They go hand in hand if you learn to let go of some things. Like maybe not everything the bible says is true (adam and eve vs evolution), but that does not mean all of it is untrue, or the same for any religion I guess.
Maybe all religions are right in some sort of way. Like I've seen miracles happen but one time my friend hit me then he turned around and ran into a door
I am a Sunday school teacher for a Baptist church. And I believe in the big bang, evolution, and every other science explanation. But I do believe it was God who put them in motion. Think about this. Why does a 2 hydrogen and an oxygen make water? What makes them stick together to form it? Why of all things make water? Why did the apes grow into Human beings? I believe it is God who makes these things do the things they do.
YES!! You, madam, are the first person I've met who also feels this way! I believe in evolution, but I also believe God "oversees" it, if you will(best term I could think of)
I too believe in all these things, and that god is the one who started them all. I believe god is the reason everything has turned out the way it has, and the reason things continue to change and evolve.
Wow. I'm amazed at this turnout. I happen to be a Christian who has stated similar beliefs here on FS a couple times. I honestly find it strange that science and religion don't seem to mix in the "real world". Then again...people. *shrugs*
If anything, I think that some scientific discoveries that people use to disprove god end up backing the idea up even more, and it's a shame that more religious people don't realise/utilise that
Big bang was proposed by a Christian to show how everything could come from a single point (God). Fundamentalism is a more recent invention of mankind and is a parasite that destroys our knowledge and wisdom. Christians in the past have been bastions of science and knowledge, but in the last 100 years, fundamentalists have been doing everything they can to ruin that legacy. Thank you for having the wisdom to make up your own mind.
Charles Darwin is considered by many people nowadays to be one of the fathers of the arguments from atheism, however recently i read a letter he wrote in response to the critics of natural selection. He hinted that one of their main problems with natural selection was that they failed to believe such changes could be brought on by random events or changes to nature, rather then a higher power. They chastised him for saying that animals changed in response to environment. He actually replied with an analogy of a water molecule. H2O is made up of two H atoms and an O atom that are drawn to each other due to their CHEMICAL NATURE, however, what gave them that nature in the first place cannot be denied to be a higher power. Aka evolution can/does occur naturally without the "guidance of god" yet it can be said that god caused the events leading to change, and gave nature the ability to react on their own.
Sorry if that bored anyone. Just thought you might find it interesting :P
Everyone should appreciate your open mind but science has answered some of these. Also Apes did not grow into humans. This is one of those weird misconceptions that doesn't go away.
The reason people need religion to answer these questions is because they are scared. They are scared that there is nothing else and this is all there is. They are scared that when they die, that is the end. They need god to be real so they can come to terms with death. If god doesn't exist, then there is literally no point to anything, and that scares most people, so they introduce an element of "certainty" in the form of a "god" and the "afterlife". In reality, nothing that anyone does, has done, or will do, makes any difference to anything. Life is at it's most basic level, completely pointless, and with no deeper meaning. One day, the earth will cease to exist, along with every single part of it's history, and eventually the universe will cease to exist too. It is because humans cannot understand the universe that they invented god to fill in the gaps.
richiro33 you're right. Apes didn't evolve into HUMANS, the evolved into about 12 different other species until eventually becoming Homo sapiens. And guest, just because you are an existentialist yourself, does not mean you yourself have all the answers. As righteous as you might feel, your theory of no god is no more true than my theory of a god existing, so how about we go on with our lives and you let us believe in what we like
Guest you have about as much proof that there is no god as we have proof that there is one. There some things in life that you just can't explain, there reaches a point where we no longer know why something happens, why life is even a thing, so yeah, I do believe there is a god who set everything in motion, a lot of people do. You can choose to believe that, but walking into a conversation on the Internet between people with similar religious beliefs and basically saying we're all wrong, would be like going into the middle of a gay pride parade and yelling "you're all going to burn in hell!" It's just rude and frankly you should have thought twice before doing it
Yeh I know I didn't explain that well enough zmatrixng. Basically it was like, yes changes in nature forces changes in species, however "could there be an unmoved mover that governs the overall changes in nature causing these events". And ps yes the h2o thing was just a metaphor that he used before mankind learned more of the effects of sub atomic particles
You guys who said that the guest doesn't have any proof, well, frankly, he doesn't need any. You guys are the ones making the positive argument, and you guys are the ones making the outlandish claim that there is some supreme being who oversees everything. If guest had to prove that there was no God, he would have to search through the entire universe just to make sure that God isn't hiding in some unseen part of it, and it is because of that that you guys are the ones who need to provide the evidence. You need to provide a reason for people to believe your claim, you can't just make a claim, assume it's right, and then demand others prove you wrong.
What about your reply? You said that his stance was no truer that yours presumably because of the lack of proof, I told you that, in fact, he doesn't need proof, you do. You have yet to provide it, and here we are.
I guess if you're referring to the part about you just wanting to believe whatever you want, I can leave you alone. I just thought you should know that the guest needs no proof for his stance, he only needs to point out your lack of it.
