Evolution vs Creationism---Is there a God? Or is it just random chance?

[Iron-Merc]

I'm definitely a creationist at heart. I believe that God is real, Jesus is the son of God. Humans are chained to a lie because that is the desire of our enemy. Satan has made his kingdom here on earth and has great influence over the human race. As evidenced in the garden of Eden, he caused the fall of humanity, the turn away from God and this is how "death" entered into our vocabulary.

In reference to evolution, its still just a theory. For one there are no transition forms in the fossil record. For another 99% of all mutations are bad. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility when you sit down and look at the odds.

For example, if evolution were true, what is the deal with all the fraudulent fossils? Surely there would be no need to "fake" the missing links between species, yet this seems to be a re-occurring theme that evolutionists cannot escape from.

Please share you views on this, I am eager to gain in insight and knowledge and that is exactly what this thread is about. I don't want this to turn into a political pissing match. Let's not mock or demean, simply list your argument and your evidence and debate your points as you see fit.

Good luck and God speed!

[Peter1469]

I see "evolution" as God's plan.

[Chris]

I see "evolution" as God's plan.

If there's God then it is His plan.

[jet57]

I'm definitely a creationist at heart. I believe that God is real, Jesus is the son of God. Humans are chained to a lie because that is the desire of our enemy. Satan has made his kingdom here on earth and has great influence over the human race. As evidenced in the garden of Eden, he caused the fall of humanity, the turn away from God and this is how "death" entered into our vocabulary.

In reference to evolution, its still just a theory. For one there are no transition forms in the fossil record. For another 99% of all mutations are bad. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility when you sit down and look at the odds.

For example, if evolution were true, what is the deal with all the fraudulent fossils? Surely there would be no need to "fake" the missing links between species, yet this seems to be a re-occurring theme that evolutionists cannot escape from.

Please share you views on this, I am eager to gain in insight and knowledge and that is exactly what this thread is about. I don't want this to turn into a political pissing match. Let's not mock or demean, simply list your argument and your evidence and debate your points as you see fit.

Good luck and God speed!

Theory or how God did it?

[Private Pickle]

Fake fossils?

[Chris]

In reference to evolution, its still just a theory. For one there are no transition forms in the fossil record. For another 99% of all mutations are bad. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility when you sit down and look at the odds.

Just a theory. There are two basic meanings of theory. One, implied by just, is it's just a wild ass guess. The other is description or explanation based on empirical evidence. Evolutionary theory is just that, the latter.

Is "no transition forms in the fossil record" your theory? Then it xis falsifiable: Pakicetus.

Odds and yet here we are.

[Standing Wolf]

There has never been a real conflict or incompatibility between the ideas of evolution and creation by an intelligent being - though there have always been some ready to pronounce that there is, and to declare that they've picked the winning side. Religion attempts to answer questions that Science does not address; Science describes the "how" without intruding into the realm of the "why".

[Chris]

There has never been a real conflict or incompatibility between the ideas of evolution and creation by an intelligent being - though there have always been some ready to pronounce that there is, and to declare that they've picked the winning side. Religion attempts to answer questions that Science does not address; Science describes the "how" without intruding into the realm of the "why".

The conflict is implied in the title, that between Intelligent Design and random chance.

[skepticalmike]

There has never been a real conflict or incompatibility between the ideas of evolution and creation by an intelligent being - though there have always been some ready to pronounce that there is, and to declare that they've picked the winning side. Religion attempts to answer questions that Science does not address; Science describes the "how" without intruding into the realm of the "why".

If evolution can explain how life arose from single-celled life existing approximately 4 billion years ago then there is no need to propose an intelligent being as the source for the creation of life on our planet.

Even if an intelligent being is assumed as creating the first single-celled life forms, humans and all other subsequent life forms would still be the products of natural processes.

It might be inappropriate to ask a question beginning with "why" if there is no answer. Asking "Why are we here?" assumes that there is some reason or purpose for us being here.

I think that it is very difficult to make the argument that an intelligent being has had any influence on either the origin of life or the diversity of life.

[Standing Wolf]

If evolution can explain how life arose from single-celled life existing approximately 4 billion years ago then there is no need to propose an intelligent being as the source for the creation of life on our planet.

Perhaps not for you or me; others obviously feel differently.

Even if an intelligent being is assumed as creating the first single-celled life forms, humans and all other subsequent life forms would still be the products of natural processes.

And a Believer would say, "natural processes designed and created by God".

It might be inappropriate to ask a question beginning with "why" if there is no answer. Asking "Why are we here?" assumes that there is some reason or purpose for us being here.

If you think about it, though, believing that there is NO purpose in our being here is also an assumption.

I think that it is very difficult to make the argument that an intelligent being has had any influence on either the origin of life or the diversity of life.

A logical argument for faith in an intelligent Creator is something of a contradiction in terms. Faith, as the Christian Bible clearly states is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1) .The difficulty arises when someone who prides themselves on logical, rational and fact-based thinking wants to employ those methods in defending their religious faith; not only is it not possible - more to the point, it isn't necessary. If it were something that one could figure out and defend on a logical basis, it would be something other than faith, would it not?