• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Evolution vs. Creationism[W:2571, 3239]

Knowledge=power

Knowledge=power

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
1,398
Reaction score
392
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Obviously I am a staunch evolution supporter and think creationism is ridiculous. However, some people are in the middle with opinions like "god started evolution" etc. I also am aware that some people still want creationism taught in schools, which I think is also ridiculous and deprives the child of knowledge.

Thoughts?
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I'm a Christian evolutionist. I believe that God created the universe and life, but that life evolved over millions of years.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I don't even see creationism and evolution as being in the same universe.

First of all, they aren't necessarily talking about the same thing. Creationism is mostly about how life began. Evolution has nothing to do with that. That's abiogenesis, which is a totally difference field of biology. Evolution is about how life changed over time. The only time when creationism and evolution even come into contact with each other is if someone says current life forms have always existed in their present state. In which case -- and excuse my bluntness -- but that is just ridiculous, with everything we know now. It doesn't even warrant a response.

Second, this is a scientific theory vs. a creation myth from 2,000 years ago. These are two fundamentally different conversations that don't belong in the same breath together. They just don't. Because if someone wants to believe a creation myth, you can throw all the facts in the world at them and it makes no difference. If you want to have a real discussion, you have to be open to argumentation and evidence. Creationists aren't. And most scientifically minded people aren't open to creation myths, either. This is a conversation that goes nowhere, because they are in totally different worlds in terms of how they see basic reality. And honestly, engaging creation myths as though they're on par with scientific research is insulting to science.

As for myself, I accept evolution. We don't yet know the exact mechanism of abiogenesis, so I will withhold believing anything until we do. I don't think that plopping in some "god of the gaps" belief is an acceptable placeholder for real information, so I simply have no opinion for the time being.
 
Last edited:
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Me too. I went through several years of doubting my faith as I studied evolution and furthered my education. One day I realized it in no way conflicted with the Bible.
digsbe said:
I'm a Christian evolutionist. I believe that God created the universe and life, but that life evolved over millions of years.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

SmokeAndMirrors said:
I don't even see creationism and evolution as being in the same universe.

First of all, they aren't necessarily talking about the same thing. Creationism is mostly about how life began. Evolution has nothing to do with that. That's abiogenesis, which is a totally difference field of biology. Evolution is about how life changed over time. The only time when creationism and evolution even come into contact with each other is if someone says current life forms have always existed in their present state. In which case -- and excuse my bluntness -- but that is just ridiculous, with everything we know now. It doesn't even warrant a response.

Second, this is a scientific theory vs. a creation myth from 2,000 years ago. These are two fundamentally different conversations that don't belong in the same breath together. They just don't. Because if someone wants to believe a creation myth, you can throw all the facts in the world at them and it makes no difference. If you want to have a real discussion, you have to be open to argumentation and evidence. Creationists aren't. And most scientifically minded people aren't open to creation myths, either. This is a conversation that goes nowhere, because they are in totally different worlds in terms of how they see basic reality. And honestly, engaging creation myths as though they're on par with scientific research is insulting to science.

As for myself, I accept evolution. We don't yet know the exact mechanism of abiogenesis, so I will withhold believing anything until we do. I don't think that plopping in some "god of the gaps" belief is an acceptable placeholder for real information, so I simply have no opinion for the time being.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you. Also, there is another point where creationism and evolution intersect. Obviously as you said evolution is the process of species evolving, but there is much to be said about how simple enzymes could have evolved into more complex organisms such as bacteria. This has been a sort of last stand for creationists because science has not yet been able to explain it (though I'm sure it will eventually).
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

mak2 said:
Me too. I went through several years of doubting my faith as I studied evolution and furthered my education. One day I realized it in no way conflicted with the Bible.
Click to expand...

