God or evolution, Which one do you believe ?

Personally speaking, I think that both of these concepts are not mutually exclusive, since, similar to the spirit of mankind's point, evolution can be proven by fact, whereas God cannot. However, in my opinion, I do not believe that God is merely a concept of religion, but rather an idea that we, humans, have created and shaped over the course of time in order to explain all of the mysteries of life that science or fact cannot directly prove. In this sense, "God" is just a concept that exists in the minds of human beings, not something that is actually physical or spiritual, as it is often depicted in religious texts and sources. With that being said, I think that God and evolution are not so contradictory of each other, but in many ways, actually similar, due to both being fragments of thought coming from our minds.

Now, going back to the question of whether God "created life" or not, I believe that he did, since, referring back to my original point, science cannot directly prove what actually created life, as there is little to no evidence of what went on before we even existed. Now, of course, there are theories like the "Big Bang Theory" which are generally accepted by the majority of people due to their convincing narratives, however, as these also cannot be proven directly by science due to an absence of concrete evidence, we cannot pinpoint what actually created or caused the creation of life in our universe. And it is this absence of evidence that I think has led people to believe in God and visualize it as some kind of diety that is closely related with the real world. Religion, in this sense, might also just be a source that helps people to better visualize the concept of "God" by portraying it in ways that seem more "natural" to humans.

They are not mutually exclusive. However, evolution is an objective FACT of life. Like gravity. God has no actual proof.

Finches have a much shorter life span than humans or reptiles. The Galapogos finches arrived by sea and had to adapt to survive. Having a shorter life span those who successfully mated and laid eggs chicks were the strongest and survive and their chicks and chicks after that developed strong beaks to crack the local nuts. those without strong beaks got ate by slow moving elderly tortoises.

Apply that to bacteria that multiply tenfold in seconds exchange of DNA is exponential. Did God create this? let me know.

Darwin

Both.

God failed us... he clearly doesn't give a damn about humans when he, for example, let billions of people die to the plague back in medieval times... and then, of course, his religious dick riders have to always justify his actions saying that we deserved it. We shouldn't worship him like that.

Evolution did not fail us, because some Europeans have developed a gene to fight viruses similar to the one that caused the plague... as a result of the plague itself... the ones who didn't have the genes to protect themselves from the virus died off, and those with the genes survived and reproduced... so in a sense, evolution helped us more than God ever did

Evolution, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

God. I am 13, and my view on religion impresses me. I do not believe in evolution, such as Darwin's theory. An evolution is meant to be an ongoing process. To this day, you do not currently see apes changing into a human or a human changing into something else.

evolution because if god existed, he wouldn't have been cruel enough to stand idle and watch my beloved 2ds be stolen in the playground at school.

God is a religious concept. Evolution is a scientific fact. Religion and science do not mix. Religion is based on faith; Science is based on reason. These are mutually exclusive epistemologies. You cannot validly confront religion with science and you cannot validly confront science with religion. They are oil and water and there is no emulsifier. Anything else is you believing in contradictory ideas at the same time.

Evolution. Facts are facts. Though I am an Atheist, I'm not dumb when it comes to religion. People still use the Old Testament in 'battles' to just themselves and twist sentences in both new and old. Facts over fiction, the Bible is a fiction book.

God & Science is a reasonable, logical answer - that I probably should have included in my og statement - and if i were to practice a religion this is probably the way I would practice it.

Why make a distinction? God AND evolution for me. I see no reason to take Bible literally. Never had a question asked at school "What did author mean by that?"

Bible's all parables to show us how to behave, not a science book. Old testament shouldn even count for Christians, as it is a bronze-age tribe book to keep the tribe strong together. Only parts of it have any moral value nowadays. New testament is far more advanced ethically, and is a great starting point of any moral discussion. Still not a science book, though.

Any God of any faith is not universal, it is not it has its own logic that does not apply o everyone i.e. the people who don't believe in that religion. Whilst I can recognise the appeal of religion, science is science, it can be repeated and reviewed and proven time and time again, and it also applies to everyone; facts and science is universal.