• 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!

creationism

  1. questfortruth

    Disproof of Evolution

    Was the very first human so different from the modern one that he was no longer a human? No, because he was the first Human. In short: he was a human. Conclusion: the evolution of mankind did not happen. Definition of humankind: a human gives birth to a human. Has Darwin an alternative...
  2. questfortruth

    Evolution is a fact?!

    Today Charles Darwin exists as a dead body. But, Darwin does exist. How? As a dead body. Thus, the question arises: When will Charles Darwin begin his proven path of evolution from non-living to living? "Evolution is a fact", he says. And today Darwin exists. In the form of a dead body, gases...
  3. questfortruth

    Legitimate Disproof of Evolution

    Dear Scientist, I ask you to give full consideration to the research manuscript I submit to you and to start the review process. This simply gives you the chance to reveal talents given to me, as I am not dumb like millions of similar non-prominent and unfamiliar submitters. I have completed the...
  4. questfortruth

    Is there true love if everyone obeys animal instincts?

    The theory of Evolution started badly. It began with the book The Origin of Species. However, the modern man did not descend from any of the known species. Not from monkeys, not from primates, not from rodents, not even from a single-celled amoeba a billion years ago. The modern man appeared...
  5. questfortruth

    Adam and Eve in human genetics. New results.

    "Not only did evolution happen: it eventually led to beings capable of comprehending the process, and even of comprehending the process by which they comprehend it." Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor's Tale, p. 613. The difference between animal and human is that human has the ability to comprehend...
  6. Ehav4Ever

    The God, Evolution, Darwin, Science debate - a different starting point

    I think that the problem stems from both sides of this type of debate not sitting down and starting with defining terms. As an outsider to the issue, let me play the referee's advocate. Ehav4Ever says: "Okay you two, play nice. Let's settle this dispute the right way. Before we begin I will...
  7. danieldemol

    Evolution and a Muslim's perspective

    According to my understanding evolution does not have anything to say about whether or not there is a supreme creator. Darwin considered it absurd to doubt that a person could be an ardent theist and evolutionist. Evolution does (according to my understanding) reject the concept that humans are...
  8. firedragon

    Creationism: Is it New? Are creationists by default dishonest& ignorant in basic science?

    Encountering a new conversation the curiosity of this made me open a new thread to understand further. Is creationism a brand new movement of some sort that sprung up around 100 years ago? If that is the case how about those who lived prior to that? Are they not creationists? Creationism by...
  9. questfortruth

    Is evolution science: Hovind vs Barnes 2020

    Comments on videos: 1. The scary and creepy thing: yes, it is. Evolution is the direct consequence of methodological naturalism: ground making way of doing science. Thus, it is science. However, Creationism is true. True to the Existent God. Evolutionism is Science, but that does not make it...
  10. questfortruth

    The Gap Theory debunked

    "the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God." Luke 3:38 Where are here the monkeys, crocodiles, fishes, original cell, gas cloud, stars, Big Bang? The Gap Theory
  11. questfortruth

    Definitions of atheism. Can atheism be scientifically defined?

    "Love your God with all your heart and mind" (Jesus Christ). Fortaste of what is comming: "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces." Matthew 7:6 NKJV "Therefore go and make disciples...
  12. questfortruth

    Is Darwinism proven/accepted by official Science?

    The journals are enterprise for producing truth out of incoming manuscripts. Darwinism is accepted by all top journals. Thus, Darwinism is Scientifically proven. But Darwinism is wrong and absurd because humans can not be born by a monkey. Thus, Science has its agenda, it is the weapon of...
  13. questfortruth

    Incompleteness of Science proves Truth Holder

    Introduction: My contribution: Suppose Dr. Gödel is wrong. In such case the probability to find [given unlimited research time and resources] the first way to prove the Riemann Hypothesis is perfect 100%. After that somebody will look for the second way to prove Riemann Hypothesis, like there...
  14. questfortruth

    Proof for Freewill (and, thus, disproof of Atheism) is notion of "Today"

    We got to know about the conservation of information from first hand by a physical problem. The problem was found by Dr. Steven Hawking and is called the "Information loss paradox in Black Holes". According to my own calculations, the Black Hole is indeed a hole in spacetime: the event horizon...
  15. questfortruth

    Theory of Darwin is not local. What does it mean?

    Because the Abiogenesis is thought to be outside the Theory of Evolution, and the latter is no longer associated with Charles Darwin [the biologists do not say ``Darwinian Theory of Evolution'' but simply ``Theory of Evolution''], then to describe difference between two competing worldviews...
  16. questfortruth

    Is Darwinism still fact after Science 02 Jan 1998: Vol. 279, Issue 5347, pp. 28-29?

    Below references proved the Biblical Creationism (which tells, that Adam’s Family is just 7000 years old), but in order to be published in Darwinists’ journals the authors are saying, that they have not proved Creationism, but simply have questioned some aspects of the Darwinism: Parsons, T...
  17. questfortruth

    Peer-Reviewed: Adam and Eve- 7000 years old family

    Are these peer-reviewed papers, which proved Creationism, debunked already? Perhaps they are all debunked now, because of this verse: "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me." Revelation...
  18. N

    Debate on Creationism

    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...
  19. N

    The Main Issues w/ the Kalam Cosmological Argument

    Hello! This is my first post on the forums, and I hope it'll be a good one. For those of you who do not know what the Kalam Cosmological Argument (or the KCA for short) is, here's the argument in its entirety used by theists. 1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause 2. The universe began to...
  20. Twilight Hue

    This certainly puts an end to the watchmaker argument.

    If you find an insect in the woods with functional gears..... Creature with Interlocking Gears on Legs Discovered This was actually discovered a while back, but I never came across this myself until now. Creationists can put the watchmaker issue to rest now. It's no longer useful anymore...
Top