God & religion or natural selection?

@android (895)
January 12, 2009 12:35pm CST
What are your views on the opposing theories of religion or Christianity against Darwinian natural selection?
2 people like this
4 responses
@goldeneagle (6775)
• United States
12 Jan 09
I believe that God created everything. If I am not mistaken, Darwin himself eventually said that the theory of evolution was impossible. What I really can't figure out is how this "theory" ever made it to be taught in schools and colleges as scientific fact. Some preachers seem to think that it was taught as an effort to discredit the Bible. I don't know about that, but I will say that it is a lot harder for me to believe that everything came from some sort of slime in a prehistoric swamp or something like that than it is for me to believe that God was in control. God created everything, I have no doubt about that. I do believe that animals have adapted over time to their environments in order to survive, but I believe God has made this possible. I certainly don't believe it could happen by chance. There would be too much room for error. What we, as humans, have to come to terms with is that we aren't meant to know everything. Some things just have to be left to faith.
• United States
12 Jan 09
I guess the only way it came to be in schools and such was via cavemen and survival instincts supposedly...but don't quote me on that.
@android (895)
12 Jan 09
Goldeneagle, you say that you believe that God created everything. I'm genuinely interested in your answer to this question. If God had existed primarily to have been able to have created everything, then where did God come from? Who created him/it?
13 Jan 09
"Darwin himself eventually said that the theory of evolution was impossible" Please find the exact quote you're talking about so I can explain exactly why you're wrong.
@luvandpower (2049)
• United States
12 Jan 09
Well...with Christianity there is the theory of creation, which dates back to 4000B.C. or so, while Darwinism believes in nature vs. nurture and how the men of early times created men of today through instinctual survival learning techniques. I would have to say I would have to go with the creation part over Darwin's theory. Not that the reason is solely in me being Christian, but also because of the logic. If the world was 64 billion years old, or however old they claim it is we would be so far more technologically advanced then we are now, sure we are advanced now, but hover boards aren't even created yet. While with creation, everything just adds up. If you actually take the time to add up all the generations of Adam, and all of his bloodline, and etc...it is just logically correct.
@android (895)
12 Jan 09
Interesting theory. So, to put it simply, does that mean that you believe that God created everything?
13 Jan 09
Calling this conjecture would be too generous. What on earth are you talking about? Humans have not been around for as long as the earth. We count modern man's existence in thousands of years or tens of thousands of years. We have only been around for the blink of an eye in relation to how old the earth is. What you've said is pure nonsense.
@android (895)
13 Jan 09
It's a simple enough question.
@Latrivia (2889)
• United States
13 Jan 09
You can't really call them "opposing theories" when only one of them is a theory, and they both belong to two entirely different mind sets. On one hand you have objectivity and a rational study of the world around us, and on the other you have superstition and a desperation for there to be something "more" than our physical world. There's really no contest if the question is "which is more accurate". Clearly evolution has, and still does occur. We have mountains of evidence for it. As for creationism - well, there's the folklore of many cultures...but which is true? None of them have any real evidence behind them. Most of it is just speculation that piggy backs off of perceived holes in the theory of evolution, or other scientific theories.
@android (895)
13 Jan 09
So you put religion down to being a result of superstition and human's nature to look for meaning and answers to everything? They may not exactly be opposing theories but they are generally used for opposing arguments as whether to the presence of God's existance or not.
@Latrivia (2889)
• United States
13 Jan 09
Yes, I believe for the most part that religion is a result of superstition, and desire to have some understanding or control of the world around them. Evolution never tries to deal with God - it is only creationism which says anything about supernatural beings.
@android (895)
14 Jan 09
I agree with this. It's human nature to search for meanings and answers to everything, that's what makes us so suggestible and that's where common superstitions like walking under a ladder or breaking a mirror come from in the first place. So it does make a lot of sense that religion could have partly come from superstitious beliefs, probably from a combination of that and history, therefore being very inaccurate.
@soham1357 (187)
• France
13 Jan 09
I think I would go for Darwinian natural selection. One of the drawbacks of this is that it cannot really predict what courses evolution of a species might take, hence it is not practical as most theories of physics. As of life evolving from the primordial soup, even if there was a one in a hundred billion probability of this happening, if you multiply it with the age of the universe and the number of planets in it, the odds of one planet supporting life isn't all that low. But of course, there is the much easier way out saying that god created everything. This doesn't really leave any room for argument. If the theory is that there was nothing in the beginning and 'poof', everything was there by some godly magic, that just evades any sort of reason, doesn't it? The theory of evolution is based on observations, and even if God really did create life, I believe that it's the study of evolution that will lead to the origin.
@android (895)
13 Jan 09
Tracing back the origin of evolution kind of makes sense, though there must have been something there in the beginning to have been able to evolute from, which still begs the question, where did it come from in the 1st place? I personally believe that the likelihood of Earth being the only planet with life on to be highly unlikely, especially considering how vast space is. They also recently found another planet with the exact same properties as Earth approximately 2 Billion light years away, they believe that we could survive on this planet, it has air, water, clouds and everything. Exactly the same as Earth.