27 Mar 06
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any conflict between evolutionary and religious views, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
27 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionThere are a lot of ridiculous people in the world.
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any confl ...[text shortened]... s, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionHow you view scripture being taken literally has nothing to do with
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any confl ...[text shortened]... s, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
evolutionary ideas being in conflict with reality. It simply boils down
to how you define evoution, if you think it is small changes, no one
will debate that, if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. As a faith it is just another other thing
people argue over.
Kelly
28 Mar 06
Why does religion have to be antagonistic to evolution?
There are many religious people who are scientists - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept the Bible means rejecting the scientific process, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any conflict between evolutionary and religious views, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
I've fixed it for you.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionHere mannion dude is why evolution is incomatible with religion:
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any confl ...[text shortened]... s, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
"if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. " -Kelly Jay
Its because fundamentalists don't understand evolution.
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by KellyJayYou clearly have no understanding of what science is. What you have described (The Theory of Evolution) as faith is most definately science. To believe it to be 100% true may be faith but to say that it is a well defined theory that is currently the best explanation for the evidence available is most definately science.
How you view scripture being taken literally has nothing to do with
evolutionary ideas being in conflict with reality. It simply boils down
to how you define evoution, if you think it is small changes, no one
will debate that, if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. As a faith it is just another other thing
people argue over.
Kelly
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by KellyJayJust a quick question KJ - did you ever actually study any science?
How you view scripture being taken literally has nothing to do with
evolutionary ideas being in conflict with reality. It simply boils down
to how you define evoution, if you think it is small changes, no one
will debate that, if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. As a faith it is just another other thing
people argue over.
Kelly
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by KellyJaynutter
How you view scripture being taken literally has nothing to do with
evolutionary ideas being in conflict with reality. It simply boils down
to how you define evoution, if you think it is small changes, no one
will debate that, if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. As a faith it is just another other thing
people argue over.
Kelly
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KThere, fixed it
Here mannion dude is why evolution is incomatible with religion:
"if you think it is changes over time taking a some
what simple life form to the variety of complex ones we see today,
that is faith not science. " -Kelly Jay
Its because fundamentalists don't want to understand evolution.
28 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionHebrews 11:3
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any confl ...[text shortened]... s, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think KellyJay's statement is accurate.
You clearly have no understanding of what science is. What you have described (The Theory of Evolution) as faith is most definately science. To believe it to be 100% true may be faith but to say that it is a well defined theory that is currently the best explanation for the evidence available is most definately science.
Evolutionists don't stop their argument with what is happening around us today that can be measured, tested, and proven. They feel the need to extrapolate their observations millions of years into the past and say that it's the most likely thing to have caused life on this planet. That's faith, not science. The guesses made to draw that conclusion are based on what the scientist presumes must have happened for this theory to hold water. That's not science.
You can't have your cake and eat it to. Stick to what science has proven and theists won't argue with you. What bothers me the most is when evolutions won't admit their faith in science.
DF
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by DragonFriendLEARN WHAT SCIENCE IS BEFORE CLAIMING SOMETHING ISN'T SCIENCE!
I think KellyJay's statement is accurate.
Evolutionists don't stop their argument with what is happening around us today that can be measured, tested, and proven. They feel the need to extrapolate their observations millions of years into the past and say that it's the most likely thing to have caused life on this planet. That's faith, not science. The ...[text shortened]... u. What bothers me the most is when evolutions won't admit their faith in science.
DF
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by DragonFriendFirstly past extrapolations ARE science.
I think KellyJay's statement is accurate.
Evolutionists don't stop their argument with what is happening around us today that can be measured, tested, and proven. They feel the need to extrapolate their observations millions of years into the past and say that it's the most likely thing to have caused life on this planet. That's faith, not science. The ...[text shortened]... u. What bothers me the most is when evolutions won't admit their faith in science.
DF
Secondly, can you tell me what are the guesses that scientists have made that prepresume the theory?