Is evolution a religion? Take the quiz.

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
1,901
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 10, 2007

  • likes, 5 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (trebob27)

  • You are wrong because:

    1. Evolution says that life began in a soup that randomly formed amino acids which by natural forces became life as we see it today.

    3. It does rule out the possiblity of God being involved in our formation by saying only natural forces (natural selectioin)formed us.

    5. It is based on conjectures with facts. The 'soup' life supposedly started in is a conjecture.

  • You're wrong because:

    Your point #1 is flawed on two points. 1) Evolution makes no statement about where life came from. What you are describing is abiogenesis. 2)No one who understands either process would say they just "randomly" happened.

    Your point #3 is flawed in that many scientists both accept evolutionary theory but yet believe in God. Ken Miller is an excellent example.

    Your point #5 again shows a poor understanding of how science works and what accepted scientific theories state.

see all

All Comments (126)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @griffithomi In the beginning people believed in 6 gods, then they decided that one god could do everything in 6 days and rest on the 7th so we have a 7 day week.

    Every religion had a different story, there is no one true religion, never was.

  • @griffithomi , ''you reject the true God, no matter which one it might be''.

    Do you know how silly that sounds?

  • @gregrutz Which ever is the true one. I would argue YHWY, but I do think an argument could be made that all religions started out as the same one. They all have one all powerful God (Ra, YHWY, Zeus, Odin, Lord Brahman etc.) and all have stories of angels (or other lesser gods, demons, spirits, demi-gods etc.) all deal with the after life (Paradise, heaven, Valhalla, Oneness), creation stories that differ very little. I would argue that at one point they were all one religion that was corrupted.

  • @griffithomi'' you reject the true God, no matter which one it might be. ''

    That's hard to do when you don't know which one is the true God because you don't know ''which one it might be''

    I didn't mean 'one god further' I mean which god.

  • @gregrutz First, it you have ever lied, argued with your parents, etc., then you have sinned. But yes, I get the "We are all atheist, we just go one God further" bit. But yes, you reject the true God, no matter which one it might be. Some even argue that, being there is always one ultimate God, that it is the same, and that they Angels and Demons are the other gods, miss understood. But I only said it for the point of explaining how it could be metaphorical.

  • @bem49525 You are wrong because:

    1. Darwin wrote 'Origin of life''  Not Origin of life.

    2. Biology is a Science and Science does not use voodoo, magic or the supernatural.

    3.If humans don't know how life started, thatt does not change the fact that you are an Ape.

  • @griffithomi ''All men and Women reject God''

    Which God did I reject? Zeus? Ra?

    And I don't remember sinning either.

  • @gregrutz No, not really. All men and Women reject God, we all Sin. In fact, a more metaphorical A&E story makes sense, since in this way it speaks about how we each reject God. The eating of the forbidden fruit would best allude to the development of self-consciousness, and thus an understanding of Good and Evil. There are more ways that just one to understand the religion. Especially since Jewish people believe in the coming of the Messiah, even though some also are not literalists.

  • @griffithomi Adam and Eve story? Christianity is based on A&E and Sin.

    No A&E means no need for Jesus.

  • @gregrutz It only "proves" that A&E story wrong if it is looked at literally.

  • I have to take issue with pair #4. In Richard Dawkins The God Delusion, he clearly explains how morals not only do not come from religions, but can be more easily concluded through a mixture of social factors and evolutionary characteristics. He explains that our compassion and want to help others, our "be good to thy neighbor" morals, comes from when we lived in small villages, where benefits could be garnered by helping, since these would create an image for the good Samaritan.

  • @catgirlkaren Creation is not a theory. Its a made up story. There is not a single piece of evidence to support anything in creation. It can be called a theory when it has scientific facts supporting it.

  • evolution is science. thank you for questioning it. you are wrong. evolution is still science. bring more facts and question it tomorow.

  • @catgirlkaren Creationism is not a scientific theory. It is religion, all religions have a story.

    Evolution prove the Adam and Eve story wrong, why do you think bible people fight it.

    Evolution is about how species came to be, not life.

    Evolution is a process that happened, a proven fact.

    There is a biology theory that shows how it happened.

  • Evolution is not a religion It is a proven fact and it has nothing to do with faith or god. It is like saying you worship Newtons principles or torricellis experiment

  • While some creationists were wrong to trust their personal beliefs by adding on to the creation story, it is true that God formed us then we evolved.

  • If you insist on arguing against evolution try following this handy how to guide of sorts. You won't be taken seriously until you can show you have bothered to actually study the subject.

    watch?v=tCU3bCQ34x8

  • "and I know therefore it is not a "fact"."

    Yet you still demonstrate you know nothing of evolutionary theory. You've also yet to respond to the fact that I am a former creationist who rejected that pseudo-science based on creationist dishonesty.

  • "As for the 'soup', they can't tell the exact location where it was because they don't have proof it existed, only that it is possible,"

    There would have been innumerable instances taking place across the planet, but we do know as fact the chemical composition of early earth.

  • "All I heard about evolution said that it all happened by natural forces."

    That's because evolution itself is a documented and observed natural process that operates free of outside influences. It has no relevance on how life started or whether it was due to natural or supernatural causes.

  • "That was not what i was taught."

    Then you were taught wrong as your statements so far indicate.

    "I was told life came from the soup by my biology teacher in 9th grade."

    Meanwhile there are scientists who have spent their entire careers studying this subject well beyond the 9th grade level and have a much better understanding than your 9th grade teacher.

    "Does Ken Miller say God could have had a hand in our formation?"

    Yes. I do believe that is what my statement implied.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more