 |
|
|
|
| You Can Believe In The Bible And Also Evolution |
| A lot of people try to put the two together, but i don't think you can just pick and choose which parts of the bible are true and which aren't. It's like, believing in evolution against the bible, and also believing that gay is wrong, because the bible says so. I think that's bad, but I would like to hear what other people have to say.
Edit: OK, i get that you CAN believe in whatever you want, but would it make sense is what I'm trying to ask. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is very true. I don't know why you have to choose either or. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I believe in the Bible and change.
Such a misleading term "evolution" is.
But to take it the way you mean it, one would have to be a compromiser with contemporary "truth" to
take the story of Adam and Chava not literally.
"Let us make man in our image"
He created us. Creating may take time, but do you seriously think (if you are a compromiser) that to
make man in his image, he would have made the lifeform pass through different animal forms over a
long time to get man in his image?
You know. I guess you could see it that way.
But then, Jesus would be descended from animals. That's ridiculous. How holy is he when he has
microbialish ancestors?
Also, that could mean that Darwin was a prophet of God. Nah! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't see why one can't take the Bible for what it is. A cracking book that offers some fantastic
stories, an insight to history and legend and some good morals. If you take away the New Testaments
general message of peace and goodwill there is no reason to deny the reality of evolution.
If on the other hand you are stubborn enough to think that the Bible is the exact word of god and
every word is the literal truth then no, you can't have both, evolution does contradict Genesis.
This is the sole reason why there is so much resistance to the theory of evolution. You would have
to be either stupid, brainwashed or incredibly stubborn to fall into this latter category. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Let's be clear, the creation story in Genesis is the overwhelming reason the religious reject
evolutionary theory. Genesis is the first and oldest story of the Old Testament, it in fact mirrors
stories told in other cultures predating the Jews and was written in an era when human civilizations
knew next to nothing about any of the natural world around them. Thunderstorms were an angry God
back then (do you still believe that today?). In comparison the New Testament does not repeat the
exact same story as Genesis to reinforce it, certainly it DOES emphasize God's glory and that all
things flowed from God, but there is nothing in the New Testament that says God did not create
natural processes - perhaps evolution itself - as part of his/her tool used to shape the world.
Evolution is easily compatible with the New Testament, and its conflict with the Old Testament is
really pretty foolish. If the Old Testament instead had a story about the Great Thunderbird (like
with Native Americans) would the extremely religious Christians then keep claiming evolution and
fossil records are false because the Great Thunderbird told us itself that it made every animal
through the ages?
Even if you believe evolutionary theory is wrong or imperfect it is laughable that the very process
of trying to figure out these answers ourselves objectively is somehow an offense to God. God did
not give you a brain so you could shut it off and just take the word of one document from an ancient
compilation of dozens and dozens of documents from different authors. Your subtext talked about not
picking and choosing which part of the Bible to believe, but the Bible itself was picked and chosen
from many books some of which are confirmed by the church to have been officially rejected or left
out of the final version. A church council can pick and choose --- but no one else can? God didn't
give you intelligence just to read this compilation of preaned instructions and then sit down and
shut up. Don't ever be afraid to observe and question and come up with theories, Jesus himself
challenged the dominant Jewish church of his day big time, and don't believe the act of thinking is
somehow an offense to your God. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You can and even may believe whatever you like, I think what you mean is should you. I believe
taking anything by rote including the bible is a mistake. You should always use your mind and heart
to decide what you think is best and makes sense to you. To do any less is to deny your heritage as
a thinking human being. Critical thinking in all things! |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Your wording makes a false assertion. You don't "believe" in evolution, you accept it as fact
because it's backed up by evidence. Belief is reserved solely for opinion and other unprovable
things, like religion.
But yes, a person can believe in a religion and accept the fact of evolution.
Edit:
noideas lives down to his name. That someone can be so wilfully ignorant of how science and
evolution work is a travesty. High school dropouts like noideas should be allowed to own a
computer. |
| |
 K9  11 Oct 2009 07:29
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If you believe in what genesis says word for word the I don't see how anyone could believe in both
the bible and evolution. I think that someone can be a christian and believe in evolution but there
is a huge distinction between these two things, I personally don't think that science and religion
can/should mix but that's just me. If a person takes genesis as literal truth I would find it
incredible to believe that they also believed in evolution, the two contradict each other massively. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!
Have you ever tried to suck and blow at the same time?
The only person that frequently tries is justsumguy |
| |
 v00v 06 Feb 2009 02:43
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Personally, I don't know how anyone can believe the bible, so my answer is no, you can't believe in
both |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Depends on the person in question. I, personally, don’t think the two should be blended together
as if they’re on the same level. They’re not. The concerns of science and the concerns of the
Bible are not the same. Science is religiously neutral and the Bible isn’t a science book. They
shouldn’t be mixed as if they’re two halves of the same whole. The two are definitely compatible
so long as each one stays on their own side of the line and isn’t forced onto the other’s. Once
the line is crossed, the nonsensical subjective assumptions always begin. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I figured mariafu would spend all night looking up the Ten Commandments and still not nail the
question. I felt obliged to help out. Sorry for butting in. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You, as is the case with most "believers" and "non-believers" have done very little research
regarding the Bible. Most people (by far most people) go by what they've been told. That includes
believers and non-believers. Most people who have read the Bible in it's entirety a couple of times
would be considered versed in the Bible. A ridiculous concept.
Tell us what the main commandment is.
Tell us what the second is.
Or just talk about your favorite dance tunes. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sign In
