One thing that bothers me is that according to the evolution theory, modern man (homo sapiens) has supposedly been around for about 200,000 years. Yet the oldest writing ever found is about 5,500 years old.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stm
The fact that NO writing samples can be found older than about 6,000 years despite the claim modern man has been around for and additional 194,000 years seems statistically improbable. And for those who suggest that modern man lived for almost 200 milleniums and left NO evidence of any writing, but miraculously developed it due to agricultural pursuits only in the last 6,000 years is equally statistically improbable.
I believe the earth itself is very old, on the order of 4.5 billion years, but the sudden emergence of thousands of writing systems in 6,000 years versus 195,000 years of absolutely nothing is quite interesting. With all the samples of ancient writing we currently have, you would think that some additional samples would surely be found from the billions and billions that must of been created during 195,000 previous years of modern man, but there aren't any.
2007-10-02 11:00:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Someone who cares 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I've wondered the same thing. The most common argument I've heard is that there is no evidence. That's not true at all. Just because you close your eyes when evidence comes along or refuse to try and understand it, doesn't mean it's not there (unless you're the president... but that's a matter for another forum).
The other argument I've heard is in the Bible's account of creation, and that the Bible is the immutable word of God. The problem with this is that if part of it is the immutable word of God, then ALL of it must be immutable, right? And if ALL of it is immutable, why aren't the creationists upset that we aren't putting adulterers to death, punishing those who work on the Sabbath, and all that Biblical stuff? If those parts of the Bible aren't meant to be taken literally, then maybe some other sections should be reviewed in light of contradictory evidence.
By the way, I am a Christian and a scientist, and believe wholeheartedly in evolution (having examined the evidence and being educated in biology). If actual evidence comes along to the contrary, I'll examine it and critique it. Like any good scientists, if it is valid, I'll put it up with the evidence I've already seen, and if that requires changing my viewpoint on evolution, then so be it. My faith has never kept me from looking at the world and seeing the beauty and complexity in front of me, rather than trying to shoehorn it in to an ancient account of the world. What is more, it is completely and utterly irrelevant to the drive to live a good life of love and caring.
2007-10-02 16:28:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by andymanec 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all, science should be taken "with a grain of salt"
especially science which assumes too much as well as
science explaining how we came to be (w/o first-person observation).
Micro evolution I have no problem with.
It is clearly demonstrated and does not go
against any religious belief I have.
Macro evolution has many scientific problems
that science will not admit. It has an agenda
and bias as well.
It mainly goes against my religious belief that
Adam was formed as a human being in God's image
and God breathed life (soul) into him.
Macro evolution tends to take away the relationship
with God from the begining.
It does not solve how matter and life came to
be in the first place.
Also, I think that genetics is losing more and more
information over time (like making a copy of a
copy of a copy) so that inbreeding becomes more
and more undesireable because of that fact.
The world is under a curse spiritually, morally, and physically. It is all winding down to the end.
People use evolution as an excuse to think that
there is no spiritual life when there certainly is!
If you only study natural causes for everything, you
can not delve into what is spiritual
and will be lacking in life!
Behavioral science/psycology has been a very mixed
up field. When it is denied that we have a spirit, the
full answers will never arrive and there will be
many abuses towards life.
2007-10-02 16:34:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nickel-for-your-thoughts 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
EVOLUTION proposes that life is the result of chance events happening over almost incalculable lengths of time... that every form of life is the result of random (though beneficial) mutations that made each generation capable of out-surviving other similar organisms, and that these mutations were passed on to the next generations, and built upon by further random mutations...
The Bible teaches that God specifically created various life forms, and that He specifically, and purposely created man in His own image; so we are not the results of a compendium of genetic "accidents," nor are we merely the highest form of animal on the planet.
That is why I personally, as a Christian, reject the theory of evolution as an explanation for the origins of life.
Yes, the Bible does say that a day is as a thousand years to the Lord, but this is more an illustration of how the passage of significant (to mortal humans) amounts of time is nothing to God, and not intended to be used as a mathematical identity to figure out the ages of things that are said to be days old, or the passage of time that was said to have taken place over days.
PS. Isn't it great to just get a non-insulting question to answer, and without all the abusive and insulting answers to go with it??
