ChatterBank0 min ago
Did God Use Evolution To Create Life?
289 Answers
Did God Use Evolution to Create Life? Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? What does the evidence reveal? Does the evidence support the Bible’s description of events, or was Darwin correct? What have discoveries over the past 150 years revealed?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by locusts. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// Did God Use Evolution to Create Life?/. My belief is yes. God has no time therefore 7 days cld equal 7 million years.
//Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? // quite possibly
//What does the evidence reveal?// no idea. I'm not the sort who needs to delve (yes it may make me naive or even uneducated but Im happy as I am thank you!)
//Does the evidence support the Bible’s description of events, or was Darwin correct?// Darwin (evolution) and the Bible are not mutually exclusive
//What have discoveries over the past 150 years revealed?// probably not much more than the 150 before the most recent 150
//Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? // quite possibly
//What does the evidence reveal?// no idea. I'm not the sort who needs to delve (yes it may make me naive or even uneducated but Im happy as I am thank you!)
//Does the evidence support the Bible’s description of events, or was Darwin correct?// Darwin (evolution) and the Bible are not mutually exclusive
//What have discoveries over the past 150 years revealed?// probably not much more than the 150 before the most recent 150
19h44 DTC - //
God must have been desperate when Andy was created a moderator on here! //
Disagree.
I don't always agree with his posts but Andy seems to be fair and balanced. I didn't know he was a mod but if so, (judging by his replies to posts) he seems pretty fair and ok.
I first joined AB a few years ago - then I had a hiatus of very seldom getting on here. Since becoming active on AB again recently it seems that the open minded banter has gone. Too many antagonistic posts / replies.
We dont all have to agree (that wld be boring) but so many here now seem to be here simply to cause arguments
God must have been desperate when Andy was created a moderator on here! //
Disagree.
I don't always agree with his posts but Andy seems to be fair and balanced. I didn't know he was a mod but if so, (judging by his replies to posts) he seems pretty fair and ok.
I first joined AB a few years ago - then I had a hiatus of very seldom getting on here. Since becoming active on AB again recently it seems that the open minded banter has gone. Too many antagonistic posts / replies.
We dont all have to agree (that wld be boring) but so many here now seem to be here simply to cause arguments
A fair assessment eve.
I'm not sure if you are a regular follower of the theist debates on here, but they basically separate into two positions, with no common ground.
The atheist position is that no-one yet knows how the universe was created, but the probably will one day, and until then we simply don't know.
The Christian position is that God did create the universe, but of course, they have no evidence to back up that notion.
Speaking personally as an atheist, I have no problem not knowing, and no problem with no-one else knowing either - my gears get ground when people come on and tell me that it just like that, and I am stupid because I dpn't understand.
But as I say, locusts has no interest in answers to the questions he poses - occasionally he will come on and answer his question himself, with reams of pasted relgious texts, which rather defeats the raison d'etre of the site.
I'm not sure if you are a regular follower of the theist debates on here, but they basically separate into two positions, with no common ground.
The atheist position is that no-one yet knows how the universe was created, but the probably will one day, and until then we simply don't know.
The Christian position is that God did create the universe, but of course, they have no evidence to back up that notion.
Speaking personally as an atheist, I have no problem not knowing, and no problem with no-one else knowing either - my gears get ground when people come on and tell me that it just like that, and I am stupid because I dpn't understand.
But as I say, locusts has no interest in answers to the questions he poses - occasionally he will come on and answer his question himself, with reams of pasted relgious texts, which rather defeats the raison d'etre of the site.
// with reams of pasted relgious texts, which rather defeats the raison d'etre of the site.//
o god can I say I would rather read a rehashed religious text than yet another ream of script on what Andie think Christians believe? - dressed up as a scarecrow so Andie can easily knock it down
I can ? thank you - Go light on what Christians believe please, The And it is fair to say yo have no idea
o god can I say I would rather read a rehashed religious text than yet another ream of script on what Andie think Christians believe? - dressed up as a scarecrow so Andie can easily knock it down
I can ? thank you - Go light on what Christians believe please, The And it is fair to say yo have no idea
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I'm not sure that I agree with Theland. A sort of evolution can surely occur with inorganic molecules, or even with simple atoms or particles.
We used to have an old-fashioned bagatelle game with an array of nails planted into a board and we sent random balls up the side so that they could roll back down through the nails in an apparently random bouncy way. They arrived at the bottom of the board in a bell-curve pattern; more in the centre and fewer at the side. It wasn't God's design, it was simply the playing out of the laws of chance.
Theland, can you respond to this post without simply saying "No, it isn't true"?
We used to have an old-fashioned bagatelle game with an array of nails planted into a board and we sent random balls up the side so that they could roll back down through the nails in an apparently random bouncy way. They arrived at the bottom of the board in a bell-curve pattern; more in the centre and fewer at the side. It wasn't God's design, it was simply the playing out of the laws of chance.
Theland, can you respond to this post without simply saying "No, it isn't true"?
With a universe only 13.7 bn years old, there would simply not be enough time for any kind of life to evolve by random means.
That said, it is not simply a question of the number of shots at success.
The origin of life is not a matter of chance.
Life is created by God and no amount of science will alter that fact.
That said, it is not simply a question of the number of shots at success.
The origin of life is not a matter of chance.
Life is created by God and no amount of science will alter that fact.
Pixie, Theland has said that no amount of science would alter the 'fact' that the universe was created by God.
There is no sane response to such an assertion. I have hoped for a long time to guide poor T towards the true path, but he will not listen. Fortunately, he is not destined for eternal damnation for his lack of understanding.
There is no sane response to such an assertion. I have hoped for a long time to guide poor T towards the true path, but he will not listen. Fortunately, he is not destined for eternal damnation for his lack of understanding.
Theland - // Then prove it by reverse engineering. //
I honestly think your faith, strong as it undoubtedly is, ensures that you simply wake up every morning having forgotten any and all discussions you have had up to and including the night before.
So once again, for the umpteenth time - I don't have to 'prove' anything.
I am content not to know the origin of the universe, and not especially to care that I don't know.
You on the other hand, regularly state with firm conviction that the universe was created by God, and you regard this as a fact, and have said so times without number.
Since you are the one with the conviction that your belief is 'fact' - the responsibility for proof likes with you, and only with you.
I have stated, yet again, that I don;t know how the universe came into existence, therefore I have nothing to prove to anyone.
You on the other hand state that the universe was made by God - so the obvious response to that is - prove it.
Of course, you can't, which is fine, because you don't know, any more than I know.
The similarity between us, is that neither of us knows beyond even reasonable doubt how the universe came into being.
The difference between us is, I am perfectly happy to acknowledge and accept my lack of answers, you of course, are not.
I honestly think your faith, strong as it undoubtedly is, ensures that you simply wake up every morning having forgotten any and all discussions you have had up to and including the night before.
So once again, for the umpteenth time - I don't have to 'prove' anything.
I am content not to know the origin of the universe, and not especially to care that I don't know.
You on the other hand, regularly state with firm conviction that the universe was created by God, and you regard this as a fact, and have said so times without number.
Since you are the one with the conviction that your belief is 'fact' - the responsibility for proof likes with you, and only with you.
I have stated, yet again, that I don;t know how the universe came into existence, therefore I have nothing to prove to anyone.
You on the other hand state that the universe was made by God - so the obvious response to that is - prove it.
Of course, you can't, which is fine, because you don't know, any more than I know.
The similarity between us, is that neither of us knows beyond even reasonable doubt how the universe came into being.
The difference between us is, I am perfectly happy to acknowledge and accept my lack of answers, you of course, are not.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.