Why does it seem one cannot believe in evolution(or science for that matter) AND God?
475733
You can, this a false dicotomy that is wreaking havok on our nation and it's views of religion and science.  there is nothing to suggest that God did not use the laws of physics that he created and science later discovered to creat the universe and world we live in now.  This means God used the Big bang to make the universe, and used evolution (through devine intervention) to make life on earth, even humanity.\n    The creation story put forth in Genesis is not meant to be taken literally and anyone who does so is ignorant, and does the cause of Christianity more harm than good.  It seems likely that this story of creation is a myth ment to teach the primitive Hebrews who first recieved it, the proper relationship between Man and his God.  Remember, these people knew nothing of science so a creation story going on about expanding space-time and gene flow would mean nothing to them.\n   In fact, while science is a wonderful example of God's power and glory, the creation story is really one of the most insignificant things in the bible.  What is important is the message of love conveyed by Jesus, to 'Love your fellow human as yourself."  As long as you do this and devolop your personal relationship with God, you are doing God's will.  That is what Christianiy is about, not makeing people believe the world was created in 7 days.
1034859
Ok, how can you believe in evolution? I mean really, the complexity of animals, and well every living thing, came about by accident!! At least we have the bible that was inspired by God! And was correct about allot of scientific things way before man figured it out!\n\n 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.\n\nAll you have is a theory that we came from nothing!\n\n\nNo, I am not mad, just stating the obvious.\n\n\nloj
848400
I disbelieve on the grounds of lack of evidence so short of proof being forthcoming I couldn't say I believed God existed. Convictions or subjective opinions don't come into it-it's purely down to a lack of valid evidence.
365617
Well simply, if you don't go by the bible (or other religious texts), then there is nothing to tell me there is a god.\n\nTherefore there is nothing to believe or disbelieve anything about a god, because without the bible pushing his existence, i have nothing to suggest he existed.  It is a non-issue/problem.\n\nThat aside: Here are the main reasons why I don't believe \nin god\n\nEvolution (including evidence of unintelligent design)\nBig Bang Theory\nHistory of Religions (diversity of opinion, and change)\nEvidence (or lack of) supporting Religions\nOther Animals\nMoral contradictions in some religious teaching.\nHow Impersonal Nature Is! (Think 'evil' in nature, natural disasters, etc, why make a world that threatens to kill it's population from a multitude of different ways)\n\nLook up parasitoids or even the more commonly known parasites! What is god's will for them! To be a burden? To kill the host?
224608
"Dr" Hovind is a complete charlatan, and the arguments as far as Earth's rotation and the distance to the moon are fradulent.\n\nIn any case, I know a number of people, including one who is a priest, who believe in both God and evolution.  In this viewpoint, God is more of a supreme architect who created the basic structure of the universe, and evolution is one of the ways in which this universe operates, giving rise to life in all its complexity.  It's a reasonable viewpoint, given that you can neither prove nor disprove God.  Personally, I don't find God necessary, so I don't include such a being in my view of reality.  Can I prove this?  No, not really.  But a believer in God can't prove to me that this being exists, either.  As far as whether you're a creationist of an evolutionist, I'd say you're an evolutionist since you believe that life diversified through evolution.  Darwin was also a believer in God, although not a personal God you could communicate with.  His viewpoint was much more like the school of theological thought that was very popular at the time called Deism, which proposes a God that exists as a permeating force, but which does not perform miracles, or give prophecy to individual humans.  In other words they view God as more of a force of nature than an anthropomorphic God.   So, if the originator of the theory of evolution could believe in God, and felt that he was learning about the works of this God by understanding nature, then I'd say someone who believes in God and considers the process of evolution to be one of the achievements of that God is an evolutionist.  \n\nThe idea that a belief in God and acceptance of evolution as a scientific throught are impossible to hold at the same time is a straw man set up by religious con men who are mostly interested in controlling people's thought for the purpose of building up their own political power.  By creating a false dichotomy, they can get people to isolate themselves from other schools of thought, which makes them easier to control.
