Creationism vs. Evolution

[Ron Swanson 1]

Ok thanks Sam. You're right, I was looking for 14 billion for the universe and I thought it was 6 billion for the earth, but as you pointed out, it's 4.5 billion. Either way, I do think the big bang is necessary in terms of discussing evolution because this is science's way of explaining how the earth came to be. I don't think it fair to just start at 4.5 billion when it took 9.2 billion to get to the earth. But your right, the theory of evolution does just pertain to the earth.  So we'll stick with that.

And as far as no one being right, that's also a possibility, but it seems highly unlikely. But it could be. But if that is so, I think the progression of humans as a species is far more limited than most people would like to think. There will always be mysteries in this universe and on this earth that no one will ever discover or figure out. They may have said that 200 years ago, and look at where we are now. Yes technology has opened up a wealth of knowledge, however, technology is limited as well as earth resources. Where we will be as a race in the next 50 years will not be far off from where we are now. Maybe the cure for cancer will be available, but then maybe the avian flu will have knocked out half the world's population. Hard to say. Though actually I had speaker in my biotechonology class say her company is only 5 years from producing an effective vaccine for the avian flu as well as an anthrax vaccine in a powder form, which would allow the vaccine to spread quickly and be available in mass quantities. So there will always be progression, but I think that progression is slowing now. Anyways, that was a huge tangent and I'm not sure what it has to do with no one being right.

[foolygoofy 0]

I do know of two reference in the bible where there is a mention that a day for God is like 1000 years.  There is mention of this by King David, and another in the new testament by Peter in 2nd Peter 3:8.  After you read the bible you see that things are not in the human way, but it's God's way so when people reference a day, they think of a 24 hour day or they narrow creation to 144 hours and not to many years of creation.

Have you ever thought that perhaps we are still in the creation stage.  As the Hubble telescope looks deep into space they see the edge of things, matter or whatever you would like to call it, it is said that after that edge, there is nothing and they can not see any further than that.  Then the fun fact is that this edge or end is expanding rapidly.  In other worlds, the universe is getting bigger.  Look at people now and look at people then.  People then saw a comet and they were saying that something was going to happen.  People now see a comet and understand or have an idea of what it is.  So in a way, we have gotten smarter, we have taken one more step to greatness in evolution.

As I read thru these post I see that some don't believe in religion and others see science as bad.  I haven't been on this rock much, but I was once too religious and science was bad.  Then life hits you and you question God and kind of turn to science.  Then finally I was balance and you come to see that as you put the two theories together, things tend to make sense.

Religion is an easy way out to explain things.  He got cure, that got fix...it was a miracle, leave it at that.

Science is the tool to understand the world and the beauty, power and wisdom of God.

I believe that pulling too much to a side is bad and many people tend to fall too much on that.  Some either go too much to science, others too much into religion and they get caght in that world.  Look at things in many angles and you'll be surprice, that's my theory on creation and evolution.

[2nerdy4u 1]

Sc4_cewl: I'd actually have to say that the chance that someone out there has this vital question nailed is very low. There are so many different possible ideas, an infinite amount. But, we, as humans have only thought of a finite number of these possibilities. Also, I think I'd have to say that the world in 50 years will be VERY different. And our rate of advancement is not slowing down. I'd have to say that it is increasing exponentially. Agriculture is only about 9-10k years old. Writing is only several thousand years old. Cars are only about 100 years old. People didn't have access to a computer 75 years ago. And the internet wasn't around in the 80's. The rate of human advancement is skyrocketing.

foolygooy: 7000 years is still nowhere near what science tells us. And Hubble looking farther into space is not because of expansion. Light travels only at 3E8 m/s and the stuff we see from the farthest reaches of the universe is not the result of expansion. What we see is the universe from a long time ago. This is why a telescope is sometimes called a "Time Machine." And trying to balance the two doesn't work out too well. First of all, God has no part in science, simply because the supernatural cannot be observed or tested. Secondly, how would you explain things like evolution and creationism? Both can't be right at the same time. One says that this cycle is natural and the other says that everything was relatively spontaneously created by a supernatural being. So which is right?

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Sc4_cewl

Ok thanks Sam. You're right, I was looking for 14 billion for the universe and I thought it was 6 billion for the earth, but as you pointed out, it's 4.5 billion. Either way, I do think the big bang is necessary in terms of discussing evolution because this is science's way of explaining how the earth came to be. I don't think it fair to just start at 4.5 billion when it took 9.2 billion to get to the earth. But your right, the theory of evolution does just pertain to the earth.  So we'll stick with that.

...

quote>

You might be interested in this article that I found in Scientific American.com:

Misconceptions about the Big Bang

Regardless of whether you have any misconceptions its an interesting read. I haven't checked its quality though.

I found it when I was looking for where your 6 billion might have come from.

Hawking's A Brief History of Time is also interesting, although its fairly old now.

[coolotter88 2]

scientific american is the oldest continually published magazine in the US, it should be very reliable. I am a long time subscriber to it.

[KingTitan 6]

HAHA Coolotter88, I subscribe to that also.....

VERY RELIABLE

[panthersimcity4 162]

Sorry to tell everyone but...

Even if you believe in atheism, it's still faith. Since you have to have faith that the Big Bang theory is correct.

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist? God could have slowly created the earth by evolution, you know, because I personally don't think it takes only 6 days to create an entire universe of living organisms.

I personally think of God as the images we see in our mind... they exist, but they are not material.

I think Genesis implies that humans were created from the dust of stars, which could actually point to the Big Bang theory.

Why do people do good deeds? Because something tells them that is a good thing to do. I don't think anyone can explain it. For example: without a moral consience, you could walk by an entire street of starving children being rabidly attacked by dogs and do nothing about it. Where does this moral consience come from? Definetally not from our nature, since our nature is violent and aggressive, hence our large militaries and weapons of mass destruction. (read Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm, 1985, etc, some books by atheists, actually, who have proved that point) There's something in us that tells us what is right and what is wrong. It can't just be some random choice we make by ourselves.

[2nerdy4u 1]

How does this thread always come back?

Anyway, panthersimcity, I see many flaws there. First off, Evolution and Creationism are VERY different. Evolution occurs by natural selection, not intelligent design. Basically, what you are trying to say is that a Biblical day is more than 24 hrs. This still falls under Creationism.

Secondly, science is not faith. Observations, measurements, experimentation, evidence, proof. Not faith. And the Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution. The Big Bang, at the moment, is simply math. So unless you deny that 1+1=2, the Big Bang is not faith.

Third, not all life comes from preexisting life. See exception 2 of Cell Theory (note: not the common use of the word theory, but the scientific one).

[Micah 16]

Originally posted by: 2nerdy4u

Secondly, science is not faith. Observations, measurements, experimentation, evidence, proof. Not faith. And the Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution. The Big Bang, at the moment, is simply math. So unless you deny that 1+1=2, the Big Bang is not faith.quote>

 

Even scientists have to have faith that dark matter and dark energy exist. There are scientists who are divided over the issue. Some say it exist, others say that gravity is different in different regions. Everyone in this whole entire world has a religion that they adhere to, even non-believers. You have to have faith that a god doesn't exist because none one on this Earth knows everything. Scientists say we can only observe 4% of the universe *matter* which is pretty much like knowing nothing at all.

[quartets 0]

You have the same idea most people do about no scientific basis for creationism.  But there is plenty of science in it's favor if you look for it.  A new movie is coming out that may or may not do a good job, but it's going to show how any scientist that doesn't believe in evolution are discriminated against. 

It is late at night and I've had a long day.  But I will share some scientitic info about creation and evolution.  Actually, it is evolution that has no scientific fact to back it up.  You think I am some off the wall wierdo.  But I am not.  I am a journalist, not like most of the people in the media who report unimportant stories in favor of ratings.  I have a kind of hectic schedule, but give me a day or two and I'll post some for you to consider.

Quartets 

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Micah ... because none one on this Earth knows everything. Scientists say we can only observe 4% of the universe *matter* which is pretty much like knowing nothing at all.quote>

And isn't that great?!! Tomorrow we could be looking at everything in a completely new way. How wonderful! What might we find if we look? The discoveries already have been amazing, beyond humanity's wildest dreams. What else is there to find?

Originally posted by: Micah

...

