Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

The cold virus thing is an example of adaptation, not evolution.

[Reach]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

The cold virus thing is an example of adaptation, not evolution.

An adaptation is a trait that the organism evolved smartass

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

i get that a lot. maybe i am too much of a smartass...

[jewpinthethird]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

marxandlennon...hmm...I wonder what your political affiliation is....

[marxandlennon]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

marxandlennon...hmm...I wonder what your political affiliation is....

not communist. doesn't work, won't work. Liberal, yes. but the name just sounds cool

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

COMMIES!!!!!

[Baby-]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

You know there is evidence that can prove humans came from primates, but there are a few things that can help support humans being created by a "God"
The thing is is that i don no see how a person can chose a side. In my eyes neither can be absolutely correct, though evolution is based on what we have came across through the years. It just doesn't make sense. Humans and animals exist because they exist.

Can any of you give me insight on your views on human existance because i am curious.

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

See Genesis.

*side note* I believe you can't prove the existence of God because of His very nature. Faith in Him is the ultimate faith because there can be no proof.

[devonin]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

See Genesis.

Genesis is only evidence for anything if you can prove that it is accurate.

*side note* I believe you can't prove the existence of God because of His very nature. Faith in Him is the ultimate faith because there can be no proof.

Man says to God: prove to me that you exist
God: I refuse to prove that I exist, for proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing.

[Baby-]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

See Genesis.

*side note* I believe you can't prove the existence of God because of His very nature. Faith in Him is the ultimate faith because there can be no proof.

This is what i mean. I don't want to have to go to a book to explain to me about God or evolution. i want to hear it ( or typed) by a person, a normal person on their views.
Why they think we exist.

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

I think we exist because God created us. Happy? ^_^

[devonin]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

That explains -how- we exist (Well, it doesn't actually explain anything because you provided no evidence) but doesn't address the actual question, which was -why- we exist.

[Baby-]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

I think we exist because God created us. Happy? ^_^

Could you elaborate at all??
Im not going to deny your belief, I just dont know what to believe in.
Dust is composed of around 20 chemicals, i think-- well that's what i read in a book, and those chemicals can be found in humans. This would help establish that God could have created us from the dust of the earth as stated in the bible. On the other hand there is a big connection between us and chimps.

[lavakeese]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

1-I already told you there is no evidence to provide
2-I believe that God created Adam and Eve, who caused the fall of man, who begat everyone down to Noah, and who populated the world after the flood with his family. I'm not sure there is much else to elaborate. I believe it really is that simple.

[devonin]

Re: Evolution & Darwin Vs. Creation

Dust is composed of around 20 chemicals, i think-- well that's what i read in a book, and those chemicals can be found in humans. This would help establish that God could have created us from the dust of the earth as stated in the bible.

Now see, that's a bit of fallacious reasoning. Dust isn't "naturally occuring" The reason household dust has a lot in it that 'can be found in humans' is because one of the major componants of dust is dead skin that has come off the body. Cum hoc ergo proptor hoc doesn't apply here.