Moderator: Moderators
If I understand ID, that should be option 4: God used evolution but intervened.rocky_923 wrote:Right now, i'm leaning more towards Intelligent Design. I am still searching for answers though.
welcome Mr. Rayment. glad to have more creationists in here. we're always in need of more, because we seem to always be outnumbered by evolutionists and atheists.Philip J. Rayment wrote:Hello, this is my first post to this forum, having just registered. And I'll nail my colours to the mast straight away by saying that I am a 6-day creationist.
Oops, that is my mistake as far as my use of the word "evolution" goessteen wrote:One quibble. "Evolution" didn't generate the universe. "Evolution (As science understands it), deals with how populations of life forms change over time. It has nothing to do wuth the universe, or even with how life originated.
I will be more careful with my wording from here on. 
).Astronomy, right?starseyer wrote:Oops, that is my mistake as far as my use of the word "evolution" goessteen wrote:One quibble. "Evolution" didn't generate the universe. "Evolution (As science understands it), deals with how populations of life forms change over time. It has nothing to do wuth the universe, or even with how life originated.
However, I intended the question to encompass the origin of the universe, of earth,
Abiogenesis, right?and of life on earth.
The Scientific Theory of Evolution.As well as the development of species including humankind.
Hmm, I must admit to not seeing that.Cosmological origin and biological evolution do go hand in hand, after all.
Indeed. As I pointed out, the Creation myths of almost every culture and religion of this world are in discongruence with multiple fields of science.And they are also addressed in the creation myths (hehe showing my bias here
I always think of astronomy and cosmology in harmony with the Theory of Evolution. This is mainly because it was in my college Astronomy class, when I learned about the scientific theories of the origins of the universe (the big bang in particular) that my mind was open to the possibility of biological evolution. (I used to be a staunch anti-evolutionist.) The theory of how the atoms we are made of were formed in the stars, and how the earth itself came to be formed, goes hand in hand with the Theory of Evolution as a coherent scientific view of where we came from.steen wrote:Astronomy, right?
Abiogenesis, right?
The Scientific Theory of Evolution.
Yes, creationism is in disagreement with most science, not just the biological field of Evolution.Hmm, I must admit to not seeing that.Cosmological origin and biological evolution do go hand in hand, after all.Indeed. As I pointed out, the Creation myths of almost every culture and religion of this world are in discongruence with multiple fields of science.And they are also addressed in the creation myths (hehe showing my bias here
No offense taken, even if it had been a criticism.Science is the exploration of the "what" and the "how," while Christianity and religions are the exploration of the "why." They need not be in opposition, except for those who insist on crossing over and have one seeking the answers of the other.
(he, he showing MY bias here. I still believe that if creationists would take a look at talk.origin and weed out some of the more absolutist and erroneous claims about evolution, the discussions would be a lot more fruitful.)
(PPS. EDIT> That wasn't meant as a criticism of you, sorry if it gave that impression. I suddenly realized that when I read my reply
