If God wants us to believe the Bible, why do fossils, DNA, geology, disagree?
92864
Please, give me an example on how it disagrees. Thanks! If we evolved from apes, why are apes still in exsistance?
289060
The Bible tells us Who. Science tries to tell us how (& there are many "hows" that science has figured out). Evolution is just a theory (not a proven fact), it is PoliticallyCorrect (so it is probably theologically wrong) - but it is an attempt to explain how God may have designed His creation.\n\nIn any event, the speculation is not worth much time or worry - it is not a criteria for God's Salvation by His Grace based on true faith (acceptance of His Salvation & acceptance of His Lordship, to be a disciple to seek to do His will). Scriptural fact:\n\nTrue Faith + God's Grace = His Salvation\n\nEvolution (or any other process of creation) is not a belief factor in the equation for Salvation. It doesn't matter if you think green is the prettiest color, or if you think orange is the prettiest color, or some other color - that is not a factor in God's Salvation, either. 'Faith + Grace = Salvation' is a time-tested formula - since Abraham - & it still works the SAME way. Because God is unchanging, His Word is unchanging, His Law is unchanging, His Salvation is unchanging.
1154023
That response from gimpalomg was kinda disrespectful. Evolution is a waste of time. It tries to disprove something that cannot be disproved. Evolution is baseless, unfounded and a big scientific hoax to sway believers into thinking that science answers such questions. Evolution is circular reason. You say the earth couldn't possibly be 10000 years old max, I ask why, u'd probably bring up some evolution based theory that attemot to explain away the truth, which is the bible, but for now, I won't be forcing those doctrines down ur throat =D. \n\nThibnk about the bible for a second. The flood would explain so many things that science fails to answer such as the extinction of dinasuars, they're too big to fit on an arc.  Bare in mind that dinasuars are simply reptiles we see tody except that everything had the ability to live longer, if you want to explore that theory look it up because I promised not to use circular reasoning. the flood would explain why fish remains are ound on every mountain peak. It would explain why there was a "nomadic" time period in that time. And sooo obvious to us, it would explain what the heck a huuuge arc is doing on mount Ararat, which by the way was picke dup by NASA satellites. It should be noted that the bible states that Noah's arc rested atop mount Ararat. \n\nLastly, Evolution should not be in text books. The theory is warped an d blown aout of proprtion. I believe there are six major theories that compose the entire science of evolution. Only 1 uno theory hasbeen proved. That theory is microevolution which states that some organisms have the power to make themselves evolve MINOR CHANGES i.e Darwin's discovery of natural selection (longer beaks vs. shorter beaks etc.). This is GREAT, sure, except that the other theories cannot be proven but some have been disproven, there's something they don't always include in text books. Macroevolution which is the level above Microevolution comprises of the theory that species make huge changes over time such as extra limbs, DNA changes etc, again, not proven, even disproven by "vestigial" organs... aren't we supposed to evolve by GAINING other parts, not losing them. Buut scioentiest insist on using vestigial organs as the tailbone... guess WHAT ppl, it's not vestigial; you try walking around without it then try calling ir vestigial ,it serves a purpose. &#92;\n\non to the whole age thing. The earth is more likely to be 10000 years max than millions. According to the evolutionary theory, dinasuars became extinct MILLIONS of years ago. How much time does it take for flesh to decompose? I'm thinking FAR less than a million years. Why then are red blood cells still being found in dinasuar remains? The best answer is that the earth could NEVER be nearly as old as we think it is. I also want to point out thaT the earth is usually dated by ratioactive dating, which, in itself, is VERY unreliable. Research Radioactive dating accuracy and find the fact. The dates are beyond the level of being off, scientists know this. All they do is find a formula which is closest to the actual date even if it is millions of years inaccurate. Don't believe me? Research it yourself. \n\nEvolution is something that has been put in textbooks to simply explain away religious doctrines they feel are impossible. If you do your research like I did, you will easly see that evolution is no more true than Roman mythology\n\nAnd one dangerous thing we seem to be doing. The bible is NOT all symbolic.  That is REALLY dangerous. If i told u that the wings of the eagle stretched far beyond my reach then went on to recap yesterdays events, would you beleive that all of what I said was symbolic. How symbolic can anything be. The bible is literal at times. If you want to read the prophecies in the bible about the establishment of Israel, the rebuilding of the temple, the aliance os powers against Israel and it literally being sur
123622
Various recent Popes have repeatedly stated there there is no discrepency between science and the Roman Catholic faith. \n\nThe creation story in the bible is allegorical, not factual. The bible is not a book of science. \n\nIn fact, there are two creation stories in the bible that disagree with each other in the details. This in itself should tell you something.\n\nEvolution is not "right" or a "fact". Evolution is a theory, and it is just the most currently accepted theory to explain the observations we have. I would expect it would be replaced when a better theory that exlains more of the data supercedes it.
