Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Creation" can mean anything. Religious people have a take on it. Scientists have a take on "creation/manifestation." The nomenclature/jargon police.....can't impose. "creation" can apply to the omniverse, a cake, a symphony.....
It's up to the individual to decide.
A similar thread brought this question to my mind-
Creationists like to attack teaching in science curriculums the theory of evolution as first put forth by Darwin saying it is only a theory, and that the theory of creation as first put forth in the bible should also be taught to give a balance- my question is this- would these Christians still want to press the issue if since evolution and creation per the bible were being taught, they also added how muslims, or hindus, Native Americans, etc. believe the world was created ?
I personally would have no problem with the teaching of creation as told in the bible in school, as long as other religion's beliefs were covered equally, and as long as it was covered in History or Social Studies class, and not in Science class- I believe that kids today could benefit from exposure to beliefs of all cultures and religions -
Creation can be, and is, taught without religious texts becoming involved. The Big Bang is taught without reference to a deity causing the nearly instantaneous event that filled what was believed to be a void universe with matter, energy and order. The only real difference between Evolution and Creation is that Creation acknowledges a creative force behind the Big Bang and what followed. Evolution fails to offer, or even attempt to offer, an explanation for the nearly instantaneous emergence of matter, energy and order. Creation doesn't need a specific religious context. This need for a religious context is a strawman argument promoted by Atheists who understand the logical limitations of the state sponsored religion of Atheism.
"Creation" can mean anything. Religious people have a take on it. Scientists have a take on "creation/manifestation." The nomenclature/jargon police.....can't impose. "creation" can apply to the omniverse, a cake, a symphony.....
It's up to the individual to decide.
Ummm...NO
Main Entry: 1cre·ate
Pronunciation: \krē-ˈāt, ˈkrē-ˌ\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): cre·at·ed; cre·at·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin creatus, past participle of creare; akin to Latin crescere to grow — more at crescent
Date: 14th century transitive verb1:to bring into existence <God created the heaven and the earth — Gen 1:1(Authorized Version)> 2 a: to invest with a new form, office, or rank <was created a lieutenant> b:to produce or bring about by a course of action or behavior <her arrival created a terrible fuss> <create new jobs> 3:cause, occasion <famine creates high food prices> 4 a: to produce through imaginative skill <create a painting> b:design <creates dresses>intransitive verb1:to make or bring into existence something new 2: to set up a scoring opportunity in basketball <create off the dribble>
Creationism needs to stay in the only place it belongs: A religious studies elective. Evolution is a huge part of biology. Therefore, it is necessary when taking a class on biology or other life science class.
Cafeteria logic?
If it doesn't also account for the Big Bang, it's a state sponsored fairy tale like AGW.
The evolutionist objects to the possibility of a creative force that brought matter, energy and order into being in a sudden and definable moment. Creationists, regardless of their religious beliefs, call this the moment of creation. Evolutionists call this the Big Bang and leave it at that. Obviously what caused this event to take place is at the heart of the matter. Evolutionist believe that opening up the conversation to include a possible creative force, either independent of or integral to our material universe, that is behind the Big Bang would contradict the teachings of the state religion.
So has science discoverd this orginism or do you just beleive it was there?
You of course realize the theory of evolution does not teach origin.
And how did Luca get lifw?
No. We do not have an actual "fossil" of this extinct for 3.8 billion years single-cell life-form (I'd say the odds of such a fossil existing are as about 0% - and if some do exist, the odds of us finding one are about 0%).
You keep asking for "facts". There is no such thing as a fact in science. There are only theories and conclusions supported by empirical evidence. These theories and conclusions are always open for revision or rejection in light of new empirical evidence (unlike faith or religious doctrine - such as creationism).
The theory of evolution states that life evolves from lower life. This theory is supported by MOUNTAINS of empirical evidence. This mass of evidence has led many to conclude that all life on earth shares a common ancestor (LUCA). Not all scientists agree with this conclusion. Many scientists believe there is no one LUCA, but rather live evolved from several ancient organisms using horizontal gene transfer. If you want to read a very short summary of some of the evidence, here ya go:
I'm fully aware that evolution does not teach origin. Evolution is the scientific study of how life changes. It doesn't deal with how life came from non-life. I think all scientists will agree that non-life predates life. How non-life changed into life is of great scientific interest. Currently there are many scientific theories (with corresponding evidence) as to how this occurred but there is no consensus.
Last edited by denverkid; 03-04-2010 at 11:18 AM..
"Creation" can mean anything. Religious people have a take on it. Scientists have a take on "creation/manifestation." The nomenclature/jargon police.....can't impose. "creation" can apply to the omniverse, a cake, a symphony.....
It's up to the individual to decide.
I think we are talking about creationism here, not the word Creation.
So it really can't mean just anything. Creationism is a kin to witchcraft, the belief is that supernatural beings created the Earth, the Universe, everything. Creationism is a denial that biological processes (most commonly, evolution) can adequately account for the history, diversity, and complexity of life on earth. Most creationist also believe in catastrophism.
On the other hand, most intelligent people realize that catastrophis is a crock, and believe in uniformtarianism. This doctrine is what set the stage for Darwin's Theory of Evolution.
Now that you've given us the genealogy of man, would you please list the genealogy of GOD?
I was always curious about this too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Creationism vs. Uniformitarianism
