Creation/Evolution; Which is true?

[Dryad]

Adam and Eve

I don't believe that Adam and Eve were the only humans on earth, or even the first humans on earth. In ch.1 of Genesis God created men and women. I think Adam and Eve were the first semites (leading to the Arabs and Hebrews).

[White guy 101]

Both

[dukdodgers]

Dryad wrote:

<quoted text>
Well it could get really long and I've got to get to bed soon but here's some.
Speciation
I think it's quite possible that there are millions of years between each day of creation. That would allow each day to be 24 hours and also allow for evolution (it doesn't actually say that they were consecutive days). There may have been a limited number of species created at each step which then became many. Or one (or a few) species created at the first step and then nudged in different directions during the millions of years between days.

It is plausible because in reality, we don't know exactly how or when life began. Just for the sake of discussion, how to you feel about the hypothesis concerning the 1st molecules of life starting in the layers of mica?

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2...

This does open a can of worms though, if Genesis is open to interpretation. The fundie's aren't gonna like it.

[Jacques]

legomania100 wrote:

First, I would like to make an important definition. That of "Religion"
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
If I may be so bold as to paraphrase, that means that a religion is what you believe about how you got here, what life is all about, and how you should behave.
Christianity is a religion.
Islam is a religion.
Pantheisim is a religion.
Creationism is a religion.
Evolution is a religion.
Suprised at the last one? Here, I'll show you why it is a religion.
All of the above views theoretically explain how we got here, in an unobsevable way. Christianity says "God Created," Evolution says, well, "It happened by accident"
Each gives the value of a person. Christianity says that each person is of immesurable value. Evolution says that we all came from dirt, and therefore that is our value.
Both Christianity and Evolutionary Theory tell what happens when a human dies too. One says that the person dies and goes to either heaven or hell, the other that the person decomposes and becomes ingested as worm chow.
Notice, that I have not projected any arguments between the two views of Creation/Evolution, just stated a few of thier inherent worldviews with basic logic and deduced that Evolutionism is as equally a religion as Creationism.
Now, with that in mind, I would like to debate which religion is backed up by science. For example, what evidences are there for both sides? Does good science,(2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.) support one side or the other?
I understand that this is a very heated topic, and would ask that everybody who contributes refrain from profanity, name calling, and insulting of intelligance. These only raise tempers and really have no place in a debate, expecially a science debate.
Of course, if someone breaks basic etiquitte, please ignore them.
I look forward to seeing what comes of this!

Any person asking this question should have nothing to do with science. If you really believe evolution is a theory then go on your dr.dino sights and pollute your rubbish from there

[dukdodgers]

Dryad wrote:

Adam and Eve
I don't believe that Adam and Eve were the only humans on earth, or even the first humans on earth. In ch.1 of Genesis God created men and women. I think Adam and Eve were the first semites (leading to the Arabs and Hebrews).

What are your views on the other civilizations that grew without the influence of the the Middle East cultures? China was thriving, so were the South American civilizations just to name a couple.

[Dryad]

The earth.

For this part I have to clarify that I don't believe God dictated the creation story. I think it was given through a vision. Seeing the creation of the earth unfold through a dream would make it seem as if the sun, moon and stars were created after the earth was created. This is becasue of the massive volcanic activity that took place during earths early days. This would have covered the earth in dark clouds. Plants would have started growing, in the carbon rich environment, before the sun was visable as anything more than light through clouds. You would also have day (light) and night (dark) long before you could actually see the sun. In my opinion, the fact that Genesis describes the earth's early days as it would have looked to primitive men, had they been around, gives credence to the story. Just consider that the earth was covered in water and then the dry land "appeared" from the water - is that not how plate tektonics would have looked like, seen in a vision by someone who didn't understand what plate tektonics was?

[Jacques]

The Bible says we are made of dust. I ask you, do you really believe that? I am a christian, however I am a realist. Genesis was never meant to be the full story on how we came to be, Genesis is an overly simplified story written for people thousands of years ago who did not have even the most basic grasp of maths/science/reality.

Lets examine the Biblical man's powers of concentration: When Moses went up Mount Sinai, he was gone for three days. The people back then SAW miracles: The 10 plagues, the Red Sea parting, as well as Manna. 13 miracles! But what happend? Moses returned three days later and those people were worshipping a golden calf? You really think God will then tell a story of the true creation, big bang theory -- which entail quantum physics as well as nuclear physics--, evolution theory -- which entails modern biology, to people who had the attention span of a goldfish and the math/physics literacy of 3 year olds? The Genesis account was to satisfy those simpletons. Simple stories for simple people. I hope this stupid debate ends soon. It is time to wake up from stupid, people!

[Jacques]

dukdodgers wrote:

<quoted text>
What are your views on the other civilizations that grew without the influence of the the Middle East cultures? China was thriving, so were the South American civilizations just to name a couple.

Good point. Creationism estimates the world at 7000 years old *laughs* The city of Jericho has written records older than that!

