How can creationism exist with all the evidence out there?

Question

I am just so intrigued as to why well educated people still believe in Creationism. It is still possible for people to believe in a universe that contains a god without there being creationism. For example it is still unknown as to what caused the Big Bang, this could have been god. It also doesn't disprove the bible either if creationism doesn't exsist. Jesus spoke in parables, who is to say that the book of Genesis isn't also a parable like story. Why keep an obviously disproven concept alive if it doesn't aid anyone or anything.

I myself do not believe in a god, but there is no definative proof for god's non existance so I can't garantee I'm right. Evolution however can and has been proven again and again. There are examples of organisms evolving all around us, along with fossil evidence,DNA evidence etc.

This is not an attack on anyone, and I know there are a lot of similar questions out there.I am just interseted to hear how & why Creationists explain away all this evidence

I'm getting a lot of people just dissing whatever they don't believe in.That's not what I'm interested in, I'm interested in knowing why people stand by creationism.
son of God: you think "evolution is an illusion", why?
Macaw's Wing: Interesting point but it brings up a whole knew area of science :p
Jilan A: "do you know how a single cell become like you", yes in fact I do, as I am currently doing human biology at University (mostly from mitosis, then stem cells becoming specific...). So did you want to bagin discussing why you believe in Creationism?
Atheists need salvation also: Science doesn't work on someone is smarter than someone else, it works on the fact that if you have enough evidence you can prove your theory. It works on colaboration of ideas, and alot of that has happened since Darwin. Yes Darwin was wrong with some parts but these have been improved and the Theory of Evolution is made stronger. That's Science

ali: You're right the big bang is a theory, sorry I wrote it almost like it was fact.
Morgaine: Interesting point about the reverse of atheists saying unexplained science is a hoax (i think I sometimes fall into that category and I will watch myself closely now :P )
taketheh...: Surely if you believe in microevolution you'd have to see the possibility of macroevolution. Lot's of small changes = an organism completely different from it's ancestors
Karoly: you might want to look up more information on evolution
Revjam: You've talked a lot about fossil records but what about genetic similarities or similarities in structures (e.g why do humans have an appendix? Why would god create us with a redundant piece of 'hardware'?)

bLaNe: all you show from your comment is a lack of knowledge into how evolution works. I have shown that I am knowledgable and understanding of your faith (even if I don't totally agree with it), the least you could do is show the same in return.
Inteligence: “The ability to comprehend the logic of
perspectives other than one’s own” (Bowers and McArthy)

Question: Good strong response. Thanks for showing you have taken the time to understand evolution. I still don't agree with you though because I have seen much more evidence, but that is my opinion.

I am interested as to why believing in Creationism is so important to some Christians? I know many Christians who believe in evolution and god in the same way as myexample in the queston. What is wrong with believing this?

Answer 1

How can creationism exist you ask? Simple, there are a lot of creationist nuts out there.

Answer 2

How can something evolve without first being created? Don't you know that Charles Darwin recanted his theory of evolution? Look it up. Do you really believe that humans evolved from monkeys? If so, why do we still have monkeys? I think evolution is not the proper word to describe why animals of today have developed such and such. The best word I could come up with is adaptation or development. Look at the bodybuilders, did they grow those muscles out of evolution? I think you know the answer. But the question I wanna answer for you is whether or not God exists. Look around you. Is it really possible that all living creatures you see just popped up of nowhere millions of years ago and became what they are right now because of evolution? Only an entity with unfathomable intelligence, creativity and power can create these. Some people say Science disproves the existence of God. I think otherwise. Science should amaze us on what God has done and is capable of doing. Friend, let me encourage you to read the entire Bible. You'd be surprised that it's not just a spiritual book, it also teaches us Science. It takes a lot of nerve to believe that God exists, but that's what you call faith. I suggest that IF YOU REALLY wanna know the truth, read the Bible and talk to God in prayer. If you do this SINCERELY even though you may feel like a nutcase at times, I believe that God is gonna personally talk to you. How I do know? I've experienced it. Friend, I really wanna help you. You can e-mail me when you have the chance.

