Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.\nhttp://www.holybible.com/\n\n"Since the issuance of Charles Darwin’s, The Origin of Species (1859), there has been a massive campaign to flood the “intellectual market” with evolutionary propaganda. Though such ideas by no means originated with Darwin, he popularized evolution more than anyone else."\nhttp://www.christiancourier.com/archives/whyEvolution.htm\n\n\n!!!!!!!Please I beg of you enlighten me!!!!!!!
127251
Tell you what.  Spend six weeks in a biology lab with some species with very short life/reproductive cycles--say, drosophila or flatworms--and they'll be your witnesses to evolution.  Is it easy to argue against the existence of something one can actually see happening in front of one?  For example, how do you explain the constant mutation of the flu virus.  It's not a point of theory--it's an observable fact.  So, how does that happen, if there's no evolution?  You see my point:  we don't need "witnesses," because we have real empirical evidence.\n\nBut in any case, it doesn't matter what I believe or what you believe.  There is room both for your cosmology and for mine in the world.\n\nWhat does matter is what is taught in school.  As of yet, right-wing Christian evangelicals have not succeeded in imposing their particular worldview on the entire country by changing our laws into Evangelical Christian shariah, and our schools into Evangelical Christian madrassas, despite their repeated efforts.  Until that time, it does matter that science, not religion, is what we study in science class.\n\nBy the way, try reading other eye-witness accounts to the creation of the world.  Upon what basis, other than your community's belief, is your religious creation myth more demonstrably true than that of Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Baha'is, Jains, etc.?  Show me the legitimate, objective, neutral, non-theological criteria that proves your book's eyewitness account more true than theirs, and you might have made a real point.  Until then, not really.\n\n(By the way, any answer that says the Bible has the true answer "because the Bible says so" would not count as a reason outside your faith system.  I'm not saying you're wrong--just that that's not science.)
10538
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.\nGenesis 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. \n The Bible clearly says that God created and creates man.
659084
Evolution is NOT science. There is nothing scientific about it. It is a religion. You cannot prove that we came from nothing. Its not even possible. You cannot create nor distroy matter, thats physics. So then how did all this "matter" around us get here. There has to be a creator. The animals may have different variations but they're still the same kind. Everything comes after its own kind. Same with people, there are tall, short, skinny, big. You'll never get a bannana from a fish. The reason you say the earth is billions of years old is because you think if you give it enough time it might happen. God created everything.
577163
I agree.  Evolution is the basis of life as we know it?  Where is the evidence?  Even if I wanted to believe that evolution was the method that God used to create our world, where is the evidence of that?  \n\nThe evolutionist isn't looking for a "missing link"...they are looking for countless missing links between EVERY species, and have nothing to show for it.  The fossil record would be rife with evidence if the theory had one ounce of merit.  Rather, it shows the complete opposite.\n\nLikewise, mutations are an extremely implausible vehicle through which upward change can occur.  They put their "faith" in mutated DNA somehow producing new species, I put my faith in a Creator.\n\nWhy do they still believe evolution is plausible?  Because they want to reject God, and evolutionary theory is the best they've got...
415211
1. Darwin's _The Origin of Species_ was a great upset to Victorian English society. He did not come to this conclusion to upset the religious community, only to offer a purely scientific explanation for humanity. A passage from his writings shows that he feared how Christians would take it.\n\n2. Creationism is usually supported by fundamental Christians who believe in the Bible's explanation of how humans originated on earth: 7 days and God resting on the Sabbath, Eve coming from Adam's rib, etc.\n\n3. Anyone who disbelieves in the answer put forth in the Bible, frankly. Not all Christians believe in creationism. It is not a requirement given the advancements in our understanding of how humans have evolved. Most do, however.\n\n4. The first amendment of the Constitution protects expression, not necessarily speech. You are free to have opinions. The cliched "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" being one form of speech that is not protected and is illegal being an example. You are free to express your dislike in certain individuals, groups, or even the government if you feel they are not providing you with what you elected them to do for you.\n\n5. Intelligent design is a newer offering by the Christian community to offer "proof" of creationism. As to who supports it, that would be whoever believes strongly enough in its version over the other alternative explanations for our arrival to this planet.\n\n6. Whoever disagrees with the hypotheses offered by those who tout intelligent design.
