Posted on 10/20/2010 9:45:29 PM PDT by RobinMasters
Were human beings created by God in an instant, or over millions of years through evolution?
Glenn Beck addressed the question on his radio show today as he came to the defense of Christine O'Donnell, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate from Delaware under fire for challenging evolution.
"Did evolution just stop?" Beck asked rhetorically. "I haven't seen the half-monkey/half-person yet. ... There's no other species that's developing into half-people."
"I don't know how God creates. I don't know how we got here," he continued, wondering what God might tell him after he dies. "If God's like, 'Yup, you were a monkey once,' I'll be shocked, but I'll be cool with it."
Beck explained, "If God didn't create, if things evolve, then your rights evolve. You're not endowed by your Creator.
"Just like you go from a monkey to a man, you go from simple rights to higher rights and somebody has to take those rights and give them to you and take them away or change them. This is again the evolutionary thinking of progressivism."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
If you believe in scripture, can you give me a satisfactory answer to the question I raise in Comment #59?
“Did evolution just stop?””
Nope but, a third of us here in the US stopped exercising and eat too much creating an obese group that will likely have diabetes and other health conditions.
Bad Evolution
:’)
In Beck’s analysis, the host noted: “The left must have evolution. ... If there is no evolution, then the Founders are right [about a Creator endowing people with rights]. They (leftists) have to force it down your throat.”
“Truth is truth,” he continued. “You don’t have to force the truth. You just keep adding evidence and evidence until it becomes self-evident.”
Jokingly referring to himself as a “half-monkey person,” Beck blasted self-labeled progressives who seem bent on halting the viewpoints of anyone who disagrees with them.
“They have to stop the half-monkey people leaders so the rest of them can be saved and become fully developed, thinking human beings.”
Beck also challenged the notion that scientists are always correct.
“There are so many things that are accepted science that are later proven to be out of whack and false. ... Science, they don’t know their a— from their elbow.”
Beck also alluded to the media’s fascination with O’Donnell’s admission she had dabbled in witchcraft in her teenage years.
“I don’t think the Wiccans are creationists. I imagine they’re evolutionists,” he said. “First she’s a witch, and then she’s a Christian. Which is she?”
Genesis says God did it. Let there be light, and so on.
theory, something was created completely out of nothing.. How can that be done?
Don't doubt God's power.
There aren’t two versions of creation in the Bible. If you think there are, then by all means, present your case.
I was talking about the non-belivers. They say there was a big bang and everything became. but when you ask them where everything came from they get stuck at the bang. Not what actually created the bang.
I agree. It is much easier to explain by saying God did it.
I did not say there were 2 versions of creation, I said there were 2 versions of the creation of man and woman. Read Genesis, don’t have a Bible here so cannot give chapter and verse, but it is in there.
“I did not say there were 2 versions of creation, I said there were 2 versions of the creation of man and woman. Read Genesis, don’t have a Bible here so cannot give chapter and verse, but it is in there.”
I think that’s Genesis 1:27, on the sixth day: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Then, in Genesis 2:7, apparently sometime *after* the seventh day: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” A woman isn’t formed until verse 22.
There seem to be two separate accounts of man’s creation, not quite the same. I’ve seen arguments about this before, with literalists claiming the first creation in 1:27 is merely a poetic summary of the same event described in more detail in 2:7 and there’s no contradiction, while another school of thought (the Documentary Hypothesis) holds that Genesis as we know it is the result of two not quite identical accounts of Creation having been edited together at some point in the past.
I love Glenn Beck, he usually nails it, right on the money.
In this case his arguments against evolution are childish and disappointing.
But I'll give him, Christine O'Donnell and anyone else a pass who can help cut our monstrous Federal Government back to some much more reasonable size.
By the way, I also like and appreciate your arguments here. ;-)
I feel like flinging some poo today.
No, I think they are trying to rally the faithful, and hoping that will not cause more harm than good.
I'm certain Beck, O'Donnell et al are sincere in their beliefs, though probably not so well versed in the subject.
Remember, Beck is a Mormon, and they have very literalist views of Creation.
O'Donnell, so it says, is Roman Catholic, so her church teaches the same as most Protestant Churches -- that God created and runs the Universe, and if His methods appear scientifically to be "evolutionary," that's no slap against God, it's just one way He choses to reveal Himself to us.
Exactly.
The vast majority of Christian Church denominations do not agree.
If your belief in God hinges on the evolution/Creation debate.....then you have no faith in God.
Scientifically speaking, "theories" are not "proven."
A hypothesis can be scientifically disproved, in which case it remains a disproved hypothesis, not a theory.
A "theory" can be partially or wholly confirmed, in which case it is a "confirmed theory."
Evolution is partially confirmed.
Some of it may never be confirmed, since how do you replicate billions of years of cellular evolution inside a test tube?
A "fact" is simply a confirmed observation -- fossils in geological strata are facts.
DNA is a fact.
Scientifically speaking: evolution never was, is not, never will be "a fact."
It's a theory, a partially confirmed theory, but confirmed by so many facts that no serious scientist doubts it.
Bunk and nonsense.
Our entire understanding of the Universe is based on scientific data accumulated over hundreds of years, at ever increasing rates, and accuracy.
The "Big Bang Theory" is only one of a number of scientific theories proposed for how the Universe began.
Another was called the "Solid State Theory".
Amongst the various theories, the Big Bang is currently most widely accepted because it best fits the scientific data available.
Over the years there have been numerous scientific challenges to the Big Bang Theory, so it has been and no doubt will continue to be modified, or even replaced, in the future.
But all of that will be based on scientific data, and the math that ties it all together -- not on blind faith.
“I’m not sure we stopped evolving. We are 4-6 inches taller than our counterparts from the early 1900’s.”
Or maybe just better diet, hygiene, & living conditions.
What an astonishing argument!
Do you expect scientists to replicate in a test tube what it took God billions of years to evolve?
Do you think scientists should be so omnipotent?
Or do you imagine God is so nearly human?
The fact is that scientists have found evidence for and even partially replicated very ancient forms of "pre-life" chemicals.
Some day, who knows?, maybe they will reconstruct the entire evolutionary sequence leading to life.
But why should it make much difference to us whether they do or haven't yet?
OneWingedShark:
There are many, many biological examples today of asexual or semi-sexual reproduction amongst plants, animals and other little critters that seem never to have gotten the "have sex" memo.
Those who did "get it," of course, have done much better, for obvious evolutionary reasons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.