Why Creationism over Evolution? Bring on the arguments

[Alex_G]

I understand evolution well, and even have my own modified predictions and theories on it, (thats why i love science). I see it as the only real legitimate standpoint on how life on this planet is the way it is. I am always baffled how such oposing ideas such as creationism even have a leg to stand on.

I would love to hear the arguments all condensed here so i can see what you have to say, and have the oppertunity to respond.

p.s. you evolutionists by all means join in

 

[Willamena]

To which "opposing ideas of Creationism" do you refer?

 

[Alex_G]

Literal scripture belief on such things as the creation story, all things that are mutually exclusive with scientific propositions, i just want to see some of the justifications people have for believing them.

Never mind really, i felt this was going to flop and not get answered lol ..shame

 

[yossarian22]

It is never particularly smart or scientific to take an absolute position on anything scientific.

 

[Hope]

It is never particularly smart or scientific to take an absolute position on anything.

And yet you just did.

 

[joeboonda]

Young Earth creation or Old Earth creation? Many Christians believe in creation that allows for an old earth. It is not a central doctrine like salvation by grace through faith in Christ. Humility is importance in discussing these things I am learning.

 

[yossarian22]

And yet you just did.

doh.
Any scientific matter.

 

[Hope]

doh.
Any scientific matter.

Yeah, but you had to go back and edit your statement.

 

[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.

 

[Anti-World]

Creationism stands because it serves its purpose...
Scientists use their mind so much they seem to forget to learn about the mind itself...

Creationism isn't just simply an idea about how the world was created. It *is*, literally speaking, but with the religions that get attached to it it becomes a religious dogma more than a scientific theory.

Therefore creationism doesn't stand on just scientific fact and experiments it also stands on "belief" and "gut feelings". Silly? Of course. But you have to remember that the creation of the universe and life as we know it isn't something that can be tested because it is not recurring.
So, in a way, creationism stands on one more leg than evolution...

Evolutionists love to point the finger at the creationists and laugh saying, "You have absolutely no reason to believe in that!" but fail to realize that they don't have any reason to believe in evolution either...
Evolution and/or creationism can only be proven or disproven over vaste amounts of time and even by the time evolution is finally capable of being proven it's highly unlikely anyone will be one step closer to knowing if creationism is valid.

So, please, evolutionists stop trying to convince everyone that the evolution THEORY is not a theory...


People choose creationism over evolution because it fits *their* facts better. People pick and choose their own axioms every day and that's where these debates come in to play.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

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

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

 

[camanintx]

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]

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]

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.

 

[doppelganger]

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]

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]

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.

:clap 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]

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?

 

[rojse]

Creationism stands because it serves its purpose...
Scientists use their mind so much they seem to forget to learn about the mind itself...

Creationism isn't just simply an idea about how the world was created. It *is*, literally speaking, but with the religions that get attached to it it becomes a religious dogma more than a scientific theory.

Therefore creationism doesn't stand on just scientific fact and experiments it also stands on "belief" and "gut feelings". Silly? Of course. But you have to remember that the creation of the universe and life as we know it isn't something that can be tested because it is not recurring.
So, in a way, creationism stands on one more leg than evolution...

Evolutionists love to point the finger at the creationists and laugh saying, "You have absolutely no reason to believe in that!" but fail to realize that they don't have any reason to believe in evolution either...
Evolution and/or creationism can only be proven or disproven over vaste amounts of time and even by the time evolution is finally capable of being proven it's highly unlikely anyone will be one step closer to knowing if creationism is valid.

So, please, evolutionists stop trying to convince everyone that the evolution THEORY is not a theory...


People choose creationism over evolution because it fits *their* facts better. People pick and choose their own axioms every day and that's where these debates come in to play.

Evolution has the same strength as a theory as we give the theory of gravity. It is an extremely well-supported theory through many varied fields within science - biology, geology, animal husbandry, and so forth.

The word theory has many meanings, due to the linguistic abuse the word has suffered. But in this context, we use it in the sense that it is a scientific hypothesis that completely supports all currently available evidence, such as the theory of gravity.

Obviously, evolution is not a fact, in the sense that it can never completely be proven, only disproven. But I can say the same for the theory of gravity, but nevertheless, people still accept that as fact. We have not detected gravity waves, either, but we accept the theory because it explains how our universe works.

As for your statement that no evidence supports evolution, I can immediately see that you have done absolutely no scientific research on the subject, or are ignoring this research completely. There are numerous examples of evolution today. Look at all the species of dogs - they descended from the wolf. Look at how our crop species evolved, and compare the initial crop with our current crop. For corn, the ears are far larger, contain more kernels, and these kernels are far more fruitful, for example. I could discuss many other crops, but I would just be harping on the same vein.

What about the thousands upon thousands of fossils that have been discovered through painstaking escavation, managing to piece together a complex history of animal evolution?

Even should this not convince you, we have done our own evolutionary research in the laboratory on many subjects, and there are many examples of improved performance within a measurable criterion.

For your statement that evolution cannot be disproven, I would completely disagree with that statement. Spontaneous creation of a complex animal would disprove evolution, or even a relatively simple animal. Finding a complex animal in strata where there should be none would disprove it. Rapid changes in a species over the span of several generations would disprove it.

Evolution does not answer the question how life first originated, or how the universe or the earth was created, unlike creationism, but then, it is not designed to. What it does answer is how come we have approximately ten million species of animals on this planet, and how these species came about.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

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.

That supposition seems to be based on your feelings and not the truth of other people's motives.