609185
First off I would like to say that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with humans or creation of our world as many anti-evolutionists seem to believe.  Next, if you deny evolution than how can you explain antibiotic resistant bacteria, insecticide resistant insects, etc, etc, etc.  If you confuse evolution and human evolution then that is your own issue as so many have previously posted.  Lastly, about our own HUMAN evolution, if you think that humans do not evolve, then you believe we are not a living part of this natural world and deny HERITABLE MUTATION.  If you deny all of this and still deny evolution, human or not, then I truly believe you are a lunatic and don't believe in worldly fact.  You might as well say the world is flat and pray to the sun God.  PLEASE DO NOT DISREGARD SCIENCE AS SO MANY PEOPLE DO, LOOK AT THE FACTS (NOT THE PROPAGANDA THAT RELIGIOUS PEOPLE MAY FILL YOU WITH) AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF BECAUSE YOU WILL COME TO UNDERSTAND EVOLUTION AND ITS KEY CONCEPTS WHICH IS THE ONLY THING WE CAN REALLY BANK ON IN THIS WORLD.
658849
Your question is a very reasonable one --and brave, since you'll certainly get answers from religious zealots who have completely closed their minds.  Let me start by saying my *only* personal agenda is a search for the truth, no matter where it leads me.  Unlike many, I'm not here to shove my beliefs down anyone's throat. \n\nThe short answer is that I doubt it's possible in this kind of forum to get into enough details to convince a confirmed *creationist* that humans evolved from simpler life forms.  But I hope to encourage an open-minded person to continue with their own research, and not be tempted by overly "easy" answers.   \n\nThe long answer (most of it written by me, some of it transcribed manually; none of it pasted)...\n\nI, too, was unclear about the evolutionary process for a long time.  While I'm not an expert (and *nobody* has *all* the answers) I think I can help you get to a place where it makes *sense* to you as it now does to me, since you appear to have an open mind.  (Agnosticism is good!)  \n\nAfter hearing people's arguments and questions for many years, I am convinced that there are six huge factors getting in the way of a general acceptance of the *overwhelming* scientific evidence for evolution.  \n\n1 - the common misconception that evolution claims apes or chimpanzees changed to human beings, and the perceived indignity -- and indignation -- that goes along with that idea... or with *any* suggestion that we evolved from a lower form.  It's nothing but ridiculous human arrogance!\n2 - the lack of human conception for the vast time life has had on Earth to evolve\n3 - the human temptation to rush things and jump to ridiculous (and therefore naturally hard to believe) conclusions.  Evolution involves not three or four steps, like fish to amphibian to ape to human!)... not hundreds, or even thousands of big, visible steps... but perhaps hundreds of millions of minute, subtle changes in a life form.  Remember, we have had the time!\n4 - the mistaken notion that creatures evolved because they "decided" to, or "wanted" to.  When we say, for example, that fish needed to absorb oxygen more efficiently from the water, so they evolved gills, that's not to imply it was a choice.  Evolution is about mutations... changes that were random from one generation to the next, over long periods of time.  Those changes that happened to be good for the creature meant that creature survived long enough to reproduce, which meant there would now be lots of little babies with that same feature.\n5 - a fearful and/or stubborn refusal to abandon faith in a Creator, since doing so might condemn the unbeliever to eternal suffering\n6 - It's just *easier* to think about a Creator.\n\nI know you want to see some details of our "life's path" to make sense of it, and I will provide that, below.  Just a bit more, first.\n\nThe central ideas of evolution are that all life shares a common ancestor, and that it has changed over time (obviously, if we are to explain getting from A to B).  While it's hard for many people to imagine the changes that would result in, for example, human beings from lifelessness, the first thing to keep firmly in mind is that we are talking about an *unimagineable* amount of time to play with... the earth having been around for some 4.5 billion years, as you said.\n\nUnderstandably, few people can appreciate how much a billion is.  Do you realize that roughly a billion *seconds* ago, "The Godfather, Part 2" was about to win the Academy Award for Best Picture?... that Richard Nixon was President of the U.S.?... that Hank Aaron had just broken Babe Ruth's record of 714 career home runs?  1974 was drawing to a close -- one billion seconds ago.\n\nIt's a lack of appreciation for this vast amount of time which, I think, makes people skeptical.  They wonder how, in any amount of time they can envision, an ape can c
