Creation vs Evolution

[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.

[Avicenna]

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

Evoultionist, myself.

[Rodion Romanovich]

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]

Gah. lock teh thread. Please

[doc_bean]

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.

[KafirChobee]

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.

First, I voted evolution. However, I do not see a problem with evolution being within the plan of a supremebeing. Recall a Minister's sermon (in my youth) asking the question. "What is a day to God?" A day in creation could well be millions, even a billion years. He also said the Bible was a book of parables and fables meant to demonstrate how man should behave - it lays the ground work for law, but was not meant to be the law of man; so much as the moral guide to how one should conduct themselves within the confides of their society.

Those that expound on the idea that the bible is literal - miss the point entirely and miscue the meanings held in it.

Also, read recently (in PB) a readers response to a couple of honored "Darwin detractors" - Prof. Michael Behe & David Berlinski. The reader (Walt nobody) said: I would like to see the debate move away form "Where did man come from?" to the more germane question of "Where did this god come from?" The theists should ponder that and leave the rest of us alone.

To this I say, amen.

[Reenk Roink]

Gahism...

Evolution has too many questions not answered, and apparently nobody likes Creationism anymore...

[doc_bean]

First, I voted evolution. However, I do not see a problem with evolution being within the plan of a supremebeing.

Me neither really, I was talking about why god would have created a 'finished' world the way it is. Why are some planets older than others ? Why are some stars older than others ? What's the point of a shift in speices (evolution within a species) if God made them exactly like they were for a reason to begin with, did he change his mind ? Were did fossils come from ? Why did the dinosaurs go extinct if they did exist ?

That's the problems I have with 'Creation' as viewed by creationists. There could well be a creator, there might be point to an evolving universe, but that's a whole different story.

Myself, I can not comprehend the thought of thunder being a meteorological phenomenon. There must be a higher force at work. Besides, nobody has ever managed to make a thunder in a laboratory, thus proving that Thor exists.

I shall now write to my local school board, insisting they teach Germanic Gods as an alternative to unproven meteorolo

I fully support this movement.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Evelotion is demostratable through selective breeding and apparent throughout the world. I'm not budging on this one.

That doesn't mean of course that God didn't flick the "on" switch.

[InsaneApache]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

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

[DukeofSerbia]

I voted for Creation. Too many reasons to write why...

[rory_20_uk]

I voted for Creation. Too many reasons to write why...

LOL!!!

[Ironside]

Your statement above is a circular proof

Actually I'm agreeing with you somewhat. You cannot exclude the existance of a universe existing outside or before our own (our universe started to exist with the Big Bang though). What I'm saying is that everything that possibly exists outside/before our universe is as easy to meassure as how long a kilogram is.

[Lemur]

More importantly, does a banana prove God's existence? Swallow that, evolutionists!

(I know I posted this video in another thread, but it's good enough to post twice.)

[Rodion Romanovich]

Actually I'm agreeing with you somewhat. You cannot exclude the existance of a universe existing outside or before our own (our universe started to exist with the Big Bang though). What I'm saying is that everything that possibly exists outside/before our universe is as easy to meassure as how long a kilogram is.

Agreed

[Kralizec]

I voted evolution because I hold it to be more plausible then creationism- but I should add that a vote for evolution is not a vote against a creator.

Legio: The way I always understood it (barely I should add) is that there wasn't a "before Big Bang". We know that singularities bend time/space, inside singularities they don't exist, that a black hole is literally a hole. So in the singularity that the Big Bang came from, there simply was no "before".

[rory_20_uk]

But if you had a "universal time" that the time of individual universes could be plotted against there can be such a thing. The time within the universe can be warped, but "univeral time" can not be.

If this philisophical construct is used there could be a place where the universe we are in was sitting on a "shelf" and was then started by something. Our perception of time then commenced.

[Kagemusha]

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.