Devo on evolution VS. God...

According to Devo:
"God made man
But he used the monkey to do it
Apes in the plan
We’re all here to prove it
I can walk like an ape
Talk like an ape
I can do what a monkey can do
God made man
But a monkey supplied the glue"

I was thinking, though the bible says that man was made in God's image - it doesn't say anywhere that God could not modify his design if he chose to do so.
Perhaps this is why there are so many "proto humans" but no links to link them together in one continuously evolving chain.

Really I just wanted to use Devo lyrics as the basis of a philosophical idea.:biggrin:

I was having this argument with my 13 year old stepsister who believes that 2005 years ago god created the world and the bible fell from the sky...Now thats south carolina public school at work. Anyway, in the bible it says that god created the earth over the course of several days. Who is to say that God goes by our 24 hour day? Why couldnt god have created the earth one day (X Trillion years ago) then created plants in one God "Day" (X billion years ago) then created animals another God "Day" (X billion years ago) which both could have easily come from single celled organisms and bacteria. Then he had the animals evolve eventually producing humans yet another God "Day" (X million? years ago) it makes sense to me. The way I see it is when someone stands up and says No! God created everything and since you cant prove that he didnt then im right. I ask them: If your God is so powerful then why do you doubt that he could have created creatures that CAN evolve. By saying that he cant you are saying that he is not all powerful and a being that is not all powerful is not God. Then I usually do my sassy black girl snap, spin, flip my hair, and walk away with one hand on my hip.

its an interesting subject, but I don't know much about evolution. However, if what you're saying is true, then god looks like a monkey? and he modified us to look like humans? Is that your way of explaining evolution?

about the 7 DAYS thing... many christians will tell you that of course its not 7 days as we know them, but that days means years in Gods terms. Then there are other christians who say that the bible is an exact account, and it was in fact 7 days, equal to 168 hours as we know it.

I am the type who does not know what to believe, but I know that I can't trust people to teach me. The idea that God controls evolution is a new idea to me. And it makes sense in my eyes. But I'll still have to wait until Im dead before I make up my mind.

I was having this argument with my 13 year old stepsister who believes that 2005 years ago god created the world and the bible fell from the sky...

Actually 2005 years ago is when Christ died on the cross and not when God created everything. Also, the New Testiment of the Bible was created several years after that. The Old Testiment has been around longer than 2005 years.

Anyway, in the bible it says that god created the earth over the course of several days. Who is to say that God goes by our 24 hour day? Why couldnt god have created the earth one day (X Trillion years ago) then created plants in one God "Day" (X billion years ago) then created animals another God "Day" (X billion years ago) which both could have easily come from single celled organisms and bacteria. Then he had the animals evolve eventually producing humans yet another God "Day" (X million? years ago) it makes sense to me.

I go by this theory as well. It even says in the Bible that a day with the Lord is like a 1000 on Earth. This doesn't mean though it took God 6000 years to create the Earth and everything on it. It really could of been only six days but it could of been six billion. The thing is, we really don't know.

The way I see it is when someone stands up and says No! God created everything and since you cant prove that he didnt then im right.

You're no more right than anybody else. Unless somebody has a time machine they can't go back and show you what they believe. You can't proove we evolved from apes or from fish that crawled from the sea so in my eyes, I'm right.

I ask them: If your God is so powerful then why do you doubt that he could have created creatures that CAN evolve. By saying that he cant you are saying that he is not all powerful and a being that is not all powerful is not God.

I don't doubt that he could create animals that evolve. Who's to say the animal Adam named "horse" didn't look like the horse we see today? God changed man when he was thrown out of Eden so who's to say he didn't let the animals change as well?

This isnt about religion being right. Lets not take it there. I like the idea that came from the original post, and I don't think the thread deserves to be twisted into a dispute over religion, and get closed. Its just food for thought. Leave it at that.

And let us not forget that Devo also encouraged us to "whip it, whip it good".
I do my best to comply.

And let us not forget that Devo also encouraged us to "whip it, whip it good".
I do my best to comply.

And to think a philosophical discussion was started by the one who said "whip it good"

I believe that it is possible to have microevolution, meaning adaptation within a species. However I dont believe in macroevolution, change from one species to another. Also if you guys are interested in reading more on the subject you might want to check out the book The 10 Things You Should Know About the Creation vs. Evolution Debate by Ron Rhodes. Its full of interestion ideas.

i took oceanography I last semester and can tell you that the professor brought up some good points. as you could figure, there were some heated debates between both sides. Ron Rhodes brings up some great ideas in his book. a very interesting read......

