jettscience Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 i was just wondering if you could believe in both evolution and creationism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diatom Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Why would you? Evolution can stand on its own. There is no need for a God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I suppose if you were seeking a happy medium you could choose to believe in intelligent design. (not that you can "choose" to believe anything, which isn't something you consciously decide) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Demosthenes- Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 You can believe in what ever you want, you could believe in both, but of course you want to know: do they conflict. The basics of evolution don't conflict with many creationalist ideas, especially Old Earth Creationalists, but it really depends on what form of creationalism you subscribe to. There are many differnt religions and schools of thought. The three points that creationalists have problems with are: the age of the earth, and the change of non-life to life and species changing to other species, and the evolution of primates to man. The first really applies to the literal interpretation of the Bible, primarily the book of Genesis. If you add up all the ages of the prophets in the Bible back to Adam you don't get billions of years you get thousands, around six to ten thousand. Carbon dating primarily has found that the earth is around 4 and a half billion, whicyh is not really part of evolution, but science. The second is non-life to life. Creationalists believe that God created all life, and it didn't come from "goo" by random means. Creationalist traditionally hold life as very "special" especially man, so it is hard to except that it came about other ways than God. Some creationalists actually thing that evolution includes animals spontaneously changing to evolve. They don't quite understand that these changes are over time. And they have a problem with mutation, which is the way major change is made in evolution. They argue that all mutations are bad, when in fact not are mutations are bad, and can lead to major change in a species. This Brings us to the third point. The human being is seen as even more "special" than other life, so it seems against the general feeling of christianity, even blasphemous, that humans could come from primates. But these are all reconcilable through "Theistic Evolution". This is creationalism in that they believe in God, and evolutionalist as well, and the fact that the earth is billions of years old. They believe that God used evolution to create life on Earth, and when hominids where advanced enough he started giving them souls, and they became man, and "God's Children". I am still forming my personal version of these theories and how they can be reconciled with my religion. Evolution in its basics, the change of the genetics or frequency of alleles over time, is irrefutable, but there are fuzzy areas related to science. There are theories that the Earth could be made from other planets showing that the earth in its present condition could be only thousands of years old, but this only supplies the possiblity of a young earth, it does not prove anything. Much like God, it is entirly possible, and there is no proof, and in a scientific stand point it is far more likely that there isn't. It comes down to faith I think, I don't think that there are many people who believe in Creationalism purely from a scientific stand point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 i was just wondering if you could believe in both evolution and creationism Anyone who tells you that you can't is probably a creationist. Evolution does not deal with the origins of life and is not intended to, so it doesn't have a lot to say about the core ideas of creationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 it wouldn`t be incompatible to say that "God" or "the Creator" uses Evolution as their chosen method. in fact that sits quite nicely in both camps just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth tater Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 I know a number of people who believe that the Universe was created by God, and who also believe that mankind evolved over the eons from lower life forms. They argue that evolution was all part of the plan. They call themselves "creationists," but I understand that there is some debate about the term...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellbender Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 They call themselves "creationists," but I understand that there is some debate about the term...... The more colloquial term is "theistic evolutionists". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth tater Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 The more colloquial term is "theistic evolutionists". It seems that there is more than one term that can be correctly applied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 when we say 'creationist', do we mean one who believes in jehovah as the creator, or one who believes the accounts of genesis to be litterally true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellbender Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 It seems that there is more than one term that can be correctly applied. Do you have any idea what the term "colloquial" means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth tater Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Do you have any idea what the term "colloquial" means? Are you trying to be offensive, or does it just turn out that way accidently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellbender Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Are you trying[/i'] to be offensive, or does it just turn out that way accidently? No, I was actually trying to be rhetorical. Are you trying to be annoying by bringing up this point so many times? We already went over this, and I am not going to clog up yet another with this discussion. I said before, if you still can't let it go, start another thread somewhere, or better yet, PM me so we don't waste any more space on any forums. If you don't want to try either of those options, then I'm done for good with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 the curse of the evidence of human common ansestry thread III revenge of the spud darth tater, reguardless of how accurate or otherwize this is, the consensus usage on this site is that 'creationist' describes someone who believes that the world and all her life was created as is described in the book of genesis. people who believe that a deity created life, but not nessesaraly in the way described in the book of genesis are not refered to as creationists. people who believe that evolution is responsible for life, and that a deity guides (or is otherwize responsible for) evolution are refered to as religiouse evolutionists, theistic evolutionists or, i believe, evolutionary creationists. if thats not the common usage, then put it down to the desire, on this site, to differentiate between creationists who believe the book of genesis to be litterally true, and 'creationists' who believe in evolution, due to the fact that this distinction is relevant because: A/ the beliefe that the book of genesis is litterally true generally conflicts with the theory of evolution -- the belief that a deity created life does not. B/ the vast majority of people that believe the book of genesis to be litterally true and who have visited this site (ie, not most of these people, just most of the ones who feel inclined to come here and preach) have been slightly odd in the head, and out of courtacy they are differentiated from theistic evolutionists, who would otherwize share their name. C/ saying creationist and theistic evoloutionist is considerably quicker and easyer than saying creationist who believes the book of genesis to be litterally true and creationist who believes in evolution, and that it is guided by a deity. there are lots of examples of words having different meanings when used in a scientifical context as opposed to their normal usage. i suggest that you accept that the way in which we use the word 'creationist' is slightly different from the way in which you are used to hearing it, and simply adapt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jettscience Posted April 29, 2005 Author Share Posted April 29, 2005 hey thanks for all the help. it really help me understand better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts