Does the question what came first the chicken or the egg indicate a presence superior to man ?
Does the riddle of this question indicate the necessary presence of something that was superior to man (in order to create one or the other in the first place) ?
This question indicates a Creator. Evolutionists would disagree even when faced with simple logic. Do offspring appear before parents? Not in nature, but again evolutionist would probably argue that science can be made to manipulate logic for example in test-tube births and cloning. It all depends what one will choose to believe. I choose to believe in God and His Creation. Why? Because his stamp of creation is all around especially in science. Science could not exist without Him because He created everything for His pleasure and Glory. " for through him God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can't see--such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through him and for him". Colossians 1:16. Through science we are now able to see things that are hidden and far way as in space.
Thanks - The question is not about what each of us believes - but rather - given the complexity of the riddle , how could the riddle be resolved to a logical conclusion.
what you believe will lead you to a conclusion. This is not complex at all. Either offspring come from parents or parents come first.
You didn't ask your question, then ask 'why' in the original question, just a yes/no answer is all that is required. I'm not here to justify my answers, this is not a school essay, or a debating forum.
If one is a believer of creation according to biblical teachings then there is very little to debate about which came first the chicken or the egg.
Assuming God created Adam and Eve as (adults) and not as (infants) it would be safe to assume that every living creature was initially created in it's adult form also. The Chicken came first! :-)
Thanks but the question is not really about which came first - but rather does this riddle indicate that there must be something greater, in order that the riddle could be resolved to a logical conclusion.
Once again I would say if one believes in the biblical account of man's creation they (already believe) there is something "greater" than man. A Gallup poll taken in 2011 stated (9 out of 10) people in the U.S. believe in God or a Universal mind.
No, to me, the chicken must come first, otherwise who is going to lay that egg? Remember the egg has only half the chromosomes. You may then ask, "Where does the chicken comes from?" To me, the answer is the same as that for all other creatures... either they evolved from something that was created in the primordial waters, or they were themselves created in those waters. However, given that chicken have wings but cannot fly, it does seem that these vestigial structures suggest that they must have evolved from other birds and were not initially created.
A good answer but it raises more questions than it resolves to me. The idea that the chicken evolved (from say some dot like creature) then the egg laying process evolved from the chicken is plausible, but the same question then arises about the dot
LOL, do remember that the egg has only half a set of chromosomes. Someone lays an egg, it get fertilized and become a creature but the creature is not an exact replica of the parent... mutation does happen occasionally and over time, presto!
the question has been asked by people for ages, but the only indication of a presence superior to man is woman. Nothing rude against men --they have many fabulous qualities, but eggs and growing babies, no.
No. It is the classic "paradox" juxtaposing the fact that we all start as children, but that adults had to "make" us.
I personally believe that the question itself proves evolution. The egg is a chicken, and generations and generations and generations later, it may begin to transform into the egg of a new species and grow up to be the adult.
The egg becomes a DIFFERENT chicken. Thus, the egg and the chicken* are one.
Do remember that an egg has only half the set of chromosomes...
Logic: if an egg only contains half the chromosomes then evolution is definitely out
Not as simple as that... all life forms began from the primordial waters as primitive life forms and they evolve over time. Those that practice asexual reproduction gets wiped out over time because of their limited gene pool.
Good point, Walter, although I don't think the *classic* question bothers with matters of fertilization. For my purposes, come to think of it, I am going to assume that fertilization (embryo) is implied, and so a false paradox is presented in vain.
Stanwshura, WikiAnswers says: "Most chicken eggs produced for consumption are unfertilized. Eggs found in the grocery stores are typically produced by chickens that never come in contact with a rooster."
Right. I think we can assume that the egg in this question is not in the grocery store, but in a nest (usually) and still a potential chick*.
That's exactly how you end up with a paradox. Wrong premise, wrong conclusion because you simply refuse to accept the fact that eggs don't fertilize themselves.
That's my POINT. (Non-sibling) sex (fertilization) begets the NEW...what "chickster". The rooster is a given. Thus is begotten biodiversity and thus evolution! Chicksters are not asexual. Species survival MEANS change. Sheesh! I mean "HEESH"!
Stanwshura, how does the cock fertilize a non-existent egg? The hen must lay the egg first, right?
And both the hen and cock began life as what?
Stanwshura, read my other posts. I have answered that already but seems like you prefer your own answer. So just stick to what you wish to believe in.
What a derisive dodge! I asked. If you had an answer, you'd offer it. This was a discussion. But you apparently cannot handle a dialogue that wrestles with the real stuff. I believe in facts, not post-death fairy-tale "happily ever after"s.
Stanwshura, I asked you to read back my posts on this page, didn't I? You give me the impression that you want to stick to your point of view. That's why I tell you to stick to your own opinion. I am not here to change your views.
@stan there is just to much specialization in nature for macroevolution to exist. Can evolution explain interspecies diversity?
My thinking. If one feels the chicken was placed here by aliens, you then to me simply create a bigger picture ie what came first the "alien chicken" or the "alien egg". If you believe the process all "evolved" from some dot like creature again are you simply not moving the question further back in time ie what created the dot like creature. The answer to the riddle therefore tends to lead more to the thinking of a creator, who could be almost pulling the chicken out of a hat like some sort of magician. But if you believe that everything was placed here by a creator, then again does the riddle simply not grow even bigger yet again ie the same question applies "where did the creator come from".
Not if one understands and subscribes to the basic principles of biology.
Yes, the simplest way to explain a higher presence is to believe in Genesis. Now I do understand that you might consider it ignorant of me to leave other theories out, so that's why I said this is the simplest way. God came from infinity (we don't understand this concept because we all had a beginning), he created the heavens the earth. Then, the animals I'm supposing this is where the chicken came from. Now, in theory maybe he put a fertilized egg in a warm place thus, the egg hatched, and came first. Either way this would explain a higher presence. Go ahead make the question more complicated, but old testament says it could be either way through a higher presence.
QUOTE: "Go ahead make the question more complicated."
LOL, I am still wondering who created God. You mean He created himself and then created the heavens and the earth? By the way, the earth is not even an infinitesimal part of the universe.
@WaterPoon I implied that this answer is based on belief in the bible. If you believe in the bible, you believe that God has been here since forever (he was not created). Therefore, belief in the bible implies belief in a higher presence.
by Jack Lee 2 years ago
For the evolution scientists, which came first the chicken or the egg?I don't think this dilemma has been fully explained or explored. All evolution scientists and biologists, please explain...
by heavenbound5511 7 years ago
why haven't you accepted Jesus and ask God to fill you with His spirit and find out for yourself that it is true?Why haven't you decided to choose to believe and ask for His Holy Spirit in Jesus name and prove it to yourself? This is the only way your doubt of God and Jesus will be proven wrong to...
by ArockDaNinja 7 years ago
Seriously, what came first, the chicken or the egg?!
by Ian Stiglingh 5 years ago
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?We should define the egg as being a chicken egg which would produce a chicken when hatched. So what was most likely the first?
by Sylvia Van Peebles 7 years ago
Do you consider the devastation from the tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, etc., 'Acts of God' ?If the Bible teaches that God is love, how do you reconcile causing death and destruction with being a loving God? What about Satan? He is called the ruler of this earth? What part does he play in the...
by etb50 9 years ago
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? here is the answer that is on Yahoo.com, read what they think, and tell me what you think.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 556AASTta0this is under religion because if you read the askers rating of the best answer, they quote a passage from...
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|