I am glad you are at peace with it. However, if you take the bible literally, it definitely contradicts the bible. Creation in 7 days, and Noah's Ark are perhaps the most glaring contradictions that come to my mind immediately, though I'm sure I could find others.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

I am not a literalist.
Knowledge=power said:
I am glad you are at peace with it. However, if you take the bible literally, it definitely contradicts the bible. Creation in 7 days, and Noah's Ark are perhaps the most glaring contradictions that come to my mind immediately, though I'm sure I could find others.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Knowledge=power said:
I am glad you are at peace with it. However, if you take the bible literally, it definitely contradicts the bible. Creation in 7 days, and Noah's Ark are perhaps the most glaring contradictions that come to my mind immediately, though I'm sure I could find others.
Click to expand...
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27

... is a biggie in my humble opinion. Unless you try to take the apologetic view that evolution was guided by a god, the process of natural selection leading to evolution of species dispels the idea that man was created in God's image. There's too thorough of an explanation for the evolution of homo sapiens and too many extinct, but still fully sentient hominid species -- homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis, etc. -- for that idea to be plausible. Even non-extinct species like today's chimpanzees and orangutangs being able to show that they are capable of having an idea of self and displaying rudimentary consciousness is troublesome to the idea that we are the only ones created, instead of having inherited those traits from a common ancestor.

Also gets me, as I have posted before, that there's still the idea that 'male and female' were created, and were created for each other. Knowing several intersex-by-birth (~1% of live human births have noticeable degrees of androgyny) and also transgendered people, and more importantly, a somewhat lukewarm understanding of the mechanisms behind those conditions, turns that 'male and female' statement into very over-simplified version of what actually goes down in nature.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

brothern said:
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27

... is a biggie in my humble opinion. Unless you try to take the apologetic view that evolution was guided by a god, the process of natural selection leading to evolution of species dispels the idea that man was created in God's image. There's too thorough of an explanation for the evolution of homo sapiens and too many extinct, but still fully sentient hominid species -- homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis, etc. -- for that idea to be plausible. Even non-extinct species like today's chimpanzees and orangutangs being able to show that they are capable of having an idea of self and displaying rudimentary consciousness is troublesome to the idea that we are the only ones created, instead of having inherited those traits from a common ancestor.

Also gets me, as I have posted before, that there's still the idea that 'male and female' were created, and were created for each other. Knowing several intersex-by-birth (~1% of live human births have noticeable degrees of androgyny) and also transgendered people, and more importantly, a somewhat lukewarm understanding of the mechanisms behind those conditions, turns that 'male and female' statement into very over-simplified version of what actually goes down in nature.
Click to expand...

Very well put. This provided me another perspective that I had not realized. Thank you for a great addition to the thread.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

digsbe said:
I'm a Christian evolutionist. I believe that God created the universe and life, but that life evolved over millions of years.
Click to expand...

That would mean the Bible is wrong. And if it's wrong about that, what else could it be wrong about?
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Paralogic said:
That would mean the Bible is wrong. And if it's wrong about that, what else could it be wrong about?
Click to expand...

How so?
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Knowledge=power said:
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

It's impossible that any god would have created Evolution as we know it... that would mean that the god did not know what Evolution would create and what what it would make extinct.

That proves that the god did not know what will happen, therefore the god is not really a god, therefore there are no gods.

Simple enough.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

digsbe said:
How so?
Click to expand...

The Bible does not accept evolution. If you have questions about this issue you should take some college level courses in religion or theology.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Paralogic said:
The Bible does not accept evolution. If you have questions about this issue you should take some college level courses in religion or theology.
Click to expand...

Good point. The two contradict eachother entirely.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Paralogic said:
The Bible does not accept evolution. If you have questions about this issue you should take some college level courses in religion or theology.
Click to expand...

The bible doesn't accept anything. It tells stories. Some probably historical, some myth, some truth, some fiction.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Removable Mind said:
The bible doesn't accept anything. It tells stories. Some probably historical, some myth, some truth, some fiction.
Click to expand...

Here is a great example. The bible depicts "heaven" as a place with streets made of gold, the land of milk and honey, etc. All of those things are no longer "heavenly." If the bible were written in 2013, heaven would have Ferrari's and yachts, great drugs and supermodels.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Paralogic said:
It's impossible that any god would have created Evolution as we know it... that would mean that the god did not know what Evolution would create and what what it would make extinct.

That proves that the god did not know what will happen, therefore the god is not really a god, therefore there are no gods.

Simple enough.
Click to expand...

It is so simple in fact that it is also wrong.

As Chesterton put in in the early 20th century "If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox; for a personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly, especially if, like the Christian God, he were outside time.".

