One of the biggest issues facing Christianity in terms of apologetics is the scientific debate of Creationism. This is a very interesting debate because rather than trying to prove a different points such as the “Big Bang Theory” or evolutionary theory, they instead accept all other hypothesis as scientific fact and start with the assumption that Biblical science can never be accurate. Here are some of the argued points regarding Creationism, summarize from the Not So Deep Thoughts website (Pettit):
I. The Problem of Creationism Stated as a logical dilemma
A. Source of Evidence
1. Creation Science is based solely on the Bible
2. The Bible is full of inaccurate facts (even shows differing Creation accounts)
3. Therefore, Creation Science is based on inaccurate facts
B. No Consistent Position
1. Creation Scientist affirm that their belief stems from interpretation of Scriptures
2. Creation Scientists disagree on those interpretations
3. Therefore, Christian Scientists disagree on their own beliefs
C. No Testable Evidence
1. Creation cannot be tested scientifically and proven
2. True science can be tested scientifically and proven
3. Therefore, Creation Science is not true science
D. Lack of Evidence
1. Theories need evidence to be proven
2. There is significant evidence missing from the Bible (Eden, Ark, Flood)
3. Therefore, the Bible cannot be proven
E. Denial of Facts
1. Evolution is a scientifically proven fact and clearly seen in life
2. Creationists deny evolution
3. Therefore, Creationists deny scientifically proven facts
All of these are valid points if there actually based on reasonable assumptions. For example, in the first dilemma, they argue that the Bible is full of inaccurate facts, but usually they base their “error...
... middle of paper ...
...le has any scientific accuracy. For the science portions, it may be easier to rely on Christian organizations that discuss the science of this regularly such as Answers in Genesis (www.answersingenesis.org) or the Creation Research Institute (www.icr.org). Even though evolutions are often stubborn, they typically show great interest in learning, and there we have the chance to help them learn about the God Who created them.
Works Cited
Kondepudi, D. K. Introduction to Modern Thermodynamics. Chichester, England: Wiley, 2008. Print.
"Large Hadron Collider." Science and Technology Facilities Council. Research Councils UK, n.d. Web. 09 May 2014. .
Pettit, Joe. "30 Reasons Why Creationism Is False." Not So Deep Thoughts. N.p., 21 Aug. 2013. Web. 09 May 2014. .
18 February 2014 “NSTA Position Statement: The teaching of Evolution”. NSTA.org. -. nd. Web. The Web. The Web.
Sarfati, Jonathan D. Refuting Evolution: A Response to the National Academy of Sciences' Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science. Green Forest, AR: Master, 1999. Print.
"Creationism Has the Greater Basis in Science." Roanoke Times [VA] 6 Mar. 2005: 3. Infotrac
The arguments that many Young Earth Creationists make for their belief and against evolution are that fossils were created through the great Flood, the literal belief in Genesis, and that radiocarbon dating used in Evolution is too imprecise to prove that the Earth is older than 10,000 years.
The discourse focused on one question: Is creation a viable modern of origins? This directly links to the focus of this essay: that expert disagree despite the same evidence. Part of this comes from confirmation bias, a disregard for facts or ideas that go against one’s own ideation. Ken Ham was guilty of this; he took scientific ideas that only matched his creationist views and distorted them to be portrayed the only correct science. The methods he used, such as coral reef aging, are outdated and have been replaced by better methods, such as radioactive dating. Bill Nye used these more accurate measurements support his argument that the Earth is closer to 4.5 billion years old. Another argument from the creationist side is a distinction between observational and historical science. Essentially, historical science is scientific study in regards to the past, whereas observational science is the scientific research of the present and cannot be applied to the past. Beyond the implication of nigh complete uncertainty of past events and how they transpired, the claim is not even falsifiable. It is impossible to prove that science today is different than past science, thus the idea can be disregarded as any sort of theory. The more rational thought, that science is science whether in the past or present,
Evolution, otherwise sometimes called the “Devil’s hoax,” is a controversial topic that ignites a rather substantial reaction, particularly in Christian religious communities. Through the years, the heated debate over whether God or evolution is right has become a major breaking point for people of faith. Evolution suggests that God didn’t miraculously place humans in their present form on Earth and that the Bible isn’t the ultimate scientific truth. In this world, science is pitted against religious faith, suggesting neither can exist mutually with the other.
