Which side are you in?

[PreciousExo]

I don't really think i belong to any of the 3 groups or sides but i feel like science is here to give us physical evidence of how the world was before we got here.

[samps1910]

When you consider the origin of the universe, the emergence of life on Earth, and the future of humanity, the chances are you do so from one of three perspectives. Perhaps you’re educated in the sciences and are convinced that current scientific theories and data explain our origins and enable us to exercise some control over future events; yet you also have a knowledge of the Bible and its seeming incompatibility with science. Alternatively, you might believe that God created the world and that the scriptures contain all of the answers about our origins and future; at the same time, you understand the basics of the scientific theories and can see their apparent incongruity with some of the teachings of your religion. Then again, you may be familiar with the fundamentals of biblical religions and of science, not feel committed to one or the other perspective, yet be curious about whether their apparently disparate explanations and timelines for our origins and outlook on the future are reconcilable.

As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?

Perhaps there can be more groups, where people who blindly believe in faith or people who believe in neither. I think, based on these groups, I would fall in group 3. Science has always been something that fascinated me and I hold it very dear when it comes to reasoning. The Bible is a way of life, but not something I would rely on completely. Same with science as there are many things which are a mystery. The existence of a higher power is what I rely on and for that reason, I can't seem to take one side.

[Nicole Carvalho]

I'm on the 3. I don't take a side either science or religion because neither is perfect or absolute. The bible is interpreted by people and in the past, they could just hide some information also the science just can prove some events scientifically. So, for me I don't try to be extreme because this way I would blind myself and won't change my opinions, that's why I keep an open mind for options.

[Ellylion]

When you consider the origin of the universe, the emergence of life on Earth, and the future of humanity, the chances are you do so from one of three perspectives. Perhaps you’re educated in the sciences and are convinced that current scientific theories and data explain our origins and enable us to exercise some control over future events; yet you also have a knowledge of the Bible and its seeming incompatibility with science. Alternatively, you might believe that God created the world and that the scriptures contain all of the answers about our origins and future; at the same time, you understand the basics of the scientific theories and can see their apparent incongruity with some of the teachings of your religion. Then again, you may be familiar with the fundamentals of biblical religions and of science, not feel committed to one or the other perspective, yet be curious about whether their apparently disparate explanations and timelines for our origins and outlook on the future are reconcilable.

As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?

I'm definitely in group 3 I think that science and religion don't really contradict each other. The author brings a theory of Earth with history - Earth created with all the fossils and dinosaurs' bones, which I found quite intriguing!

[britcott30]

I would fit in a group who will just let the unanswered questions (that cannot explained by scientific or by biblical) to become a mystery that only God knows the answers. Because there are always some things in this world that cannot logically fit in human’s mind.

[Kenna Ridzi]

I'd fall into group three, I've always been an indecisive person and I can see the logic of both sides. Science has proof on its side, but the Bible and its stories have faith on their side. I think the deciding factor is which one you believe to support this argument more, the idea of proof or faith. In some cases, such as the Big Bang being the start of the universe as proven by Red Shift, the proof is prevalent. But what about what comes after? That's where my faith takes over. It just depends on which way you look at it.

[Tangerinehippie1]

I believe that God is science.

[Chigo Nwagboso]

Personally, I believe that the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit as a Christian. But, I'm also curious to have a knowledge of what science has to say about the earth and it's creation. This book is really intriguing and adventurous.

[Deval Sodha]

When you consider the origin of the universe, the emergence of life on Earth, and the future of humanity, the chances are you do so from one of three perspectives. Perhaps you’re educated in the sciences and are convinced that current scientific theories and data explain our origins and enable us to exercise some control over future events; yet you also have a knowledge of the Bible and its seeming incompatibility with science. Alternatively, you might believe that God created the world and that the scriptures contain all of the answers about our origins and future; at the same time, you understand the basics of the scientific theories and can see their apparent incongruity with some of the teachings of your religion. Then again, you may be familiar with the fundamentals of biblical religions and of science, not feel committed to one or the other perspective, yet be curious about whether their apparently disparate explanations and timelines for our origins and outlook on the future are reconcilable.

As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?

I am in the third group.
I believe in spiritual knowledge and also in scientific research. I completely believe that both of these can go hand in hand. And I am quite confirm about this after reading this book.

[Mutai Marshal]

I am more inclined to the Bible. Unlike most books, the Bible is a document of faith. Not all arguments have documented evidence considering that it addresses events that took place many years ago. It's a book of faith. However, I don't dispute blindly what science argues.

[Mutai Marshal]

I am more inclined to the Bible. Unlike most books, the Bible is a document of faith. Not all arguments have documented evidence considering that it addresses events that took place many years ago. It's a book of faith. However, I don't dispute blindly what science argues.

[Nqobile Mashinini Tshabalala]

I'm part of the other group. I wholeheartedly believe that God created Heaven and Earth and everything in it. I am a scientist by profession and have come across some mind-blowing discoveries. I have also read many scientific journals and they have revealed more than what I have learned in the Bible about the Earth and I think that's also part of God's plan. I think for humans, science is necessary to gain more understanding about God's mysterious works and ways.

[Nikhila Kulkarni]

I think there's a fourth group: people who are on both sides and believe that there is just more to it than we can possibly know as humans.

I agree and I would consider myself in the fourth group. The religious teachings in ancient times were a way of explaining it to people what science proves later. Such religious books, if we see from a certain perspective, are nothing but documented findings explained philosophically. Although, there are many things that are still not confirmed and we still don't know. We might find out in the coming years.

[Peace Odii]

I'm of the first set of humans—those who see similarities between Bible teaching and scientific evidence. The God of the Bible is responsible for creation.

[Sakura5]

Very interesting question. I would see myself more in the first group I think, of "Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence". At the same time, I am aware that scientific theories cannot account for everything and I hope one day they will be able to give a justification for these unresolved mysteries. But the road is still very long, I think. Also, these three are macro-categories that overgeneralize the personal beliefs of people. I understand why the author put it in these terms, but at the same time, I don't think every single individual can be thrown into a definite category such as these.