Evolution is accepted within the vast majority of Christendom, it has been taught in Catholic schools for a very long time. It is only "controversial" among a small segment of Christians and therefore a favorite subject for those who seek to paint Christians as ignorant or dangerous.

It is a silly subject taken seriously by only those on the extreme positions in either side.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Moderator's Warning:
Religion forum rules: the religion forum is for the civil discussion of theistic issues. It is specifically not a place for questioning or denying the existence of God or gods, nor for bashing religion in general or bashing a specific religion. Violations of this rule are subject to infractions and threadban. The correct venue for these things is Philosophy. Bear that in mind when posting.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Paralogic said:
It's impossible that any god would have created Evolution as we know it... that would mean that the god did not know what Evolution would create and what what it would make extinct.

That proves that the god did not know what will happen, therefore the god is not really a god, therefore there are no gods.

Simple enough.
Click to expand...

Why is it impossible? Who has set the parameters for what God or a "god" must or musn't do? Is there some sort of God Handbook that I'm unaware of?

This "proves" nothing. :shrug:
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

gilbertc1908 said:
It is so simple in fact that it is also wrong.

As Chesterton put in in the early 20th century "If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox; for a personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly, especially if, like the Christian God, he were outside time.".

Evolution is accepted within the vast majority of Christendom, it has been taught in Catholic schools for a very long time. It is only "controversial" among a small segment of Christians and therefore a favorite subject for those who seek to paint Christians as ignorant or dangerous.

It is a silly subject taken seriously by only those on the extreme positions in either side.
Click to expand...

Just another method the leftist media in America uses to define Conservatives as out of the mainstream....
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Evolution vs. creationism is a false dichotomy.

As Gilbert said, "Evolution is accepted within the vast majority of Christendom, it has been taught in Catholic schools for a very long time. It is only "controversial" among a small segment of Christians and therefore a favorite subject for those who seek to paint Christians as ignorant or dangerous."
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

nota bene said:
Evolution vs. creationism is a false dichotomy.

As Gilbert said, "Evolution is accepted within the vast majority of Christendom, it has been taught in Catholic schools for a very long time. It is only "controversial" among a small segment of Christians and therefore a favorite subject for those who seek to paint Christians as ignorant or dangerous."
Click to expand...

Then explain how it's contradictions to the bible are not controversial in Christian religion.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

Knowledge=power said:
Obviously I am a staunch evolution supporter and think creationism is ridiculous. However, some people are in the middle with opinions like "god started evolution" etc. I also am aware that some people still want creationism taught in schools, which I think is also ridiculous and deprives the child of knowledge.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Teaching creationism in school doesn't deprive a child of knowledge, it adds to the knowledge a child receives. That is unless it's being taught at the expense of something else, but I don't see that being the case.

The only time a child is deprived of knowledge is when something vital is left out of the curriculum.
 
Re: Evolution vs. Creationism

SmokeAndMirrors said:
I don't even see creationism and evolution as being in the same universe.

First of all, they aren't necessarily talking about the same thing. Creationism is mostly about how life began. Evolution has nothing to do with that. That's abiogenesis, which is a totally difference field of biology. Evolution is about how life changed over time. The only time when creationism and evolution even come into contact with each other is if someone says current life forms have always existed in their present state. In which case -- and excuse my bluntness -- but that is just ridiculous, with everything we know now. It doesn't even warrant a response.

Second, this is a scientific theory vs. a creation myth from 2,000 years ago. These are two fundamentally different conversations that don't belong in the same breath together. They just don't. Because if someone wants to believe a creation myth, you can throw all the facts in the world at them and it makes no difference. If you want to have a real discussion, you have to be open to argumentation and evidence. Creationists aren't. And most scientifically minded people aren't open to creation myths, either. This is a conversation that goes nowhere, because they are in totally different worlds in terms of how they see basic reality. And honestly, engaging creation myths as though they're on par with scientific research is insulting to science.

As for myself, I accept evolution. We don't yet know the exact mechanism of abiogenesis, so I will withhold believing anything until we do. I don't think that plopping in some "god of the gaps" belief is an acceptable placeholder for real information, so I simply have no opinion for the time being.
Click to expand...

You lost me at "creation myth," since the word "myth" implies that the story is untrue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom