Who is to say that he does? Is it not possible that some people are so against the possibility of a divine being that they simply dismiss any attempts he makes? Or is it not possible that God doesn't even try with such people since they've already given up on him? The point is, you can't say another person's reasons are invalid simply because you haven't had the same experience. If you had lived your whole life underground and I came from the surface and told you of the sun, would that make its existence any less valid?

Personally, I believe in evolution and the lack of an intelligent creator. I also believe that even if there WAS an omnipotent being who created the universe, life evolved anyway. I also believe that even if there is an omnipotent being, he doesn't meddle with the world.

I honestly agree! It is not hard at all to imagine a God that could create this way. I don't believe anyone’s salvation depends on this belief one way or the other. I don't understand God in the least he is absolutely wonderfully unfathomable to my human mind. So essentially I faithfully believe in God and the bible. 7 days means 7 days...bam! Adam and then Eve...with no belly buttons...LOL. Hope and Faith are little words but everything changes if you believe!

God has never let me down...my own doubts at times have sure gotten me down...

If you feel it's irrelevant, then why do you dismiss the evidence for evolution, such as that in the link Fwip posted a page or so back, as well as evolution we have observed in modern-day animals?

Hm. Well, I haven't read all the previous posts, nor do I plan to, but I'll just go ahead and put my opinion out there that I believe in Creationism. Hang around me for five minutes and it would be hard NOT to see that. I love Jesus a ton. (: And I think that the human body itself is evidence enough. (There's a squirrel in my ceiling... Just thought I'd put that out there.) If you look at all the chemical reactions that must happen in order for the human body to function properly, it just makes me wonder, how could that all happen on accident because of an explosion, you know? That's just my personal opinion, though.

Failing to understand something doesn't mean it didn't, and doesn't continue to, happen.

You have absolutely no understanding of the big bang theory, the human body, or evolution.
Don't use what you have no understanding of in an argument.

I can easily respect the opinions of religious people like Hydrogen or Maximillian, but some people here not so much... At least put up some sort of argument and show that you know what you're talking about before posting. And if you didn't read, at least read the link one page back.

Non-evolutionary creationism would be that some higher power created virus and everything else at the same time.
Intelligent design, same sort of idea.

Indeed, they're not theories that are testable at our will, but they kind of are. If a race other than our own genetically engineered us and planted us on a planet, well, we do have the technology to do that.

It's a long shot. But for all we know, we're just the imagination of some conscience we've never even heard of..
Anyways.
There are theories that viruses are early forms of life, the paradox being that they need a host to survive. So viruses before life doesn't make sense, etc.

Sorry, it's been a while since I've been on.

Again, there are plenty of people that love Jesus and aren't Creationist.
It would be, if we didn't have tons of fossils of our distant ancestors, showing a very clear evolution. If there were absolutely no evidence that we evolved, out existence would point to some sort of outside force. But we do have the fossils, so no.
I'm beginning to see this misconception a lot. Evolution doesn't say bacteria just accidentally turned into humans one day. It was a very slow and gradual process, going through millions, if not billions of difference species, until it eventually ended up where we are now. All the chemical reactions didn't suddenly start happening in one generation, but over the course of trillions.

Furthermore, the bacteria that exist today are highly evolved. None of the original species still exist, and these species would have been far simpler than modern bacteria.

Ok, I wasn't going to post, but what I believe is that the universe is only about ten thousand years old, that the world was created in only seven days, and that, through a 3 billion year process, evolution did take place only as a matter of the universe being pulled into existence not the actual universe existing that long.

I don't have any links, but off the top of my head and through countless documentaries, I recall that many physicians have already calculated the age of the Universe by the rate of expanding materials, making it a few billion years old.

Do you have a scientific reason to uphold your belief or is it based on faith?

Man, how wrong YOU are.

Btw, science is REAL. :O

Now for serious.

Evolution is real, it's happening now, it's documented. If you choose not to believe it, that's fine. But I reserve the right to mock or pity you in the same manner that I would mock or pity someone who just claimed that the Earth is flat or that disease is caused by an imbalance of humours.

I was not aware that it was the role of doctors to calculate the age of the universe.

_{I think you mean 'physicist' :P}

No, you don't. No one here has the right to mock anyone else here. It's in the forum rules.

I believe that there is no reason evolution and creationism shouldn't be able to go hand in hand.

If we're talking young earth creationism, then yes there is a reason.

If the bible is taken literally, yes. But if we accept some of it could be figurative, much like the parables...

EDIT: Also, 45 percent of American Muslims were polled and said that they see evolution as "the best explanation for the origin of human life on Earth."

First, all scientific reason that I have is based on faith. Theories are nothing more than models of reality. Anybody who partakes in science is putting faith that these theories are reasonable representations of reality, but that doesn't mean that those representations are reality, nor should it be taken the other way; they could very well be how things work. Therefore, everything that I state is based off of faith, even through science.

Plus, I mistyped what I had really meant. I believe in God, and I believe that God created the world and universe in seven days. Nonetheless, I have several theories as to how human existence could come into play (happen) - even without God - and only a couple theories as to how the universe could be created - once again, even without God - and I have only two (maybe could be three if I were to think hard enough) ideas as to how the matter came into existence.

Why I put that was what I believed is because I know that God could do it anyway he wanted to, but he did it in a way that wouldn't be lying (meaning he wasn't using a metaphor when he said 7 days), with the earth and universe being 10,000 years old, and the universe having a multi-billion year old history, according to the Bible (which I also have put faith towards being accurate). But, that isn't the only way I believe God could have created the earth in seven days, I have more ideas to as how he could have done it.

It isn't faith if there is evidence behind it.

Please read Sokal and others on the Science War....you postmodernist

Unless you yourself have done the research on everything you believe you're putting some amount of faith into it, even if it's just faith in the research abilities of the scientists who created the theories you subscribe to.

No, I'm just real. I'm not against science, never said I was. I believe that science is accurate, but I can't even be sure that 1950 was real, even with evidence. How can I assume that a fossil dated back millions of years is 100% evidence of something happening? No such thing as absolute proof exists. I'm about 95% sure that dinosaurs existed, and I'm about (but not at) 100% sure that events during the 1950 happened. Therefore, I "believe" that dinosaurs existed in the earth's history. That is based off of faith.

Sorry to have gotten off of topic: I do believe that evolution took place.

@Hobbaloo- Whoops! Thanks, that's exactly what I meant. :P

@Oasis- I understand what you mean now. No one is exactly sure 100% that one thing happened or another.

However, I think that it's not 100% faith when it comes to evidence. It's human observation of our surroundings, and it's that skill that humans have to observe and to conclude through logical reasoning that points to a longer history than a mere 10000 or so years. It takes time for rock to build up and layer up in the way it has. It definitely takes time for everything to happen, and definitely more than 10,000 years through carbon dating or rock dating.

In all the recorded history of man's time, there have been pretty much 0 descriptions of those prehistoric and pre-mammal animals, such as, like you stated, dinosaurs. If those weren't living things before the time of humans, how did they get so low in the rock layer and what exactly are they?