Le Beau, Bryan F. "Science and Religion: A Historical Perspective on the Conflict over Teaching Evolution in the Schools." EbscoHost. MARHO, n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2013. .
Many people have tried to reconcile the differences between creationism and Darwinism but few have succeeded. Any religious debate is seen as a very sensitive subject and the discussion about the foundations of certain religions generally becomes difficult. Darwinism, in relation to religious beliefs can become controversial; some say they can coexist and some say they cannot. Darwinism was not intended to be anti-religious, but religious activist have criticized the belief since On The Origin of Species was published in 1859. Common ground between the two subjects is a very rough place, but it can be achieved. Reconciliation between the subjects has been achieved but few are standing by it because even the compromise is controversial.
A lot of people, Christians and non-Christians alike often question the accuracy of the theory of evolution. Those who express doubts about the theory are often labelled “unscientific” or “backwards” by some in the pro-evolution camp. At times, the popular perception of evolution seems to be that it has been proven beyond all doubt and there are no scientific obstacles left for it. In fact, there are quite a few scientific flaws in the theory that provide many reasons for it to be doubted. It is true though, none of these questions necessarily disproves evolution, but they do show how the theory is less than settled.
The clash between evolutionists and creationists seems to be far from its finale. Both sides come up with potent arguments in favor of their positions. Evolutionists stress the absence of factual evidence in favor of God’s existence, point to fossils as a proof of the evolutionary process, and name the Big Bang as the reason of the universe’s appearance and further development. Creationists, in their turn, stress that there are no intermediate links between species in found fossils, consider complexity and diversity of nature to be an indirect evidence of God’s existence, and refer to the second law of thermodynamics to argue against the Big Bang theory. However, none of the sides seem to see that both points of view can not only co-exist, but be successfully combined. Such a combination could explain everything at once.
In 1859, Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking Origin of Species, which would introduce the seminal theory of evolution to the scientific community. Over 150 years later, the majority of scientists have come to a consensus in agreement with this theory, citing evidence in newer scientific research. In an average high school biology classroom, one may imagine an instructor that has devoted much of his life to science and a predominantly Christian class of about twenty-five students. On the topic of evolution, one of the students might ask, “Why would God have taken the long route by creating us through billion years of evolution?” while another student may claim “The Book of Genesis clearly says that the earth along with all living creatures was created in just six days, and Biblical dating has proven that the earth is only 6000 years old.” Finally a third student interjects with the remark “maybe the Bible really is just a book, and besides, science has basically already proven that evolution happened, and is continuing to happen as we speak.”
The Comparison of the Creation of the Universe and Origin of Man and New Species
The information presented in evolution studies must be viewed with an open mind since there is no definite proof or law of evolution. The dilemma boils down to science vs. religion. God has been our creator since beginning of time, but the discoveries of recent science are sudde...
In today’s society, many topics create a very substantial amount of controversy between different groups of people. From abortion to the healthcare reform, there are countless topics of discussion. One of the major and ongoing controversial topics in the religious community is the Big Bang theory versus Creation. One side of the controversy is, predominately, the scientific community, with the other end obviously being the religious community. Genesis 1:1-2 says: “First this: God created the heavens and earth—all you see, all you don’t see.
Just about every individual wonders if the universe was created and how it was created. The Bible begins with the words, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” There are many people in the world who do not believe that statement. It has been 150 years since Charles Darwin published his theory and challenged the whole world what they believed. This argument is still one of the biggest controversial issues around the world. This issue separates political groups, religions, and even many schools. This is such an argument because there is no absolutely proven answer. Although there are several ideas, people mainly argue over two of them. Creationism and Evolution are the most controversial in today’s society. Both Evolutionists