What came first, The chicken or The egg? Science vs Religion

[Slyhunter]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Believing that it's possible beings exist with more power, whatever, than we mere humans doesn't require religion or faith it's simply calculating the odds of such an occurrence in a multi-verse.

 

[Markle]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

I didn't read your soliloquy. Since you did not leave an option 3, for both, it is a worthless thread.

 

[S.J.]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

 

[ThatDude30]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

I didn't read your soliloquy. Since you did not leave an option 3, for both, it is a worthless thread.

Your input is worthless, its my opinion that science contradicts the bibles version on how life is created. If your opinion is both? Then you can respond with your opinion. Just responding with that you didn't read my soliloquy because you think this thread is worthless because I did not have an option 3, is actually worthless.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

There is agnosticism which is the views that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that god does exist or the belief that god does not exist. It is a doctrine or set of tenets rather than a religion.
If you don't believe in any god or higher power then your atheist, and atheism can be defined as a religion.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Believing that it's possible beings exist with more power, whatever, than we mere humans doesn't require religion or faith it's simply calculating the odds of such an occurrence in a multi-verse.

Believing is faith and religion is the belief and worship of a personal god or gods

 

[S.J.]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

 

[ThatDude30]

Personally, I believe somewhat in a higher power. But I also believe in science's ability to explain HOW life was set into motion.

Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?

Evolution is perfectly compatible with creationism if you believe that a god guided it/began it. There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth. And seeing as Genesis was written based on a non-falsifiable untestable story, rather than experimentally-backed theory, I tend to believe science.

I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.

Humans have very long generational times compared to say, bacteria. Thus the rate at which they evolve is considerably slow. We do have skeletal records that show we have had numerous ancestors that can be traced to us, however, which show some of our evolutionary path to where we are now.

If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.

I'm sure an athiest or a nihilist would contradict you there. But as I've mentioned, spirituality can be factored into science. There is much that science cannot explain, and the idea of God, the afterlife, etc, fits very neatly into that expanse of unknown knowledge. Though concerning the subjective nature of religion, I will say that life is very much what you make it. YOU, and what you BELIEVE IN, gives your life meaning.

It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.

Let me play devil's advocate and challenge you on this. Why is it one creator? Why not multiple? Maybe perhaps it was one creator among a pantheon of gods? Fuck, maybe it's aliens if you watch the History channel too much lmao.

Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.

I appreciate your ability to be insightful; you understand why people can disagree with you here, and understanding is something I wish people had a lot more of nowadays.

I didn't answer to every paragraph here, but if there's something you'd specifically like to ask me about, please let me know.

I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human life

Then correct your OP.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.

If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.

Contradict means- assert the opposite of a statement made by someone. Science says human life evolved from single cell organism.
Contradict means- Be in conflict with. Science; human evolved from single cell organism Bible; God created man with soil
There isn't any conflict with the two? I never said it contradicts the whole bible as some of you assume. I just stated that science theory of humans evolved from single cell organisms contradicts the bibles God created man out of soil.

Soil doesn't contain single cell organisms?
Do we know what was in the soil?

The theory of evolution is that human evolved from a single cell organism not soil. Soil would contain multiple single cell organisms more and likely. But where did I say there wasn't any single cell organisms in soil? And if you cant understand the difference by god creating man from soil and science says we evolved from a single cell organism, you maybe should read genesis in the bible and google the theory of evolution.
Either your being a smartass or just plain dumb to not understand what I'm saying about the two.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

You never answered any questions that I had asked pertaining to your statement that religion and believing in a higher power is not the same. I provided a definition which is fact you provided nothing so your statement is strictly based on your opinion and without providing and evidence to support you statement, your statement is false.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

explain how they aren't the same. Not just ask me another question," Why does someone need a religion to believe in a higher power?' I stated my defense on why I disagree and what have you provided to support your opinion? Nothing. So instead of asking more and more questions simply explain why you think that.

 

[ThatDude30]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

So do you believe in god? Where did your idea of god and what is god, come from? You just made up a belief of a god or higher power based on no other religions ideas? So you basically develop your own religion?

 

[S.J.]

Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

You never answered any questions that I had asked pertaining to your statement that religion and believing in a higher power is not the same. I provided a definition which is fact you provided nothing so your statement is strictly based on your opinion and without providing and evidence to support you statement, your statement is false.

I'm not interested in engaging in a flame war or insult contest. If you are looking to stir up shit, there's always the Flame Zone.

 

[ThatDude30]

How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

You never answered any questions that I had asked pertaining to your statement that religion and believing in a higher power is not the same. I provided a definition which is fact you provided nothing so your statement is strictly based on your opinion and without providing and evidence to support you statement, your statement is false.