How about this:

"The Missing Link" is where God created man.

I true believer will not believe anything. Why? Because things change and igf they were in another time, a new belief would come along. That's why these beliefs are truly beliefs, but ideas.

As a Christian, I think that the debate over the creation of earth is beyond stupid. Would he really want us down here sayin', "Nuh aa! Man was man when he was created, not an ape."

Also, what bloke mentioned makes sense, Never thought of that, but I gave up on the beginning since it's pointless to interpret the past since it's been done and can't help anything. Anyhow, back to Bloke, um, yes, it says God created man in his own mention but it doens;t say when. There are 4 books not in the Bible as it is and many "articles" is you also. This could just be a missing piece or a misinterpreted piece. I mean, come on, how many times has the Bible been translated? And by who!?! Gutenberg...oh my. Not sayin' he's bad or anything, but that's just one. I'm not sayin' the Bible is wrong, I'm just sayin' it's misinterpreted and if God wrote and He's such an awesome being, how can we understand anything of His. We can't, so interpretation is a must and therefore an opinion which is an idea, 'cause it could always change and not a belief making nothing true except the fact that now is now to us and then is the past and there is the future...

Actually 2005 years ago is when Christ died on the cross and not when God created everything. Also, the New Testiment of the Bible was created several years after that. The Old Testiment has been around longer than 2005 years.

Sorry to trivialize things, but 2005 years ago was when Christ was born. A.D.
means "the year of our lord" or something like that, in abreviated greek.

Sorry to trivialize things, but 2005 years ago was when Christ was born. A.D.
means "the year of our lord" or something like that, in abreviated greek.

If were gonna get that technical about someone who wasnt alive that long anyway then Jesus was actually born around 5 A.D. Making it around 2000 years when he was born ;)

Sorry to trivialize things, but 2005 years ago was when Christ was born. A.D.
means "the year of our lord" or something like that, in abreviated greek.

This is where big debates happen. Some people believe A.D. means After the Death while other believe what you said. Many people believe Christ was born in a period between B.C. and A.D. There are others who believe he was born as late as 64 A.D. or as early as 100 B.C.

I'm going to go with the theory he was born between B.C and A.D. It just makes more sense to me.

I have heard that A.D. means "Anno Domini". Not positive about the spelling, but I was taught that it was not an english phrase, and it translated to something like what satchmode said. I was actually taught this in school, in history class.

This is where big debates happen. Some people believe A.D. means After the Death while other believe what you said. Many people believe Christ was born in a period between B.C. and A.D. There are others who believe he was born as late as 64 A.D. or as early as 100 B.C.

I'm going to go with the theory he was born between B.C and A.D. It just makes more sense to me.

B.C. means "Before Christ"...well why would there just be a missing link of years between the two? that just doesn't make sense. even the christians know that when one calendar ends another one begins. but you don't wait a few years to start the next calendar. it doesn't work like that.

haven't you ever heard on a TV special "in the 60th year of our lord..."? they don't say "60 years after the death of christ..." whether the year is wrong or not the fact is our calendar is based on the birth of christ being the beginning of our current age. there is no "big debate" as to what A.D. means. anyone who knows enough to argue about it knows what it means. the only debate is when christ actually was born. look it up.

I have heard that A.D. means "Anno Domini". Not positive about the spelling, but I was taught that it was not an english phrase, and it translated to something like what satchmode said.
Rick is correct. Anno Domini is Latin and literally translates to 'year of the lord'. Usually it's understood to mean 'in the year of our lord'. The Oxford English dictoinary states it to be 'of the Christian Era'.

^Ah, you took it from me. Yes, Anno Domini is said to be the time between BC and AD and therefore...time, i guess stop, record wise. Anytime in their can be refered to, but not by BC or AD. It's just a time...idk, I;m tryin; to remember something I read but yeah

^Ah, you took it from me. Yes, Anno Domini is said to be the time between BC and AD and therefore...time, i guess stop, record wise. Anytime in their can be refered to, but not by BC or AD. It's just a time...idk, I;m tryin; to remember something I read but yeah

Anno Domini IS AD. Thats where they get the AD from, Anno for A, Domini for D, put them together you have AD. It isnt a time between bc and ad, if that is the case then we are currently living outside of time. *cue twilight zone music*