You'll forgive my short reply, but I have little time before work (12 hour shifts are the death of me) I just wanted to mention one thing: I thought you were opposing the teaching of ID in school entirely.
As for what class it should be taught in, I'm going to tentatively agree that it should NOT be taught in Science class. I'm not sure how your schools work in the States... do you have a religion class in high school, or something of the sort? If not, where could it be taught?
Science Versus Religion
Moderator: Soul Moderators
- Tree Fingers
- Loyal
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:00 pm
- Contact:
- Brad
- Veteran
- Posts: 1226
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 1:46 am
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
Democracy. It rolls off the tongue nicely. Better than others. I can say it, spell it, define it, but can?t admit to ever believing it. So convoluted has it become that it has mesmerized generations into a comma of perfect sublimity. You dance to the music of your youth, identify with your own memory, become a time capsule of numb comfort. And there, mired in the exhaustion of a life in progress, you surrender your right to question for the luxury of not being bothered.
- Matt Good
- Matt Good
- sbloemeke
- Veteran
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 5:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
I believe that evolution is true. There is too mcuh evidence for it, like the moths in England and the bacterium that gained a tendancy to resist penicillin. The world was created by dust clouds, the sun by gases. However, there is an intelligent designer. I believe that God did make the world in 7 days, however, his 7 days are billions of years for us. He said "Let there be light", and so, the gases created the sun. He made the animals through evolution, and humans came really late in creation. So, both sides are right.
Though, evolution should be taught. Every person has a choice to learn about it in church or not. It should not be forced upon a person. Evolution isn't either, it is just a theory given. Just like the theory that 2 triangles with 3 angles the same are similar, it is the same way. So, we go to church and state. They must be seperated, and should thus be seperated.
Just some views...
Though, evolution should be taught. Every person has a choice to learn about it in church or not. It should not be forced upon a person. Evolution isn't either, it is just a theory given. Just like the theory that 2 triangles with 3 angles the same are similar, it is the same way. So, we go to church and state. They must be seperated, and should thus be seperated.
Just some views...
- GodsChild7
- Loyal
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 10:29 pm
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
I have been reading these responses, and I am quiet interested. I have to say that my opinion on creation and evolution is thus: We WERE created by God and by God alone. No Big Bang or anything like that. Also on the topic about evolution, I believe that our bodies change over time, but not necessarily evolution.I'm not a science person, so I am not going to say that evolution doesn't exist, but I do know that we did not evolve from apes or anything like that. I know for a fact that we came from the dust of the earth and formed by God's mighty hand.
- Tree Fingers
- Loyal
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
Originally posted by sbloemeke@Nov 23 2005, 07:22 PM
I believe that evolution is true. There is too mcuh evidence for it, like the moths in England and the bacterium that gained a tendancy to resist penicillin. The world was created by dust clouds, the sun by gases. However, there is an intelligent designer. I believe that God did make the world in 7 days, however, his 7 days are billions of years for us. He said "Let there be light", and so, the gases created the sun. He made the animals through evolution, and humans came really late in creation. So, both sides are right.
Though, evolution should be taught. Every person has a choice to learn about it in church or not. It should not be forced upon a person. Evolution isn't either, it is just a theory given. Just like the theory that 2 triangles with 3 angles the same are similar, it is the same way. So, we go to church and state. They must be seperated, and should thus be seperated.
Just some views...
[right][/right]
If evolution is true, and there is an intelligent designer (God), then why are 99% of the life he created no longer existing? Do you believe that humans truly are the goal of evolution? If so, why? What separates our evolution from the evolution of all the other animals that we, as humans, consider lesser?
- yoaliens3000
- Veteran
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:37 am
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
I agree with that sbloemeke said...
No other animal is said to "less evolved" then humans. They've merely evolved in a different direction.
Im assuming his basis for that thinking is religious, though if evolution is true then we are and will always be evolving. Besides, what is God's definiton of human, a head 2 arms, 2 legs? Maybe were not at the "goal evolution point" in Gods eyes yet. Who knows, Im thinking too hard.
Originally posted by Tree Fingers+Dec 11 2005, 05:34 PM--[/right]
[/b]
No other animal is said to "less evolved" then humans. They've merely evolved in a different direction.
Im assuming his basis for that thinking is religious, though if evolution is true then we are and will always be evolving. Besides, what is God's definiton of human, a head 2 arms, 2 legs? Maybe were not at the "goal evolution point" in Gods eyes yet. Who knows, Im thinking too hard.
- Tree Fingers
- Loyal
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Science Versus Religion
Technically, if evolution is true, then the greater majority of life that has existed no longer does..species have extinct while those that survive are the evolved members of those species, ultimately becoming a new species. Speciation also occurs in other ways without extinction, but by geographical modification.
Thus, it would follow that the majority of life ever existed no longer does.
"Les evolved" is an attitude that we have about ourselves; it isn't a declaration of evolution necessarily, but of superiority.
Thus, it would follow that the majority of life ever existed no longer does.
"Les evolved" is an attitude that we have about ourselves; it isn't a declaration of evolution necessarily, but of superiority.