The Creation and Evolution clashes with dealing with the age of the earth, and the creation of man. The structure is described in the Bible as God created it however they describes the earth before the six days of creation. When thinking about the integration of evolutionary principles as far as the scientific laws are concerned there is no difference between the origin of the earth and all of its life. Could the Big Bang theory of happened? That gap theory, everything made out of nothing. Is the gap theory real? Luther sided with the Bible with creation, is his blessing relevant today? Was the earth created out of nothing no previous atoms did God use. God created the heavens and the earth in six days so we had the seven day for Shabbat. The Progressive Creation explains the Genesis flood and the six days of creation. So the question is could God really have created everything in six literal days? If so where did the origins of life come from; and what about the Law of Nature their survival of the fittest? How big is the rift between the evolutionist and the creationist? Can we trust the Bible to tell us the truth? These are the questions that I will be looking to answer. In evolution and creation of religious idea about how the Earth came into existence? “In America alone the conservative number of scientists to believe in creation is more than 10,000.” Both creation and evolution offer a belief system; both use the same information to present their view of the origins of the earth. “Creationists maintained that there is a reasonable and logical belief system, backed up by the weight of evidence is observable in the present.” By using present-day science creationist can prove that the earth and man was created and not evolved. By using the term evolution we will use the definition “believe that all things have made themselves by means of their own natural properties, with no supernatural input. Chaos has become cosmos, all by itself; particles have given rise to planets, palm trees, pelicans and people, with no help from the outside of the properties of the matter of energy.” As teaching evolution to my students by question has been to them, if we came from a single cell amoeba with no intervention, how can some cells grow and change into thousands and millions of cells while others remain single cell amoebas? It is a question that we always look at and try to solve. Evolutionists believe that cells are constantly changing, if they are why do we still have single cell amoeba? Sent evolutionists try to involve a god in the process, however most evolutionists strongly reject any intelligent direction. “Even many academic theistic evolutionist scientists who claim to believe them both evolution and God insists that the process was entirely natural this evolutionary creation process supposedly took place over billions of years in which countless creatures struggled, suffered and died, with strong ruthless wiping out weak at many points.” To intelligent designer is the foundation of many religions of the world just Christianity. If you are an atheist, agnostic, or secular humanist you don’t believe that anyone may do therefore you don’t believe that anyone has any rules over you. You can do whatever you want to do without any consequences. If you’re Christian or one of the other world religions that believes that God created the earth, there are consequences for the way you live. When God created the earth there was no sin therefore there was no shedding of blood, no death, and no pain in this world. It is only when sin entered the world through rebellion that death, pain, and suffering entered the world. “Evidence points overwhelmingly to the rapid formation of coal of spores were reading and deposited they rapidly buried in Victoria Australia there are huge brown coal beds containing large numbers of logs of pine trees of types which today to homegrown swamps.” Also, “many southern hemisphere coal deposits showed no sign...
...of science vs. religion there has been no issues more hotly debated than that of evolutionvs. creationism. The issue is passionately debated since the majority of evidence is in favor of evolution, but the creation point of view can never be proved wrong because of long standing religious beliefs. Human creation is seperated into three simple beliefs; creation theory, naturalisticevolution theory, and theistic evolution theory. The complexities of all three sides create a difficult dilemma for what theory to support among commom people, religious or non-religious.
The theories of human evolution tend to always cause a heated dispute in modern American society. Each theory presents its own evidence proving its acceptance, but lacks enough evidence to prove the other theories incorrect. All the theories that attempt to explain human existence fall under the categories of creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and the theistic evolution theory. The creation theory explains that a certain God, or God's created the humans, and evolution does not exist. The naturalistic evolution theory states that evolution is driven by purely natural forces, and is not controlled by any input from a god, goddess, or multiple deities. The theistic...
The creationvs. evolution debate is a continuous debate. How and why are we here on earth? Were we purposely made or did we evolve accidentally? Are we the creation of innovative intelligence or are we simply the end result of countless cosmic accidents? What does the evidence say? Two dominant views seem to battle their ideas and beliefs for countless centuries. While theists believe God is our glorious creator of everything, naturalists hold truth that God does not exist, only matter exists and we came into existence and operate by only physical processes.
Without concrete evidence, the creationvs. nature debate doesn’t amount to much more than a philosophical dispute. Although everyone has the right to their own opinion, the question is what is the true source for that opinion? Individuals are capable to believe whatever they chose, yet that doesn’t make them right. Many decide to stand strong to “evidence”, but that evidence is not the same as actual proof. Evidence is helpful to form assumptions, while proof concludes the situation. If we had stone cold proof, the theory of evolution wouldn’t be called a theory.
Creation signifies the existence of a divine creator who put the world and all life-forms into existence. Life is the product of intelligent design. Therefore, a perfect design in biology...
The History of Christian’s Responses to Evolution before the 21th Century
This report is divided into 3 parts, the Pre-Darwinism, early responses to Darwinism and the mid 1950s responses toward Darwinism. The focus of this report is how Christian responds to Evolution that is explained in three ways, rejection of evolution, reconciliation of evolution and Christianity, and integration.
