• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Debate on Creationism

leov

Well-Known Member
Analysis of DNA shows the origin of homo sapiens to be 200,000 years ago. Analysis of the light received from out there in the sky shows the universe is expanding and, extrapolating backwards, would have been tiny about 14 or 15 billion years ago or so. Analyzing geological structures shows the earth to be very old, and that there was no global flood. Analyzing the fossil record indicates that something like evolution surely occurred. And analysis of the microbiology of organisms shows that evolution surely did occur. Maybe we don't know of certain human events, but there is lots of evidence about all kinds of things.

What kind of evidence do you want?
There is no problem with time. There is no problem with evolution. Only origin point is the question.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What kind of proven science you plan to counter creationism with?
"proven science"? Seriously? Science is not proven, it is evidence based. And the fact is that there is no scientific evidence for creationism and there is mountains of evidence for the theory of evolution.
 

Riders

Well-Known Member
Hello. I am going to challenge Creationists, more specifically Muslim or Christian Creationists, to present their best logical evidence for God. Since this is not science vs. religion, I don't want anything that's trying to pointlessly debunk evolution since it will only extend the argument or anything like that. I'll try to disprove yours logically, and the cycle will continue until one side stops debating.

Your thread title says it is on creationism debate. You can not have a creationism debate without debunking evolution or getting into science vs. religion.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
If knowledge of God is beyond human comprehension, why think about God at all. It is as if, practically speaking, there is no God at all.

The Universe, and how it originated, is also beyond the human mind to fully grasp

There is a mystery, the Great Unknown and this mystery is unsolvable; I call it God. But it can be experienced in the "no mind state".

So, I agree "thinking" won't bring you any closer, but I disagree that there is "no God", because there is a Big Mystery, which I call God.
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
Hello. I am going to challenge Creationists, more specifically Muslim or Christian Creationists, to present their best logical evidence for God. Since this is not science vs. religion, I don't want anything that's trying to pointlessly debunk evolution since it will only extend the argument or anything like that. I'll try to disprove yours logically, and the cycle will continue until one side stops debating.

It's straw man. To make sure that you really understand what evidence itself is. Please first present the evidence of foods you ever ate in one out of all the meals you ever had in your life time. Mind you, by the age of 31 you should have had more than 30,000 meals, just present the evidence of any of them, arbitrarily how about the lunch you had today but last years? Evidence its food contents.

Second, does your country have a history older than 1000 years. Randomly fetch a history book with history older than 1000 years, try to mark down all the human names ever mentioned then come back to us with the evidence of their very existence.

If you can't do the above 2, then ask yourself why and what evidence is!
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Created things exists, so the creator also must exist. :)
Nope, you are assuming a creation. This is terribly failed logic. Things exist, we are debating if there was a creator or not.

And you are also guilty of an equivocation fallacy. When one use the term "creationist" that usually refers to someone that believes the myths of Genesis.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I think it is fair to say that there is no evidence that any godlike agency has had anything whatsoever to do with the functioning and operation of the universe.

If there is a God, he/she doesn't care about whether conscious creatures suffer, or whether evolution "creates" awesomely designed organisms. Why are there viruses and deadly bacteria and parasites that kill their host?
Yes these are some of the standard arguments. But none of them comes anywhere near proof of anything, either way.
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
The Universe, and how it originated, is also beyond the human mind to fully grasp

There is a mystery, the Great Unknown and this mystery is unsolvable; I call it God. But it can be experienced in the "no mind state".

So, I agree "thinking" won't bring you any closer, but I disagree that there is "no God", because there is a Big Mystery, which I call God.
Yes, the universe is weirdly mysterious. Whether to call this God, or just "that mysterious universe" -- makes no difference to me. Certainly this concept of God is not of a personal creator monotheistic God.

Whatever is experienced in the "no mind state" is probably not the mysteries of the universe, unless this experience contains (among other things) understandings of quantum field theory and the standard model, and understandings of why the functioning of the universe can be described via mathematics, and a million other details. From what I've heard about it and the little bit of experience I've had, it's more like an ecstatic experience in which you think you possess all knowledge; similar to the kind of experience generated by certain illegal drugs.
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
Yes these are some of the standard arguments. But none of them comes anywhere near proof of anything, either way.
No proof against God's existence is needed. If he/she doesn't *do* anything, doesn't interact with the universe in any way, why believe in him/her?
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Did God create the universe to wait 9 billion years to have earth, then wait 4 billion years for life to evolve into humans, then wait hundreds of thousands of years so he could give his message to one chosen people in one region of the globe on one spec in our galaxy, then, because they "sinned," genocide all of them except for one family and have that specific family reproduce to recreate humanity?
Ahh....so now we’re getting to the reason behind this thread. Good!

Time has no effect on Jehovah, according to the Bible. (2 Peter 3:8) But He’s established natural Laws that ‘govern’ events. — Job 38 33.

The Bible would not present such a candid, graphic description of Jehovah’s actions, if it’s goal was to deceive people.

Yet from Matthew 22:37-39, it’s obvious Jehovah wants us to love Him.

How do you reconcile the two?

Through study, and reasoning on those accounts (God was protecting His people)....and tying in the Resurrection hope for “the unrighteous.”
— Acts of the Apostles 24:15.

Reasoning on Scripture like Isaac Newton and others did. (He read the same words of Scripture that you read...but he arrived at a different conclusion.)

(Why Jehovah God allows suffering....another reason why many are skeptical of God’s existence....is explained in Genesis 3.)

So long.

Actually, information *does* arise by chance.

So do products on an assembly line:

Only through processes already established.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
No proof against God's existence is needed. If he/she doesn't *do* anything, doesn't interact with the universe in any way, why believe in him/her?
That is an argument, again a pretty standard one.

Look, I'm not sure why you are trying to present arguments to me. I responded to this thread just to point out that for the OP to look for "proof", of either God's non-existence or his existence, is rather a fool's errand. I am not terribly interested in conducting a debate, with you or anyone else, about the issue of God's existence.
 
Top