Even scientists have to have faith that dark matter and dark energy exist. There are scientists who are divided over the issue. Some say it exist, others say that gravity is different in different regions.

quote>

And you know what? It doesn't matter. That's it. Sometimes you have to be wrong before you can be right. Scientists accept that. They know that. And that's why its not faith. If a person of faith had part or all of their faith undeniably demonstrated to be wrong that would probably be a major catastrophe for them. If a scientific theory is proven wrong, no-one sheds a tear, no-one has a crisis of faith. Its a chance to move forward to greater understanding. When one idea fails, often another way of thinking about the problem becomes apparent. That's why science is not faith, unless you so greatly expand the meaning of the word faith, that it no longer has any useful meaning at all.

Originally posted by: Micah

Everyone in this whole entire world has a religion that they adhere to, even non-believers.

quote>

This is a contradiction in terms. I don't see why theists have such a difficulty understanding the concept of a person having "no religion". I think Dawkins said something like "atheism is a religion, as off is a tv channel". I may not agree with him on several things, but its a clear enough analogy.

Also, no religion is not the same as no god, nor is it the same as no spirituality. There are atheistic religions, non-religious theists, and even atheists can be spiritual.

Originally posted by: quartets You have the same idea most people do about no scientific basis for creationism.  But there is plenty of science in it's favor if you look for it.

 ... quote>

Well anything has "confirmations" if all you are looking for is confirmations.

However, to see if something meets the criteria of a scientific theory, Karl Popper suggested some things to look for to see if its a good theory (in the scientific sense - see previous posts):

1. It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory — if we look only for confirmations.
2. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question, we should have expected an event which was incompatible with the theory — an event which would have refuted the theory.
3. Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
4. A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory but a vice.
5. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it.

6. Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory.

Originally posted by: panthersimcity4 Sorry to tell everyone but...

Even if you believe in atheism, it's s

[Mikeaut1 261]

Originally posted by: panthersimcity4

...

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist?

 ...

quote>

Sam: Some creationists don't seem to be too keen on that idea. quote>

Who, exactly? It was a creationist here in this discussion that suggested the existence of both theories, and they were shot down by the evolutionists. I happen to believe that God created the universe and all the animals in it, as well as evolution. I'm not one of those creationists who doesn't believe in the dinosaurs, we have fossils and rock to study that prove there was something big here a long time ago. And evolutionists are pretty certain that birds derived from dinosaurs, so that's evolution in progress today. I believe there is evolution, among all the animals of this world, but that God created the earth and the animals. There are many creationists out there that would probably consider evolution in our world today subsequent the creation of the universe.

[2nerdy4u 1]

quartets: Okay... let me get this straight... THERE IS NO SCIENCE IN EVOLUTION?!? Oh, well is that right? Ok, let me tell you something: Evolution is science. Testing, observation, proof, calculations, everything. Those guys busting their butts to figure out these things are not crazy loonies. Creationism CANNOT be accepted as science. Would you like to know why? Well, creationism has to do with the supernatural not the natural. I don't understand what being a journalist has to do with any of this, but I'll give you some time to try to back up your statement.

About the dark matter, well, I can understand what you are trying to say. The problem is, it is not faith. Rather, what we have are two different scientific theories. The calculations show that something is affecting the light that travels through these areas. That is a fact. The reasons as to why are under debate. But, you see, it is not faith. Simply two scientific explanations. It is very similar to what sam said about the wave and particle theories of light.

Anyway, I have to agree with sam when he says that stretching the definition of faith too much makes meaning useless. It is pointless, and you're just messing with the words to try to get the upper hand in the argument, which doesn't help at all. Do you have faith that you have two arms? Do you have faith that you are currently sitting at your computer? Clearly a pointless thing to do.

[Micah 16]

And isn't that great?!! Tomorrow we could be looking at everything in a completely new way. How wonderful! What might we find if we look? The discoveries already have been amazing, beyond humanity's wildest dreams. What else is there to find? quote>

I'm seriously not sure if I understand what you mean because it seemed sarcastic. 

And you know what? It doesn't matter. That's it. Sometimes you have to be wrong before you can be right. Scientists accept that. They know that. And that's why its not faith. If a person of faith had part or all of their faith undeniably demonstrated to be wrong that would probably be a major catastrophe for them. When one idea fails, often another way of thinking about the problem becomes apparent. That's why science is not faith, unless you so greatly expand the meaning of the word faith, that it no longer has any useful meaning at all. quote>

And you make an arguable *good* point. However, in my opinion, scientists do have a level of faith whenever they propose a new theory, especially when it comes to the theory of dark matter and dark energy which we almost have no proof of. Note: faith is not just a theist-related word as some make it appear.