I'm not interested in engaging in a flame war or insult contest. If you are looking to stir up shit, there's always the Flame Zone.

Questioning your statement is engaging in a flame war or insult contest or stirring shit up?

 

[S.J.]

Why would one have to have a religion in order to believe there is a creator?

So then what makes someone believe in a higher power without religion? Without a religion how can you believe in a higher power? What would make someone believe there is a higher power?

Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power especially a personal god or gods(a higher power).
Religion is a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

What's your point? To me, religion requires me to follow someone else's idea of who and what God is. Flog me if the dictionary doesn't agree.

You never answered any questions that I had asked pertaining to your statement that religion and believing in a higher power is not the same. I provided a definition which is fact you provided nothing so your statement is strictly based on your opinion and without providing and evidence to support you statement, your statement is false.

I'm not interested in engaging in a flame war or insult contest. If you are looking to stir up shit, there's always the Flame Zone.

Questioning your statement is engaging in a flame war or insult contest or stirring shit up?

You were attempting to antagonize me and you know it.

 

[MaryL]

Which came first boiled, or fried?

 

[irosie91]

Which came first boiled, or fried?

boiled. There are some "civilizations" that never encountered FRYING------they either roast or boil. Sad bit true

 

[Indeependent]

Personally, I believe somewhat in a higher power. But I also believe in science's ability to explain HOW life was set into motion.

Evolution is perfectly compatible with creationism if you believe that a god guided it/began it. There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth. And seeing as Genesis was written based on a non-falsifiable untestable story, rather than experimentally-backed theory, I tend to believe science.

Humans have very long generational times compared to say, bacteria. Thus the rate at which they evolve is considerably slow. We do have skeletal records that show we have had numerous ancestors that can be traced to us, however, which show some of our evolutionary path to where we are now.


I'm sure an athiest or a nihilist would contradict you there. But as I've mentioned, spirituality can be factored into science. There is much that science cannot explain, and the idea of God, the afterlife, etc, fits very neatly into that expanse of unknown knowledge. Though concerning the subjective nature of religion, I will say that life is very much what you make it. YOU, and what you BELIEVE IN, gives your life meaning.

Let me play devil's advocate and challenge you on this. Why is it one creator? Why not multiple? Maybe perhaps it was one creator among a pantheon of gods? Fuck, maybe it's aliens if you watch the History channel too much lmao.

I appreciate your ability to be insightful; you understand why people can disagree with you here, and understanding is something I wish people had a lot more of nowadays.

I didn't answer to every paragraph here, but if there's something you'd specifically like to ask me about, please let me know.

I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human life

Then correct your OP.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.

If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.

Contradict means- assert the opposite of a statement made by someone. Science says human life evolved from single cell organism.
Contradict means- Be in conflict with. Science; human evolved from single cell organism Bible; God created man with soil
There isn't any conflict with the two? I never said it contradicts the whole bible as some of you assume. I just stated that science theory of humans evolved from single cell organisms contradicts the bibles God created man out of soil.

Soil doesn't contain single cell organisms?
Do we know what was in the soil?

The theory of evolution is that human evolved from a single cell organism not soil. Soil would contain multiple single cell organisms more and likely. But where did I say there wasn't any single cell organisms in soil? And if you cant understand the difference by god creating man from soil and science says we evolved from a single cell organism, you maybe should read genesis in the bible and google the theory of evolution.
Either your being a smartass or just plain dumb to not understand what I'm saying about the two.

Theory is not science.

 

[irosie91]

semantics

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human life

Then correct your OP.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.

If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.

Contradict means- assert the opposite of a statement made by someone. Science says human life evolved from single cell organism.
Contradict means- Be in conflict with. Science; human evolved from single cell organism Bible; God created man with soil
There isn't any conflict with the two? I never said it contradicts the whole bible as some of you assume. I just stated that science theory of humans evolved from single cell organisms contradicts the bibles God created man out of soil.

Soil doesn't contain single cell organisms?
Do we know what was in the soil?

The theory of evolution is that human evolved from a single cell organism not soil. Soil would contain multiple single cell organisms more and likely. But where did I say there wasn't any single cell organisms in soil? And if you cant understand the difference by god creating man from soil and science says we evolved from a single cell organism, you maybe should read genesis in the bible and google the theory of evolution.
Either your being a smartass or just plain dumb to not understand what I'm saying about the two.

Theory is not science.

A scientific theory is an idea so well-supported by empirical and theoretical evidence that it is accepted as a correct explanation for the purpose of doing science, until it is shown to be incorrect. Some scientific theories are so well supported that they are considered fact. Evolution is one of these theories.

If you want to challenge this theory, then start publishing acience which contradicts it. No, all of this internet squawking is not a challenge to an accepted scientific theory.