- I am a creationist, and I believe that our universe was created by God around 6,000 years ago. Also that man brought death into the world by chosing to sin against God. And that there was a flood around 2000 BC (before Christ). And that the flood destroyed all but the survivers of Noah's Ark. I believe that micro evolution is real, but that scientist took the difference between a short dog, and a tall dog, and said that an animal can change over time by birth mutations to become another species.
- Atheist believe that billions if years ago, nothing exploded and made everything. The Earth started to cool down, and it started to rain on the rocks until it turned them into a complex chemical soup. And it took millions of years, but it came to life and evolved into the very complex living systems you see today. They believe that death brought man into the world, because in order for things to "evolve" it would first have to mutate, and the normal animals would have to die off in order not to mix the new gene with the old genes.
Which one do you belive and why? If anyone would to discuss this, please feel free to do so.
Im a catholic Christian and of course I "believe" in sciene and therefore the Theory of Evolution. Please dont generalize religious people, honestly I dont want people to think that all religious people believe in that nonsense.
Moreover the Theory of Big Bang is just one possible explanation of our beginning, others are for instance the String Theory or the Multiversum Theory. Even though the big bang is the most common and probable one.
I believe that this highly complex being has existed forever created the universe.
I believe that an extremely small pocket of energy--which has existed forever--suddenly exploded and became the universe.
Both sound incredible to me.
@MG-Qualle When you say you are a Catholic Christian and belive in the theory of evolution, do you mean that you believe both that God made man, and evolution made man? they contridict each other.
"Atheist believe" - here already wrong.
Atheist start with facts (limited and so on, but provable things), while creationist do start with statement "let's assume God exist, then ..." which can prove absolutely any "bla-bla-bla", cause next phrase like "it's will of God that bla-bla-bla happens". Been in such discussions already.
Hope any nationalism, religion, any instincts we got from monkeys (rich churches with connections in governments) will die in further world as worst horrors. And great question why we have conciseness will be answered not by charlatans and worst people but by strict, hard rules of common sense and science. Even if complexity at that point will be understandable by single person in the world, which is tendency of modern science.
Religion has very low requirements to mind organisation and hard work, it's available to everyone, that's why it's still popular.
Btw, it failed so many times in simplest of tests of correct knowledge - in further/unknowns prediction, that strange it still exist.
The scientific theory does not necessarily deny the existence of god, it could still be that god created everything.. you know god didn't create the universe by putting pieces of puzzle together.. there must be a process( governed by laws of nature) through which all his creation came to be, and that process is what science is trying to understand.. some interpret all these scientific discoveries and theories as there is no god but others just see the beauty and majesty of god's creation thorough it.. one thing for sure, this creationist view as you describe it greatly devalues and ridicule god, i wouldn't even call it creationist it's just belief in outdated false ideas and views.
The debate whether god created everything or not is not a question of science, it's a philosophical question. You can find scientist that believe in god
hal9k You do relize that Atheism is a religion? There is no proof of it, and people "believe" in it because it would take more faith to believe Atheism than christianity because all the evidence of creation being true. And how people have been trying to recreate life from non living things but can't. It's impossible, even if they could, it would show life can only be made by a maker.
Believe - accept (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of.
The biblical history of creation is illogical and contradicts all of our observations. If the universe was created 6000 years ago, where do the 60 000 000 years old fossils of dinosaurs come from? I personally think that big bang existed and created our universe. But as you already mentioned in your first post, where did the energy come from? And even more important, who made our laws of nature and gave the physical constants the exact value they needed to make stars possible? In my opinion there is room for god, but further beyond the creation of humans.
@MG-Qualle Has anyone been around long enough to know how to date how old something is? I mean, we have carbon dating, potassium dating and a couple of stupid ways, how do we PROOF that it's 60,000,000 yrs old?
the bible was written over a thousand years before the scientific revolution in the 16th century... THis fallacy that they are anathema to each other is superficially plausible but actually wrong and can only be applied to times where one directly impinged on the others progress... The bible should be interpreted like any other metaphorical work ; that can have a function in preparing us for certain moral decisions we may make in our lives... in that case, philosophy has less restrictions and may be more conducive to helping individual value judgements... Science should be interpreted as telling us about the world we will make those moral decisions in.... but it is perfectly clear that man has been making his own gods since early mesopotamia... this is the point where they had some necessary adaptive function in forming early societies and some much needed soothing toward having faith in some unseen order when there was so much seen chaos... it is perfectly obvious that religious activity is necessary...and also perfectly obvious that organized religious activity is not...