Creation Vs Evolution
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:9,10 KJV
Hello fellow Christians. There is much debate in our society over how mankind came to be. Creation vs evolution. Of course, we true believers know God spoke the universe into existence but it's nice to see believers articulate this truth to the world so well as these letters taken from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram newspaper does:
Faith and science
1. Three June 26 letters, by Miles Hawthorne, Terry McDonald and Amy Bell ("Unabated debate on Earth's origins"), stated opposition to all who hold a supportive view of the Bible, creation and intelligent design. But they offered no real substance.
To argue that science will provide the answers requires the evolutionist, at some point, to say that something came from nothing, or matter always existed, and by blind chance, here we are.
In my research at Texas A&M, I studied such things as insect resistance, population dynamics, mutations and the fossil record.
McDonald wrote that the Bible "won't contribute to our knowledge of how the world works." I beg to differ and offer pre-scientific information from 2,500 to 3,500 years ago. It is found in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, dated about 250 B.C.
Job describes gravity by writing that God "hangs the earth upon nothing."
Solomon, in Ecclesiastes 1:7, writes: "All rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again." This describes the evaporation and condensation of our rain cycle -- discovered centuries later.
In Psalms 8:8, we read of "the paths of the seas," a description of the ocean currents that were charted thousands of years later.
Isaiah 40:22 describes God sitting "upon the circle of the earth." Wow! This was still a subject for debate in 1492, when Christopher Columbus set sail.
An elaborate, pre-scientific system of "hygiene" was given by Moses to the Israelites to avoid disease, sickness and death.
Archaeologists have uncovered evidence of ancient civilizations (the Hittites, for example), ancient cities (Jericho and the fallen walls) and ancient peoples, many of them known previously only from biblical accounts.
As a scientist, I accept the Bible because of its pre-scientific information, most of which has been confirmed in the past 500 years. The Bible was not meant to be a scientific book, but when it reveals something scientific, it's always correct!
-- J.L. Taylor, Bryan
McDonald wrote that evolution should be taught because America's scientific progress has slipped away. "Let's use reason and allow our students to develop into the kind of scientists who can lead us back to the prominence we once enjoyed," he wrote.
Using reason, I maintain that teaching evolution as fact to our students will not reverse this unfortunate trend but will push us further down a slippery slope. Evolution isn't scientific law. It hasn't been proven conclusively. Rather, it remains a theory. Data may support this theory, but it can't be tested and proven.
Belief in evolution requires one to move from the realm of science to the realm of faith. Evolution requires faith; therefore, it's like religion, which is based on faith.
Let's consider the moral implications of evolution: Humans are animals and should therefore follow their instincts; sexual desires shouldn't be constrained but rather should be fulfilled in any way; altruism toward others is foolish because of survival of the fittest; life ultimately has no meaning.
Let's consider the moral teachings of the Bible: Treat others with love and compassion; work hard and be productive; submit to authority; exercise self-control because we each will face God on Judgment Day and receive justice for our actions, heaven or hell.
Based on reason, which worldview produces a more civil, honorable, productive, caring society? Which worldview will produce better scientists?
Passing on the moral teachings of the Bible to our students will ensure a bright future for America and continued progress in science. An unscientific, religious belief in evolution will cause our nation to crumble from within and self-destruct.
-- Blake McClain, Roanoke
In recent letters, evolutionists have accused creationists of having no scientific support for their position. The opposite is true.
The second law of thermodynamics says that informational content and order will gradually decrease over time, not increase, as evolution would have it.
Aside from some bogus man-to-ape "discoveries," there are virtually no fossils in a transitional state from one species to another, whereas there should be at least millions if evolution were true. (Sorry, one "dinosaur/bird" fossil only means there was once a "dinosaur/bird.")
Other examples could be cited, but this should show that the shoe is on the other foot.
-- Thomas F. Harkins Jr., Fort Worth
There are many websites that debunks the secular science that promote evolution. This bit of important information below comes from www.creationevidence.org.
Q: If fossils are dated, by Carbon 14 decay, to be millions of years old how can homo sapiens be contemporary with a species such a 'carcharodon megalodon' or any other prehistoric creature?
Acceptance of the Gap Theory or any other compromise position between the divinely-inspired creation account of Genesis and the fallible evolutionary assumptions of man is really a question of ultimate authority--God's Word or man's word (see Rom. 3:4).
In response to the above question, let me state the scientific truths that: (1) the Carbon-14 dating method is not used--especially by evolutionists(!)--to date fossils which they would consider millions of years old, because it is accurate only to about 4,500 years ago (the calibration range given by the bristlecone pine tree) due to C-14's relatively short half-life of 5,730 years; and (2) no fossil has ever been scientifically proven empirically to be millions of years old. These supposed absolute dates are founded upon well-known and publicized errors which plague all radiometric-dating techniques, including the unobserved assumptions of no original daughter isotope, a constant decay rate, and a closed system (i.e., nothing entering in or leaching out of the rock sample at all).
David V. Bassett, M.S.
CEM Staff Writer
Please visit CEM ONLINE (Creation Evidence Museum) at www.creationevidence.org (go to Links We Like in menu and click on CEM ONLINE)