Why Creationism over Evolution? Bring on the arguments (Creator, Earth)

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Anti-World

People choose creationism over evolution because it fits *their* facts better.

Precisely, and they fabricate their facts to fit their presuppositions.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Anti-World

Creationism stands because it serves its purpose...

For any theory to be considered valid, it must not only explain what we already know, it must also tell us what we don't know. Evolution has done a remarkable job of predicting things that we didn't previously know. That is why it is considered such a strong theory.

Please point to one prediction that creationism has made about what we didn't already know.

[Hope]

Originally Posted by rojse

I suppose creationism gives people an exaggerated feeling of self importance when they say God created them, instead of saying that they are one of the many products of the evolution process.

I would substitute the words "self importance" with "self worth." In a godless, evolutionary universe, the human has neither importance nor inherent worth, so anything goes: murder, rape, torture, etc. After all, if we are only animals, why should we act any differently than animals?

Whereas, humans who are created in the image of God have an inherent worth that makes murder, rape, torture, etc. detestably evil and wrong. Evolutionists have no fixed reference point from which to claim any evil act is actually evil. They have no true basis for saying humans deserve to be treated with respect, or that human life is valuable, when humans are merely a product of mindless chance.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by rojse

I suppose creationism gives people an exaggerated feeling of self importance when they say God created them, instead of saying that they are one of the many products of the evolution process.

I suppose, but Creationism, having an exaggerated feeling of self-important, and believe in a God who created Us aren't necessarily intertwined either.

Personally if God wants to use mutations in DNA to help create species, I figure it's none of my business to say otherwise.

[doppelgänger]

The answer is rather simple. The "usefulness" of a model of thinking about reality is determined by one's purpose. An "evolutionary" model is more useful for harmonizing physical, observable evidence and explaining the biological relationships between organisms and their environment. A "creationist" model is more useful for maintaining belief in a peculiarly literal reading of certain myths from the Bible.

Depending on one's purpose, one will choose one over the other based on its usefulness. This usefulness is often mistaken for "truth" by both sides.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by Hope

I would substitute the words "self importance" with "self worth." In a godless, evolutionary universe, the human has neither importance nor inherent worth, so anything goes: murder, rape, torture, etc. After all, if we are only animals, why should we act any differently than animals?

I think that's a false argument, though I've seen many theists make it. The Euthyphro dilemma aside (i.e. the question of whether morality and goodness flow from God, or exist independently), your moral nature is not dictated by your physiology or your evolutionary history.

Your rationale has a few implicit steps, so I'll break it down so they can be addressed:

- animals are amoral
- evolutionary theory is incompatible with morality handed down by God.
- if evolutionary theory is correct, then humans are animals as well, and have no God-given morality.
- therefore, if evolutionary theory is correct, then humans would be amoral.
- therefore, if evolutionary theory is correct, there is no reason for humans to act morally.

Physiologically, humans are animals, regardless of your beliefs about how we came into being. As evidenced by the fact that humans are capable of exercising morality, we can conclude that this fact does not automatically imply that humans are amoral creatures.

Further, I don't see why only a scenario where Adam and Eve are created whole by the direct hand of God is the only one where God would be able to endow humans with morality. What reason do you have for this assumption that, IMO, is built into your question?

Still further, even without any sort of morality handed down by God, a code of human social behaviour would still settle out... even an amoral creature will still try to acheive maximum benefit for itself, and in most social settings, indiscriminate raping and killing will work against that goal, not for it. Also, evolutionary theory predicts that over time, beneficial behaviours will tend to become more prevalent, and detrimental ones will become rarer and rarer. Assuming that it was beneficial for our ancestors to live in groups, behaviours and traits that help us work better as a group will tend to be favoured, whether they're passed down through genetics or through parents teaching their children.

It may be argued that animals might not have "morality" as we define it, but they do have norms of behaviour that discourage certain types of conduct and encourage others. Making a distinction between this and human morality might be only semantics, or excess anthropocentrism.

So... even without God, we'd still end up with some sort of moral code. And even without direct special creation, I imagine that an omnipotent God would be able to find some way to imbue morality into us if He thought it was necessary.

[lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Hope

I would substitute the words "self importance" with "self worth." In a godless, evolutionary universe, the human has neither importance nor inherent worth, so anything goes: murder, rape, torture, etc. After all, if we are only animals, why should we act any differently than animals?

Whereas, humans who are created in the image of God have an inherent worth that makes murder, rape, torture, etc. detestably evil and wrong. Evolutionists have no fixed reference point from which to claim any evil act is actually evil. They have no true basis for saying humans deserve to be treated with respect, or that human life is valuable, when humans are merely a product of mindless chance.

Oh yeah you nailed it. As soon as everyone figures out they aren't special little children to be minded after by some god everyone in the world is going to start some wild violence filled cesspool across the earth, where deprivation and indecency reign supreme. Well sorry if evolution doesn't fill your world with romantic feelings of purpose but based on all current observations and empirical evidence (see thats what makes science based on fact by having demonstratable evidence instead of stories in a book) evolution is the only known way that life is as it is to this day, sorry if it upsets everyone that they share a distant relative with the chimps and gorillas but everything is related to something. Just like you have aunts and uncles that embarrass you, you share genetic code with other animals and if you go back far enough in the evolutionary chain your related to your dog. Also just because everyone in the world believes it's true doesn't make it fact, everyone thought the world was flat and the the whole entire universe evolved around our backwater little planet, but that didn't make it true now did it? Fact is fact and science bases things on facts. A scientific theory means, that for all purposes it is the most reasonable conclusion that man can come to at this moment maybe with further empirical evidence the idea might change or even become a scientific law like the concept of gravity. Evolution does not concern itself with whats good or evil anyway as it has absolutely no importance to the reason why were here, not to mention that they are such extremely vague concepts to begin with that even the Bible can not and nor will it ever be able to answer whats right or wrong 100% of the time. For instance would the bible be able to say whats right or wrong in the following situation.
If a man goes out to the store to feed his starving family and realizes that he doesn't have enough money to pay for that loaf of bread and jar of peanut butter that he's getting for dinner and then tries to steal it so one of his children don't die in the middle of the night. Stealing it from the poor store owner whose worried about losing his shop as insurance is going up on him and he was already robbed at gun point last week and the father while stealing the bread for his children and gets caught by the store owner and they get into a fight as the man doesn't want to be arrested and the store owner ends up killing the man.
Now first of all what does any of that have to do with why we have an imposable thumb or why we're here period and secondly can you answer who is right or wrong? the store owner worried about his lively hood and his children or the man stealing a loaf of bread for his children? Because if the store owner gave a loaf of bread to every poor schmuck who walked through the door he'd soon find himself in the poor house. If the father doesn't get anything for his children soon he may not have as many children to worry about.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Hope

Whereas, humans who are created in the image of God have an inherent worth that makes murder, rape, torture, etc. detestably evil and wrong.

How do you know what worth your God places on you? From reading the OT, I would think not much. Besides, doesn't the term "self worth" describe the value we place on ourselves?