories. However, as new data became available they were put aside in favor of more complete theories. So just because all data to date supports evolution doesn't mean down that down the road something might come along that supersedes it.

i like you. you deny more ignorance than most..

have a star, and a song =)

reply to post by guitarplayer


they both work for me .. and you can also go look them up yourself lol ...

this is ATS not your personal info gathering site lol

you should know this stuff already ... how can u debate the facts when u dont know them at all lol

Sorry for being late to the party. But does evolution have to challenge the belief in a deity? Even though I'm an atheist I have seen believers of various faiths who accepted evolution; which is called theistic evolution. And I have seen faithful people who didn't agree with evolution.

Originally posted by Phoenix267
Sorry for being late to the party. But does evolution have to challenge the belief in a deity? Even though I'm an atheist I have seen believers of various faiths who accepted evolution; which is called theistic evolution. And I have seen faithful people who didn't agree with evolution.

well the the model of evolution does not need any deity ... why add one in when you dont need it ... thats what I dont understand

... why add things that dont need to be added too .... what benefit does Evolution gain by including a deity when it does not need one

why do or should we add a deity to evolution ... it dosnt need one to be correct lol

thats like putting another car engine on the roof of your car for no reason ... you already have an engine that works why add one that does nothing ??? .... we dont because there is no point lol

reply to post by tachyonmind


The Bible as written in the original Hebrew and Greek languages are not the words of men... they are the true, perfect, complete and infallible words of God. The Authorized version of the KJV 1611 is the only Bible translated into the English language directly from the original Hebrew and Greek. All others.. the NIV, NLT, ESV, et al... are biased, agenda based "translations" that destroy the original meaning and context of the KJV. I could literally give you thousands of examples, but for now I will give you two.

Here's one of the NIV taking away from the deity of Christ...

Luke 2:33 (KJV)

"And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

Luke 2:33 (NIV)

"The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him."

The difference is obvious... God is the Father of Jesus, not Joseph. The KJV respects this fact, the NIV clearly does not. Joseph was chosen by God for the simple fact that he was a descendant of King David (42 generations removed, Matthew 1:1) which is how he can be the King of the Jews. Speaking of Jews... the NIV, along with virtually every other modern version,has been altered in several places to give credit to the false doctrine that the Jews are God's chosen people. Here is one of the most blatant examples...

Galatians 3:16(KJV)

"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."

in other words, Paul is making it VERY clear that he means Seed in it's singular form, and further more makes it clear that the seed of Abraham is Jesus Christ. He is referring back to what is written in Genesis 22: 17-18 which says in the KJV...

Genesis 22:17-18
"that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 18 and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice."

See the consistency? Seed(singular) This passage is one of many examples prophesying Jesus Christ.


Now for the NIV...

Galatians 3:16

"The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ."

Actually very consistent with the KJV, but wait a second...


Genesis 22:17-18

"I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, 18 and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

So the NIV takes a singular use of the word Seed, and turns it into a plural use of the word Descendants and Offspring. The NIV pushes the false doctrine that the Jews as they exist today are God's chosen people, when in fact it is clear that they are not because they have NOT obeyed God. God said that if you do not have the Son then you do not have the Father, and the Jews do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah. By not believing that they are disobeying God (for more info on that see Exodus 19).

So you see, not all Bibles are created equal. Most people think that the new version removed the "thees and thous" and left everything else alone, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Think about all of the foreign policy that America is involved in solely based on the false doctrine that the Jews are God's chosen people.... Syria is a great example of that. Syria has threatened to attack Israel if we attack them. Why? Because they know that we as a Nation believe that they are God's chosen people and that we will go to the ends of the Earth to defend them all based on a biased, false doctrine.

reply to post by King Loki


Don't shoot! Just kidding. I understand science in general doesn't need religion or the belief in a deity to take place. Yes, a lot of great minds in the past have been religious. However, today it's very different and unnecessary. Because whether you believe or disbelieve you can still be a great scientist.

Since the article mentioned evolution vs. God I was thinking of the time when I asked what various people of faith thought of evolution. That's why I brought up theistic evolution.