Religion & Spirituality

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Creation versus Evolution. Why evolution is not sufficient to prove Bible wrong?

Bible is the holy book of Christians. It is nothing but the word of God.
Christianity should be considered for its historical viability.

We, Christians believe that God created the earth and the universe. Estimated age of earth is ~6000 years old. Some may argue that earth is billions of years old. We can term as old earth theory. But it is illogical to conclude something or question Bible without asking sufficient questions. Often people get carried away by some evidence and come to a conclusion. Evidence should be complemented by logical reasoning.

Everyone agree that Adam and Eve were the first humans created by God. When both Adam and Eve were created did they appear one day old. No. They were created as adults. Conclusions without logical reasoning and asking every possible questions are not sufficient to prove Bible wrong. Remember Bible is nothing but the word of God. Human ideas are also evolving and our science and research is improving day by day. It may not be perfect today but it may be more perfect tomorrow. Improvement is an ongoing process and perfection is never attained. Only God is perfect. Everything else is in transition. We need to ask do cosmology, geology and other sciences have evolved enough to prove Bible wrong? My belief in Jesus, our only savior helps me confidently say that Bible can never be wrong. It may be difficult for many to understand, but belief in God empowers logical reasoning.

About evolutions, can it prove Bible wrong? No. True that living beings may adapt to the environment. Let us agree that adaptations are genetically heritable and it is heritable across different environments. This is just an accumulation of data. That addresses What part of the phenomenon. But logical reasoning enables us to think about how and why ?
Why does genes behave in a particular way way ? Why does it adapt? Was it designed that way ? This is where creation/creator comes into picture. Without asking sufficient questions evolution or transitional forms is an incomplete understanding. Evolution by itself may not stand out, it may need a force to drive it.

The entire life on earth is driven by one force and I need not repeat it!

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

i would like to add a true story.

Issac Newton, the famous mathematician often used to tell his friends about the Lord to which he friends won't agree.
One day, Newton invited them for supper over his place. They arrived at his home and Newton requested them to sit while he was preparing the supper. Being bored, they went from one room to the other.

They saw a whole solar system replica in his room. When Newton came there, his friends asked who made that beautiful system there. To which Newton replied, "I don't know, It must have been there by chance"

To which his friends laughed and asked why was he playing trick on tgem. To this, Newton replied, "if this small replica of solar system must have a creator, how such magnificent, splendid solar system and Universe have no creator?"
His friends looked at him in a very understandable way.
Maybe we can understand what he wanted to convey.

1-25 of 68

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@Horsefrost Newton was right... he didn’t know.

Now, 400 years later, we do know... and nobody would be more pleased about that than Newton.

So he just made up a convenient fiction.

He claimed that because his model required a creator, everything in the universe must require a creator.

That’s a simple non sequitur, and makes a mockery of his argument.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost So, if the complexity of the Universe necessitates it having a creator, how could that even more complex creator come into being without and even more complex creator? And so on ad infinitum.

When you explain where that creator came from you can simply apply your explanation to the universe instead, thus rendering your postulated creator redundant.

BlueSkyKing · M

@Horsefrost Seems anecdotal. Was it a painting or a model? But some people define myths as made up stories that are true. No doubt he was a devout Christian but he also wrote more about alchemy than science. How did they determine the size of each planet at that time?

Sharon · F

@BlueSkyKing I've heard a similar story about Newton, dealing with Astrology.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@BlueSkyKing He created a model. His objective was not to create a model by measurement and making them perfect but to let his friends know what the truth was.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@newjaninev2 I feel like now you know everything? Right?

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@Sharon For that you can refer to the scriptures which suggest someone has created this universe. Where the Lord came fromis a big question. Probably he created the 4th dimension - time. Before that, maybe time itself was not a thing. Time is always known as a reference, when there would have been no reference, there would have been no time to tick forward to.

I will ask these questions to the Lord himself when i get there.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost Which "lord" is that? The "scriptures" are just a collection of myths and superstitions, they don't provide real answers to anything.

BlueSkyKing · M

@Sharon So did I, but he never wrote a word about the subject. His library had three books astrology related. Including one that criticize it.

Sharon · F

@BlueSkyKing There are a lot of anecdotes about Newton, it's impossible to determine with any certainty which, if any, are true. Even the one about an apple falling on his head is probably not literally true.

BlueSkyKing · M

@Horsefrost Cite the source please.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@BlueSkyKing why do you need to get to the source? I don't understand. There is alot of information available on internet. Would you mind taking some pain to search for it?

