Evolution vs. Creationism

[william jay schroeder]

1) Evolution isn't incompatable with a god.
2) If something is unanswered then science doesn't just assume.
3) If the forces need a cause, why doesn't a god?

micro evolution God said hecreated it in a week if this is a lie all he said is a lie.And it had to be a day because plants and animals dont survive any other way. other wise saying different cause you a lot more problems. it does assume thats how it begins, we assume this because of this and test it to prove it. Thats the great mystery and why God said we must have faith. Do you think if God told us how, we would truelly understand. and to try to think this it would go on forever. If a god created god who created that god so on so on. This is the whole issue with all this. why are we here? just to live and die. i think that is not a choice to live by. there would be no point in morals, we should be able to do as we wish. Like hitler and communism. Their seems to be a lot more to this issue than just science. Why do you think communism and Hitler and others taught it or believed it. so they could do what they wanted. Hitler just believed he was speeding up evolution getting rid of the inferior races.

 

[twenty1blakjack]

why are we here? just to live and die. i think that is not a choice to live by. there would be no point in morals, we should be able to do as we wish. Like hitler and communism. .

Hate to nitpick, but you have NO IDEA what communism is do you? I think the word your looking for is anarchy, which is the opposite of communism.

 

[william jay schroeder]

Hate to nitpick, but you have NO IDEA what communism is do you? I think the word your looking for is anarchy, which is the opposite of communism.

pick out what you can argue i see. communism teaches evolution because religion destroys communism.

 

[Tenacious-D]

pick out what you can argue i see. communism teaches evolution because religion destroys communism.

I see with that American flag you are being par for the course in not knowing what communism is. Communism has nothing to do with atheism.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

I still want to know when Noah dropped off the Hippopotamus in Africa;

april 18, 3751bc

was that before or after he dropped off the Kowala in Australia?

before, on the way to alaska via aussieland

I.E. how does the biblical flood account for the large number of indigenous species which are everywhere on the planet,

indigenous...everywhere? Like cockroaches?

and can Noah have really gotten two of each?

he didn't, God is the one Who told the animals to show up at and get on the Ark.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

It seems to me that 7-day creation is almost identical to 'Rome being created in a day'.

Now! Now! Let's try to be accurate in our quotes, more apropos, "Rome WASN'T built in a day."

 

[UniversalAxis]

God said he created it in a week if this is a lie all he said is a lie.

If this is true then to prove anything that God said is a lie would destroy your religion for you. I think you should be more flexible in your beliefs, or at least not gamble your beleifs the necessity of disproving evolution.

Even a diamond cannot bend, but the steel of a hammer can. This is why a hammer can destroy a diamond without being destroyed itself.

A man said to himself, "If God is real then I can move this mountain." After years of trying the man gave up and wept as he left his faith at the bottom of the mountain. God looked down and pitied the man, for it was never His plan that the mountain should move.

Please don't stake your belief in God on this silly little issue. He is much more important than that.

 

[william jay schroeder]

I see with that American flag you are being par for the course in not knowing what communism is. Communism has nothing to do with atheism.

so the former ussr allowed religion China allows religion certainly not christianity. why is that.

 

[UniversalAxis]

It seems to me that 7-day creation is almost identical to 'Rome being created in a day'.

Now! Now! Let's try to be accurate in our quotes, more apropos, "Rome WASN'T built in a day."

I suppose you're right... but there was deeper point to that.

<Edit>BTW I tend to use single quotes when I'm paraphrasing. I wouldn't want such an obvious reference to be seen as me taking credit for that which someone else said.

 

[Tenacious-D]

so the former ussr allowed religion China allows religion certainly not christianity. why is that.

That is China not communism. Are you really this politically naive?

 

[william jay schroeder]

If this is true then to prove anything that God said is a lie would destroy your religion for you. I think you should be more flexible in your beliefs, or at least not gamble your beleifs the necessity of disproving evolution.

Even a diamond cannot bend, but the steel of a hammer can. This is why a hammer can destroy a diamond without being destroyed itself.

A man said to himself, "If God is real then I can move this mountain." After years of trying the man gave up and wept as he left his faith at the bottom of the mountain. God looked down and pitied the man, for it was never His plan that the mountain should move.

Please don't stake your belief in God on this silly little issue. He is much more important than that.

my faith is not debendent on whether evolution is true or not, I know its not true. this belief denies my God and i feel led to defend my God.

 

[UniversalAxis]

Please don't confuse Carl Marx's anti religious views for those of all people in communist nantions. There are 1,298,847,624 (July 2004 est.) People in China, and some of them are Christian. According to the CIA World Factbook, 3-4% of China is Christian. That is 45,459,667 Christians. Please be bit more sensative before making judgements about other people's culture and government. China is still a great nation with long and illustrious traditions, even if they are not perfect or Majority Christians.

 

[UniversalAxis]

my faith is not debendent on whether evolution is true or not, I know its not true. this belief denies my God and i feel led to defend my God.

I defend them both. Is that wrong?

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Excellent example of current trends in evolution:

The "C" word is conspicuously missing":

Happy Holidays!

Seasons Greetings!

"I'm dreaming of a white holiday, just like the one in years to come....."

Indeed, evolution at it's finest!

 

[twenty1blakjack]

Excellent example of current trends in evolution:

OK...

The "C" word is conspicuously missing":

Happy Holidays!

Seasons Greetings!

"I'm dreaming of a white holiday, just like the one in years to come....."

How does Christmas relate in anyway to evolution?

 

[UniversalAxis]

Merry Christmas to you, as well, Pilgrim.

I'm afraid you'll have to excuse my having not mentioned Christ by name, as a Christian, he is included in the Trinity of God whenever I refer to God. Same with the Holy Spirit.

But, I would like to say that, since this is a discussion of the Origins of Life the Universe and Everything, and Christ was born in the middle of History as opposed to the beginning; that we would mention him if we thought it was necessary, and so far that has not come up.

The 'trend' of Evolutionists to not mention Christ might be because we speak of a time before Christ came to this earth. No other reason.

 

[USincognito]

so the former ussr allowed religion China allows religion certainly not christianity. why is that.

Did you not take Political Science 201? Would you like a refresher on totalitarianism and how the regimes in power maintain it? Iraq was basically a secular state. Care to hazzard a guess why, in a land containing the most holy shrine of Shi'ia Islam, that was?

 

[raphael_aa]

China has an official christian church.

 

[BurningHeart]

I am at this point a Christian Old Earth Creationist, and I have been searching extensively on this topic for a while. Here is a summary of the fors and againsts I have found so far. I still find new ones for each side every day.
Any creationist, or evolutionist for that matter, that thinks it is clear cut either way, has another thing coming. This debate is about as grey as you can get. The only way to prove it in my mind, would be with a time machine.

Amen. This is what I tried to say at the beginning of my discussion, no one seemed to care though. I simply get told I don't know anything about science.

That said, at this point, I'm still leaning more towards creationism.

To me a lot of the problem is interpretation of data. As we are reconstructing events that happened 10s of thousands, millions or even billions of years ago.

I will start off with the things that both evolutionists and creationists have to agree on.

FACT: There are a number of fossils in layers of rock, that appear and dissapear from the fossil record, ranging from deep sea creatures, to dinosaurs to mammals. (notice I didn't say less to more complex.. as this is a theory)

I've always found that point itself intriuging. That the fossil record shows no increasing complexity of life, but rather an explosion of it.

FACT: Carbon 14 Relies on a few assumptions:
1. The Earths atmosphere has the same amount of Carbon 14 now as it did when the object being dated was still alive.
2. After the object or creature died, it was not submerged for any significant period of time in the ocean.
3. The sample tested was not contaminated.
4. If these are not wrong, it is thought to be very accurate.

FACT: Carbon 14 is fully decayed after 40-50 thousand years.
FACT: Isocron Dating is irrelivant for anything younger than 10 million years.
FACT: When a flood occurs, sediment is rappidly taken from one place, and moved to another, and laid down with gravity seperation obvious.
FACT: no one knows how the cell goes from DNA to creature.
FACT: There are 50,000 years worth of season lines in a core sample of ice in Greenland
FACT: There are 250,000 years worth of season lines in a core sample of ice from the arctic, at which point the lines get fuzzy.
FACT: all coal deposits in the world have traces of carbon 14
FACT: a set of bones with large joints and a flater but larger skull was found in 1856. It was interpreted 3 times: 1st time: pre-darwinism - dude with a vitiman D deficiency and a fractured skull. 2nd time: the missing link (gave rise to the text book ape human/transition).

I believe that you must also assume a gas exchange system in balanced equilibrium to use radiocarbon dating methods.

For Evolution (Athestic or theistic)

- rest is irrelivant for an infinite creative being. So the First book of the bible is written symbolically, and evolution can be made to fit it.
- an infinite being could have created the first cell with a tendancy to evolve.

