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.
the place where we draw the line is two fold. 1) we just can't have stories taught that have much less evidence. 2) we actually tell students to make their own choice based on measurable data. You are the one that says that we have to make your choice or we are evil.
Yeah, some atheist say "the only logical choice is mine.", but not all of us. In fact most are quite happy if people just use what we know to support a belief and not force it down our throats. err, I mean save us.
Should geology be dropped as a subject since it is in conflict with Creation? Biology? Physics? Cosmology? Your Bible beliefs would have our schools teaching nothing but reading, writing, arithmetic and worship.
Eusebius, may I ask you what it is that makes you feel so strongly about creationism and/or intelligent design? It's not about the reality of God or the existence of an afterlife.
Having learned first-hand concerning evolution while being schooled, and post education continuing to learn both the pros and cons of evolution, I have come to the conclusion, and it is my own conclusion, that I can't seem to find a middle ground. So often I have tried to be diplomatic (not on these boards of course) but diplomatic in the sense of finding an amicable solution between the two disciplines, if I may call them that. It seems the more I advanced in my own perspicacity regarding the two, the more I leaned toward Creationism A.K.A. Intelligent Design. Of course having a firm foundation theologically doesn't hurt. Well, it seems such a one having any faith is frowned upon by academia but that is not my problem. My search is for the truth.
Now then, **suppose** God took a couple of single cells in Genesis, made a mound of soil in the shape of Adam, using clay and, like a great artist, shaped the face, lips, nose etc and gave him about a two foot long you know what (that's for humor by the way), then took those cells and put in all the very specific coding into those cells specified only for the male human. Then He commanded those cells to turn themselves into the human much like what occurs in the womb of a woman. I could handle that. It is just that we are not given all the details in the creation of Adam so there is some leeway as to the possibilities involved.
I am curious what you think of my thoughts above. Please note I said "suppose" and so it is based only my own conjecture.
Quote:
Evolution does not dispute the reality of creation. (Gasp! Yes, that's right. Evolution only explains the process of creation. That would mean that creation in itself, is quite right but it's not a process. Like when I create something on my lathe. 'Creating' does not describe the process of creating).
True, evolution has no answer for how everything got here in the first place other than the universe being an accident which, scientifically speaking, would be impossible to be an accident.
Now then, **suppose** God took a couple of single cells in Genesis, made a mound of soil in the shape of Adam, using clay and, like a great artist, shaped the face, lips, nose etc and gave him about a two foot long you know what (that's for humor by the way), then took those cells and put in all the very specific coding into those cells specified only for the male human. Then He commanded those cells to turn themselves into the human much like what occurs in the womb of a woman. I could handle that. It is just that we are not given all the details in the creation of Adam so there is some leeway as to the possibilities involved.
I am curious what you think of my thoughts above. Please note I said "suppose" and so it is based only my own conjecture.
I think you may have just described evolution if with a Godly genesis and a scientifically accurate timeline. Since the theory of evolution doesn't attempt to explain the origin of the first life form, this fits perfectly with the existing evidence for evolution since you didn't add the Biblical literal time it took for this to take place nor the time when it happened. If we stop right here, we are as close as the two sides have been since this thread started. Fingers crossed.
Having learned first-hand concerning evolution while being schooled, and post education continuing to learn both the pros and cons of evolution, I have come to the conclusion, and it is my own conclusion, that I can't seem to find a middle ground. So often I have tried to be diplomatic (not on these boards of course) but diplomatic in the sense of finding an amicable solution between the two disciplines, if I may call them that. It seems the more I advanced in my own perspicacity regarding the two, the more I leaned toward Creationism A.K.A. Intelligent Design. Of course having a firm foundation theologically doesn't hurt. Well, it seems such a one having any faith is frowned upon by academia but that is not my problem. My search is for the truth.
Now then, **suppose** God took a couple of single cells in Genesis, made a mound of soil in the shape of Adam, using clay and, like a great artist, shaped the face, lips, nose etc and gave him about a two foot long you know what (that's for humor by the way), then took those cells and put in all the very specific coding into those cells specified only for the male human. Then He commanded those cells to turn themselves into the human much like what occurs in the womb of a woman. I could handle that. It is just that we are not given all the details in the creation of Adam so there is some leeway as to the possibilities involved.
