We have no idea what gravity is, there are various theories but no one really knows, that doesn't mean we should stop teaching gravity.

I find it hard to believe that these two thoeries are really so incompatible with religion and why, if anything, they aren't used as a scientific argument FOR a creator.

I think one of the reasons that there is pushback on this is because many people do use the theory to "disprove" religion and it sometimes comes off as patronizing, and whether it is God-given or evolved behavior, people tend to fight back when their beliefs are attacked. This, of course, can go both ways too.

If you looked long and hard enough you could probably find some evidence for pretty much any position.

You realize that this applies to evolution too? It's not like there was some data gathering and observation and then an objective group of scientists sat down and evolution was the best idea they could come up. One guy came up with a theory and people have been looking high and low to find any evidence to back it up ever since then. What tests have been done to prove evolution?

For the record, I sat in on a "creationist" lecture one time, and I have to say it was every bit as scientific as anything. They followed the scientific method, had evidential proof to backup their claims, and did all of this without once opening up the Bible. Also the guy talking had once been a hard core "evolutionist", or so he claimed.

The Bible doesn't say that evolution didn't happen either.

Edit: And I have a question for Alex and any one else who isn't down with the whole evolution trip, and honestly I'm not trying to start something, or belittle, this is an honest question, don't read into it. If you don't think that they are our predecessors/offshoots, what do you think all the bones we're digging up are? Just extinct animals?

I don't know much about the specific dogma of Creationism, other than its basis in Christian religion. If the idea of creationism is that God once waved his magic wand, and in seven days created the world, how do believers respond to the relics and evidence found all over the world, that the world - and mankind - is much much much older than the Bible calculates it to be? (I'm not being a smart-ass, I'm really asking)

I don't know much about the specific dogma of Creationism, other than its basis in Christian religion. If the idea of creationism is that God once waved his magic wand, and in seven days created the world, how do believers respond to the relics and evidence found all over the world, that the world - and mankind - is much much much older than the Bible calculates it to be? (I'm not being a smart-ass, I'm really asking)

I think the ones that look like ape bones are probably ape bones and the ones that look like human bones are probably human bones.

There's some variation between all the humans in the world today. Combine that with thousands of years of potential decay [Edit: of bones of people who died back then] and it's not suprising to find some strange looking bones. Also strange mutations in humans occur today, isn't it possible that old bones could be from one "normal" human's defective bone growth?

We know that some species have gone extinct maybe there was once a different type of ape that had a more human-like bone structure. That doesn't really tell you anything about where such a species originated from.

Agreed, but what I meant was lets say we date object one as 2 billion years old and object 2 as 1 billion year old. Then we find out those dates are off by 500 million years, a significant amount, but all we care about for this "argument" is which object is older than the other. It doesn't matter if the dates are off or not because they are going to be off the same amount. Also I didn't bring up Pangaea because it contradicts anything, it's just another clue that the Earth is really old. The Bible doesn't say anything about the techtonic plates not moving.

Here's a simple question that I don't think has been addressed yet. If you believe in evolution, where did the universe come from? If you believe that a single cell amoeba eventually morphed into a complex human being through billions of years of chance mutations, where did the first amoeba come from?

Here's a simple question that I don't think has been addressed yet. If you believe in evolution, where did the universe come from? If you believe that a single cell amoeba eventually morphed into a complex human being through billions of years of chance mutations, where did the first amoeba come from?

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but, if I'm being honest, I have to say that your comment of "I'm not being a smart-ass, I'm really asking" seems a bit at odds with other parts of your statement. To me, at least. If not, my apologies. And, for good measure, a tip: Try to not use phrases like "waved his magic wand" if you're trying to not sound belittling. Again, I don't know your intentions, but I know that phrases like that tend to carry certain connotations with them. Again, if this isn't the case, my mistake. And despite the full paragraph I've spent on it, I'm not really hung up on this or anything.

Here's one: What if, there is a God. And he did create the Universe. But some guy wrote the Bible, just some guy. [quote]

This is a point I tried to make before- but condensed (thanks!)

Also, to make the 66 book bible (I'm Lutheran by upbringing) they CHOSE which books to include- just a bunch of people in a castle somewhere applepicking a book that would influence the political world for the next 15, 1600 years.

a) I'm here to help!
b) My point exactly!

Just a question- what the hell is up with the quote function? First it messed up my point, now it makes fun of Wendy's point...?!

So you find it easier to have no answer as to where the universe came from and believe that somehow it "started" for lack of a better word and at the same time or some point thereafter the first living organism appeared and then through billions of bacteria turning into fish turning into mice turning into cats turning into apes turning into humans somehow lead to the world we observe today, as opposed to believing that God created everything? Despite the fact humans have observed species going extinct and the universe is generally decaying as opposed to new species popping up and life appearing in places it wasn't before? If you want to grossly extrapolate observable phenomena you can just as easily argue against evolution as you can for it.