@Sharon True, even if it is an anecdote, the concept behind this, you can not neglect. Isn't it but obvious like Sharon bakes a cake and then tells her friends that the cake got baked on its own. Her friend would ask how and Sharon too may say that even if this cake requires a chef or a person to build it, can this universe be possibly created in such a uniform way? Planets take equal time every year to rotate.

The leaves of a plant or a tree are bisected right from the middle and many many more.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost

why do you need to get to the source?

I expect she wants to try to determine the veracity of your "true story".

can this universe be possibly created in such a uniform way?

There's no evidence it was created. Postulating a magical "creator" just adds a layer of complexity because you then need to explain where that creator came from and, furthermore, why that explanation cannot simply be applied to the universe instead.

Planets take equal time every year to rotate.

No they don't. In general they're slowing down but they're also affected by other massive objects.

BlueSkyKing · M

@Horsefrost You made the post, why must I look or take your word? Don’t you know?

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@Horsefrost The creationist website that fed you this nonsense (https://www.wholesomewords.org/children/creation/whomadit.html) needs to tidy up its act. Not only is the anecdote around a chat between newton and an atheist friend (you’re joking, right?) obviously contrived shite, they include such howlers as "All of these balls, representing Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune”. Extraordinary, given that Uranus and Neptune were discovered long after Newton's death.

I have pointed out to you (and you have ignored the lesson) that it is a simple non sequitur to say that because my computer is designed by an intelligence then everything in the universe must be designed by an intelligence.

You also fail to explain what created such a creator. if you claim that the creator was always there, then it’s just as valid to say that the universe was always there... and that has the advantage of being simpler, because it disposes of postulations about unnecessary magical entities.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@Sharon Nonsense? For the person it was written, maybe she woild grasp what it wants to convey.

Now, i know that common sense is not so common as you do not go to what this story wants to convey, rather you want to dig into the origin of this story?

Do you think i won't use the number "2" untill you will show me how it came into existence? You may not use but i would want to use it. Don't you wear your gown untill you get to know from where the material or the fiber was delivered to get the finished product? Or are you the "i won't wear until i would know from where every thread of it is" type?

The universe is such a complex thing and still you are having day and night regularly is something which would need a proper planning just like you need to fix a bulb with a plan where do you need light in the house. Now you would want the explanation of poles but human being were not supposed to live on poles just like they were not supposed to live in the outer space.

He is the beginning and the end.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@BlueSkyKing look upwards ☝️☝️☝️, it is not my post. I commented on it just like you are commenting.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost You're not making any sense. Is English your first/only language?

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@Sharon with this 400 years of science, don't you think you people are boasting alot about it? Science itself is a very biased form, very relative form of study. I don't say it is all wrong but maybe science one day will lead you to the Lord which i highly doubt but it could be a thing. Asking questions is always good but to the right person. I am not the right person but neither was Albert Einstein nor was that guy who wrote a book on universe.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@Sharon you too are not making any sense. Is English 'your' first language?

My first language is English.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost

to the Lord which i highly doubt

I doubt it too as there is no evidence your "lord" thing even exists.

Science asks questions of the universe itself. It's a method of determining how it all works. There are no authorities in science.

Entwistle · 56-60, M

@Horsefrost This assumes the solar system is a fixed thing..it isn't.
It has no creator as it's just a label we put on a collection of planets and moons.
The same goes for everything in the universe.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost My first language is English too but I'm having a lot of difficulty deciphering your comments.

Horsefrost · 46-50, M

@Sharon Science just asks questions. Some of it are based on mere observations. Do you think scientists have really travelled into the Sun to check about it's Hydrogen Helium hypothesis? How absurd would it be to guess about something? This is purely a hypothtical school.

How many elements are there in your periodic table? Do you think that the elements found on earth surely woukd be found on other planets and Sun too? Can't it have an extra element which you or this science has never heard of?

There was a frog in the pond and the frog thought that that pond is the size of the universe and there were no world inside out. Everything was just water, everywhere, it is just water and so are the scientists when they claim it is only Hydrogen and Helium which can make this fusion reaction possible.

Can't there be another element which is responsible for the radiation?

Think about it.

Sharon · F

@Horsefrost We can dtermine the Hyrogen/Helium ratio in the Sun by examining the spectrum of light from it. We also know how much energy is released by hydrogen fusion and the amount of energy reaching the Earth. It's a simple matter to calculate to rate of fusion in the Sun.

There are 92 naturally occuring elements and another 26 artifical ones. As the elements are define by their atomic number, there is no room for extras to be inserted between existing ones. The heavier elements are only created in very large stars or supernovae. I doubt they're deposited evenly throughout the universe.

All this is basic physics, barely even secondary school level.

1-25 of 68