170155
Kinda prejudiced in the way you asked, dontcha think?  :-)\n\nThe story of Adam and Eve is a parable.  I don't expect it was meant literally even by the people who wrote it.  I feel very sorry for the small-minded people who have to have the story be "true" in order to see any value to it.\n\nEvery human on the planet has a gene that, if it worked, would make us as furry as chimpanzees are.  It doesn't work, it has a transposon (a type of genetic parasite) stuck in it.  Without that transposon, we'd all have to pay a lot more for shampoo every month!\n\nSo, the question before the creationists is, wherefore doth we have it?  Did God create us with a broken gene, complete with parasite, that we don't even want?  Or were Adam and Eve furry?  So far, I've only found one creationist willing to accept that Adam and Eve were hirsute people.\n\nThere are a thousand arguments like this.  To date, creationists flee in terror from all of them, while presenting the same old, tired, long refuted nonsense in support for their cause.  They cannot explain the pattern of genetic similarity.  They cannot explain how the Great Flood hasn't left the entire surface of the earth salt-infused and sterile.  They cannot explain how any species more complicated than a protozoa survived the flood.  They've got nothing.\n\nResponding to some of the nothing they have:\n\nPopulation Growth:\n\nAssuming a constant rate of population growth is simply naive and silly.  We *know* the population growth hasn't been constant.  Remember the black death?  60% of Europe *died*.  That's not growth!\n\nIf we apply the same argument to fruit flies, we find that the entire earth is covered in fruit flies in a matter of days.  Funny how that hasn't happened.  It's almost as if populations do not experience continuous growth because limits are set by the environment!\n\nAnother fun fact about the constant population growth argument:  If it's true, the Bible LIES!  After all, at the time of Exodus, it says more people left Egypt than existed on earth at the time!\n\nSo, dump the rather silly population growth argument.\n\nDinosaurs:\n\nThere are NO human fossils found with dinosaur fossils.  Not a single one.  You're welcome to point out a specific exception.  There are three sites showing "human" and dinosaur footprints, but Paluxy is a product of wishful thinking and some faking by townsfolk hoping to get more tourist dollars (they admitted this) and the other two (Tuba City and some site in Russia I don't remember) are just really bad fakes.\n\nDinosaurs are not lizards.  Let a lizard grow forever and it will not turn into anything resembling a dinosaur.  This is one of Carl Baugh's silly claims and it causes nothing but ridicule for creationists.  Lizards belong to the suborder Laertes.  They have sprawling legs.  A large lizard has large sprawling legs.  Dinosaurs have legs better mounted. Small dinosaurs have smaller legs.  Small dinosaurs cannot be mistaken for lizards.  (Well, if you're utterly ignorant about biology, I suppose they could.)\n\n(At least Baugh stopped claiming that breathing pure ozone would help you live for hundreds of years, despite the fact that ozone is explosive and poisonous!  But since when has a creationist needed to understand a subject before making declarations about it.) \n\nSea monsters as evidence?  Gee, now that's desperate.  I'm sure you'll present the physical evidence that dinosaurs were fire-breathing next, right?  Sheesh!\n\nOh, and carbon dating has not been "proven wrong".  Not that it matters.  There are thousands of different dating systems.  Carbon dating, by the way, only works on organic materials:  NOT FOSSILS.  Dinosaur fossils are NEVER dated by carbon dating.  So, you're wrong.  Again.\n\nLaw of Angular Momentum:\n\nUm... because other collisions happen?  I know, stunning!\n\nReally dumb argument.\n\nHistoric
584546
Ok, how can you believe in evolution? I mean really, the complexity of animals, and well every living thing, came about by accident!! At least we have the bible that was inspired by God! And was correct about allot of scientific things way before man figured it out!\n\n 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.\n\nAll you have is a theory that we came from nothing!\n\n\nNo, I am not mad, just stating the obvious.\n\n\nloj
629513
Origins of life were initially suspcted to be of creation from God.\nThen the Theory of Evolution kicked in, suggesting all life came from a single cell.\nNow life came from a stone that banged into earth 4 billion years ago.\nBut are any of them true if we keep finding more truths. If breakthroughs always happen, wouldn't there be an endless amount of breakthroughs? So what we all know now is not the truth?\n\nThe origins of life on earth?\nDon't even think about it.
