do u believe the 6day creation or genesis / noah's ark? or man came from apes?

[fingolfin]

how can we make a concrete proof out of all these theories and book stories??

how's darwin's theory related to the creation??

how certain are we that what we're believing into are real??

should we stick to our false belief??

i'm friggin' confused...

.. if you don't want to be confused, segregate the two. Darwin's evolution theory is science, while those of the Story of Creation is religion. They can never be in the same plain.


.. and you stated

should we stick to our false belief??

... you used the word false, hence you know that it is false. Why continue to believe in something that you yourself have admitted that is false ??

.. i'm not saying that you should be an atheist or a religious person, think and ponder it on yourself and only you can provide the answer.

[Hellblazer 2.1]

OT: i have noticed that dartzed and tirong-say have posted messages from jude_1:3. do they act as spokesperson of jude_1:3? OR, are dartzed, tirong, and jude are one and the same person? hence the ratio of 1:3?

i'm just wondering.

[tripwire]

Q: do u believe the 6day creation or genesis?
A: NO

Q: noah's ark?
A: NO

Q: or man came from apes?
A: NO. we don't come from apes but we are however relatives with the apes.

Imagine this, human is composed of bacteria and that same bacteria will eventually come out [out of nowhere] when flesh rot. The same observation that science explianed it before that life started from a single cell bacteria. Now, you can believe what you want but I believe the latter than that of the bible's claim.

[cromagnon]

yes we are from apes , primates ....

[Tirong-say]

yes we are from apes , primates ....

Are you believing or really saw the change from apes to humans.

[cromagnon]

im believeing it , but evn not seing it ,,

- there are mountful of evidence..

[fingolfin]

Are you believing or really saw the change from apes to humans.

.. with this question, you're implying that SEEING IS BELIEVING ?? Am i correct ?? If I am, the evidence are there, the fossil records of the earliest hominids up to the homo sapien sapiens which is us. It might not be a complete fossil record coz there's still tons of work to be done, but it is right there.


.. and if we follow your stand of SEEING IS BELIEVING; you believe that God created Man, right ?? Have you actually seen it Don't get me wrong, I know my question to you is silly, but I'm just reiterating your question to cromagnon.


.. but if you say that I'm wrong with my analysis on your question, kindly enlighten me with what you really mean.

[Tirong-say]

.. with this question, you're implying that SEEING IS BELIEVING ?? Am i correct ?? If I am, the evidence are there, the fossil records of the earliest hominids up to the homo sapien sapiens which is us. It might not be a complete fossil record coz there's still tons of work to be done, but it is right there.


.. and if we follow your stand of SEEING IS BELIEVING; you believe that God created Man, right ?? Have you actually seen it Don't get me wrong, I know my question to you is silly, but I'm just reiterating your question to cromagnon.


.. but if you say that I'm wrong with my analysis on your question, kindly enlighten me with what you really mean.

The fossil records found is not yet ultimate to prove that we humans do came from apes. We could say it is the closest things that in how science could explain where do we came from. Then what about if the fossils found is not really the missing links from apes to humans but merely just extinct apes. The evolutionary claim as well as the creationist claim as per natural laws point of view is still to be proven, both of them is still based on beliefs.

[fingolfin]

.. look, Tirong, science has concrete evidence, while Religion only has WORDS ... that's the biggest difference

[Tirong-say]

.. look, Tirong, science has concrete evidence, while Religion only has WORDS ... that's the biggest difference

But, Sir Fin, it should be the veracity and applicability of the evidences that should matter, if it could not really satisfy what it ought to support then it's not really an evidence at all. I could say that both Evolution and Creation is still to be ultimately verified, there should a reason or a divine reason why these words are furnished. Our main tool in proving things which is Science is still developing, perhaps we could reach that stage where everything can be explained.