Here's an example. Rape is considered morally wrong in virtually every human society (ranging from city life to remote tribes). However, rape isn't looked down upon in the animal category, and actually can have the advantage in natural selection (due to an increased passing of its allelles).

haha icic.. well tell him 'thank you' for caring.. i hope i didnt sound to rude or forceful to any1

Don't worry about it

Haha I think your city wins. Knoxville, TN doesn't have the largest Catholic population, but that is changing somewhat with the influx of immigrants...

Afterlife> the truth is, I'm not really sure. What I will say, however, is that my belief does not follow Catholicism in this aspect.

ohhic haha... well I basically see it as 'survival of the fittest' as you said. All animals do what they must to survive.. whereas humans rely more on civilization and their supreme intellect, most other animals are not intelligent enough to form 'civilizations' and therefore depend on their natural instincts..

I believe without such a globalized and well-developed society, humans would act very similar to other animals.

I dont think the Catholic church has much of an elaberate idea of heaven.. what exactly do you believe? jw

hah this is like the first time that I have really used this forum.. I created this account a while back to get help with java, but 2day is the first time I have really used it much.. How do you become a "team Colleague"?

...i gotta go to bed, but I'll answer the questions tmr.

Team Colleague> Basically, you're a retired mod.

Interesting.... A few comments -- opinions, to be sure (except the first):

Theories are not facts. The are based on observations and seem to hold true, but aspects of the theory still have not been proven. That's why they are called theories instead of facts.

Creationism: According to Isaac Asimov, based on scientific evidence (carbon dating for one) Creationism could only be true if the world was created by a deceitful creator. The proven age of the world does not coincide with the 'stated' or 'created' age, therefore the scientifically provable data had to be manufactured and is therefore a lie. It's an interesting thought...

Evolution: An alternate 'subtheory' is that we did not evolve from apes. Instead, apes and humans have a common ancestor farther back that split into what eventually became us on one line and apes on another.

As for other current species eventually becoming human, not likely. No more so than the egg that evolves into a cake could eventually become an omelet. Their current path has taken them away from the possibility of being human.

Genesis: Possibility is that it was written to explain where we came from in terms that were understandable to the population at the time (1600-400 BC, somewhere in there -- see http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm)

Six-day/24 hour debate. C'Mon, it's poetic license. That means in 144 hours the world was created. But Jupiter would have been created in 60 hours, Mars in 147.72 hours... Day in Genesis is (probably) an ambiguous term, used because at its writing the people would be able to understand it rather than aeon or millions of years. Heck, they barely had writing back then.

Bible: So far has been relatively accurate historically, where the places events are mentioned. As for the individuals many (most?) have not been proven to have existed. Doesn't mean they haven't, it's just very hard to prove. Allegedly, JC has one mention outside of the Bible pointing to his existence. As for specific events surrounding his life and exploits, little to nothing has been found that I'm aware of to prove he (or most others for that matter) existed outside of the Biblical records. Not being a historian, I may be uninformed of documentation that proves otherwise.

Didn't the loving creator create the single organism that eventually evolved into us? I for one don't have a problem with this idea.

Sure we do! Every day we believe lies because we don't know any better. Luckily, it doesn't hurt us most of the time.

Isn't this true in the teachings of most religions? So nothing special about us...

Reminds me of a song by Yakko of the Animaniacs... :mrgreen:

The purpose of most religions are to instill morals. Their morals just don't always coincide with Christianity's set of morals. But they make sense for their believers. Or their brainwashed masses -- take your pick.

If by organism you mean adam and eve, then sure... me either

I'm not aware of any historical evidence that disproves the credibility of the Bible. You may want to take a look at my reasearch paper, as it is an in-depth look at historiagraphy as applied to The New Testament.