1028220
Because religion is what is used to explain what we do not understand.  From the beginning of time people have created religions and Gods to compensate for the unknown.  \n\nOriginally, eclipses, stars, and pregnancy were all seen as works of a God.  Now we understand these sciences and can rationalize them in our common knowledge.  If you expand this to today, we have a whole belief system setup to explain what we don't understand in today's world.  And it doesn't take a genius to think, "Well, these seems to be a process... ...I wonder what happens when we know a bit more, and a bit more, and...".  \n\nSo to me, a belief in God or a religion is nothing more then an acceptance of intellectual laziness. It's an excuse to look at something you don't understand and say "God did it" instead of "Let's find out how that came to be and why".\n\nDo I think that there could be a God?  Sure.  But I also believe that there could be life on another planet.  Which one do you think we will have quantifiable proof of first?
22583
Absolute proof?  No, just as there isn't absolute proof for evolution.  There are, however, a great number of evidences that would indicate that there is a God.  Taken together, you can then infer it, but that is where faith comes in.  Others have mentioned some of the evidences, but whether or not you accept that as indicating that God is real is up to you.  Others see them and interpret them differently.\n\nWhatever you come to believe, it's going to require some faith.  Some positions require more faith than others do.
412335
A belief in god and evolution is mainly a problem for closed-minded bible literalists...typically fundamentalists, who believe that every word in the bible is written as god intended.\n\nThe problem you face is this. If the bible isn't taken as a literal document of belief, how do you choose which bits to believe and which bits not to believe? So, is execution right or wrong...because the bible is both "for" and "against". Same for homosexuality (although not in modern terms).\n\nMost scientists I know who are christians accomodate this dilemma by using the bible as a broad belief framework - which is perfectly acceptable - and they talk about how they are able to draw their values from this position, but they keep an open mind about what science discovers and how science can help. \n\nBible literalists have a hard time trying to present their ideas without attacking science, as though science is some kind of enemy - the kind of enemy that will end up saving their lives from cancer or serious accident someday. The greatest disservice these people play in society is to present the idea to children that science is somehow seriously flawed and that nothing can ever be proven - unlike their belief system, however, which has a complete video record of god creating the earth in 6 days (sorry, that was sarcasm...something bible literalists will have a hard time understanding).\n\nTo Vangyblue below - that's the biggest pile of nonsense I've read for for at least 30 minutes. All the evidence of the failure of American education is present in your response.
785532
No evolution does not disprove god.  But it does pose a very large challenge.  Evolution and Christianity are not as compatible as you may think.  If evolution is the correct theory, then that means that the literalist biblical theory is not right.  Sure you might be able to save it by saying that it is metaphorically true (say, a day to god equals a billion years or whatever).  But if some parts of the bible are not literally true, then why think that any of it is literally true?  Jesus, God, etc. can all be seen as being metaphors for the natural world and the human condition.  With no way to really tell what is literally true and what is metaphorically true, allowing that at least some of it is not literally makes the rest questionable.  If one part is not true, or only becomes true if you take it as a metaphor, what does that say about the rest?  What the bible says then cannot be believed just because it is in the bible anymore, and one of the central justifications of christianity crumbles.  of course god can still exist, but its a major challenge.\n\nOk as for your other question about how can an atheist account for the existence of anything without a God:  all i have to do is ask you where god came from.  Did god come from nothing?  Was he always there?  If you say god came from nothing, then you violate your own rule that nothing can come from nothing.  If you say he was always there, then why can't the atheist just say that the universe was always here?  Why can't the atheist just say that the universe always existed?  Its more likely (by occam's razor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor ) than the belief that god was always there.  Religion doesn't answer the question of where things came from, it only begs the question of where god came from.  Under the religous explanation nothing is really explained.\n\nI admire your call to tolerance and hope of compatibility, but i'm afraid its nothing more than political correctness.  It would be nice if both sides could be right, but when you think about it there really is a tension.