Answer 3

Just because some people keep yelling that molecules-to-man evolution is a fact, that doesn't mean it is.

As T. Wallace has said, “A major reason why evolutionist arguments can sound so persuasive is because they often combine assertive dogma with intimidating, dismissive ridicule towards anyone who dares to disagree with them. Evolutionists wrongly believe that their views are validated by persuasive presentations invoking scientific terminology and allusions to a presumed monopoly of scientific knowledge and understanding on their part. But they haven’t come close to demonstrating evolutionism to be more than an ever-changing theory with a highly questionable and unscientific basis. (The situation isn’t helped by poor science education generally. Even advanced college biology students often understand little more than the dogma of evolutionary theory, and few have the time [or the guts] to question its scientific validity.)”

And as Dr. Michael Houts said, “This illustrates another key (non-scientific) feature of the theory of evolution. The theory is constructed in such a way that no matter what the evidence, evolutionists can claim it supports their religion. If a bird is brightly colored, it evolved vivid feathers to attract a mate. If a bird’s plumage is drab, it evolved that drabness to provide camouflage. If similar structures are derived from similar gene sequences, it is because the two species share a common ancestor. If similar structures occur in species that are genetically quite different, it is because of 'convergent evolution.' No matter what the evidence, in the eye of the believer, evolution is true.

One criterion for determining if a theory is scientific is if it is falsifiable. In other words, the theory must be constructed in a way that an experiment could be devised to prove it false. In the discussion of similarities between organisms, the theory of evolution is purposely constructed so that no experiment can prove it false."

The real "facts" fit just fine within a creationist worldview.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp

Answer 4

Let's start with the two types of evolution: microevolution and macroevolution. Microevolution is small, localized changes within a particular species, and you're right, there is evidence for this. Macroevolution is the changing from one species to a very different species, and there is NO evidence of this anywhere in the fossil record. Charles Darwin stated in his work, The Theory of Evolution, that if his theory were correct, there would be plenty of evidence to be found in fossils; but if the evidence were not there, then his theory was invalid. A good book to read is "Darwin's Black Box". You are correct in that the existence of God cannot be proven as easily as, say, you could prove that 1+1=2, but let me give you something to think about. There are certain laws which govern our known world - stuff like gravity, for example. Now, for a law to exist, there has to be a Lawgiver - someone to think up the law, bring it into being, and have the power to enforce the law. You can name yourself Emperor of the World and issue edicts all day, don't matter, you have no power to enforce them. Someone apparently has that power. Try reading C.S.Lewis' "Mere Christianity". He was an atheist and tells how he got from there to being a Christian. Good for you for asking questions - accept the truth as you find it!

Answer 5

It has to do with levels of moral and ethical reasoning. The creationists are at a median level where they accept their morality from an external authority, in this case, the bible. Because they think in concrete terms, the word has to be right or wrong for them. So, wanting to be good people, they decide that it all has to be right. Anything that contradicts the bible has to be evil - patriarchal religions are circular that way, so that anything that deviates from the prescribed code is bad and to be avoided at all costs.

In order to continue to consider themselves good people, they learn a kind of double think where they just skim over what doesn't fit. So, for example, when Lot offers to let a group of Sodomites gang-rape his two virgin daughters, he's doing a good thing by protecting his visitors who turn out to be angels. It doesn't occur to them that he had a greater obligation to protect his daughters, and that the angels could have taken care of themselves. The bible is full of contradictions and mistranslations, but they ignore those by assuming that the "lord" had a hand in every change that was made right down through the court of King James.

You are able to question the prescribed code, and take from it what works for you, or not. You have the capacity for abstract thought. They don't.

They can't do it because they got stuck at a pre-adolescent level of moral and ethical development. You aren't. They won't change until they make that cognitive shift, and the sad truth is that most of them never will.

BTW - plenty of atheists have a similar problem with archaeological, historical, psychic or scientific anomalies. They assume something can't exist, so any evidence that contradicts that expectation is labeled a hoax. This is the opposite of empiricism, but they don't see that they are being just as irrational as the people they criticize.