Science (which you have pointed out is fallible anyway) cannot prove creation and it cannot prove evolution. So either way it really boils down to a belief.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1.
"For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day" Exodus 20:11.
"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible" Colossians 1:16.

Genesis 20-25 seems to make it pretty clear:
20 Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." 23 So the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Here's one: What if, there is a God. And he did create the Universe. But some guy wrote the Bible, just some guy.

Sure, but who said God works on the 24 hour Earth day? Seems sort of arbitrary for God to operate in the time frame defined by the Earth's rotation on it's axis, doesn't it? Also it says he made birds but it doesn't say he didn't take the frame work for the lizards and start tweaking from there. Just because he created them doesn't mean they all have to poof out of thin air without any relationship to other things.

Here's one: What if, there is a God. And he did create the Universe. But some guy wrote the Bible, just some guy. Can you be Christian and still believe in Evolution? Or does that make you a miscellaneous God-believer if you don't agree with 100% of the Bible's arguments?

Well, first off I never really said how I feel. Secondly, as I said before, the explanation of how it started is completely independent of the fairly evident process of where it went from there. The implication that since there is no scientific consensus on how it began means that a) god did it or b) at the very least the notion that God did it is as plausible is silly. That being said God and evolution aren't mutually exclusive either. Science has indeed proven evolution as much as it can be proven within the realm of what science has defined as what it takes for something to be proved. There are lot of things that aren't "proven." We find new species of animals all the time, who's to say they aren't a result of new species evolving. There's a difference in accepting something based on faith alone and accepting something that while there's a small chance it might not turn out to be right, is based on things you can literally touch, measure, and collect.

I missed out on public high school. Where exactly is all this proof you keep talking about? Finding new species deep in the rain forest or at the bottom of the ocean is not the same as observing a [certain species] giving birth to a [different species], which for evolution to be true must have happened at least as many times as the number of currently known species plus some X number of intermediate non-survivors. You'd think if it had to happen that often there would at least be one such event recorded in human history.

If some guy made up the Bible, why believe any of it? If you do agree 100% with the Bible you really can't also believe in evolution, because they clearly contradict each other.

That wasn't my question. My question was, if you are "Christian" in whatever sense of the word, strict or loose definition, do you have to believe in the Bible and therefore not believe in evolution, to believe in God? Or does that make you a non-specific "God-Believer" who isn't Christian?

You're talking about something that would have taken place slowly over the course of like umpteen billion years taking place in front of someone who knew what they were seeing and have the ability to document it well enough to count as evidence. Plus it's not like we're talking about a mouse giving birth to a cat, we're talking about a mouse giving birth to a mouse that is a tiny bit different, perhaps only at the cellular level. So you're asking people to capture an event that happens over the course of a billion years over the course of a few and just happen to be in a lab with the animals when it happens and happen to catch that ever so subtle change between the two where you could say "This is a new species" vs "This mouse just has a longer tail" Plus, like that would change the opinion of anyone who doesn't buy evolution anyway. We see evolution ALL THE TIME, tall smart people have tall, smart, kids, stupid short people have stupid short kids. If none of them ever "crossed over" the human race would look very different in 1000 years. Luckily for us we do cross over since humans have more reasons to hook up than "hey you look like me" and physical location isn't a problem. Unluckily for us the people contributing the least to society are cranking out kids like it's going out of style and smart people are having kids less and less. If you haven't seen Idiocracy it's worth a watch, it's pretty funny. (Though I think has gotten a bit more hype than it deserves, it's hardly the funniest movie of all time)

You can believe in a creator and not be Cristian, or any other religion, in my opinion, if that's what Wendy was asking.

If you do agree 100% with the Bible you really can't also believe in evolution, because they clearly contradict each other.

I guess if Brett Favre doesn't need the second t, Christ doesn't need the h.

In my opinion this comment is just plain wrong. No real proof of this has been shown to me. Of course, you can interpret the current Bible translation however you wish. Or you could learn the several ancient (and in some cases extinct) languages and interpret them yourself. Either way, it's all interpretation unless the Man himself is telling you how it happened or you have the Flux Capacitor attached to your Delorean.

Agreed. As far as I know the Bible doesn't go into detail of the process by which God does bring things into existence, so even if you were to read the bible literally there seems to be room for interpretation. On top of which it's sort of dangerous to literally interpret something that is 2-3 languages and 4-5 degrees of "telephone" away from God's mouth at this point. Especially if it was never meant to be read that way in the first place.