I don't see why theists have such a difficulty understanding the concept of a person having "no religion". quote>

Who said I was a theist?
I believe there is no such thing as "no religion", but that's just me.

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Micah

I'm seriously not sure if I understand what you mean because it seemed sarcastic.

quote>

Actually it was not in any way sarcastic. Oblique and obscure most probably. Incomplete, most assuredly. Posted long after I should have been in bed and asleep most definitely. But it should be read in context with the second paragraph I wrote, probably also with part of the seventh and most or all of the eighth, and unfortunately also with a couple I deleted before I posted. I apologise if it came of as sarcastic though.

However science as an endeavour relies on the unknown, if only to turn it into the known. As I've previously said in other posts science  is a process by which the unknown can be made known. If we knew everything in the universe it would probably be extremely boring. What we discover about dark matter is likely to revolutionize our understanding of the universe and how it behaves, including fundamentally altering our understanding of what we currently think of as the "laws" of the universe, just as the theories of relativity forever changed the way we think of gravity. Scientists in the field are most likely extremely enthusiastic about such important discoveries. In science new ideas, new discoveries and new ways of looking at things is a very valuable thing, and not something to be avoided or feared. That is (a small) part of what I was referring to.

Who said I was a theist?

I believe there is no such thing as "no religion", but that's just me.

quote>

Perhaps it was that to me you appeared to equate the terms god and religion and use them apparently interchangeably in subsequent sentences that caused me to think that you were and for some strange reason I used the same equation which I would not normally use. Although I would agree that you have perhaps exposed a flaw in my logic since I apparently made the distinction subsequently. I also agree that you could potentially be from one of those atheistic religions I mentioned.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[quartets 0]

2nerdy4u

There are many scientists who believe the universe was created.  And yes, they have science to back them up.  I've looked at both sides and if you think there is no science  behind a creator you have made a leap of faith.  Even Einstein referred to The Creator on numerous occassions.  Evolutinary scientists are constantly having to correct their theories and findings.  Of course, that happens to any scientist.  But to think they have nailed down evolution is not correct.

Again, I have a crazy scedule and it may not be until the weekend but I'll give you some science references.  Just try to look at them as objectively as possible.  

As far as being a journalist, it has led me to keep up on the news in many areas such as science and has taught me how to research.  That doesn't mean other people can't do the same, it's just that it is something I've done full time for a long time and have proven myself pretty good at turing up facts.  

Thanks,

Quartets

[2nerdy4u 1]

Hmmm... I'd have to say that this post of yours kind of contradicted your first one, but whatever...

Anyway, what kind of science do they have, these creationist scientists? The idea of a god cannot be measured, observed, or tested. You cannot get proof. Therefore, this higher being has no place in science. Period.

And of course, I'm not saying that evolution is flawless. Scientists are well aware of the fact that all of their theories should be closely reinvestigated. In fact, any test of a theory is an attempt to prove it wrong. Science is self-correcting.

[Sam 163]

I found this article today which gives a nice simple explanation of why an understanding of the scientific theory of evolution is of such great practical importance to society:

Another perspective on cancer: Evolution within - October 2007

I figured it was especially relevant since Voar Tok raised the issue of cancer several pages ago.

I also found this article in the same archive which I thought was quite a nice summary of how science evaluates new evidence, and particularly topical given quartets' two recent posts:

When it comes to evolution, headlines often get it wrong - September 2007

Both articles are written for a non-technical audience and also have pictures to illustrate the points.

Edit:

Another article illustrating the practical uses of the scientific theory of evolution, and the science behind it:

Evolutionary evidence takes the stand - January 2007, update added August 2007

This one is relevant to what Frankie_Grove said about viruses on the previous page and my response to that post.

Originally posted by: Mikeaut1

Sam: Some creationists don't seem to be too keen on that idea. quote>

...

There are many creationists out there that would probably consider evolution in our world today subsequent the creation of the universe.quote>

Hence my deliberate choice of the word "some".

[southsider 0]

I believe in creation. I don't have a problem with evolution, if that's your thing alright,but what I don't like is when humanists and "intellectuals" or certain "elitist" try to force evolution upon people or when they say that creation is completley impossible and evolution is what everyone should believe. People have to keep in mind human evolution from ape to man is theory. Believe what you want to just don't force feed your ideas to people who are true belivers.

