1. 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!

Featured Do creationists accept biology?

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Jaiket, Oct 21, 2019.

  1. Jaiket

    Jaiket Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    8,136
    Ratings:
    +1,695
    Religion:
    Something else
    I mean the observations, findings etc that are not explicitly within the field of evolution?
     
  2. sun rise

    sun rise "Let there be peace and love among all"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    37,845
    Ratings:
    +14,410
    Religion:
    Love
    The ones I know of do accept biology. Also some creationists believe "God is who, evolution is how".
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,546
    Ratings:
    +1,078
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    Hallelujah. I am really tired of the false dichotomy that some non-believers (read, atheists) seem to put people into....anybody believing in a Creator MUST be a young earth literal 7-24 hour day creationist and all the arguments and criticisms are assuming that....OR, if the person they speak to actually figures that the earth is 4 billion (or thereabouts) years old and evolution is real, MUST be an atheist; no god involved.

    At least, those who talk to ME seem to do that.

    There are those....MOST Christians, actually...who do believe that "God is Who, evolution is how".

    For crying out loud, the Catholic church accepts evolution as 'how,' officially...and since it was a Catholic monk who did the definitive work on inherited characteristics (heard of Gregor Mendel? BTW, he was not only NOT criticized for his work, he was made an Abbot).

    Ah, well.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  4. Jaiket

    Jaiket Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    8,136
    Ratings:
    +1,695
    Religion:
    Something else
    I have plenty of experience of theists who accept evolution and I'm fine with it. When I say creationist I mean as in not-evolution, Go made us separately kind of thinking. I'm sure there are some of those people here (there are certainly some who argue against evolution) and I'm curious as to where they draw the line, if they do explicitly.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    811
    Ratings:
    +327
    I think the main issue with creationists regardless of them being old or young earth is that eventually their "theory" falls apart. I do however think that old earth creationist are seen as being more realistic than young earth are.

    To me, when having spoken to old earth creationists, it seems that they are simply twisting the texts into sort of fitting with science and as long as you don't ask to many questions its all fine.

    But looking at some of the points they use to explain why an old earth is perfectly explainable and fits with the bible (If that is the one we are talking about) it quickly seem to cause a lot of problems.

    1. Days in the bible is argued to mean a long period of time, which explain why the Earth can be billions of years old. Which obviously makes you wonder why in the creation story it says this:

    Genesis 1
    13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.


    This is typically what we humans understand by a daily cycle and not something that refer to millions or billions of years. Its pretty difficult to get a good explanation for that.

    2. If God is timeless, omniscient, omnipotent. Why would he need billions of years anyway, 6 days should be more than enough, that makes little sense.

    3. On the 7 day God is resting, so how many million of years is he doing that. Remember humans have already been created earlier, so how exactly does that fit with our current understanding of human evolution. Homo sapiens are not million or billions of years old. So how does these creation days convert into years? Do one assume that they are of equal length or do they just change length depending on what seems to fit the best?

    So in the end, when all comes down to it, the old Earth creationists ain't much better off than the young ones. The best explanation, I have heard is that this is just a poetic description of the creation.

    Which eventually lead to a question about Luke 3 23-37:

    23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,

    the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat,
    the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
    the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
    25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
    the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
    the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath,
    the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
    the son of Josek, the son of Joda,
    27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
    the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
    the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melki,
    the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
    the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
    29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
    the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
    the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon,
    the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
    the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
    31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
    the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
    the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse,
    the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
    the son of Salmon,[d] the son of Nahshon,
    33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,[e]
    the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
    the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob,
    the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
    the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
    35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
    the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
    the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan,
    the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
    the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,

    37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
    the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
    the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh,
    the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
    the son of God.


    At which point are we no longer talking about a real person? where in this list does the change occur, if at all? So if the creation story is just a poetic description, then we can assume that Adam probably never lived, which obviously give problems for the bible... and is it realistic to assume that the early Christians thought this as well? Nothing in the bible give the impression that it were the case.


    So again, as long as one does not ask to many questions it all fits well together for the old Earth creationist :)
     
    #5 Nimos, Oct 21, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
  6. David J

    David J Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2019
    Messages:
    164
    Ratings:
    +39
    Religion:
    Christian
    I'd like to know if hardcore creationists, like Ken Ham, recognized early hominids. Were they placed on Noah's Ark or not?
     
  7. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    26,543
    Ratings:
    +10,645
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Got any examples? Because:

    cre·a·tion·ism
    /krēˈāSHəˌnizəm/

    noun: creationism
    the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.


    .
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Nimos

    Nimos Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    811
    Ratings:
    +327
    As far as I know, Ken Ham believe it happened exactly as it say in the Bible. And dinosaurs etc. were on it as well, but died off I guess.

    This is from Ken ham website, think you can find information there:
    https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    26,543
    Ratings:
    +10,645
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    How creationists accept biology:

    biology textbook for creationists.png
     
    #9 Skwim, Oct 21, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  10. Jaiket

    Jaiket Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    8,136
    Ratings:
    +1,695
    Religion:
    Something else
    I have a friend who says, if you want tomatoes you plant a tomato plant. For him the universe is a tomato plant and we're God's tomatoes. I guess that's maybe an example of creation via evolution though I did mean it in the creation as opposed to evolution.
     
  11. LuisDantas

    LuisDantas Aura of atheification
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2008
    Messages:
    46,138
    Ratings:
    +14,620
    Religion:
    Advocate of letting go of theism. Buddhist with an emphasis on personal understanding.
    Wouldn't that be evolutionism, though? With a theistic perspective, sure, but all the same evolutionism?
     
