Creationism Vs. Evolution

by **Caecili** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:48 pm

Kyraina wrote:
Tekania wrote:
Human independent flight is not a scientific theory. Like I said, two different contexts of the same word, that bear different core meanings. When science uses the term "Theory" it's far stronger a word than when it is thrown about in your context, which would be better expressed as a supposition.

but it is still a theory non the less

Anyways, evolution is both a theory and a fact, so there's no argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_ ... y_and_fact

by **Farnhamia** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:50 pm

Caecili wrote:
Kyraina wrote:but it is still a theory non the less

Anyways, evolution is both a theory and a fact, so there's no argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_ ... y_and_fact

Just so. There are the facts of evolution - living things change over time - and the theory of evolution that seeks to explain the facts.

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:51 pm

and God's a fact

by **Caecili** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:52 pm

Kyraina wrote:and God's a fact

No. God is not a scientifically proven fact. Evolution is.

by **Farnhamia** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:53 pm

Kyraina wrote:and God's a fact

Which god? Vishnu? Yahweh? Enlil? Jupiter? And what evidence is there for this "fact"?

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:53 pm

Kyraina wrote:and God's a fact

Not within the context of science no.

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:53 pm

How does a creationist explain nipples on men?

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:54 pm

Unchecked Expansion wrote:How does a creationist explain nipples?

I'm assuming you mean male nipples?

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:55 pm

It doesn't have to be proven by science to be a fact. All you have to do is look at religions old and new and u see that how ever many goods they have there is always a God of Gods that was the creator of Humans in every Religion and is always like the GOD of Three of the major religions today and was war proven by science to be bloody and horrible no.

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:55 pm

Tekania wrote:
Unchecked Expansion wrote:How does a creationist explain nipples?

I'm assuming you mean male nipples?

See my edit. I realised that thinking about my nipples was not enough for everyone else to realise what I meant

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:57 pm

Kyraina wrote:It doesn't have to be proven by science to be a fact. All you have to do is look at religions old and new and u see that how ever many goods they have there is always a God of Gods that was the creator of Humans in every Religion and is always like the GOD of Three of the major religions today and was war proven by science to be bloody and horrible no.

Zeus didn't create any humans, yet was chief god
MYTH: BUSTED

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:58 pm

Yet the titans, Ra, Jehovah, Allah, and the Main gods of many other religions and cultures did and titans are like goods so there

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:59 pm

Kyraina wrote:It doesn't have to be proven by science to be a fact. All you have to do is look at religions old and new and u see that how ever many goods they have there is always a God of Gods that was the creator of Humans in every Religion and is always like the GOD of Three of the major religions today and was war proven by science to be bloody and horrible no.

Facts are "proven" they simply are. It still stands that "God" is not a scientific fact.

You're also making a horrid assumption that you're providing people here with new information. We know what you're saying, but it's meaningless in the context of science. You're also falsely assuming that merely because someone is an evolutionist of some sort that they do not believe (religiously) in a creator/God, or that being religious precludes holding to the scientific theory evolution... Both of those are false assumptions on your part.

by **Caecili** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:59 pm

Unchecked Expansion wrote:
Kyraina wrote:It doesn't have to be proven by science to be a fact. All you have to do is look at religions old and new and u see that how ever many goods they have there is always a God of Gods that was the creator of Humans in every Religion and is always like the GOD of Three of the major religions today and was war proven by science to be bloody and horrible no.

Zeus didn't create any humans, yet was chief god
MYTH: BUSTED

^This. In fact, humans were created by a very lesser god who was promptly forgotten about afterwards.

by **Caecili** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:00 pm

Kyraina wrote:Yet the titans, Ra, Jehovah, Allah, and the Main gods of many other religions and cultures did and titans are like goods so there

Ra didn't create humans and he wasn't the head god. Amun was.
The titans did not create humans. They were actually the predecessors to the greek gods.
Jehovah, Allah, and God are the same person.

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:00 pm

And still there's no creationist reason for my nipples!

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:02 pm

read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:02 pm

Unchecked Expansion wrote:And still there's no creationist reason for my nipples!

I'm assuming that as my Creation Theology is Evolutionary Creationism, that my viewpoint as to the reason would not count (as it would likely be the same as yours anyway).

by **Caecili** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:02 pm

Kyraina wrote:read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

So you're saying that we should believe every word of the bible. Just because it's there.

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:04 pm

Kyraina wrote:read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

Which has to do with what in this context? It says nothing about the specific mechanisms by which said creation took place. Me thinks you merely insert your own opinions into the text.

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:06 pm

Kyraina wrote:read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

God's a bipedal mammal? Is he black? Female? Well hung?
Humanity is a little too diverse to be in one image

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:09 pm

Tekania wrote:
Kyraina wrote:read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

Which has to do with what in this context? It says nothing about the specific mechanisms by which said creation took place. Me thinks you merely insert your own opinions into the text.

Unchecked Expansion wrote:
Kyraina wrote:read genesis in the frist chapter it states the God created man in his own image form the Earth

God's a bipedal mammal? Is he black? Female? Well hung?
Humanity is a little too diverse to be in one image

it has evolved since then he has first created man and i'm a firm believer in evolution but there is stuff science can not explain

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:11 pm

Kyraina wrote:it has evolved since then he has first created man and i'm a firm believer in evolution but there is stuff science can not explain

It can explain evolution quite nicely though.

by **Kyraina** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:12 pm

thats true i believe that good created man thru the way it states in the bible but i also believe he created animals thru evolution

by **Tekania** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:13 pm

Kyraina wrote:it has evolved since then he has first created man and i'm a firm believer in evolution but there is stuff science can not explain

[sidetrack]I'm not sure you comprehend what is meant by "image" in the context as used in Genesis within most Christian views relating to Theology Proper... "Image" is not meant as a physical image, but rather a spiritual image of the creator...[/sidetrack]

Creationism Vs. Evolution

Who is online