Guys don't down vote him/her they make a good point. Except that when I say it's no truer, I mean that there is no sufficient evidence either way. Yes if I want to make my stance true to other people I need proof. However if atheists want to disprove god, they also need proof. If there was sufficient proof to disprove god then god wouldn't be considered real by anyone anymore. Yes there is enough to doubt god, but there is also enough to believe. That's what I'm saying. I don't have to bring proof any more then guest has to bring proof. Neither party has enough, so we end the argument, agree to disagree and let the other live in peace
I know I'm reading this all a little late , but I don't believe either entirely which I hope everyone thinks is fine :3 there are some things that science has proven has happened trough evolution and ect. But there are also many things that cannot be proven for sure, things that are only theories. I believe in a higher power, and I mean it can't hurt to hope that there is, right? But I believe a little of both, I have yet to find a reason to disregard one belief for another. So I can't say I follow a religion, but I respect those who do and those who don't equally! Everyone has reasons for their choices , and I think that whatever choice helps you personally be the best person you can be towards others is the right one for you :)
The stance that god drives evolution is known as 'theistic evolutionism' and many people hold to that belief - it is not something the few of you have just come up with. The theory of evolution does not need a theistic slant for support , but people who try to reconcile science with religion often do it that way. One problem is that in evolution , humans are not the ultimate product and in a few billion years, a more advanced species may emerge. Why do humans have souls but not that species? What about homo erectus or Australopithecus - do they have a soul? Are they going to hell? Evolution can be harmonized with the concept of a generic god (Thor , others) but it is difficult to reconcile with the concepts of the bible, especially Genesis which exhibits no trace of scientific understanding .
The amount of bullshit you have to weave around Christianity to support its 'truth' ought to have you questioning it.
It was actually a very good debate if you happen to watch the whole thing. Bill made very good logical points. Ken however, being a creationalist, (I apologize if that is misspelled) kept referring his points to "because God said so" and "because God made it that way". I do advise watching it, it's very interesting.
I hate it though. People just want to say that god made everything happen. The bible is just a bunch of made up stories like a fiction book. I'm sorry if I'm offending you, but do you seriously expect me to believe a magic guy in the sky is our savior? Also how was your god created?
And that's exactly what Bill was saying though some of his debate. And that's what makes science fun, discovering where we came from and how old the world is!
ok i dont believe in it what so ever but its not right to judge others who believe in it. im watching the debate right now and they both have brought up good points for their sides. there have been many great people like the guy who invented the MRI machine and he believes in creationism. so dont go around trying to start fights by judging people who have different beliefs than you.
Alright I see what you're saying. Siting the accomplishments of others who hold the same belief in no way proves anything about that belief though. I'm not really sure how a real scientist could be a creationist anyway because it seems to me that they'd have to ignore so much evidence.
try watching the debate. the creationist guy has scientist who believe in creationism and they seem pretty adept at what they do and he explains why they should still be considered scientist. he has some good points.
The whole universe was made in an instant. Then it began expanding to become the universe we know today, and will continue expanding long after we're dead, to the point where its impossible for life to survive anywhere due to energy (read: heat and light) having become spread too thin.
you are talking about the big bang i am bitching about religion thinking that we all come from 2 people. that is what i was saying, you do not have to correct me because i am on your side
I wasn't trying to correct you. I just find it really interesting how much more "unreal" things get the more we understand about the universe around us.
I am a Christian and I love science. The way our universe works blows my mind, and i'm tired of being told I cannot love Jesus and science simultaneously.
It is important to respect beliefs. The problem with Ken Ham is that he advocates that creationism be taught in science classes as an alternative history of origins. That is where the line has to be drawn.
As a fellow debater Bill had a lot of fallacies. And at the end he kinda insulted ken like I don't care about the debate honestly but he pretty much said the he (bill) was more American then him cuz he was born here and that really seemed uncalled for.
I don't have anything against religions, quite in the contrary, I think religions are something amazing and beautiful. But there are so many religions, and to my knowing not every religion believes in the adam and eve story/theory. So you can't really say that's how it was and have to convince the others into believing this. If you want to believe that, no problem. Science, on the other hand, have facts, that are not only known by one culture or country like religion, but by americans, indians, chinese, australian, swiss, and all the other countries, because that is the same everywhere you go. Religions are so different and various and also precious, but if we should believe in the adam and eve story, then we'd also have to believe in all the others religions' beliefs. I hope you kinda understand what I mean. And sorry if there are maybe some mistakes, english isn't my first language :D
"Let there be light"=Big Bang
Anyone?
Sorry if that bored anyone. Just thought you might find it interesting :P
I guess if you're referring to the part about you just wanting to believe whatever you want, I can leave you alone. I just thought you should know that the guest needs no proof for his stance, he only needs to point out your lack of it.
The amount of bullshit you have to weave around Christianity to support its 'truth' ought to have you questioning it.