246808
Charles Darwin was a scientist. However, he declared himself as an agnostic. It doesn't matter whether he believed in God or not, though. What matters is that he contributed his ideas to the human race, and tried to open their eyes that evolution was how we came to being.\n\n\n*Sharptooth, evolution has been proven a lot of times already. It's just that people don't read. They waste their lives going to mass every Sunday and praying up to 4 hours a day waiting for their lives to rot off. And also, Creationism is only "just" a theory too. Nobody has ever proven it.\n\nI recommend you read these websites:\nhttp://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0411/feature1/\nhttp://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin\nhttp://www.aboutdarwin.com\nhttp://www.ncseweb.org
581810
God created evolution.   Evolution is a form of creation.\nWhy does everyone think that God always said "poof" and it was there?  His example was the potter and the clay.   There is no time frame to God.  And man did not come from monkeys.  If that were so, why are there still monkeys and apes?  Why didn't THEY evolve?  Everything else evolved.   Man was created as man.   Ape man came from the perfect man in a regression form or de-evolution.   Most don't believe the bible because they haven't read it or just don't understand it.  If you think the Bible is fake, you are betting eternity on it.   Bottom line...you are human, monkeys are animals, not ancestors.
584658
No evidence of God, this is the point.  It's about belief despite there being no proof.  \n\nI don't believe in God but I don't think that even if there was one anyone could prove the existence..\n\nUsing the human body as 'evidence' is just farcical - yes, it did happen through evolution - look at all the mistakes along the way!  Look at all the barren planets and planetless suns if you want proof that life isn't premeditated - it takes a lot of chances to come together to create life, not a 'creator'.\n\nBesides, if there is a creator I don't think much of 'his' design - bit faulty.  Too prone to disease, accident and mental disorder.\n\nYES I BELIEVE DARWIN as do most sane people.  It's ludicrous to expect people actually to believe that some creator built a world in seven days - here we have actual proof, not stories, of what happened.  Besides, for those of you who seem to think that the world was made by God, who made God?  You're question (which you seem to think is so unanswerable) about 'do you think you just popped into being' should be turned to 'God' - so 'God' just popped into being, hmmm?  The earth developed by itself - it was not created.
505591
No, Adam and Eve were the first Homo Sapiens.\n\nYou're trying too hard to fit science and the bible together.  God didn't create a clean rock called Earth.  He created the Earth with a history.  That's how you come to terms with 1,000,000 year old fossils.  He made them that old to begin with.  Connecting evolution to the Bible is easier than you think.
565234
Sir Arthur Keith (Evolution Expert) himself said it best: "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We [evolutionists] believe it because the only alternative is special creation [God], and that is unthinkable." \n\nWhat proof do we have of evolution? None at all.  One responder said you were "simplistic"...another cited the "proof" of amino acids.  Any honest/knowledgeable inquirer would recognise that those were VERY simplistic answers.  He wrote "Next comes single cells...".  Wow!  That was an easy transition...and where/how does he maintain the possibility of that? Those do nothing to support their theory, but I guess its all they've got.\n\nWhile we struggle to find the elusive "missing link", in reality there are missing links between every species. How does DNA suddenly decide to produce something other than it is programmed for? Where did those first single celled creatures come from? Where did the matter for the "big bang" come from? \n\nThere is no proof that you are reading this letter as a result of an explosion 14 billion years ago. The evolutionist accepts that origin by "faith", just as the believer accepts our Creator by faith.  However, the current scientific evidence does not support evolutionary theory, rather, it refutes it.  Why does is live on?  Because in the effort to find the origin of life outside of God, its all they've got.