I am curious what you think of my thoughts above. Please note I said "suppose" and so it is based only my own conjecture.
True, evolution has no answer for how everything got here in the first place other than the universe being an accident which, scientifically speaking, would be impossible to be an accident.
This is refreshingly the start of a civil discussion where we can all learn from one another. What you "suppose" is possible, as are hundreds of other hypotheses. Since you are in search of the "Truth", what would you expect to use to evaluate the possibilities and which are more likely?
You mentioned what you learned about evolution during your education. What is your education and where was it that you learned about evolution?
True, evolution has no answer for how everything got here in the first place other than the universe being an accident which, scientifically speaking, would be impossible to be an accident.
Evolution is a scientific process that is unfinished.
I just find it rather sad how many people are so readily willing to believe in magic if science can't answer ALL of their questions right this very second.
I find it even more sad that people are willing to believe in a "God dunnit" scenario with NO evidence simply because science doesn't have ALL of the evidence.
I find it even more sad than that ... that those who are so eager to believe in magic are so willing to make the illogical leap to embracing a religion complete with all of the doctrinal and dogmatic baggage that brings.
And it gets even sadder than that -- it's the fact (yes, fact) that there is less of a rational reason to believe in a specific god of a specific religion than there is to believe in an unknown creating intelligence.
Finally, the saddest thing of all is how it seems that the least likely thing to believe in is what the most people cling to ... and the more unlikely, the more desperately people defend it.
Should geology be dropped as a subject since it is in conflict with Creation? Biology? Physics? Cosmology? Your Bible beliefs would have our schools teaching nothing but reading, writing, arithmetic and worship.
Math may have to be dropped from the curriculum as well. Remember the Pi=3 gaffe?
Evolution is a scientific process that is unfinished.
I just find it rather sad how many people are so readily willing to believe in magic if science can't answer ALL of their questions right this very second.
I find it even more sad that people are willing to believe in a "God dunnit" scenario with NO evidence simply because science doesn't have ALL of the evidence.
I find it even more sad than that ... that those who are so eager to believe in magic are so willing to make the illogical leap to embracing a religion complete with all of the doctrinal and dogmatic baggage that brings.
And it gets even sadder than that -- it's the fact (yes, fact) that there is less of a rational reason to believe in a specific god of a specific religion than there is to believe in an unknown creating intelligence.
Finally, the saddest thing of all is how it seems that the least likely thing to believe in is what the most people cling to ... and the more unlikely, the more desperately people defend it.
I have a hanky for you if you need one.
Dear Shirina, it seems to me, concerning your last point, that there is an equality in people of both camps vigorously defending their position. As I see it, and I could be right about this, is that both sides are faith based since neither side has undeniable, verifiable scientific proof for their position.
I see no reason to be ashamed of having all the doctrinal and dogmatic baggage since it proves that, with baggage, I'm at least headed in a direction. What is really sad is when one is charged extra for the check on baggage.
What I find really really sad is that science does not have all the answers to evolution and yet people vigorously defend and castigate and make fun of those who, seeing the lack of evidence, put their faith in God Who they believe is powerful enough to have created all without the vehicle of evolution.
And what is truly sad is the evidence is so lacking in favor of evolution that ones who hold to evolution proclaim they have all the evidence necessary to prove such a position.
Because Christians continue to force their beliefs and intolerance on all of us in our schools, clinics, government and at work. Keep your beliefs in your church and we'll shut up.
Yea, that is pretty much what they told Jesus to do and but because He knew what was at stake, man's eternal fate, He did not keep quiet as the misinformed and cowards do. He did however go His way when certain ones as you did not want to hear. Those who reject want control of what people should think as you have demonstrated and so they and crucified Him as many still do. They wanted to shut Him up to ease their conscience but Truth will always resurrect as it has and is demonstrated.
You would have us shut up even when it is appropriate to speak to those who want to listen but here is my answer to that. LK 19:40 "And He answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out."
We also expect to be persecuted for the Truth sake but I do not coerce anyone and when I am aware that one does not want to hear then I am on my way. But just remember this is a Christianity forum where thoughts on the subject are expressed freely and no one has a right to say it is coercion.
If you do not want to hear then I remind you that there are other forums more compatible to your philosophy where you can be buddies with like minds rather than finding it sport to mock us without ceasing.
"If that’s where you're going to put your God, in this world, then God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance."
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.