  12. David J

    David J Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2019
    Messages:
    164
    Ratings:
    +39
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yeah.

    Stuff like Australopithecus Afarensis probably won't....

    go with the flow.
     
  13. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,559
    Ratings:
    +4,245
    • Like Like x 1
  14. sun rise

    sun rise "Let there be peace and love among all"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    37,845
    Ratings:
    +14,410
    Religion:
    Love
    Catholic church has already been mentioned. One example A philosopher's view of God and evolution

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-christian-mans-evolution/

    How could humans have evolved and still be in the "Image of God"? - Common-questions
     
  15. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    26,543
    Ratings:
    +10,645
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Not sure why you're bringing the Catholic church into this because


    The Catholic Church holds no official position on the theory of creation or evolution, leaving the specifics of either theistic evolution or literal creationism to the individual within certain parameters established by the Church. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, any believer may accept either literal or special creation within the period of an actual six-day, twenty-four-hour period, or they may accept the belief that the earth evolved over time under the guidance of God. Catholicism holds that God initiated and continued the process of his evolutionary creation and that all humans, whether specially created or evolved, have and have always had specially created souls for each individual.

    Catholic schools in the United States and other countries teach evolution as part of their science curriculum. They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains how evolution proceeds.

    Source: Wikipedia

    .
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    5,069
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    The fact that you asked this, indicates you genuinely want to know.
    Speaking for myself, I don't follow the crowd - never did... except a popular celebrity - you know, when you are young and "foolish". :D

    For me, the world can formulate it terms, ideas, morals,... I don't follow them, just because they are accepted. I don't even use certain words.

    I have a guide to my life that works perfect, for everything I do and say.
    I choose to do and say what is acceptable to my conscience, based entirely on Bible principles.
    You might say, God is my principle teacher and guide... on everything.

    So for example, my boss could tell me to lie to a client. He might as well be talking to the wall. "But everyone does it", or "It's only a small thing". It's not what God teaches me. Fire me.

    So when it comes to biology, the same principle applies
    I accept the things that can be demonstrated to be true.
    When it comes to using terms, I apply the same principles

    In a nutshell, This world is temporary, with all its ideologies, philosophies, etc., so I don't use this world to the full... if you know what I mean.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    28,616
    Ratings:
    +15,977
    Religion:
    Atheist
    As others have pointed out it depends upon one's definition of "creationism". If one goes by the traditional definition, then clearly the answer is no. One has not only deny biology, one needs to deny almost all of the sciences to be a creationist. If one is of the "evolution is how God created" then one could have a valid argument that they do accept biology.
     
  18. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    10,138
    Ratings:
    +5,361
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    I agree with @nPeace....
    There is so much that is of benefit to us in many fields of science and being anti-evolution doesn't mean being anti-science.

    I love science...but I think the idea that dinosaurs can come from microscopic single celled organisms is ridiculous. There is no proof that it ever happened....and when you say that to them, they get all upset and tell you that science is not about "proof"...its about "evidence".......but the evidence is interpreted to fit their theory so can you trust anything they say?
    That is so confusing because if you can't prove what you claim, then all you have is a 'belief' that something is true.....that requires 'faith', doesn't it? And we get disparaged for that by them for that very thing. Go figure. :shrug:

    You have to understand the difference between what science can 'prove' and what they can't....because what they can't prove, they suggest in such a way that it sounds like they have. Scientific sleight of hand.

    When you consider the gulf between man and animals, we see what is meant by us being "made in God's image and likeness". There is not another creature alive that compares with us.....regardless of what science wants to suggest. Apes are apes, who were also a work of the Creator....but man is unique. His uniqueness cannot be the product of blind chance or random mutations or natural selection or any other supposed mechanism.

    We have free will and we are not just programmed by instinct like the entire animal kingdom. We have a level of intelligence that means that we can learn so much from our parents, our peers and mentors, our environment and past experience. We can plan for the future because our intelligence allows us to go there through the faculty of imagination....animals have no real concept of the future...they can be conditioned by past experiences, but they live in the present. Any behaviors that affect their future is carried out automatically.....as if is 'programmed'.
    Have you ever run a program that was not designed by someone with an intelligent mind?

    Something that is also proof of being made in God's image is our creativity. Animals are often programmed to build their own 'houses or nests, and each one is specific to that creature. Even birds of different varieties will instinctively build the same nests that their parents built before they were hatched.....so how do they know what to build and what to make it out of?

    What other creature can create the same kinds of artistry out of talent instead of instinct? What other creature creates theatre, poetry, literature, sculpture or art out of their free will? How are these traits of benefit to any evolutionary survival advantage? Science has suggestions about these things but I personally find them to be most unsatisfying.

    What do you think?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. Base12

    Base12 In time, you will see it.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2015
    Messages:
    147
    Ratings:
    +37
    Religion:
    Christian
    I don't believe in Evolution, however I agree with many discoveries found in the field of Biology.

    Most Christians don't even realize that the Tabernacle in the Wilderness was a scale model of a Eukaryotic Cell...

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  20. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,592
    Ratings:
    +3,224
    Religion:
    Christian
    ‘Mornings’ have no bearing in the Jewish description of their literal “days”; their day went from evening to evening.

    On top of that, there were too many events recorded during the 6th day, for it to be a literal 24 hrs.

    On top of that, Genesis states that all creative days had their end, but the 7th day — the rest day — is never said to end, and Paul in Hebrews 4, said it was still continuing in his day, 4000 years later.

    Furthermore, Genesis 2:4 refers to “the day” as generations...
    Genesis 2:4 Hebrew Text Analysis
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
Loading...