68212
This is a question that seems to come up a lot, but I love it anyway!\nIf the Bible is really God's word, then there is no problem at all with a literal 6 day creation story. (If you try to change that, then you have death before Adam sinned, and Eve could not be the mother of all living, etc ... disbelieving a literal 6 day creation will make you throw out more of the rest of the Bible than you get to keep.)\nI agree with the perspective that God could have created the earth with the appearance of age, created stars with light-years of light coming from them already, etc... I mean, if God can create everything, He can create it however he likes. (Side note on the age of the earth, did you know that according to evolution the earth is ageing millions of years per year? - Ask that one sometime!)\n\nBack when Darwin introduced the theory of Evolution to modern history (the idea goes back WAY before Darwin, but that's another story), he stated that for his theory to work, there must be evidence, and speculated on what it COULD look like - None exists today. Christians really dropped the ball on this one, and let this "theory" become equivalent to "science" (science must be observable and repeatable).\n\nIs there PROOF for creation? No (again, scientific proof must be observable and repeatable), there is not PROOF, but there is a lot more reasonable evidence that there is for creation.\n\nRegarding dinosours, the Bible actually speaks of them (and dragons) in the book of Job.\nSome remote cultures (The Congo, the Amazon, etc.) have recent (20th Century) stories of dinosaurs still living.\n\nThere's a lot more, but I don't want to get too long on you, so check out the link below for TONS more info, on this subject.
645179
Ok Buckar you have a point here, now years ago when Lucy evolved and passed our DNA on down the line we soon began to walk different and get taller. See we had short legs to be able to survive on the terain and the legs were the power to run from the animals that could eat us. Oh sorry we are on Adam and Eve aren't we. After reading all these great answers I noticed one thing. Most have different answers. Now I find that there are 2 Creators, God and Lord God who created God. Jesus did have kids and hung with Mary so he could use her money to support him and he supposedly had kids too. He may have had illigedimate ones too cause they didn't have good birth control back then.As for the nipples on man they may be for the gay men. I mean its like you said God doesn't make misakes and I know a lot of gay people that are Religious and good.As for the person that stated woman was created as a helper to man I think he should have said slave cause a lot of women are supporting lazy men today.I don't see why people say the bible is fact but when I say my horoscope is true all the time they say oh that is man written and the chance of it being true is only cause some people may believe it and might have a day where it might go that way. Make sense eh ! I think we evolved from like viruses and stuff like insects did. If animals were created first and then man in Gods image only by feelings and not physical then animals are too. I say my animals love me and never sin against me where as man does, did and will continue to. Most preachers that are child molesters think it is not a sin because it is not with a woman and a man is ok cause they have written this down through time. The Monks had homosexuallity all the time and hid it, yet burned people at the stake cause they thought they were witches. This was to cover up their fears that they may be found guilty of being gay.Noah, This is utter nonsense, No way can you get 2 of all creatures on Earth into a boat for 40 days and not have them eat each other.Too many species to find to fit the boat.And how did it flood the whole world when they didn't have the weather map to show that all was flooded.I am sure that the 2 so called Gods did not send hundreds of animals from thousands of miles all over the world to get to a boat in one spot.I wonder why Jesus was in one spot on this vast Earth and at the time where there was no travel to spread the word of 2 Gods faster. If Noah had God mentally control the animals to board the boat and control the situation then why didn't he crack the whip on those darn Unicorns ! And if man is all so mighty over animals then someone was reincarnated into my parakeet cause he can say over 120 different phrases and I can't fly or immitate his language. Sorry so long as I just stopped here cause it was an interesting question .