[Dryad]

dukdodgers wrote:

<quoted text>
What are your views on the other civilizations that grew without the influence of the the Middle East cultures? China was thriving, so were the South American civilizations just to name a couple.

Like I said. Men and women were created on the sixth day. It is unknown how long after the 6th day Adam and Eve came along. Most Christians think that Adam and Eve were the people created on the 6th day but I don't see that. The 6th day states men (plural) and women (plural). Adam and Eve were one man and one woman. Clearly two seperate events. Not all people came from Adam and Eve. I think Eve is spiritually the mother of all people because it was through the Jews that mankind would be redeemed (Jesus).

[Dryad]

Jacques wrote:

The Bible says we are made of dust. I ask you, do you really believe that?

As a matter of fact yes. You see our bodies are made up of the stuff of stardust. We are made of the very same elements that make up our earth. So, in a sense, we are made of dust.

[Jacques]

Dryad wrote:

The earth.
For this part I have to clarify that I don't believe God dictated the creation story. I think it was given through a vision. Seeing the creation of the earth unfold through a dream would make it seem as if the sun, moon and stars were created after the earth was created. This is becasue of the massive volcanic activity that took place during earths early days. This would have covered the earth in dark clouds. Plants would have started growing, in the carbon rich environment, before the sun was visable as anything more than light through clouds. You would also have day (light) and night (dark) long before you could actually see the sun. In my opinion, the fact that Genesis describes the earth's early days as it would have looked to primitive men, had they been around, gives credence to the story. Just consider that the earth was covered in water and then the dry land "appeared" from the water - is that not how plate tektonics would have looked like, seen in a vision by someone who didn't understand what plate tektonics was?

Okay but how do you explain hoe the earth got there, and how do you explain evolution that occurred? Yes I would agree on that it could be a vision, but my point of view is that the Genesis account is just a simplified story to tell the people why they are here. But yes, I could imagine it coming to Moses by means of a vision

[Janine for Truth]

Jacques wrote:

The Bible says we are made of dust. I ask you, do you really believe that? I am a christian, however I am a realist. Genesis was never meant to be the full story on how we came to be, Genesis is an overly simplified story written for people thousands of years ago who did not have even the most basic grasp of maths/science/reality.
Lets examine the Biblical man's powers of concentration: When Moses went up Mount Sinai, he was gone for three days. The people back then SAW miracles: The 10 plagues, the Red Sea parting, as well as Manna. 13 miracles! But what happend? Moses returned three days later and those people were worshipping a golden calf? You really think God will then tell a story of the true creation, big bang theory -- which entail quantum physics as well as nuclear physics--, evolution theory -- which entails modern biology, to people who had the attention span of a goldfish and the math/physics literacy of 3 year olds? The Genesis account was to satisfy those simpletons. Simple stories for simple people. I hope this stupid debate ends soon. It is time to wake up from stupid, people!

ahhh but Jacques my friend, Genesis is not a simple book. i cant fathom how you would think it is?

[Janine for Truth]

Dryad wrote:

<quoted text>
As a matter of fact yes. You see our bodies are made up of the stuff of stardust. We are made of the very same elements that make up our earth. So, in a sense, we are made of dust.

yes and when we die. dust is basically what we return to. we are biodegradable. i find that truth that we are made of dust can be substantiated by science.

[Dryad]

Jacques wrote:

<quoted text>
Good point. Creationism estimates the world at 7000 years old *laughs* The city of Jericho has written records older than that!

Actually, the first civilization to have what is recognizable form of writing was the Sumarians. Their society dates to aproximately 3000 BCE.

[dukdodgers]

Dryad wrote:

The earth.
For this part I have to clarify that I don't believe God dictated the creation story. I think it was given through a vision. Seeing the creation of the earth unfold through a dream would make it seem as if the sun, moon and stars were created after the earth was created. This is becasue of the massive volcanic activity that took place during earths early days. This would have covered the earth in dark clouds. Plants would have started growing, in the carbon rich environment, before the sun was visable as anything more than light through clouds. You would also have day (light) and night (dark) long before you could actually see the sun. In my opinion, the fact that Genesis describes the earth's early days as it would have looked to primitive men, had they been around, gives credence to the story. Just consider that the earth was covered in water and then the dry land "appeared" from the water - is that not how plate tektonics would have looked like, seen in a vision by someone who didn't understand what plate tektonics was?

Plants that produce oxygen depend on sunlight. They would not be living in a carbon rich environment, but an environment rich in sulfur dioxide. The plants would die. Just look at the year 1816 when Mt. Tambora erupted.

"The unusual climatic aberrations of 1816 had the greatest effect on the American northeast, New England, the Canadian Maritimes, Newfoundland, and northern Europe. Typically, the late spring and summer of the northeastern U.S. are relatively stable: temperatures (average of both day and night) average about 68–77 °F (20–25 °C), and rarely fall below 41 °F (5 °C). Summer snow is an extreme rarity, though May flurries sometimes occur.

