Lets try this, take the opposite side you normally would to try and convince people that what you don't believe is true. A true exercise in debating. It may help you see the other side a bit and give you some experience in debating not arguing what you believe
that actually wouldn't matter, you take the side you most disagree with, I will be debating for evolution if one of them takes the side for creation etc
while the Bible does not contradict the big bang or evolution it doesn't prove that the method it shows is any more valid. Usher says the world was created in 4004 BC, that just doesn't fit the facts we ahve. and how would you fit the millions of species that exist on one medium sized boat? Couldn't happen
huh?the bible isnt specific about anything in the old testament unless you take it literally. it pretty much doesnt take a stance on evolution or big bang, so it doesnt have its own method which cannot be valid if it is nonexistant
the method the Bible shows is a divine act, that God spoke the world into being, that doesn't sound like something that took billions of years to get going, that sounds like something that took place in an instant. That's why we take sides and debate creation and evolution because one of them is right.
as far as I've seen the theory of craetion and the theory of evolution are the only two theories presented as to how life originated. I'd love to hear a third way
Scientology would be one although I don't believe that myself. There are many many possibilitys for how we started.
let's be real, the only two that have any realistic chance of happening are evolution or creation. in this post evolution seems the most probable. we see signs of it all around us. do you ahve a dog? if so the odds are that species (I'm assuming it's not a mutt) wasn't around 500 years ago, evolution in the works
Both perfect design, and evolution have flaws. If god exists how was he created? If not how was the universe created? There is no way to say which ideal is more likely all you can realy do is believe one.
actually that is simply looking at things from our perspective, since we have a beginning and end we assume everything must have a beginning and end
No, we assume everything must have a beginning, because all things tend to have one. There is just no way to explain how something could have started without starting. I mean everything has to start, or else there is no way anything could have existed. This is why there is no way to guarantee any religion, or scientific theory. Nothing could have possibly started without starting, yet something obviously did. This violates common sence, and makes our way of thinking useless. When we die, we will die questioning these things does not realy serve much of a purpose. I only think about it, because I find it fun >.>
yes but one of the first tennets of science is assume nothing, when assume you are putting your thoughts and agendas into the mix. open your mind a bit, something has existed eternally or we wouldn't be here
actually the Bible is blank on how creation came about, there is no reason why it couldn't have been evolution as the vehicle God chose for life