I see plenty of arguments on this board and elsewhere, and one pattern seems to be for Christians to embrace empirical facts, and logic when it suits them, but otherwise to suggest that the creator is simply incomprehensible and logic is useless. Why bother with the first if the second is true? And more importantly, why be bothered by things like Evolution science, or the big bang theory? Obviously an omnipotent creator can set those events in motion. They can set any event in motion so I'm not sure why cold rationality and science would have to contradict a being that exists outside of them/

Truth be told, I'm not sure why Christians even feel a need to argue for the proof of god. Even with, for example, the most damning and obvious evidence of evolution, what stopped god from instantly creating the world with fossils, animals, etc. as they are in a way that would perfectly conform to a theory of evolution? You don't even necessarily need intelligent design. God can get along just fine without needing to be propped up by our earthly theories.

For that matter, what's preventing him from say creating the universe five minutes ago and just planting memories in us that make us think there has been an intricate history? This guy is omnipotent, for, um, god's sake. He can easily slice and dice evolution and make it perfectly plausible, nothings stopping him. So in the context of the "god" debate, why does it matter if, for example, evolution is valid or not?

There is no aspect of existence we can turn to that he couldn't have already rigged.

do you know the truth that Darwin's Theory of Evolution was referred by Darwin himself as a work of imagination and not real, it just points his views. It is not the real truth about the humanity.

If one is going to talk about God they have to consider things like the Bible, for that's how we have come to know Him. Evolution contradicts the Bible. And there are many scientific facts in the Bible. Yes, indeed it is possible for God to have caused macro-evolution to happen, but you can't talk about God without considering His Word. If you don't consider it, you might as well not start conversations about Him. In the same way you say, , same goes for evolution: why don't we remember ever evolving? It takes as much faith to believe in evolution as it does to believe in God (yes, i know this is old, but it's true, therefore i repeat it). All "proof" i've seen for evolution were a lot of drawings, computer simulations and statements that seem like it can happen (not really proof). Also a lot of people grabbing one skull and some jaw and claiming it's a new species—it's like building a snow man. God wants us to live by faith, for the time being. But at the same time, all who believe have their own proof. In the end, we will all believe: this is why i say "non-believers" (with quotes).

You must also remember that just 'cause it's logical doesn't mean it's true; that's why it's called a "theory."

And God can't contradict Science, 'cause that may mean Science can disprove Him—which it can't.

I should point out before I continue that I am also an atheist so my post should be considered as MY point of view (an atheists point of view).

Two days ago in the biology class we discussed this theories and a new one (!?). My desk mate is a Christian who believes in the creation theory. He just doesn't give up no matter how much I try... In my own language there is a saying, don't know if there is one in English, but it is something like this: Believe and don't search (with the meaning of wonder, ask questions, etc.) (some say this is written in the Bible).
I really cannot see how anyone could think the evolution theory is not valid. There are tons of evidence that point out to it. Besides there is NOTHING that points out to the creation theory. In fact there isn't much in the Bible that can be scientifically proven. Logically most things in the Bible don't even make sense.
There is something that troubles my atheist mind... Gottfried Leibniz created in 1714 the "Principle of sufficient reason" (prime mover theory): Basically what he said (and others before him) is that if everything is a reaction to an action then the very first action, the very first link in the chain is God. If every other theory is illogical this one really makes sense. Think about it...
My biology teacher also told me that there is a new theory regarding evolution. It turns what we know upside down. According to this theory men is not an evolved ape, but the ape is an evolved men. As hard as that may seem (I totally disagree with this theory, although men is by far the worst and the best of all animal kingdom) there is something that makes sense in it. Speech may not be an evolution, but an involution, men may have developed speech because he could no longer use body language. And considering what men does to this planet this theory seems at least possible. One more theory to think about...
There was a time when people would have taken for granted how men was born, how the Earth and the Universe was. I hope that time has passed, questions must be raised and answered with the use of science. Nothing must be taken for granted, everything must be researched and if possible proven scientifically. We should remember the ones that still believe men was created rather then evolved that this is the age of reason not of blind faith!

EDIT


Drawings, computer simulations and statements are more then we can say about the creation theory. Is there any proof (even logic) to support it? No there isn't... The way I see it the creation theory was an easy answer to a difficult question that 2000 or 3000 years ago could not be answered. If you would take someone from the first century AD and show him a TV he would say it is a miracle and blame it on God because he simply wouldn't bother with finding another answer.



This post has been edited by truefusion: Feb 16 2007, 10:55 PM

So you're saying that saying, "God created [this]," isn't logical enough? We support creationism with Intelligent Design (I.D.). And there's the watchmaker argument—still not logical enough? Our proof is what we see and the logic behind it. Isn't that what the theory of evolution is based on as well? I've been in this discussion with glenstein, already: We believe by how things are presented. And I.D. provides a good enough presentation.

First, before anything else, I want to emphasize that I was merely using evolution as a placeholder for any field of science at all that has any religious implications whatever. I didn't want to focus on the truth of evolution itself. Ok. Here we go.



hmmmmm...... Which is true? I guess it depends a lot on how true to the word of God the Bible is.

But isolating that first quote, "evolution contradicts the bible", I have something to say. There is a considerable and thoughtful group of people who believe quite the opposite on this point. One can consider his word without taking it literally, and as far as I know fundamentalists are exclusively the only group who even take the science of the Bible literally. Which, staying away from evolution, means that many christians are ok both with science and religion. Most, I would say.


I am not sure I understand the above statement. What kind of "remembering" are you talking about and how is it the same as the memory I mentioned (where you are convinced you've been alive for many years when you are really only 5 minutes old)?? Those seem to me fundamentally, totally opposed. No one has a personal memory of evolution like they have a personal memory of their own life. Was that your point?



I agree with that statement above very much and if I were a christian, I would stop there. But why do people go on and use science when God doesn't need science. Why is there an urge to use it to prove him?



Um, I'm fairly sure that neither are true. Both humans and apes branched off from a common ancestor and evolved alongside one another, but neither apes in their present form nor humans in their present form turned into one or the other.


This post has been edited by glenstein: Feb 17 2007, 02:43 AM

They're both true. Reason you don't believe such is 'cause you believe that evolution is Science—this is where our beliefs differ.


[1]Who are these people?
[2]I remember seeing a poll on how the Bible should be read, in a Christian forum, and i think 98% of the poll said people read the Bible literally (i'd provide a link to the topic, but i can't find it). The only time a person might not/wouldn't/shouldn't take certain verses literally are those that are poetic, speak in parables, prophecy, etc... Basically everything else should be taken literally.
[3]Mhmm.


Yes, that was my point.


This part can be answered a couple of ways:

1. Because certain people state, "Well, i'm a Science person, that's why i don't believe in God."—even though you can be a Science person and believe in God.
2. Better to ask those who ask us to prove God with Science.