Creation vs Evolution

**Big_John** · 06-15-2006, 06:34

the answer to this thread is "no".

**Tribesman** · 06-15-2006, 07:48

The idea of something coming from nothing only works in my mind when you ad a Creator to the question of origin.

There goes a central plank of creationist theories

**Sjakihata** · 06-15-2006, 08:07

Theoretically there can exist a 'first mover' as Aristotle descripes him, without running into the problem of regression ad infinitum. He could always have been there (hence not coming from nothing because he is there and have always been there) that means he isnt coming from nothing, because he have existed at all times and will continue to exist.

**Avicenna** · 06-15-2006, 08:19

Now I see what they were going at in the monastery, about Aristotle influencing Christianity and Islam.

Evoultionist, myself.

**Rodion Romanovich** · 06-15-2006, 09:17

I personally believe that universe has always existed or was created way before big bang, and that big bang was merely the creation of the planets, stars and galaxies closest to where we happen to live. As such, there's no "something coming out of nothing", which I too think is a pretty unfounded, ridiculous and unscientific idea lying behind the traditional big bang theory. Following upon the creation of earth by big bang, it's not difficult to trace all the steps of evolution - from the evolutionary fight between molecules, a very special form of half self-replicating molecules evolved, then developing into becoming better at self-replication by entering capusles to bring with it helper molecules for the task, then creation of advanced cells, and after that multicellular organisms evolving as cells merging finding an advantage in doing so. Every step of the chain has a clear causality and every change has a cause. However if something came out of nothing, then there would most likely have needed to be an outer stimuli in my opinion, an outer force of some kind or another. Which IMO makes the big bang theory, unlike evolution, religion.

**English assassin** · 06-15-2006, 09:33

Gah. lock teh thread. Please

**doc_bean** · 06-15-2006, 09:37

Evolution, that's the way the world (universe works), cause and effect, action and reaction. Things don't *suddenly* appear.

Ad to why they would appear I wouldn't know, but then, when did God appear and why ? And why did he create the universe ? And why did he create it like it is ? A creator makes far less sense to me than evolution.

**InsaneApache** · 06-15-2006, 09:41

No, don't lock it. I have seen the light.

The idea of a omnipresent being makes more sense than the thought that our puny minds cannot grasp the concept of infinity and timelessness.

I shall now go and have a bath and contemplate my navel.

**Ironside** · 06-15-2006, 11:37

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

I personally believe that universe has always existed or was created way before big bang, and that big bang was merely the creation of the planets, stars and galaxies closest to where we happen to live. As such, there's no "something coming out of nothing", which I too think is a pretty unfounded, ridiculous and unscientific idea lying behind the traditional big bang theory. Following upon the creation of earth by big bang, it's not difficult to trace all the steps of evolution - from the evolutionary fight between molecules, a very special form of half self-replicating molecules evolved, then developing into becoming better at self-replication by entering capusles to bring with it helper molecules for the task, then creation of advanced cells, and after that multicellular organisms evolving as cells merging finding an advantage in doing so. Every step of the chain has a clear causality and every change has a cause. However if something came out of nothing, then there would most likely have needed to be an outer stimuli in my opinion, an outer force of some kind or another. Which IMO makes the big bang theory, unlike evolution, religion.

The Big Bang theory only states that it's impossible to see any further behind it because it created the laws and the time that we see today.
Whatever existed before is impossible to know, according to current theories.

Originally Posted by Sjakihata

Theoretically there can exist a 'first mover' as Aristotle descripes him, without running into the problem of regression ad infinitum. He could always have been there (hence not coming from nothing because he is there and have always been there) that means he isnt coming from nothing, because he have existed at all times and will continue to exist.

Point is that it can also be applied to the universe aswell, we simply have indications about it (or parts of it) transforming from time to time, getting "reborn" if you wish.

Anyway the more I'm thinking about it the more I feel is that if there's a eternal omnipotent God, the creator of universe and that man is chosen by Him, God certainly has an odd perspective on propotions

Choosed Evolution BTW.

Is the mix choise if you belive that God used evolution to create humans or...?

**Big King Sanctaphrax** · 06-15-2006, 11:39

The idea of something coming from nothing only works in my mind when you ad a Creator to the question of origin.

That's your perogative, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with biological evolution.

**Rodion Romanovich** · 06-15-2006, 11:57

Originally Posted by Ironside

The Big Bang theory only states that it's impossible to see any further behind it because it created the laws and the time that we see today.
Whatever existed before is impossible to know, according to current theories.

See the discussion in this thread in the monastery: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=65763 (especially second page)

Here's my reply to a similar statement in that thread

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

You're basically saying: Before Big bang there was nothing, thus, everything that is after big bang was created by big bang. Because everything was created by the big bang, therefore, there was nothing before big bang. You're saying:
(A=>B ^ B=>A) => (A ^ B)
which is a logical fallacy

Your statement above is a circular proof

**Kagemusha** · 06-15-2006, 22:50

Originally Posted by Sjakihata

Theoretically there can exist a 'first mover' as Aristotle descripes him, without running into the problem of regression ad infinitum. He could always have been there (hence not coming from nothing because he is there and have always been there) that means he isnt coming from nothing, because he have existed at all times and will continue to exist.

I agree with Aristotles. Its scientific fact that evolution is the way how nature develops species. But i believe in higher power that put everything in motion at the beginning,who has always been and always will be. Who is everything and we are all part of this entity.Thats my personal belief.