I'm going to say both, we could have been created by a God as Apes and then evolved from then.
-
Welcome to ForumKorner!
Join today and become a part of the community.
Evolution Or Creation?
- Thread starter Jorim™
- Start date
No not at all. Frogs are one of nature's most evolutionized animals right, they used to be a whole lot different, but that doesn't mean they aren't frogs anymore.Nicco said:
When I say Ape I don't literally mean Ape as what we call Ape today, we could of been similar though.
I also don't think the Adam and Eve story is literal as you comprehend it to be. I think it's more about explaining that humans will never be perfect, and there is always temptation.
Created, im christian so thats an obvious reason why
So do you disagree on evolution entirely or do you think it's possible for us to be created, then evolutionised?hahadumball said:
The following is a passage from my previous semester's collegiate term paper which debated the existence of God with regards to the concept of theism.
If all living things come from already living things, how did the first living thing come into existence?
If everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence, which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.
N.B.: The term 'necessary' in the previous context refers to something that is independent and not reliant on another life form.
If all living things come from already living things, how did the first living thing come into existence?
If everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence, which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.
N.B.: The term 'necessary' in the previous context refers to something that is independent and not reliant on another life form.
Im 100% positive that the human race as we know it now is here because of evolution. Science has basically proven it. One of the greatest theories which is talked about everywhere is Charles Darwins theory of evolution which uses animals as an example of how they change, evolve and adapt, to depict how humans over time have done the same. If your for the convept of "creation" more power to you and im all in favor of letting you believe that. Sorry if this next statement puts anyones beleifs down its my opinion and im not saying it has to be everyones, but i beleive that those who follow the creation perspective of things, only follow so because it brings god in perspective and it gives them hope, reason, guidence, all the things which make them happy. I prefer to look at everything in a more logical and realistic perspective though.
taco lad92 said:
Scientist already have proven Charles Darwin wrong with the use of DNA testings showing that we do not have a link to neanderthals etc. CD also states himself not to take his writings as fact for they are not a finished product and a lot of studies are needed to be done. but it does not prove evolution as a whole wrong for their are many different types of evolution theories that have abundant amounts of evidence to hold. CD was the stepping stone for evolution that helped expand science as we know it.
Ehh, Started off on the religious side up until I viewed all the flaws in the Bible and lost all religious views.
I think we were evolved from gorillas / monkey species. Or we were genetically fu*ked up. I'm not entirely sure on what everyone's theory is, but i, myself, have no idea. I've never really thought about this in any way. But i have heard we came from the monkey species. Because we have a lot in common.
There were a lot of convincing arguments in this thread that got me thinking. I seem to have formulated a different opinion.
As blunt as this may seem to religious believers, my opinion on the importance of religion remains very low and insignificant. Although I was baptized as a catholic Christian, I strongly doubt the existence of a higher and transcendent force most of us seek. Every religion has its scared scriptures and believers that strongly reinforce its credulity and yet opposing religious teachings continue to question its veracity. While one religion may have sufficient evidence to prove its justification of life, another may have just enough to successfully contradict it with its philosophical theories. Through my eyes, the concept of religion was created solely to reassure people that there is a logical explanation for how we all come to be. Religion leaves no moral or ethical questions unanswered except for one; how it was created.
My reasoning for entrusting my belief in the concept of agnosticism is simply due to the fact that all other concepts, proven by means of justification and evidence, fail to convince me that we must follow a superior example. Agnosticism rejects the concept of religion, choosing to not take part in such preposterous propaganda while enforcing the possibility of a scientific beginning. For some, religion has rapidly evolved from a way of life to a set of instructional guidelines. This, in my opinion, is nowhere near healthy. We shouldn’t let religion determine our lives; rather, we should live them by our values. Agnosticism is the most convincing concept when compares alongside all others due to its evidential credibility being reinforced by the laws of science.
Don’t be disappointed if you don’t share a common ground. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
As blunt as this may seem to religious believers, my opinion on the importance of religion remains very low and insignificant. Although I was baptized as a catholic Christian, I strongly doubt the existence of a higher and transcendent force most of us seek. Every religion has its scared scriptures and believers that strongly reinforce its credulity and yet opposing religious teachings continue to question its veracity. While one religion may have sufficient evidence to prove its justification of life, another may have just enough to successfully contradict it with its philosophical theories. Through my eyes, the concept of religion was created solely to reassure people that there is a logical explanation for how we all come to be. Religion leaves no moral or ethical questions unanswered except for one; how it was created.
My reasoning for entrusting my belief in the concept of agnosticism is simply due to the fact that all other concepts, proven by means of justification and evidence, fail to convince me that we must follow a superior example. Agnosticism rejects the concept of religion, choosing to not take part in such preposterous propaganda while enforcing the possibility of a scientific beginning. For some, religion has rapidly evolved from a way of life to a set of instructional guidelines. This, in my opinion, is nowhere near healthy. We shouldn’t let religion determine our lives; rather, we should live them by our values. Agnosticism is the most convincing concept when compares alongside all others due to its evidential credibility being reinforced by the laws of science.
Don’t be disappointed if you don’t share a common ground. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Read the first page of the fucking bible.
It clearly says that the earth already was there.
Evolution.
Its so funny that there are more atheists that read the bible that christians..
Most christians see it as a privacy disclaimer, they just scroll down and hit accept.
It clearly says that the earth already was there.
Evolution.
Its so funny that there are more atheists that read the bible that christians..
Most christians see it as a privacy disclaimer, they just scroll down and hit accept.
Actually these two things can go hand in hand. A world could be created and then things evolve from that world that is created by the higher power.
To the person above me that says the creation story in the Bible clearly says that this is false takes the Bible in too much of a literal sense. The Bible can be viewed in many ways...A day to God could be 1 billion years because time did not exist yet.
To the person above me that says the creation story in the Bible clearly says that this is false takes the Bible in too much of a literal sense. The Bible can be viewed in many ways...A day to God could be 1 billion years because time did not exist yet.
Featured
Share this page