[2nerdy4u 1]

This thread is back...

I completely understand what you mean. I'm atheist and it sickens me when people try to force creationism on others. No scientist should ever say that creationism is impossible. It is possible, but not by science. It''s just not provable. About evolution being a theory, as I have said many times, a scientific theory is different from just a theory. Scientific theories have been tested, observed, explored, researched, and refined by several people through the course of decades, centuries, and even millennia.

[Karybdis 34]

I just always remind people that Evolution is exactly as much of a theory as Gravity is...

[coolotter88 2]

What's sad is that there is an argument when there shouldn't be. Evolution is science, creationism is not.

[Joesocwork 4]

Because there is considerable disagreement over the validity of both of the above assertions, as much of the 17+ pages of the thread would attest.  

[Micah 16]

Originally posted by: Joesocwork Because there is considerable disagreement over the validity of both of the above assertions, as much of the 17+ pages of the thread would attest.  quote>

 

Is that a fragment?

Edit: Sorry if it seems like I'm nit-picking, but I just didn't understand the "because" part.

Nevermind... my brain wasn't working.

[panthersimcity4 162]

Eh... you guys are still debating about this?

Since when did Evolution replace Creationism? Last time I checked there was nothing about Evolution that could rule out a diety. I think they can both co-exist.

I don't think we'll ever know which is true or not. Maybe on "Judgement Day" or when the Universe collapses on itself...

[2nerdy4u 1]

Well, evolution is testable and observable. A deity is not testable nor observable. As soon as you stick in that deity, you're no longer dealing with science. Sure, maybe some god did create this universe and start up evolution. Might be right, nobody knows. It's just not science. You can't prove the existence of a deity and you can't disprove the existence of a deity.

[ccecill 52]

Originally posted by: panthersimcity4 Sorry to tell everyone but...

Even if you believe in atheism, it's still faith. Since you have to have faith that the Big Bang theory is correct.

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist? God could have slowly created the earth by evolution, you know, because I personally don't think it takes only 6 days to create an entire universe of living organisms.

I personally think of God as the images we see in our mind... they exist, but they are not material.

I think Genesis implies that humans were created from the dust of stars, which could actually point to the Big Bang theory.

Why do people do good deeds? Because something tells them that is a good thing to do. I don't think anyone can explain it. For example: without a moral consience, you could walk by an entire street of starving children being rabidly attacked by dogs and do nothing about it. Where does this moral consience come from? Definetally not from our nature, since our nature is violent and aggressive, hence our large militaries and weapons of mass destruction. (read Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm, 1985, etc, some books by atheists, actually, who have proved that point) There's something in us that tells us what is right and what is wrong. It can't just be some random choice we make by ourselves.

quote>

Even if you believe in atheism, it's still faith. Since you have to have faith that the Big Bang theory is correct. quote>

With all due respect, I take a little exception to that.

I'm athiest because I do not believe in god and I'm pretty apathetic about the creation of the universe. You can't have faith in anything you really don't care about.

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist? God could have slowly created the earth by evolution, you know, because I personally don't think it takes only 6 days to create an entire universe of living organisms. quote>

Yay. Just divide Christianity even more. Create another sub-genre of ignorance amongst the jesus bunch. You guys are divided enough anyway...

You guys are EXTREMELY divided. And here's why. If I were to debate alongside another athiest against a Catholic and a Baptist on God, would you honestly think they'd bring up their specific churches? Moreover, would they even care or take their differences into consideration given the extreme views of the athiests? Both would try to convince me that god is real, jesus died, and he rose. The catholic/protestant divide would likely not be mentioned... and both would consider each other believers. Right?

But, the next sunday, the divide would come... a divide that in the past caused terrible wars amongst Catholics/Protestants and even resulted in the creation of even more "sub genres" of christianity (Lutheranism, Calvinism, The Anglican Church). Who's right?

It's funny christians... You sit right next to so and so every sunday, but yet you differ on so many things. Aren't you guys supposed to "not yoke with unbelievers"? Well, my question to you is: Who exactly is the true believer?

A guy who goes to T.D. Jakes's church believes that adulterers should be stoned... How? Is T.D. Jakes's message not getting across? Is god not with him?

