Evolution - Your thoughts

[Sara-Louise]

Hasn?t Evolution Been Proven True? - Answers in Genesis

I just want to know what you make of this.
I think this article makes a very fair point.

Sara

[Jon-Marc]

I don't need to click on that. I already know the answer to that question: NO, evolution is not true, has never been proven true, and cannot BE proven true.

[aTruster]

Amen, amen & amen.

[Bloodbought]

Evolution is a theory. Before a theory can be accepted as true the events it predicts must be repated.

Creation can not be repeated therfore evolution remains a thoery.

We have the word of a witness who was there and who carried out the creation. Is the word of the creator not enough evidence?

What we do not fully understand is how God it. Our finite minds could not take it in so we have to accept what God has said.

There may have been an "evolution" in the mind of God as he created each stage of the animals etc. What He created gets nearer to man at each stage.

[aTruster]

Quote.... ''What He created gets nearer to man at each stage''.


What your saying here is the animals were getting closer to the likeness and the image of God, because man is in that image and likeness. To say that animals were getting near to man and by implication God at each stage is preposterous.

Man was formed from the dust and animals were brought forth.

Unless I've mistaken your meaning?

[canny]

Dear Sara,

I am in the Theist ( I think thats what someone called it) camp, I believe God created "the big bang" and sorted the soup that started it all..... and that Genesis helps us understand the order of things.

[eddybear]

Hasn?t Evolution Been Proven True? - Answers in Genesis

I just want to know what you make of this.
I think this article makes a very fair point.

Sara

There is an underlying assumption in the article, and indeed I think in the whole of the AiG site, that because the Bible, including the Genesis accounts, is inspired by God (which I do believe) that it should all be read literalistically (which I don't believe).

I believe that in places science - whether cosmology, anthropology, biology, geology and so on - can help us to understand the Bible better, i.e. it can help us to see which bits should be taken literalistically, and which bits should be taken figuratively.

To believe it should be all taken literalistically is a simple approach to Bible interpretation, but I also believe it is flawed, and actually leads people to believe "God said that......." when he did no such thing. Science observes the world, indeed the cosmos, that God created. It can never explain the "why" of creation, and at times scientists can get carried away and make wild unsubstantiated claims. (Of course, we Christians would never do that, would we? ). But when science is based on repeatedly observable data about God's creation, then we should take note. After all, "The heavens declare the glory of God" as the Psalmist wrote.

If you want to look into this further, I would suggest Reasons To Believe: Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Kenneth Samples, David Rogstad, Jeff Zweerink This is a Christian site, that takes the best of science and uses it, not as a weapon to attack faith as some atheists do, but rather as a tool to point people towards Christ.

[titus212]

I think this article makes a very fair point.Sara

Excellent article, that shows that science CAN prove "Intelligent Design" over "Evolution".

Some of the fairly good points:

All logic predicts that if you have nothing, nothing will happen. It is against all known logic and all laws of science to believe that the universe is the product of nothing. This concept is similar to hoping that an empty bank account will suddenly give rise to billions of dollars all on its own.

And:

In fact, what the intelligent scientists are actually saying is, “If I can just synthesize life in the laboratory, then I will have proven that no intelligence was necessary to form life in the beginning.” Their experiments are simply trying to prove the opposite—that an intelligence is required to create life.

Duh!! "I will CREATE life to prove that life was NOT created." Stupid.

And in the section about "Common Descent" it states:

In fact, there is another logical reason why things look alike—creation by an intelligent designer using a common blueprint. This is the reason that Toyota and Ford motor vehicles look so much alike. They are built to a common plan—you only have to look at them to realize this.

Even the quote by Darwin was interesting. Evolution can NOT be proven as true and is only a theory. There are many things in nature that science can point to, to prove that Creation can be true. Excellent.

Varlen (The VMan)

[aTruster]

Dear Sara,

I am in the Theist ( I think thats what someone called it) camp, I believe God created "the big bang" and sorted the soup that started it all..... and that Genesis helps us understand the order of things.

canny,

''I believe God created "the big bang"

My Bible says, and God said ''let there be light and there was light'' and not, ''let there be bang and there was bang''.

Is there a scripture you can bring to substantiate the claim?

Blessings,H.

[Sara-Louise]

I'm sorry if i offended anyone or caused an arguement. I didn't mean to.
I was just wondering what your opinions where on all of this.
I am tryin to understand the theories that science has and whether they agree or not with the bible.
Sara