34443
To everyone here - you can't argue with each other. You are arguing matters based on someone's faith - so there can be no logical outcome as viewed from both parties. To have religious faith means you 'just believe' despite what might be shown false - that's when these folks tend to raise the 'get real - how can that be so' attitude.\n\nStay in your realm and believe what you want to, but do not tell me and others that all of observed science is garbage. If you fell ill at ease when looking at science - perhaps you need to look inwards and ask what is making you feel uneasy?? If you feel that folks who believe in evolution are all going to hell for denying God - then why worry about them? I'm sure that they are not concerned about it.
412786
Thank you I am so glad someone asked that question. You are so right on that. If you think about it, yeah evolution is scientifically proven so there's no denying that. But if you are arguing on the side of creationism than you have to realize that there really is no denying science. You can't deny a fact such as gravity exists. It's just there and no bible can disprove that. So if you combine both theories there shouldnt be an ragument at all. God created the universe; that's the explanation for the "big boom" and then he created humans. Humans and all other cretures of the universe naturally evolved from his creation. Now how hard is it to accept the fact that that's probably the most logical explanation out there?
195377
Yup, I believe in God and The Bible, His letter to mankind.  And no, I do not believe in the Theory of Evolution.\n\nIf one believes the Bible is God's Word, then one can't believe in evolution.  Since the Bible IS the Word of God, then the entire book has to be perfect -- totally inerrant.  This means that if one believes anything in the Bible, one must believe every single word.  It's all or nothing; God either said it or He didn't say it.  He is either lying or He is telling the truth.  He is incapable of lying or of being inaccurate in anything He says so every bit of it has to be true.\n\nEven though there are things we may not understand, we believe them anyway, because God is totally trustworthy.  There are many things few of us understand, but we believe in them anyway, such as the deeper things of science and mathematics.  I don't understand much about how a computer works and the many advancements in information technology, but I sure believe in them.\n\nIf there's anyone we can rely on it is God.  He doesn't make mistakes.  He is perfect.
980309
I am a christian and I believe in evolution, we didn't just spontaneously appear however the process had to start somewhere, the probability of the random event occurring to start life is so low its near impossible.
283170
A god-fearing fundamentalist named Charles Darwin first theorized on evolution. Here's what he wrote (see ref.):\n....During these two years (March 1837 - January 1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come by this time (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see the Old Testament, from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rain-bow as a sign, &c., &c., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than....the beliefs of any barbarian....\n  ....Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.\n  And this is a damnable doctrine....\n\nSomehow I suspect he was less "ineduacted" than the questioner...
148007
I can't believe a faith based on a book that is flawed in many ways.  I can't believe in something there is no way of having real, tangable, physical, scientific proof of.  I can't believe in something that is based on the words of people that may well have had a delusional disorder.  I can't believe in something that contradicts it's self and leaves alot of things open it can't realistically explain.  Science is in the process of proving something else entirely and has more evidence than religion does on the matter.  Which should I believe?  I tend to lean to the logical side of it which leaves religion out.  Until someone can conclusivly, scientifically prove some of these things I will not believe.
1057563
Evolutionism isn't like that.  You don't have to try to get people to subscribe to it. Evolution doesn't require worship like "God" does.  Evolution will continue to exist even if noone belived in it, "God" would not.
417171
As it seems this question has raised yet another debate, I'd like to add my 2cents. As the father of paleoboy, and a Christian, I believe I have raised my son well. Because I have not fallen into the ignorance, as I will call it, of pre-empting God. Evolution is merely a theory, man should  not be assumed to be included in this factor. In fact, there exists more questions  of man's progress than proof of any evolution. \nThe animals however, and lower life, could have been designed by God in many numerous ways. Who are we to question the means, or claim to know as to how God works? He works, as we know, in mysterious ways! Could he not have in fact, by design, created species that could evolve and adapt to earth changes, if for no other reason, to allow clues behind for the event of man to discover, to weed out those that would choose to use this information, to disprove His existence?\nTo claim we have all the answers to the mysteries of God is to fall into ignorance as Christians. I back up my son's answer, as an open, unquestioning mind as to the works of God. Paleontology is a science, based on evidence, and a great deal of theory, which is always subject to change with newly discovered evidence.