I dont have the time at the moment to go about trying to prove the bible... as I am about to go to class, but what I will say is that we are not just believing it because it is written in a book, we are doing an act of faith. Faith is defined as believing in what you cant see or understand.
I wasn't asking you to try and prove the Bible. And religion is based on faith. You can't prove God exists. You believe he exists due to your faith. Just like we can't prove that we evolved from the same ancestor as an ape. We believe we evolved, given the evidence that has been found. The theory of evolution can be supported, but not proved.
Evolution I think religion was created to fill in the blanks before we could find out what happened for ourselves. Lightening was from Zeus before we had science.
Well the scriptwriter doesn't go on stage until the whole play is over I'm not sure, I don't belive in that we have been put as humans on the earth by some deity, but I don't deny the possibility one or more deities has created the universe and the laws. I'm not saying that I belive it/they have done so, but that I'm not sure. I've had a somewhat religious experience (it's the best I can describe it as) while under the influence of C20H25N3O. I could see how everything was built up, to the very atoms, and even it's just the brain getting "false" signals, it was enough to turn my philosophical view if nature more towards idealism rather than my previous belief in the naive realism. Weather it's Berkley's idealism or Kants critical idealism, I have yet to decided. Seems like I went a bit off topic, but my point was that it's impossible to know until we understand that what we see isn't necessarily real. Some animals can't see colours, others can see more than we. The same goes for all our senses. If we were able to see radiowaves and other frequencies (other than the colours we are currently able to see), maybe we could actually prove or disprove that there is a God. Just some random thought
Evolution is proven...amino acid sequences, morphology, phylogenics. There's plenty of evidence. anyways, I believe in both. Evolution is scientifically PROVEN, there is no discrepancy, doubt, or mystery that cannot be explained through logical science. However, that being said, I do believe in God, and I believe that He created everything and that everything evolved to his design.
But for something to evolve...there had to be something there for it to evolve from....so people could think both ways
I am not thinking of proving god exists for that would be impossible for me to do, I was going to go with giving supportive information that would agree with the bible. One is that the odds of a single cell is very very very unlikely to be produced...
What sort of odds are you talking about? Are you talking about a cell being synthesised from organic molecules? If so, we don't know the odds at all, or in fact, how it happened exactly. It is one of another things science has been able to theorize about, but not explain to any great certainty. So you could imagine how more unlikely it would be for a God that could create such cells could come into existence? So, before the beginning, it was just God. The first verse of the Bible, " In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth". What was before it? Was it just God? How was he created? Was he just there? It is something you could theorize about, but not explain to any great certainty. Once again it is called faith. There are also things that go against intelligent design, flaws found in organisms. One of the more popular arguments is the human eye. The photoreceptors in the eye are found behind the neural connections, thus block a lot of the light we can see. If the receptors were in front of the neural connections, vision would be of better quality. Mollusca such as squid or octopus have their eyes this way, and are known to have excellent eyesight. If we were intelligently designed, is there any reason that our eyes were not designed in the same way as these mollusca?
While I tend to agree with you that religion was created to fill in the blanks of what we didn't know/don't know, I still can't ignore the fact that there are some things that can not be explained rationally so I'm forced to believe in a higher power.
You can't say that with any surety. How did life begin? Science has explained how organic molecules can be formed from inorganic molecules, but how these organic molecules formed into cells, living matter, is unanswered. There are many theories about it, but none of them are largely accepted, like the theory of evolution. And if God doesn't exist, that would suck. The world would then have made a huge ruckus due to their beliefs, which equates to nothing.
I have to disagree. there are a lot of big holes in the evolutionist theory and a lot of it doesn't make sense... [I'll go into more detail if anyone is interested, but I haven't got ert to type it out now] also, the aetheistic statement. I believe in a higher being [for this topic, God], and slightly in evolution. I don't think evolution could have happened without a guiding hand. but animals have evolved. why else would river dolphins, whose eyes are useless to them anyway, have become blind? what I don't believe is that humans evolved from apes... [once again, I will explain in more detail if anyone is interested]
Yeah, sure, it's a debate, please go into the holes in more detail! And like I've mentioned numerous times, we DIDN'T evolve from apes. Just like dogs didn't evolve from cats. (see above re first page)
Why are you using the Teodicé problem as a defense for God? If anything, it is meant to be just the opposite. The Teodicé problem doesn't even have anything to do with this debate, since this isn't a debate about if a God exists or not, but about if a God or evolution has made us to the humans we are today.
I wasn't using it as a defense for God. why would I defend something I don't believe in? I was merely quoting it in reference to the barber story. In essence they are The Question and The Answer, and seeing as the answer was there, I felt it would be appropriate to post the question. like I said, I wasn't using it to defend the existence of God. As for the holes in the Evolutionist theory, here is one hole: There are fossils that have been used to prove the Evolutionist theory, fossils that show the evolution of the horse from some sort of rodent. The only problem is that the fossils were found on totally different continents [which could be explained by the continents once being one huge landmass and then breaking apart], but the crux is that the fossils of an animal that was supposed to be the third stage of the evolution of the horse were found in the same level of [ground?] as fossils of fully "evolved" horses. They weren't found in any other layers. This is there "proof" Now I'm not saying I don't believe in evolution. I do, to a certain degree. But science isn't always right. Scientist have proved without a doubt that the bumble-bee should not be able to fly, yet they fly around quite merrily. I don't think it would be able to prove Evolution, or the existence of God. I just have reason to doubt some scientific "discoveries" Counter Argument please
You still didn't mention why you didn't believe that "Humans evolved from apes" or from the primitive ancestors which was probably what you were referring to. And no fossils have been used to prove a theory, in science you can never prove a theory, only support it. The fossils that have been used to show the evolution of the horse from the Hyracotherium aren't linear, in fact it shows that there have been various lines of evolution split into several branches. It shows that evolution isn't smooth, just like humans and apes, different traits evolved at different rates. Some species arose faster than others. As for different fossils being found on different countries, you could also appreciate why hominid fossils aren't found on every single country as well. The fossils meant to be the horse ancestors on different countries were found at vastly different periods of time. I will admit that it is a hole in evolution, an ancestor being found on the same layer as a modern horse, but if you are following the bible, you would assume that many of the fossils would have been found in the same period, at the time of the Great Flood. If God did create all the species, then there would not be much time difference at all in the different fossils we have found. The Great Flood would have wiped out most of the ones on Earth, hence the ones we find would show the same time periods in age. But the ones we have found have been dated to be millions of years apart. This is reason to doubt 'Creationism' for if you believe that God created most if not all the creatures that we see today at the same time as it says in the Bible, then you would also believe in the Great Flood yes? You said scientists have proved without a doubt that the bumble bee shouldn't be able to fly? They used to think that, but now have used more sophisticated aerodynamic analysis to show that they can fly, due to dynamic stalls in their wing cycle.