For creationists -- Is the theory of evolution an evil conspiracy, or is it just incorrect?

Question

Please elaborate beyond "the bible says ..."

No, I know that evolution doesn't negate the existence of god to a believer-- MOST christians acknowledge evolution.

Answer 1

Just incorrect. :-)

IMO, many Christians have taken the creation-evolution controversy too far by demonizing evolutionists, but that doesn't change the arguments I've seen against evolution. It also does not change the fact that I've read countless explanations of how evolution could have happened, and mighty little proof to show for it. (making bold assertations such as: "The evidence for evolution is overwhelming and can be seen everywhere" is NOT proof. You need to give me examples and references. And even then, I will still double-check it.)

If you're really interested, check this site out: http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/creation.shtml
and also this site: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html and this http://www.trueorigin.org/isakrbtl.asp

There are countless more sites, but hopefully those three will be enough to help.

Back to the topic: I do think there are many people that just cannot accept the idea that evolution might... just might... be wrong. But no, I wouldn't warrant it as an evil conspiracy.

Answer 2

Elaborating beyond " the Bible says..." is really irrelevant, because the Bible is the word of God and is correct in every way, but here goes...
Evolution is just plain old wrong. Darwin was a moron who took falsified scientific data and formed a flawed theory. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that say one type of animal can evolve into another( a bird cannot evolve into a cat ).

p.s. Don't rule out an evil conspiracy. (read the books of John)

Answer 3

Both.

1st: Evil conspiracy. The church 500 years ago was very evil. Think about Galileo. Beginning with France, they revolted against the church, and set up reason as their goddess. A few hundred years later came Darwin, Heckel, Huxley, etc. Darwin was trained as a theologian. But when he found out things that APPEAR to contradict the Bible, he was happy because HE HAD ALREADY REJECTED THE BIBLE. Most of the early evolutionists were happy to jump on the bandwagon for they admitted that Darwin had given them a reason to do their own thing without being held accountable to God. There is much more I can say on this subject, but I need to move on to the next point.

2nd: Incorrect.
(a) Design exists --hence a designer
(b) Irreducable complexity --cannot evolve in little steps.
(c) Symbiotic relationships -- how did one survive it the other came along, say, 200 000 years later?
(d) Enthropy - energy alone is not sufficient but it must be directed to higher order
(e) Living Fossils - why didn't THEY evolve?
(f) Extrapolation of microevolution - microevolution is observable; macroevolution is not. Variation within a gene pool can go only so far and no more.
(g) Missing links are still missing - according to Darwin, there should be MILLIONS of transition forms. If scientists had to take a pig's tooth to get one of the missing links from 'ape' to man, they are really scraping the barrel for evidence.
(h) Dating problems - ALL radioactive dating have MAJOR problems.
(i) History of history is too short - so, modern man has been here for 75 000 years yet history only dates back to about 5 000 years.
(j) Population growth and distribution - DNA trace of the origin of man shows somewhere in the Middle-East, not Africa.
(k) Too little salt in the oceans
(l) Too little mud on seafloor.
(m) The distance of the moon from the earth - at the current rate of regression of the moon from Earth, it should have been past Saturn by now.
(n) The strength of Earth's magnetic field - at the currrent rate of decay, it should now be non-existent
(o) The rate of rotation of Earth - Earth's rotation rate is solwly slowing down. At 5 x 10^9 years old, one Earth-day would currently be MUCH longer than 24 hours.

I can add more to the list but I think this should suffice.

And I don't need to revert to "the Bible says...."

Answer 4

shouldn't you really be asking, if evolution is correct does it negate a the existence of God to a believing Creationist?

Got a joke for all my Christian brother and sisters. I tell this to my fundamentalist friends and the see the wisdom and humor in it.
A man dies and goes to heaven and waits to enter through the pearly gates (please don't take anything in this literal OK). Well anyway he waits in line and waits and waits and finally he cuts to the front and asks St. Peter why they're waiting so long.
"Well, my son when you come to heaven, there are so many denominations and faiths, that when you come to Heaven you go before God and he explains everything to you so you understand what the truth is."
"Well St. Peter" said the man" does that take a long time we've been waiting for hours"
"Well no my son, it takes maybe 30 seconds or so"
" but St. Peter if thats the case why have we been waiting so longz?"
" well you see that man over there in front of God, talking to him"
"Yes"
"Well thats a Fundamentalist Preacher and for the last few hours , he's been arguing."

Answer 5

I could desire to assert that could desire to be a huge, international conspiracy that could desire to give way immediately. The medical community isn't a monolithic physique that metes out judgments. this is a very unfastened determination of squabbling scientists who've an inclination to throw hissy suits over terminology. Edit: The creationist neglected the factor. Evolution works. those genetic calculations are used to offer drugs, assume how populations exchange, ect. Evolution is even used to come across fossils. greater importantly, evolution has stored lives. Ex: an entire technology of anti-malarial drugs grew to become into discovered employing the endosymbiotic concept, the evolutionary clarification for mitochondria and the plastids. you're attempting to let us know the hammer we built a skyscraper with does not exist, and you ask your self why we snicker at you.

Answer 6

Theory of evolution is such a broad term, which is why there is so much debate over it. The theory that is combined with abiogenesis to explain human existence is obviously incorrect. The theory of evolution that includes adaptation below the species level, or maybe even to some point, macro-evolution, is not necessarily incorrect.

Using evolution below the species level, or evolution where 1 species is split into 2 as a base, should not allow for people to speculate that arthropods can become humans.

Answer 7

I believe in creation,however, things DO evolve. The theory of evolution is wrong not the idea of evolution itself. God created the world. Then from there he let nature take its course, which would involve evolution. I personally see no conflict w/ the idea.

Answer 8

Good question. I of course am not a creationist...lol. But I wonder about this as well, because you figure they must "rationalize" it somehow. Have all these scientists independently gone wrong and reached incorrect conclusions that coincidentally confirm each other, or are they deliberately trying to undermine the Bible? I'd assume they usually settle on option B, or perhaps its variant, that the scientists have been deceived by Satan. Let's see what they say...lol.

Answer 9

Just incorrect. The proof for molecules to man evolution just does not exist.

Answer 10

I doubt you'll get many answers. :)