80179
Re.:  Dinosaurs \n\n\nI believe that God created upon this earth PRIOR TO Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3.\n\nI believe God destroyed all prior creation (Gen.1:2) to bring forth man created in God's likeness (Gen.1:26), with an UNBROKEN lineage beginning with Adam.\n\n\n\nPat (ndbpsa ©)
380136
Actually, true Christians, who study the bible, not only can find logic, but scientific evidence in the Bible's teachings.\n\nFor instance, in the book of Leviticus, the Israelites were instructed to leave the camp and bury their excrement.  This was centuries before scientists truly found out what benefits proper sanitation brought.  They also were told to quarantine those who had leprosy, even before they knew what leprosy truly was or how it was spread.\n\nSecondly, the Bible gives scientific facts that were before their actually being proven in the scientific field.  Isa. 40:22 states that God dwells "above the circle of the Earth."  It wasn't until well past Jesus' life that scientists could agree that the earth was round, but under Godly inspration, such facts were put into writing.  Other examples in the Bible state that the Earth "Hangs above nothing" in space, and give an accurate description of even the water cycle, years and years before scientists even discovered it.\n\nLogic and reason are a solid basis for faith.  Hebrews 11:1 says that Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the EVIDENT DEMONSTRATIONS OF REALITIES though not beheld."  In other words, Faith is based on previous experiences known, but not beheld personally.  This is the whole reason Jesus performed miracles on earth.  To prove that in the future, he would be able to redo the same things.  These acts could help others to instill faith in him.\n\nThe Bible is not a science textbook, but is a book full of scientific examples and logical reasoning.
258906
The Bible only proves anything if you already believe.\n\nSimilarly, science only proves anything if you believe in it.  \n\nThis point is usually missed by people on both sides of the argument; hence all the disagreements.
106520
Creationism was created to protect Fundamentalist's belief in the inerrancy of scripture.  As they see it, the Bible is inerrantly true and if any small part of the Bible, even one word, were to be proven false, then all of the rest of the Bible, including it's spiritual truths, would be called into question.   \n\nThis understanding of the Bible does not make sense to very many people.  Most everyone can see that the Bible is full of inconsistencies, contradictions, myth, and legend.  Further, hardly anyone believes that an error in the Bible's statement of fact casts doubt on its expression of spiritual truths.\n\nThe Fundamentalists and their ilk, the Evangelicals, are way out in la-la land on this.
1074144
In the grand scheme of things, those aren't important.\n\nThe Bible is a guide on how to live your life and how to walk according to God's wishes.  I'm not as good in my Bible as I should be so I'm sorry if this doesn't make sense.\n\nAnd I do believe they reference dinosaurs in Genesis vaguely - someting about monsters of the deep - during the flood story.
738549
Every fossil, every observation in biology points to evolution. There is nothing that goes against it or points to a different way to scientifically explain modern diversity. There is not one fossil or one piece of DNA that does NOT point to evolution. It would be hard NOT to see the concrete evidence, and only those blinded by faith can do this.\n\nEvolution is 100% world-wide accepted fact, including the evolution of man.\n\nThere is ZERO evidence for a higher being causing anything. This is why people who are religious need faith, you can't see or study the actions of a deity, by definition. Evolution has ZERO faith and ALL evidence.\n\nScientists (real ones) have been studying and supporting evolution for over 150 years, and still nothing has pointed to creationism. There is clear links and transitional forms between everything in the fossil record to the Class-Family level, if not Genus-Species level. And this includes humans, which there are several 'missing links' which are well described and studied, people just choose to ignore this. Sure, there are still things we don't know, but that's why science is not stagnent and dead. We learn more every day, that's what happens when you keep an open mind and follow the scientific method.\n\nThere are some areas of evolution in which all of the pieces have not been found in the fossil record, but there is no counter theory that has even ONE piece of evidence that can not easily be explained by evolution.\n\nLet me turn your question around, if Creationism was correct and science could definitively prove Creationism (and thus the existence of God), why would they not? That would be the greatest scientific discovery in the history of the world. No one would pass that up to maintain the 'status quo'. There is no conspiracy to hide creation evidence. Anyone who knows real scientists knows they are glory-mongers first. They love to prove others wrong to enhance their own standing. And if any scientist could prove Creation/God, it would've been done a long time ago.\n\nGo to a museum, take a class in biology, go to reputable sites on the Internet (like AAAS: http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/evolution or http://www.talkorigins.org ) and find out for yourself.
