truthseeker63's Corner in Comparative religion

format_quote Originally Posted by truthseeker63

I have heard some Atheists and Evolutionists say that the similarities between humans and apes is proof of Evolution but similarities to me is just proof of common design designed by God there may be physical similarities and dna similarities between humans and apes but this could just be evidence of comon design or a common designer does anyone agree with me ?

truthseeker, you could also argue that God set things up so that Evolution would happen. Evolution needs not conflict with a creator God. But it does provide a plausible explanation that has no need for a creator God.

The only problem I see with your suggestion above is all the transitional fossils that have been found. Extinct animals varying from today's animals in such ways that it is hard not to see the development over time. Other evidence hard to explain by your theory above is shown in development in the womb. Did you know that when in the womb you had gill slits? Makes a bit of sense as a carryover from earlier stages of human evolution, but how would that sort of the be explained by your theory?

format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis

truthseeker, you could also argue that God set things up so that Evolution would happen. Evolution needs not conflict with a creator God. But it does provide a plausible explanation that has no need for a creator God.

The only problem I see with your suggestion above is all the transitional fossils that have been found. Extinct animals varying from today's animals in such ways that it is hard not to see the development over time. Other evidence hard to explain by your theory above is shown in development in the womb. Did you know that when in the womb you had gill slits? Makes a bit of sense as a carryover from earlier stages of human evolution, but how would that sort of the be explained by your theory?

How does evolution provide a plausible explanation that has no need for a creator God? Arguments like this are like going in circles. Theory on top of theory. There will still be unanswered questions. If there is no need for a God because species evolve, then where did the first light of life come from to trigger evolution? Human skeletons have tail bones too. Why does that mean a person would have had to evolve? Compared to other species, humans have the biggest brain size in proportion to the sizes of our bodies. (Dolphins come close). But that part of "evolution" occurred rapidly for our species which is rare. To me, I see it nothing more as proof for a common design as truthseeker stated.

I think it's foolish to try and make the religious texts fit into what science is all about. Some say,"Well they're supposed to be sent down from a perfect God." Well, The Quran, Torah and the Bible are not particularly books of science. They are books that are concerned with the human experience. Not early hominids that once walked the earth 6-8 million years ago. Religion isn't going to answer these specific and detailed questions, which is why there is science but it too has its shortcomings. There are just some things in this world that just simply won't be answered by either. For me, the existence of the one true God is enough to fill in the blanks. I respect how that doesn't satisfy others and we're all entitled to our own opinions but I know I don't lose sleep over it at night.

format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow

What explanation and explain how it is plausible?

Google "the theory of evolution". Or better yet, read "why darwin matters" by Michael Shermer.

Evolution doesn't postulate God. It provides a theory that doesn't need God. And it fits better than creationism with some findings such as transitional fossils and human gill slits (and tail bones) - why would we have these things? They could be hold overs from evolution (fits nicely), but in a creation paradigm, why would god give babies gill slits (that don't function) and tail bones? And an appendix? And why do whales have foot bones attached to no muscles? Creation doesn't fit that data. Evolution does.

The only respectful manner in which to treat a slave, is to free them from bondage immediately.

format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis

Google "the theory of evolution". Or better yet, read "why darwin matters" by Michael Shermer.

Evolution doesn't postulate God. It provides a theory that doesn't need God. And it fits better than creationism with some findings such as transitional fossils and human gill slits (and tail bones) - why would we have these things? They could be hold overs from evolution (fits nicely), but in a creation paradigm, why would god give babies gill slits (that don't function) and tail bones? And an appendix? And why do whales have foot bones attached to no muscles? Creation doesn't fit that data. Evolution does.

I'm familiar with both. Darwinism was forced down my throat in high school. But as I said in my other post, this theory doesn't answer my question of how the first life organism was here to trigger that evolution. Thank you for the post though. I've never read "Why Darwin Matters" but I'll read the book just to better educate myself about this theory.

format_quote Originally Posted by Aprender

this theory doesn't answer my question of how the first life organism was here to trigger that evolution.

Yes, you're right about that. Evolution says nothing about how the first life came to be. That is a whole different area of research And since evolution doesn't say how life itself began, it doesn't conflict with the very basic concept of creation (though it does conflict with the creation stories we usually hear)

format_quote Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

stop buying stuff made in china sweatshops then!

all the best

Wow, I do believe this is the first time I have ever agreed with you.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

Slaves can even be Kings/Rulers, such as the Mamluk Dynasty in Islamic history.

The Mamluks were a very interesting group. Slaves who became leaders of the ummah. Even born Muslims would apparently lie about their children so they could become a part of the Mamluks.
Salam

'Evolution' is not synonymous with 'evolution by natural selection'. Atomic nucleii, rock formations and legal systems, for example, have all evolved by some process or other.