evolution versus creation?
547734
yeah,  so like youd have a guy vs another guy and the first guy would go, lets look at the dna of the chimpanzee\n\nand the other guy would be like, genesis chapter 1 \n\nand the other guy would be like, sir, where in the oldest copies of the gospel of mark is the last 8 verses\nand the second guy would be like, um, um,\n\nand the first guy would be like yes thats right people have been editing the bible, but science is repeatable
346312
Before answering the question definitively, I think it may important to be aware of a few important details.  When we speak of "evolution" we are generally referring to the notion of species evolving by means of natural selection.  Many evolutionary biologists argue over the details, but all agree that natural selection is part of the evolutionary mechanism.  And so, there are actualy more than one "theory of evolution" when it comes to the details.  \n\nLet's assume for arguments sake that your question therefore could be slightly rephrased into: is evolution by means of natural selection truly happening?  The answer, I think, is a clear yes.  You may have heard some say that evolution is a controversial theory among scientists.  That is actually not the case.  what is controversially discussed are, as I pointed out above, the details of the evolutionary mechanisms.\n\nNow, assuming that evolution by natural selection is real, and therefore, that not only we as human beings evolved, and that we furthermore are still evolving, does that mean that therefore religious believes are impossible?  Again, I think the answer is clear.  And this time it is no.  science and religion are absolutely reconcilable.  But as always the devil is in the details...  When some scientists say that science is the only way to the truth and therefore evolution has done away with God, the problem is that they are making a metaphysical, that is anon-scientific, philosophical statement: The statement cannot be tested by a scientific experiment.  Consequently, if the statement were true, it would prove itself false, since it is not scientific.  It is, what we call in philosophy, the liar's paradox (If I told you I am a San Franciscan, and all San franciscans are liars, am I telling the truth?).  On the other hand, when a biblical literalist tells you that the Bible has told us how the world was created in six 24 hour days (and one Sunday of rest...), the problem lies in reading the biblical text literally.  The Bible is full of what in theology we call obscure text passages...  There are contradictions, there repetitions, etc.  For example, if Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, how come he dies at the end of the fifth book and writes about it?  I could list more examples, but I think you get the point.\n\nSo, we can conclude that indeed a materialistic interpretation of the world (i.e., science is the only way to the truth) and a biblical literalism (i.e., the biblical text is to be read literal by the mere literal meaning of its words) would present two irreconcilable positions.  But as we have seen, both positions are problematic.\n\nIf we allow for science and religion to communicate with one another, they can actually inform each other and in there dialogue provide one interpretation of the human experience of reality.  Accordingly, religion would thus attempt to interpret the world in light of Scripture, but also its tradition.  Science on the other hand tries to attempt the same using its own very particular methodologies.  The concepts from both disciplines are then brought to a dialogue with one another, and from that dialogue one new understanding can emerge.  And with this new understanding we engage yet once again in a new cycle of interpretation.  As such, even religion science, and definitely our overall understanding of our human experience of reality grows continuously, or if you like, evolves.\n\nI hope that helps.
956969
I believe that God created evolution.  Therefore, I believe in creationism.  Things evolve, but as far as man coming from beast, no way!
967456
You are looking at evolution incorrectly. It is not progressive and it has no direction. Your question is ill posed.
123134
Of course it's possible. Evolution is merely the mechanism of God's creation.\n\nPersonally, I feel the inherent contradiction is in the opposite direction. Rejection of evolutionary theory reduces God to a deceiver, to a 'God of parts' filling in the gaps in our understanding of creation, rather than underpinning it in it's entirety, it also rejects one of the greatest of God's gifts, the faculty of pure reason.\n\nPeople are, of course, welcome to their opinion, but I feel that the belief that God would create the universe in seven days, ten thousand years ago and then fix it in such a manner as to give all the impressions to the contrary is close to blasphemy
881611
Evolution is a fact, backed up by science. God is a hypothesis, 'backed-up' by the bible. The problem is that the bible is not backed-up by anything.
120182
I believe in creation, because I believe there is more scientific evidence to support it. The theory of evolution goes against all known science that we have accepted so far, such as the second law of thermodynamics. Try doing some open minded research on that one, it's pretty clear that evolution can't happen. Also, every evolutionist that I have ever talked to about evolution could not just sit down and discus their theory like true scientists. Instead, I have been called names such as "extremist" and "fundamentalist Christian" (I never meantioned religion or my beliefs, it was assumed), I have also been made fun of, and so on. But I have never been given the chance to really examen the theory. I really believe it's because there is not as much evidence as they say there is. I also believe there is a lot of evidence to support creation. I mean, come on, half of the evidence gathered for evolution could just as eaisly be interpreted to support creation, but that goes against mainstream science, so it is rejected. Trust me, I can't even begin to go into all the reasons I don't believe in evolution here, there are too many. But my suggestion to you is to do some research, and be open minded about it. If evolution has more evidence, go with it, and the same with creation. If God created the world, there will be evidence, we just need to find it. So do some research, there are a lot of good books and websites on the topic (watch out, there are a lot of really bad ones too that say nothing but lies on both sides). Two good ones are www.talkorigins.org (for evolution) and www.trueorigin.org (for creation, and some great responses to talkorigins.com). Good luck, and have fun:)
1155438
evolution doesn't exist...
284038
Evolution occurs all around us on a daily basis, so you should teach the truth.  Dogs are a perfect example of evolution occuring.  Man has got involved and sped up the process, but evolution is occuring.  Genetic mutations change characteristics or traits of the dog.  The breeder then selects those animals that get to breed for future generations, ensuring the trait gets carried on.  You can come up with at least a thousand common everyday situations that point to evolution occuring right now, so it is highly likely that it has always been occuring.\n\nThere is plenty of room to argue around what happened in the beginning.  Was there a starter creature that we all came from?  Was God's hand involved in starting things?  Did he start with a few organisms and then add more later?  These are all legitimate questions that should all be discussed, but you have to be honest and present all of the information and allow the student to then determine their own beliefs.  Evolution does not disprove the existence or involvement of God or a creator.  Evolution may simply be the means by which God does his creating.  He doth work in mysterious ways.
1106623
Yes. There is no evidence for evolution and when you look at the evidence we actually have...creation is the only answer.
935522
"Creation" and "Evolution" are two different processes, I think.\n\nThey are easier to understand for me if I put them into different "frameworks".\n\nIf there shall be some "beginning" of every item in the world, there shall be also "Creation". But, in opposite, if we are satisfied with the idea of constant continuation - without any beginning and any end - we do not have to think this idea anymore.\n\n"Evolution" is something which can be proved everyday. I work as a microbiologist and small modifications of living creatures is very obvious for me.\n\nThere are still many open questions which can be placed between "Creation" and Evolution". One of my "favourite problem" is the beginning of DNA-based living creatures: DNA needs enzymes to be constructed, and enzymes need DNA to be produced. Which is the probability of an event where both DNA and enzymes (and such forms of them which are interconnected!) can be formed exactly in the same time? 0,00000000000000000000....%?\n\nAs a conclusion: I thrust on "Evolution" but I see also "Creation", managed by "X" (you can replace "X" by "God", "Engineer" or whatever you like). They are not alternatives for ones thinking; they have a peaceful coexistence in our world.
326636
THIS TOOK ME A WHILE TO TYPE -- I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS A WHILE--BOTH SIDES EVOLUTION AND CREATION--PLEASE READ ALL OF THIS BEFORE SHOOTING IT DOWN... \n\nFIRST, I will talk about what is called THIESTIC EVOLUTION which means, GOD created the universe threw Evolution...\nWhat does the BIBLE SAY ABOUT MILLIONS OF YEARS? \num... NOT that God used Evolution...\n\nSECOND, I will talk about THE BIG BANG; BIG DUD...\n\n=====\nGod made us--However we did not EVOLVE into what we are today--God created ADAM in a matter of minutes not Billions of Years... It is more reasonable to believe that God SPOKE the universe into existance rather than using BILLIONS of years...\n\nI think that God is POWERFUL ENOUGH to do it RIGHT the FIRST TIME...\n\nGod is not IMPERFECT and does not need Billions of years of trial and Chances to Make Creation--He can cirtanly SPEAK everything into existance in a matter of Minutes...\n\n\nPeople use this verse: 2Pet 3:8"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."\n\nThis verse is talking about how GOD is OUTSIDE of our time space continum--IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BIBLICAL CREATION...\n\nThe Bibles says that there was NO death before Adam--I WILL TALK ABOUT THIS IN A MINUTE... If there were Thousands of years before Adam in which Natural Selection took place then that would place DEATH before Adam--The Bible is CLEAR THERE WAS NO DEATH BEFORE ADAM...\n\nI think God is GOOD, he would not use MISFITS and DEATH to bring about creation. God looked upon his creation and said "IT IS GOOD"--Not, It is getting better...\n\nGod created the Earth, Space, Water, Animals and Man in a specific ORDER on different DAYS which could not include thousands of years and this is why: \n\n1. God created Plants on Day 3\n\n2. God created Sunlight on Day 4 \n \n3. If a Day = 1 thousand years then Plants went without sunlight for a thousand years. Plants need sunlight.\n\n-------Still not convinced?\n\n1. God made plants and flowers on day 3\n\n2. God created the Birds and the BEES on day 5\n\n3. Bees polinate the flowers \n\n4. Flowers would have to go TWO THOUSAND YEARS without bee polination--and Sunlight--\n\n-=-=-=-=-=- what about Days and Nights?\n\n1. If one day is a thousand years; the Day would be 500 years and the Night would be 500 years... 500 years is a LONG TIME...\n\n2. Some Animals can not hunt at night and need the day to hunt for food because they can NOT SEE--yet others animals are Nocturnal and need the Night for hunting...\n\n3. If Natural selection is true during this period--Animals needed to HUNT in order to survive;\n\n4. MANY ANIMALS WOULD DIE OFF DUE TO THE NIGHT AND DAY CONDITIONS--Leaving us with ONLY DAY DWELLING CREATURES or ONLY NIGHT DWELLING CREATURES and an unequal balance in the food chain.\n\n-=-=-= How long did God create the Universe?\n\nI think its interesting to note: \n\nUniverse = (Uni-verse) root word, Single Spoken Verse(word)\n\nGod SPOKE the universe into existance\n\nBecause the Bible says so: -Then God said "Let there be lights in the dome of the sky, to separate day from night. Let them mark the fixed times, the days and the years, and serve as luminaries in the dome of the sky, to shed light upon the earth." And so it happened\n\nGOD SAID; IT WAS SO....\n\nGod SPOKE the universe into existance...\n\n-=-=-=-WHAT ABOUT ADAM?\n\nIf Natural Selection was the case, there would be Thousands of years of DEATH before Adam...\n\n\nHowever, the Bible teaches Adam sin brought Death;\nDeath entered the world because of man's(Adams) sin:\n\n"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin: and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" Romans 5:12 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses," Romans 5:14 "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead." I Corinthians 15:21-22 &q
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!
528044
It does not matter what I believe. The theory of evolution by natural selection is overwhelmingly supported by fact and argument. Intelligent Design is not supported by any facts that I know of and the argument seems to be basically, " a argument from ignorance ".
987213
Evolution and Creation are the same story told differently
291260
Adaptation? Evolution?
925227
I completely agree with you, I never understand why people can't consider the idea of God planning evolution, a combination of the two just like you said.\n\nThe people who disagree are the ones who consider the Bible to be the absolute truth when it comes to God and creation, even the Atheists are doing it. The Bible is not a history book, even Christian Fundamentalists have interpreted creation in the Bible differently. If you remember that it's not 100% facts and keep an open mind, then people would understand.