In May 1816,[4] however, frost killed off most of the crops that had been planted, and in June two large snowstorms in eastern Canada and New England resulted in many human deaths. Nearly a foot of snow was observed in Quebec City in early June, with consequent additional loss of crops—most summer growing plants have cell walls which rupture in a mild frost, let alone a snowstorm coating the soils. The result was widespread localized famines, and further deaths from those who, in a hunger-weakened state, then suffered disease as well in their less resistant condition.

In July and August, lake and river ice were observed as far south as Pennsylvania. Rapid, dramatic temperature swings were common, with temperatures sometimes reverting from normal or above-normal summer temperatures as high as 95 °F (35 °C) to near-freezing within hours. Even though farmers south of New England did succeed in bringing some crops to maturity, maize and other grain prices rose dramatically. Oats, for example, rose from 12¢ a bushel the previous year to 92¢ a bushel—nearly eight times as much—and oats are a necessary staple for an economy dependent upon horses for primary transportation. Those areas suffering local crop failures then had to deal with the lack of roads in the early 19th century, preventing any easy importation of bulky food stuffs."

This was from one large volcanic eruption. Oxygen producing plants die when the sun is blotted out by volcanic ash. The acid rain from the sulfur emissions don't help either.

I do think your "dream vision" for the Genesis story is much more plausible than a literal interpretation though.

[Jacques]

Dryad wrote:

<quoted text>
As a matter of fact yes. You see our bodies are made up of the stuff of stardust. We are made of the very same elements that make up our earth. So, in a sense, we are made of dust.

But there again comes my point: I know everything we are -- stardust, you called it, I would like to say a form of nebulae -- where created at the big bang and we are the recycled products thereof. But once again the Bible over simplified. WHY? Because people back then had no grasp of anything.

Another story: Jonah swallowed by the fish. No FISH in the sea can hold a human for three days in his stomachy, alive. Whales, however, can. But whales are not fish, they are mammals. But back then the people were not clued up so once again the Bible simplifies where there could be misunderstanding

[Dryad]

Jacques wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay but how do you explain hoe the earth got there, and how do you explain evolution that occurred? Yes I would agree on that it could be a vision, but my point of view is that the Genesis account is just a simplified story to tell the people why they are here. But yes, I could imagine it coming to Moses by means of a vision

I would agree that his explanation of what he saw in the vision would be simplified to terms that he was familiar with and concepts that he could grasp. It's like the bat being a bird. Before scientists came up with the classifications, all flying creatures would have been described as birds.

[Janine for Truth]

to answer the question. i believe in both- for eg,i cannot believe that the earth is 6000 years old. no way! the bible says in the beginning GOd created the heavens and the earth. WHo knows when the beginning was. God is called the ancient of days. 6000 years dont cut it. I believe the earth is millions of years old. i believe in what science says-most of it anyway. its interesting. it further makes me marvel at God the creator. It does not turn me away from creation. It confirms creation and creation confirms it.

Genesis:- God says ' let the waters bring forth''let the earth bring forth' he didn't physically make animals and sea life. he called it from from their source. the life came out of the water in which it already existed. the life came out of the earth because everything it needed to exist was from the earth. the same can be said of the water. he said let there be light and there was light. the light came out of him because he is light. the sun that burns billions of degrees hot, came forth out of him travelling at the speed of light. why is that so hard to fathom. and i cannot imagine all this creation taking place without a huge noise. i mean GOd was arranging the universe we know and dont know of. all this only speaks of his glory and power and majesty. the only part of creation he physically got involved in was the creation of man. he formed us out of dust and breathed life into us. it distinguishes us (or at least it should) from the rest of creation. Science comes out of GOd

We discover a couple of planets and stars, and black holes and think we have arrived and we then divorce GOd, denying him and set up ourselves up like we know it all. And yet nature as God created it, shows us up everytime, that we are nothing and are less than a speck in the universe and everything is greater than us.

[Jacques]

Janine for Truth wrote:

<quoted text>
ahhh but Jacques my friend, Genesis is not a simple book. i cant fathom how you would think it is?

Hey my fellow SA peep...

The book is not simple, the story on creation most certainly is. Think of it as poetry. Simple sentences and phrases with alot of deeper meaning. If you have read Shakespeare you will catch my drift. Just because the phrasing seems simple does not mean the book is simple! In fact, Genesis is the book with the best research possibilities possible

[dukdodgers]

Dryad wrote:

<quoted text>
Like I said. Men and women were created on the sixth day. It is unknown how long after the 6th day Adam and Eve came along. Most Christians think that Adam and Eve were the people created on the 6th day but I don't see that. The 6th day states men (plural) and women (plural). Adam and Eve were one man and one woman. Clearly two seperate events. Not all people came from Adam and Eve. I think Eve is spiritually the mother of all people because it was through the Jews that mankind would be redeemed (Jesus).

This doesn't really address what I was asking. I would like your take on how so many other civilizations grew without any influence of what formed Christianity. The Christian God, or any of His/Her agents, were not present in any civilization outside of the Middle East.