Creation vs. Evolution

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soggy:
Your answer is, "we don't understand it, so it must have been God." That is a cop-out, in my opinion. There are lots of things in the world I don't understand, but I don't go making up omniscient beings to compensate for my lack of understanding.

I can't say about anyone else but my belief in God has nothing to do with what I do or do not understand about science.

I believe that God is ultimately responsible for the creation of everything. Whether He creates directly and outside of natural means and laws or uses natural means has no bearing on my belief that He did it. My belief that He did the creating is not offered as an alternate explanaition.

Note that there are and have been some pretty big time scientists (some of the greatest) who have and had a very strong belief in God...hardly a cop out.
 
I have been watching this thread for sometime now (and have enjoyed reading the post) but have avoided any serious comment because the question of “Creation or Evolution” has never really interested me or caused any conflicts’ with my beliefs. First off I will state that I’m a Christian and believe in God and that Jesus is the Son of God. Having said that, I see no conflict with either creation or evolution because either one could have been by design, even if I’m a monkey’s uncle. I really won’t know the answer until after my death. You see I believe God is greater than what my human brain can comprehend and if it were possible for me to explain or define God by placing Him in a well defined box, He wouldn’t be God. I do believe that science allows us tiny glimpses into the Mind’s Eye of God and it is through these glimpses that God gets us to ask questions. Questions about Him and about us. I believe that it is through this dialog that we learn about God and ourselves. Anyway, y’all have fun, God bless and safe diving.
 
Uncle Pug:
There are some things that a no-god belief system just cannot explain.

such as?

this is generally a true statement (there are things we don't know and may never know) but what specifically are you talking about?

however, the no-God system is much better suited to explaining the universe than a God-based system, by its very nature.


do you go to a shaman/priest/witch doctor or an M.D. when you feel bad? everything that M.D. knows is the result of a no-God system of medicine. this doesn't mean doctors don't believe in God, it means they don't go to God for medical answers, they go to science.

the God-system approach to medicine was to pray, chant, and chew herbs. it very seldom worked (i.e. they looked to God, not science, for solutions)

science gave us the modern marvels of medicine, not belief in God

(again, i stress this does not mean doctors do not believe in God. it means they seek scientific solutions to medical problems, not divine intervention, and if they seek divine intervention (such as through prayer), it is secondary to the primary medical care given the patient)
 
MikeFerrara:
I believe that God is ultimately responsible for the creation of everything.

certainly, but that belief can not be disproven, is not science, and should not be passed off as science

as to my personal belief, there might be an intelligent force responsible for the universe, but if it exists, its not going to be the God of the Bible
 
on an interesting note, there's discussion about a possible tsunami about 8,000 years ago (4,000 BC) that would have slammed the coasts of the Mediterranean, including Italy, Greece, Turkey, Palestine, and North Africa

that might be the source for the various flood myths recorded in antiquity... just a thought:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience...eringancienttsunamidevastatedthemediterranean
 
H2Andy:
The slowdance of stars and planets that lined up with history and prophecy I referenced in my post.

But if you won't bother to read my post or the information on the website I linked why should I slowdance down a rabbit trail with you?
 
Uncle Pug:
Soggy... read the information on the linked website. It specifically disallows a supernova.

"It" (meaning Frederick Larson, Intellectual Property Lawyer) can disallow a supernova and all other astronomical phenomenon, but that doesn't mean science does. I especially like his "Clockwork Star" conclusion....it couldn't have been a coincidence...it must have been set into motion this way. It is true that we do not know of a supernova that occurred during that time period, but there are many other explanations which that document attempts to disallow with poor reasoning because they start at the assumption that it must have been a miracle. Additionally, they use a single person, Harod's obliviousness to the phenomenon as the reason why it couldn't be a comet or supernova. It doesn't acknowledge that most astronomical events, including nova and supernova, aren't that obvious. People assume that every supernova is like a light in the sky, when in reality most just appear to be a star in a space where there was none before.

Here's a pretty rational article that does not attempt to draw conclusions.
http://www.space.com/spacewatch/star_bethlehem_021220.html

My opinion is that it was either an as-of-yet unknown astronomical event or it just never happened and was a story, like so many others in the bible, fabricated from thin air (Noah)...or at best "Based on" a true story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom