What came first, the chicken or the egg?

Why can't we believe in creation and evolution?

Also, can we please delete that random comma at the end of the third option? As a writer and editor, it's seriously upsetting me. xD

Furthermore, "dont" should have an apostrophe.

@dragonlily looking at it now, I realize that I misworded that original post. (what on earth was I trying to say?)
Let me try again.

While a chick is in its egg it is developing and growing into something that can function in the outside world. But it is developing and growing. You can't look at an egg (or in an egg) and guarantee that the chicken inside will be white or brown, or will have little wings, or a big comb. You just don't know what that specific creature will be like. Sure the little flaps on it's sides that will grow into wings might be smaller than most other chicks at that point in it's development, but that doesn't mean it won't have a growth spurt before hatching and end up with perfectly normal sized wings.
So when you have a creature and it could be a chicken or a chicken like dinosaur, you can't guarantee that a baby still in the egg will end up more like one then the other. If you could look inside the egg, you might see the baby creature growing teeth. This could be the teeth like a dinosaur, or they could just fall out after the baby hatches (like an egg tooth). The creature could have a growth on it's back, but then the thing just falls off before the creature even hatches. The thing is, you don't know what about this baby creature is certain and what is just a stage in it's development until it is done developing. And what happens when it's done developing? It hatches. So you can't be sure about what will be a permanent part of the creature's anatomy until it completes it's growth and hatches. So you can't know if it's a chicken or not until it hatches.
If you can't know if the first chicken is a chicken or not until it hatches, then that means there wasn't such thing as a chicken until the first chicken hatched. Which means if you look at a timeline, then all the time that that same chicken was in an egg it wasn't a chicken yet, because at that time there was no such thing as a chicken*, and there was no guarantee that there ever would be such thing as a chicken.

Does that make any more sense?


*This is because of the time at which a creature stops being similar to another creature and starts being its own creature. It's just a funny-looking dinosaur until it becomes different enough from dinosaurs that it can no longer be classified as a dinosaur.
The entire thing above is about why there was no such thing as a chicken until the first chicken hatched, based on the fact that you can't know if the creature is far enough away from being a dinosaur to be it's own creature until it finishes developing.

I get your point, but I still think the chicken knew if it was a chicken or not before we did. A growing chicken is still a chicken, just like a growing baby is still a baby.
Or maybe the chicken didn't know it was a chicken, but it just knew it was alive. Maybe chickens only exist in our minds, and what they really are is just little bits of life that happen to be shaped a certain way, but are still just little blobs of life floating around in a vast world of other blobs and shapes.... O.o I scare myself sometimes.

Haha Any way, it doesn't really matter all that much. A chicken is a chicken, and an egg is an egg, regardless of which was created first.

Cole wrote:Why can't we believe in creation and evolution?

Yes please. You can believe in God even if evolution and the Big Bang are real (well, I say "if", but "if" should only apply to the Big Bang; evolution is a proven thing). After all, someone had to make the thing that came before the Big Bang, right?

Anyway, chicken.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19195_7- ... wered.html

Read entry #7.

I don't think this was meant to develop into a debate, but I wanted to answer @Cole's question. Please ignore my comment if you find it offensive, or start a proper debate thread and I would be happy to defend my position there. Thanks!

Spoiler

Cole wrote:Why can't we believe in creation and evolution?

I believe the reason that evolution is not a suitable solution is that the Bible doesn't leave room for it, if you believe in a literal interpretation of the 6-day creation. God didn't say He created a dinosaur and waited to see if a chicken would eventually develop from one of the eggs after it evolved.

That being said, you really have to define what you mean by evolution if you want to know if it would be compatible with a Creationist point of view. Like, we see types of adaptation ("evolution", if you will) occurring within kind all the time, which is what gives rise to speciation (the creation of new species) within their own kind, and it's totally within the Creationist POV.

However Creationists (as far as I've studied-- and definitely as far as I personally believe) don't believe that evolution changes the kind of an organism. The dinosaur example is perfect to illustrate my meaning. Creationists don't believe that a dinosaur (reptile, one kind) could give rise to a chicken (bird, a different kind), however one type of bird could totally lose some genetic information and be speciated into a different type of bird (within the same kind), like a chicken. Sorry for the rant, but I just studied this at uni last semester and thought it was really cool how it worked together, so I wanted to share. ^-^

First of all, in my opinion, it could be both. First, the egg, because it comes first in the post (you never said where it would be coming first! I'm right!), but all kidding beside, because of what has also been stated about evolution.
Then the chicken because of cC's very enlightening article, but also because of this confusing thing I'm getting into right now.
Are we referring to specifically chickens or just animals in general? Because if it's just creatures in general, and we're referring to earth, there was this asteroid thing with little bacteria that reproduced through mitosis, so technically it was the "chicken." Unless you view the asteroid as a metaphorical egg, so long as we're breaking rules.
BUT if we are breaking rules, the question is unanswerable, because where the heck did those bacteria come from? Eggs? Are pure elements like eggs? What are they?
This is why people don't ask those kinds of questions when asking this particular question. They stick to chickens, not metaphorical "chickens."

A chicken, by definition, comes from an egg. If it didn't hatch, it ain't a chicken. It would have been a mammal. How can you have a chicken if it didn't come out of the egg first? Unless God created the chicken, which is what I firmly believe.