My mom and her friend are "prayer partners", but they differ on the end times. The friend thinks what is written in Revelations has already happened, while mom thinks it's yet to happen, and yet they're<

[Micah 16]

Some would call it division. I call it interpretation. Many may claim that Christians are ignorant; however, it proves to stand that, since the Protestant Reformation, Christians are able to read the Bible and believe whatever they may believe whenever they read the Bible.

Now, you say that there is no division among athiests. There certainly is. Some believe there should be limits, some believe humans can do whatever they want as long as it does not harm a human, some believe people can do whatever they want no matter what, some believe science can be used as a propaganda tool, some believe in humanism... that human is god. Some athiests believe that religion should be dismantled everywhere including public property; however, some believe that as long as the religion causes no harm to them, they are okay with the, for example, Ten Commandments in front of courthouses. Some athiests believe that America was, in fact, founded on Christian principles and that we should use those principle to guide our country. Some athiests believe that while America was founded on religious principles, we live in a modern world where an ancient religion should not be guiding how we make our decisions.

Who exactly is the true believer?quote>

That's very simple. A person who has a personal relationship with Christ. Many athiests know that.

Are they going to hell? Are they ungodly?quote>

No. It's simply an interpretation of the Bible. The Bible clearly says who is going to heaven and who is not. It never says that you must eat certain things or do certain things, as long as they do not violate your relationship with God/Jesus/Holy Spirit.

Think of it like this: You have a best friend, but you disagree with him on certain things. However, you still have a strong relationship with him no matter what. Even though you have two different perspectives, you both will be with each other 'til the end... that is if you are true best friends. And if he is your best friend, then you wouldn't want to do anything behind his back or anything that could harm him. In fact, you'd want to stick up for him, right? That's exactly how I see a relationship between a believer and Jesus.

It doesn't matter if you believe in creationism or evolution. That's simply a distraction from what really matters.

[panthersimcity4 162]

Originally posted by: ccecill

Originally posted by: panthersimcity4 Sorry to tell everyone but...

Even if you believe in atheism, it's still faith. Since you have to have faith that the Big Bang theory is correct.

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist? God could have slowly created the earth by evolution, you know, because I personally don't think it takes only 6 days to create an entire universe of living organisms.

I personally think of God as the images we see in our mind... they exist, but they are not material.

I think Genesis implies that humans were created from the dust of stars, which could actually point to the Big Bang theory.

Why do people do good deeds? Because something tells them that is a good thing to do. I don't think anyone can explain it. For example: without a moral consience, you could walk by an entire street of starving children being rabidly attacked by dogs and do nothing about it. Where does this moral consience come from? Definetally not from our nature, since our nature is violent and aggressive, hence our large militaries and weapons of mass destruction. (read Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm, 1985, etc, some books by atheists, actually, who have proved that point) There's something in us that tells us what is right and what is wrong. It can't just be some random choice we make by ourselves.

quote>

Even if you believe in atheism, it's still faith. Since you have to have faith that the Big Bang theory is correct. quote>

With all due respect, I take a little exception to that.

I'm athiest because I do not believe in god and I'm pretty apathetic about the creation of the universe. You can't have faith in anything you really don't care about.

Who the heck said that Evolution and Creation can't coexist? God could have slowly created the earth by evolution, you know, because I personally don't think it takes only 6 days to create an entire universe of living organisms. quote>

Yay. Just divide Christianity even more. Create another sub-genre of ignorance amongst the jesus bunch. You guys are divided enough anyway...

You guys are EXTREMELY divided. And here's why. If I were to debate alongside another athiest against a Catholic and a Baptist on God, would you honestly think they'd bring up their specific churches? Moreover, would they even care or take their differences into consideration given the extreme views of the athiests? Both would try to convince me that god is real, jesus died, and he rose. The catholic/protestant divide would likely not be mentioned... and both would consider each other believers. Right?

But, the next sunday, the divide would come... a divide that in the past caused terrible wars amongst Catholics/Protestants and even resulted in the creation of even more "sub genres" of christianity (Lutheranism, Calvinism, The Anglican Church). Who's right?

It's funny christians... You sit right next to so and so every sunday, but yet you differ on so many things. Aren't you guys supposed to "not yoke with unbelievers"? Well, my question to you is: Who exactly is the true believer?

A guy who goes to T.D. Jakes's church believes that adulterers should be stoned... How? Is T.D. Jakes's message not getting across? Is god not with him?

My mom and her friend are "prayer partners", but they differ on the end times. The friend thinks what is written in Revelati