Answer 6

>>It is still possible for people to believe in a universe that
>>contains a god without there being creationism.

I think this is one of the key points that a lot of creationists miss. Most people just assume you have to be an atheist to accept what science has to say about biological evolution, abiogenesis, cosmology, etc.

I don't think it's so much a need to believe in God and the Bible that makes people side with creationism stories, but simple ignorance of science. People, especially here in the US, are just lazy when it comes to learning about science. Nobody has the patience to read something that's longer than a magazine article. These are people who don't even know basic 8th-grade stuff, like the difference between the terms "theory" and "hypothesis".

We also happen to be in a wave of sensationism right now when it comes to creationism. There's a lot of conspiracy theory mentality going on. There are people who'd love to believe that evolution is the emperor with no clothes and that "oh so clever me is the one who points out these wrong things without getting up from my chair". But that's really wishful thinking.

Answer 7

With much respect, there has never been any proof whatsoever of evolution being true, if so, please share it with the rest of the world. The fossil record bears out nothing, but has, in fact, been the biggest embarrasment for the evolutionist camp.
Michael Denton, MD and PhD, (molecular biologist)
- "Not only has paleontology failed to come up with the fossil “missing links” which Darwin anticipated, but hypothetical reconstructions of major evolutionary developments—such as that linking birds to reptiles— are
beginning to look more like fantasies than serious conjectures. (Evolution: A Theory In Crisis)."
British zoologist Mark Ridley:
- "The gradual change of fossil species has never been part of the evidence for evolution. In the chapters on the fossil record in On the Origin of the Species, Darwin showed that the record was useless for testing between evolution and
special creation because it has great gaps in it. The same argument still applies…In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation (Mark Ridley - New Scientist)."

"It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. ...Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and (we) both reject this alternative." (Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, p. 229-230).

Evolution is still taught as a theory. Besides, you admitted that you can't prove that there's not a God, just as science cannot prove that creation never happened.

Oct. 12, 2007 -- The lowly appendix may have a purpose after all.

New research suggests that the seemingly useless organ provides a safe haven for good bacteria to hang out in the gut.

Although the study stops short of providing direct proof of this proposed purpose for the appendix, researchers say there's a strong case to be made for the appendix based on new information about the role of bacteria in intestinal health.

"While there is no smoking gun, the abundance of circumstantial evidence makes a strong case for the role of the appendix as a place where the good bacteria can live safe and undisturbed until they are needed," researcher William Parker, PhD, assistant professor of experimental surgery at Duke University Medical Center, says in a news release. (Webmd.com).
By the way, how does evolution account for the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the laws of probability. And concerning DNA, the former atheist now Christian scientist Francis S. Collins, was the longtime head of the Human Genome Project. He helped to discover the genetic misspellings that cause cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis and Huntington's disease.You can find all this info yourself by researching Mr. Collins or especially reading his own book titled, "The Language of God".

Answer 8

Because creationism is a product of religion (see Genesis), and religion is not a product of logic and reason. Indeed, faith by its very definition is an irrational process. Faith is the belief in something for which there is no proof, or even proof to the contrary - religion is a system that *rewards* illogic! The scientific process that is the basis for the understanding of evolution, however, is an extremely logical and verifiable thing. The two simply just won't mesh.

Answer 9

I believe that there are gods, how ever I dont believe everything that is writen in a book by ignorant people 2000 plus years ago. I do believe that the gods made the universe, but then they made science to govern their creations. I know, I've got weird beliefs, but nobody can prove me wrong so HA!

Answer 10

Creationism is just a concept, just like the "Big Bang". Isn't the Big Bang, a scientific term a concept of creationism? It means, something sprang out of nothing, thats it. In the book of genesis, it describes that God created the universe out of nothing. So, scientifically and biblically, there is no difference.

Answer 11

They hold a viewpoint that if the Bible isn't the literal word of God, then it is meaningless. So since they want it to be true they won't ever admit anything which might undermine the infallibility of the bible.