925235
Because we have a PRANKSTER GOD!!!\nHe put the bones in the ground to test our faith in him....\n\nGOD: "HAHAHAHAHAHA, I'm killing me, I'm so funny!\n\nSimple truths: there is a mountain of scientific, verifiable, measurable evidence to support the theory of evolution...and the research continues and discovers new things all the time.\nThere IS NOT A SHRED of evidence for creationism.\n\nLook at the issue from a balance of probabilities...masses of scientific evidence...or a man made book (often changed/edited/translated) of fairy stories and a bunch of crack pots...now which is more likely?
79540
Creationism by our Creator. And the evolution theory would be okay if it werent contradictory to scripture... The bible says He created everything according to its kind.  See Genesis 1:20.  Also if we evolved, why are we not stil evolving?
755030
Technically, and scientifically it is a theory. Theory doesn't  mean that it isn't true though, it simply means it is the most widely accepted opinion of the scientific community until someone can come along with a better theory or disprove the theory.\n\n"God created Us" is not a scientifically accepted proof against the theory of evolution. This is because without evolution DNA mutation makes no sense, even though it is a well observed phenomena.\n\nFossils also would have no explanation.\n\nAnd as a teacher, it would be best to say that it is okay to not believe every theory, because many past theorems have been proved wrong, but that he or she should maybe look into evolution a little more before casting a judgement.
572537
We have discussed this, and I think it is unfair for you to cut off the topic by saying the Bible is wrong and don't say this and don't say that. There is only one answer that you will be satisfied with.\n\nThe Bible is not a book of science. The Bible is a book of redemption and eternity. Science is tied and bound to the limitations of physical time-space and can venture no further. The Bible steps beyond where science cannot venture.
706011
Creationism is not "against" modern science! In fact, the Biblical mandate to "subdue" the earth (Genesis 1:28) requires us to understand it, which is what science is all about. "Creation Science" is simply the practice of science with the assumption and acknowledgement that there is a creator God, versus the now standard operating assumption of naturalism (that nature is "all there is").\n\nNo one, including creation scientists, disputes that so-called "micro-evolution" (variation within a type of organism) caused by natural selection occurs and may be responsible for the large number of species found within a type. Almost all touted evidences for evolution are of this category (like Darwin's finches, the "peppered moth", or bacteria that become resistant to antibiotics). However, it is important to note that "micro-evolution" is a misnomer, as it implies that "a little" evolution is taking place. In actuality, NO evolution is taking place, as no increase in complexity (such as the development of a new organ) is being generated, but merely the emphasis of some already present traits over others.\n\nLarge scale change of one type of organism into another, so-called "macro-evolution", is beyond the ability of mutation coupled with natural selection to produce. Evolutionists acknowledge this is a "research issue". Even non-creation scientists (such as Denton and Behe) have written books giving the hard scientific facts that document why this is impossible.\n\nThe "geologic column", which is cited as physical evidence of evolution occurring in the past, is better explained as the result of a devastating global flood which happened about 5,000 years ago, as described in the Bible. Even evolutionists acknowledge that the fossil record is one of "fully-formed abrupt appearance" and "stasis" (that is, no change over time).\n\nThe belief that the atoms of a "Big Bang" eventually produced people ALL BY THEMSELVES (that is, without any intelligent guidance) is contrary to the well-proven Second Law of Thermodynamics, and the fundamentals of Information Theory. The universe is known to be "running down" yet evolution postulates it is "building up". Atoms to people evolution is much more a "religious belief" than a scientific fact.\n\nThere is no reason not to believe that God created our universe, earth, plants, animals, and people just as described in the book of Genesis!
1045052
I believe that the bible is the true word of God.  In the first book of the bible, it tells how God created man. I know people will argue that the world could not have been created in 6 days and the Lord rested on the 7th.  To God, one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as one day.  I don't believe in Darwin's theory, I believe in God's creation.
517551
There does seem to be a disproportionately aggressive response to the suggestion (not to say that the anti-creationism response isn't often pretty harsh).\n\nAs I doubt that many Christians think the Bible is absolute word-for-word truth the whole 'creationism is the only solution' debate seems rather bizarre to me ... who documented it?  Did God leave preliminary sketches?  Religion is the construction of man.\n\nNotwithstanding the above I respect anyone's right to have a belief ... I just don't have to respect your actual belief.  I also do not see that evolution is a threat to religion, assuming you take the view of going with the flow of it rather than the absolute adherence to man-made scripture.\n\nPeace out