2007-10-02 16:23:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
That it happened by itself! Religion states that God created the world. The Theory of Evolution states that it happened all on its own. And to give you something to think about, Earth is THE ONLY PLANET in the universe that can sustain life. Why do you think that it is that not a single other planet or moon or piece of space junk can? The universe is infinite, but how are the possibilities for life so low? Oh, and C.L Richardson, it was NOT during a literal six day period. Actually, it is explained that a day could have been years, thus showing that evolution could have just been God's way of doing it, but it didn't come out of nowhere.
2007-10-02 16:19:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
WORDS
At year 2513, Old Testament began next 1110 years, done 443 before Christ.
At year 1850, Evolution came, it was not in school 1950, so I missed it.
In the bible there are verses that say raised up or caught up to be with Jesus,
most religions call this rapture, but I do not call it that, I see no need to.
In the bible verses say let the earth bring forth grass, plant life, fruit life, herb life, after each is says seed yeilding after his kind. Programed thousands of years ago. Like rapture, evolution is just a word, Jesus was resurrected out of hell, Acts 2:27-35; HOW CAN HELL BE A BAD PLACE? Hell is just a word.
So different generations are taught different things, and languages change so that what was hot, is now so cool and it all is supposed to mean the same thing. I see everything as being programed to produce and it was doing that before some one used the word evolution as their idea of the best description.
Some people substitute one food for another, some exchange one food for another, we all have a variety of everything to have a preference of.
THE TIME THE BIBLE GIVES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH AGE OF EARTH
SAVED - BACKWARD IN TIME TO ADAM - LOST
1000 years Christ reign makes all things perfect before God.
2007 years ago Jesus in Rome world Empire #6 to year 33.
0606 years ago Babylon World Empire #3, ends Judah kings.
0391 years the Judah Kings ruled after Solomon's reign.
------- [ 17, 3, 41, 23, 8, 1, 6, 40, 52, 29, 16,16, 29, 55, 2, 31, 11, 11 ]
0036 years Solomon reigned after he began the temple. 1Ki.11:42;
0480 years from death of Moses, Solomon began the temple. 1Ki.6:1;
0040 years Moses & the Promise Land heirs in wilderness. Deut.34:7;
0430 years after Abraham Exo.12:40,41, Gal.3:16-18; all heirs get the law.
0427 years after flood Abraham gets Promised Land covenant. Matt.1:1-17;
------- [ 2, 35,30,34,30,32,30, 29 ] = 222, Gen.11:32; 205 is 427 yrs ]
0600 years, Noah 's age at flood Gen.7:6; 40 days & nights rain, 375 ark days.
1056 years Adam to Noah born, #10 son-Jesus genealogy -Abraham is #20.
------- [ 130, 105, 90, 70, 65, 162, 65, 187, 182 ].
GOD'S DAY: All existed [ ages old earth was prepared ages for intended inhabitants ], and had nothing to do with plant life day, year, season and Adam was meant to live forever, 1000 years would have been his first day, he died in the day he sinned at age 930 Gen.5:5;
2007-10-02 16:45:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by jeni 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Being a Christian also takes a great deal of evolution into account. Besides, we also evolve spiritually, physically, mentally and emotionally. Genesis tells us that on the seventh day God rested. It did not say the same for creation. At least that's the way I see it.
2007-10-02 16:24:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by ENGLASS 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Religious beliefs aside. I work in the medical field and there is no logical way that something as complex as the Human body could have happened by accident. The odds are to great to seen consider. A lot of what I studied as evolution was in actuality just adaptation. Example the famous finches of the Galapagos. when one food source died out they developed different beaks to eat different type of food. Great they adapted but the fact remains they are still finches. they did not evolve into any higher animal.
2007-10-02 16:21:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Creationists don't read the Bible where it says "And God said let the earth bring forth the creatures of the sea." (evolution)
2007-10-02 16:18:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Evolution and Genesis are in direct opposition. As I believe the Bible to be the infallible Word of God I will take it over evolution any day.
Let me add I happen to be a biologist. Saying I reject evolution is not exactly accurate. I reject molecules to man evolution. I have no doubts that we change and adapt to our environments. I believe that God created us that way.
2007-10-02 16:19:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bible warrior 5
·
4⤊
1⤋