• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Evolution or Creation?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Best Buckeye;1442851; said:
THe real question is "do you believe in God" If you believe in n eternal all powerful God then you just about have to believe in creation.
After that evolution would have followed.
Click to expand...

I used to think that way, but I disagree now. However, your statement might also be based on what deity you believe in.
 
Upvote 0
Best Buckeye;1442851; said:
THe real question is "do you believe in God" If you believe in n eternal all powerful God then you just about have to believe in creation.
After that evolution would have followed.
Click to expand...

adaptation does not equal evolution. the more adapted a certain group of organisms becomes, the less they have in common with the larger gene pool, which results in a net LOSS potential genetic diversity within that group. genetic adaption works completely opposite the basic tenets of evolution.

darwin knew NOTHING about genetics.
 
Upvote 0
Best Buckeye;1442851; said:
THe real question is "do you believe in God" If you believe in n eternal all powerful God then you just about have to believe in creation.
After that evolution would have followed.
Click to expand...
I believe that the creation of life from non-life required the hand of God. From that point forward, see: Darwin, Charles.
 
Upvote 0
because genetic code has barriers that cannot be crossed, and those barriers function to keep the population relatively stable. genetic drift exists, to be certain, but the same genetic rules that do not allow us to breed 10,000 pound cows also function to keep cows cows and not something else. like i said, 10,000 years of dog breeding (which is UN-natural selection, and therefore out of the realm of Darwin) and we haven't come up with anything that is no longer a dog. because genetic code prevents it. nature can't break the laws of nature. therefore "natural" evolution cannot happen.

re: Darwin. his ideology was not his own, but rather the brainchild of his deist grandfather Erasmus who conceived evolution as an alternative to Christianity. the two are diametrically opposed. personally, i see believing both as being a copout... but whatever. if you're going to believe the Bible, you have to believe the WHOLE THING. you don't get to pick and choose which parts you want to believe... not to mention the fact that the Creation is referenced in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Numbers, 1 Samuel, 2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles, Nehemiah, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Hosea, Jonah, Zacchariah, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, John, Acts, Romans, 1&2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Timothey, 1&2 Peter, Hebrews, James, and Revelation. if you don't believe the Creation story, what's the point of believing anything else the Book says?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye;1455071; said:
because genetic code has barriers that cannot be crossed, and those barriers function to keep the population relatively stable. genetic drift exists, to be certain, but the same genetic rules that do not allow us to breed 10,000 pound cows also function to keep cows cows and not something else. like i said, 10,000 years of dog breeding (which is UN-natural selection, and therefore out of the realm of Darwin) and we haven't come up with anything that is no longer a dog. because genetic code prevents it. nature can't break the laws of nature. therefore "natural" evolution cannot happen.
Click to expand...
How long have you studied genetics? Do you have a degree in the field? I ask these questions because none of this commentary is consistent with what little I know about the field. It also is not consistent with the excellent discussions by Dr. Kenneth Miller, Professor of Biology at Brown University and a devout Christian. See his page at Ken Miller's Evolution Page
 
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye;1455071; said:
re: Darwin. his ideology was not his own, but rather the brainchild of his deist grandfather Erasmus who conceived evolution as an alternative to Christianity. the two are diametrically opposed. personally, i see believing both as being a copout... but whatever. if you're going to believe the Bible, you have to believe the WHOLE THING... if you don't believe the Creation story, what's the point of believing anything else the Book says?
Click to expand...
Again, there is nothing inconsistent in believing the truth of the Bible without believing that everything within the Old and New Testaments is necessarily factual. Jesus, who was God incarnate in the Christian view, spoke in parables that illustrated how "fictional" stories can be used to instruct us in the truth.

There is nothing about evolutionary theory that is inconsistent with Christian faith (or indeed with Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or other major faiths) -- unless one chooses to make it so.
 
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye;1455071; said:
but whatever. if you're going to believe the Bible, you have to believe the WHOLE THING. you don't get to pick and choose which parts you want to believe... not to mention the fact that the Creation is referenced in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Numbers, 1 Samuel, 2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles, Nehemiah, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Hosea, Jonah, Zacchariah, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, John, Acts, Romans, 1&2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Timothey, 1&2 Peter, Hebrews, James, and Revelation. if you don't believe the Creation story, what's the point of believing anything else the Book says?
Click to expand...

Just because the Creation story is mentioned in other parts of the Bible does not make it a literal story. Furthermore, there are lots of points that can be gained from the Creation story without reliance upon literalism; therefore, therefore, there's no problem with "believing anything else the Book says".
 
Upvote 0
buckeyegrad;1455240; said:
This thread's inability to escape the consistent reptetition of the same, unfruitful debates on this subject would seem to suggest that evolution is in fact an incorrect theory.
Click to expand...
You seem to argue here that, on any topic on which people have long, fruitless debates, the side you are on is the correct one. Only in the tOSU-Michigan argument would I necessarily agree.

:oh::io:
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye Maniac;1455243; said:
I'd credit that more with the fact that creationists are unable to accept the indisputable facts that are being presented in defense of evolution.
Click to expand...

facts about evolution like genetic principles don't allow it, and the fossil record doesn't support it? go read Darwin on Trial.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1455082; said:
Again, there is nothing inconsistent in believing the truth of the Bible without believing that everything within the Old and New Testaments is necessarily factual. Jesus, who was God incarnate in the Christian view, spoke in parables that illustrated how "fictional" stories can be used to instruct us in the truth.

There is nothing about evolutionary theory that is inconsistent with Christian faith (or indeed with Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or other major faiths) -- unless one chooses to make it so.
Click to expand...

ok, twist it up any way you like... but verses like "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth. Speak if you have understanding," (Job 38:4) seem to indicate that God is indeed the God of CREATION.

not to mention the fact that believing in evolution supposes there was death and suffering before sin, which goes aginst the very foundation of the Christian faith. so, either God is who He says He is and created a perfect world which was corrupted by sin, or He isn't who He says He is and created an imperfect world which needed to evolve before reaching the point of perfection before the fall through sin... not very consistent...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top