Christianity and science used to be united. They shared the same perspective but shortly before the Renaissance era, Christianity and science had slowly parted to its own way (Moses). The gap grew even wider after the 18th century when Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution. Since then, there were many debates amongst the supporter of the theory of evolution and the supporter of the idea of creation for over two centuries until now (Moses). The reason for the gap is believed to be that they both convey different kinds of perspective to explain the origins of life, where most Christian believed in the story of Genesis. For example the verse “And God said, ‘Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky’” (New International Version, Genesis 1.20) implies that God created living creatures instantaneously. Having such gap did not mean that...
...Evolution, Creationism, Both, or Neither in Schools?
In “One Side Can Be Wrong,” Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne argue that teaching creationism along side evolution does not make sense, and that creationism has no business being in the science classes. Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne are evolutionary biologists at Oxford University and the University of Chicago. They published this essay in the Guardian in September 2005, seeking to appeal to middle-aged parents. They argue that creationism cannot provide any positive evidence to create a controversy and therefore should not be taught in schools to children and teenagers. On the other hand, there is a substantial amount of evidence for evolution where debate and conversation can arise. According to Dawkins and Coyne there are some who believe one theory must be right simply because of the many fallacies in the other. Dawkins and Coyne attempt to change this mindset. Dawkins and Coyne are ultimately effective in persuading their readers to rethink their conclusions about evolution and creationism by using tools such as rhetorical questions, tone, and juxtaposition. They challenge their readers to think about evolution rather than simply believing in creationism because evolution may have a few holes.
The first that will be analyzed is the use of rhetorical questions throughout the essay. One example is on page 70, when...
...education: Teaching Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
As a high school student I attended Indian Hill in Cincinnati, Ohio. Sitting in my fourth period class on yet another boring day of high school I couldn’t help but notice my science teacher acting a little peculiar. My teacher was teaching the subject of evolution to a diverse class. It is like he became a different teacher. I remember that was the fastest day of class. All through high school I noticed my teachers would act uncomfortable when dealing with the subject of evolution. Most of my teachers would quickly hurry through the lecture with little class participation and discussion. Other times I’d notice my teachers becoming bias to certain viewpoints and swaying the class activities to their side. So I wondered, do teachers feel uncomfortable teaching a subject or subjects so strongly debated over. On the other hand my teachers would never give an alternative theory or belief to counter what evolution says. With all the different opinions around the spectrum, is it impossible to narrow down one specific theory or belief to teach? Evolution, creationism and intelligent design should be taught in public schools only to inform and educate students with the knowledge from the theories debated upon.
Evolution and intelligent design are two intricate theories while creationism is a belief. Within evidence or...
...Debate: Creationism vs. Evolution in Schools: 1st Affirmative Constructive Speech
Creationism and Evolutionism by definition are very different topics. Currently, evolutionary naturalism is the most widely taught view of origins in America. In schools in the modern day, only evolutionism is taught and condoned. But before the 1920s, only creationism was taught, and evolution was forbidden. Then, on February 20, 2008, the Florida State Board of Education voted to revise the public school guidelines to require teachers to teach only Evolutionism. The law was passed with a very narrow 4-to-3 vote in favor of the law. Our resolution (affirmative side) is to teach both the theories of evolution and creationism side by side. This would provide a fair and equal education that lets our generation and future generations choose their freedom to religion as much as possible.
Before I continue my speech, allow me present some key terms in the argument:
1. Creationism - A doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis.
2. Evolutionism - A theory of biological evolution, especially that formulated by Charles Darwin.
3. Intelligent Design- Belief that life is too complex to have evolved entirely through natural processes and that an outside force outside of traditional...
...the USA whether or not Evolution should be taught in public school classrooms due to the controversy over evolution and creationism. In the early 2000’s a parent in Dover Pennsylvania went to the district school board with complaints that his child was being taught lessons in science that contradicted his religious beliefs; the subject being evolution. Joshua Rowand was taught by his family and church that the world was created through creationism and felt that the theory of Evolution did not support his beliefs and, because it is only a theory, was teaching a form of religion in a public school.
Evolution is a theory based on evidence through fossils and other means that states human beings and other complex organisms were developed over time and all originated from simpler, single-cell organisms. Because it is based on facts and evidence the argument was presented to the opposers that the teaching of evolution was simply another scientific theory that needed to be taught in classrooms. The people that supported creationism then decided that creationism, too, could be taught as a scientific theory if presented in the right manner. Thus, “intelligent design” was created.
The idea of intelligent design is virtually identical to that of creationism. It is the idea that a “being” of some sort created the entire world and everything in it within a short amount of time. While there is no...
“There are none who are as deaf as those who do not want to hear,” Barry Leventhal once said this quote (Geisler and Turek). There are so many different creation theories that people have been talking about them for centuries, none have been one hundred percent proven but all are debatable. The problem with most professionals who study creation theories is they are very stubborn. Once somebody has a plausible theory in their head they do not listen to any other theories. This quote by Barry Leventhal perfectly describes this characteristic of the professionals mentioned earlier. They are “deaf” because they refused to hear what others had to say. Many documents were written by these “deaf” professionals about their adopted theory; they harp so much on how great and true their theory is that they are not only “deaf but they are “blind” in a sense. One very famous document that was written by men who were not “deaf” or “blind” to other ways of thought was The Declaration of Independence (Geisler and Turek). The Declaration of Independence is a nonfictional document that includes a creation theory. The writers of The Declaration of Independence were not “blind” or “deaf” because they were the ones who established the free world, something that had never been done before. The Declaration of Independence is a nonfictional document, but there are many fictional documents written by people who are not...