This is the Theistic Evolution approach, and unles I'm mistaken, the Deist's view also

- At face value, and prior to mapping the gnome and understanding the gnome, every carbon based lifeform appears to have a similar DNA strand loyout. Particularly apes and humans. And it is possible to form a line from more complex to less complex creatures, and create a geneology, that in some way relates the the layers of fossils.

- iscocron dating methods seem to point to the earth being 4.5 Billion years old, which could possibly give time for the improbable events of evolution to occur.

- Adam, means either the name "adam" or "man", so the bible may mean, god created man and then man multiplied

- the scientific comunitiy supports it

not all of the scientific community, i beleive you would find about a 40-60 split if you took a poll of most scientists today. Yes, I'll admit to the 60% favoring evolution though

- there is no proof of humans living to 900 years old as the biblical account suggests

- the 7,000 year old earth timeline held by the church for the last 100 or so years, in almost undoubtedly innacurate given the ice core samples. (Iceland has 50,000 years of ice, and antarctica has 200,000+ years of ice)

- an amino acid was created randomly for a few microseconds in a lab. DNA is built by over 35,000 amino acids strung together in perfect harmony. This is kinda lame proof, bit like saying because I have an arm, it proves I killed president Kennedy. Probablity cancels this one out for all but the strongest
anti-skeptics (i.e. science doesn't even pay this one).

- retroviruses stored in DNA.

I'd say it's a fair an unbiased citing of some major supports for evolution

For Christian Creation

- it is a mathematical impossibility for the single cell to appear from nowhere.

Very true, yet a point often ignored since we're dealing with Biology and not mathematics, since sciences are not related to each other in any way

- no one knows how a cell uses the DNA to create a creature.

- it is yet to be proven that creatures DNA is very similar (the genome has not been mapped accurately for the human yet, let alone every other animal).

- Even if all creatures were proven to be similar, this could be used to prove a creator just as effectively, as a creator would reuse and modify the same design in many different ways, so the creatures could interact.
For example, if a Zebra was a silicon based life form, the lion could not live off the protiens in its body. Same goes with Kelp and whales, same with Sheep and grass (and the bacteria in their stomach that they live off).
So in essence, it is vital for everything to be compatable, for the entire eco system to work.


- Earth could be 4.5Billion years old, as Genisis is vague on the matter.

- Flood and human timeline is not certain

- the 7 Days may or may not have been literal, the language is symbolic, but given the description of the all powerful creator, it is still possible that it was created in 6 days.

- An infinite being would have no need to refine his design over millions of years.

- assuming God was an infinite being, he/she/it would have the desire to create an infinite number of creatures, although, it is uncertain if this word is appropriate for a god.

- The world wide biblical flood is written about in some form or another in most cultures, which would mean, either it happened or everyone came from the same place where there was a massive flood.

- Carbon dating has many possibilites of failure, so it doesn't really help with anything that is no at least in recorded history timescale.

- evolution came into the world at a time when the church was very negative to science, bashing it as heresy everytime it came up with a new thing (as it still does now it seems), so there is a great psychological need to disprove god, and prove self sufficiency, so people could do what they wanted without ridicule.

Yes, secular humanism does need to justify it's idea that man is able to do what he wants with no need to follow any moral code. Very conveinient that if we do away with a creator that we can do this very well

- all coal deposits in the world have traces of carbon 14, which means anything over 40,000 years old has negligable amounts of carbon 14... meaning all coal deposits are at maximum 40,000 years old.

- neanderthal man (the so called missing link), had a larger brain, the same voice box, and lived alongside modern man... from the bones it could be concluded that they where just muscle bound versions of modern day humans. In otherwords, they are no different to us.

- the grand canyon looks very much like it was caused by a world wide flood (or at least a very large one)

-The type of fossils found seems to be mostly marine (particularly deep sea), which are either not visible to most people (we don't go down there) therefore thought to be very old or not complex. Most of the "ancient" creatures, still live at the bottom of the ocean.

- The dinosaurs, are very likely to have been hunted out by man, or killed off by a change in climate after the flood.

Thats it.
I can't list my sources, as this site doesn't allow me to link to an external site yet.
If you want some, just ppm me.

Thanks, I think it's a pretty good list. I'd add to it, as there are a lot of good ideas out there on both sides. Keep up the research and so will the rest of us.

But we being creationists, simply may not know anything about science either. Just kidding guys, don't burn me because I'm sarcastic at times.

 

[Ondoher]

not all of the scientific community, i beleive you would find about a 40-60 split if you took a poll of most scientists today. Yes, I'll admit to the 60% favoring evolution though

No, actually, it is more like 95% in favor of evolution. And if you only include earth and life sciences, it is closer to 99.86%. Science really is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution.