Are you a creationist?

[TnTsParty]

I believe we were created by God. I believe there were dinosaurs. I do not believe we evolved. Even if we did evolve something/someone of great power had to get it all started. And there is NO way I can believe we evolved from a fish or something like that.

I do not think that time in the bible is accurate as we know it today but I don't think about it too hard.

 

[alizesmom]

So, just to clarify, you believe evolution existed as a result of God initially "creating"? I'm just trying to get a feel for everyone's different types of views.

God created, I think some creatures adapted as environment changed. I don't believe that a one-celled organism slowly worked it's way into a complex one. Nor do I believe that man and apes have common ancestors.

 

[Disney Doll]

I recall reading a very good editorial about the 2 things and how they can "mesh".

And no, at this point I don't remember who wrote or even where I read it, but I remember thinking the concept made a lot of sense.

The basic "jist" of the piece was that Creation took 7 "days", but who knows how long a "day" is in God's time, seeing that He is infinite. Because we are human, we, with our finite minds, see a day as 24 hours. God's "day" could have been thousands of years long.

 

[raysnkaysmom]

Thank you for all of your input. I'm just trying to understand this belief. I completely understand those who believe that God created humans, I was just confused on how people could not believe that dinosaurs existed and I wondered why that thought this. I'm starting to understand what creationism is now & the dinosaurs part seems like the extreme side of the belief-is this correct?

Am I lost...or are you referring to creation'ism' , as in the same is creation itself? I believe in creation as opposed to evolution, but I also do believe dinosaurs existed..I didnt' realize people didn't believe that...lol

 

[Wishing on a star]

OP, I don't know how much of this has been posted... I haven't been thru all the pages of responses...

If there are those who do not believe that dinosaurs exist(ed) then this must be some confusion. I have never heard that the existance of dinosaurs has been questioned.

The main thing is that many scientist use the evidence of dinosaurs to lay an important foundational building block on their theory of evolution. The whole 'billions and billions of years' thing.

Most creationist do not deny that dinosaurs existed. They just doubt the timeline. According to evolutionist scientists, dinosaurs existed billions and billlions of years ago, and disappeared long before human beings ever began to evolve.

In fact, right here in the United States, in Texas, there is a site where clear fossils of human and dinosaur footprints are in the very same rock.. in perfect stride, side by side. When these were discovered, there was much doubt... they were thought to be faked... so, where the footprints disappeared into the ledge of rock (which had been eroded away, exposing the footprints) they brought in heavy equipment to remove the layers of statified rock... And, the footprints clearly continued... and were true and real fossils that followed that rock, under layers of rock and dirt. No question.

Now, there has been much accusation that the 'human' footprints were not human at all... but that some dinosaur had a human shaped foot... Ummm, NOT... I have seen a plaster cast of the human footprints... taken from the mold that was created when they were first unearthed... before any further erosion or tampering... There is NO doubt that that was a perfect human footprint. NO doubt at all.

There is much evidence to support a 'young earth' and much evidence to show many things in nature that simply can not be the result of the current theories of 'evolution'.

 

[dcentity2000]

I believe that our fundamental reality plane and all others were created by a higher force and that evolution et al was the result of scientific and natural events inherent to the fabric of existence. Personally I think the idea the God could not create a world so intricate that it could not handle even the simplicities of evolution to be rather blasphemous.

Yes, I'm one of those damned "Progressive" Christians.



Rich::

 

[Wishing on a star]

I recall reading a very good editorial about the 2 things and how they can "mesh".

And no, at this point I don't remember who wrote or even where I read it, but I remember thinking the concept made a lot of sense.

The basic "jist" of the piece was that Creation took 7 "days", but who knows how long a "day" is in God's time, seeing that He is infinite. Because we are human, we, with our finite minds, see a day as 24 hours. God's "day" could have been thousands of years long.

Do the scriptures not say that...

One day with God (The Lord) is as a thousand years....

Also,

And, willingly, they are ignorant, that in seven days god created the heavens and the earth.

 

[dcentity2000]

I recall reading a very good editorial about the 2 things and how they can "mesh".

And no, at this point I don't remember who wrote or even where I read it, but I remember thinking the concept made a lot of sense.

The basic "jist" of the piece was that Creation took 7 "days", but who knows how long a "day" is in God's time, seeing that He is infinite. Because we are human, we, with our finite minds, see a day as 24 hours. God's "day" could have been thousands of years long.

Or perhaps 7 days is a metaphor for 7 stages?



Rich::

 

[winkers]

I voted yes. I believe we and all things were created by God. I do believe in evolution.........we all evolve. But, I don't believe my ancestors were apes either. As my 7th grade science teacher said..."If you want to visit your relatives at the zoo, that's your progative."
I've never heard of someone not believing in dinosaurs. I also don't take "7 days" to be 7 24 hour periods.

 

[Laura]

I voted yes. I believe we and all things were created by God. I do believe in evolution.........we all evolve. But, I don't believe my ancestors were apes either. As my 7th grade science teacher said..."If you want to visit your relatives at the zoo, that's your progative."
I've never heard of someone not believing in dinosaurs. I also don't take "7 days" to be 7 24 hour periods.

Our ancestors weren't apes. Humans and apes do have a common ancestor.

 

[Pigeon]

I voted yes. I believe we and all things were created by God. I do believe in evolution.........we all evolve. But, I don't believe my ancestors were apes either. As my 7th grade science teacher said..."If you want to visit your relatives at the zoo, that's your progative."
I've never heard of someone not believing in dinosaurs. I also don't take "7 days" to be 7 24 hour periods.

Your science teacher should find a new career.

 

[rayelias]

Our ancestors weren't apes. Humans and apes do have a common ancestor.

That is a theory, not a fact

 

[Nomi]

That is a theory, not a fact

Again we have a misunderstanding of what a scientific theory really is. I'll repeat myself: A scientific theory is NOT like a laymans theory (a hypothesis, conjecture or guess). A scientific theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. It NEEDS empirical evidence, of which there is a lot. The theory of evolution, and the common decent of man and apes, is based of the observable facts and evidence.

 

[Sparx]

i believe that everything was sparked, then evolution took over.

so i believe in both.

i know enough about anatomy to not believe that we all happened by chance. i also know enough of anatomy to not believe that it is mere coincidence that we share all but one base pair match with apes.

 

[Saxsoon]

There is a fascinating book by the director of the human genome project called The Language of God by Dr. Francis Collins.

He brought up a fascinating point, in Hebrew, the word for day is yom, which has the literal 24 hour connotation, 12 hour period, or an indefinite amount of time. I asked Jenny about this (for those who don't know her, she is Jewish) and she did confirm that for me. In seems that in Genesis, the last definition is used, as far as one can tell from translations. The book as a whole kind of showed the ridiculousness of pure creationism or pure evolutionism. Because Evolution alone does not explain how we are here. How the universe came to be. People seem to forget that on both sides.

 

[debbieandroo]

First of all, I really appreciate the fairness and even-handed approach the previous posters have given to this discussion.

Second, I believe that God did create the heavens and the earth in 6 24-hour days.

Third, I believe in creationism because of my faith in God and His power. Is my faith 'blind'? Some might think this but I could counter that the faith needed to believe in any one of the many theories of evolution requires the same 'blind' faith.

A friend and I visited an aquarium. We were both awed at the sight of these amazingly gorgeous fish. I opened my mouth to say, 'it is really difficult to believe anything but a Loving God could have created these fish.' My friend beat me to the punch by saying, 'it is so hard to believe that anything but evolution could have caused these beautiful fish.' Stopped me in my tracks -- and made me realize that, although we all have the same evidence before us, our faith [in one direction or the other] leads us to vastly different conclusions.

 

[ntsammy5]

Emphatically NO

 

[Momvic5]

Again we have a misunderstanding of what a scientific theory really is. I'll repeat myself: A scientific theory is NOT like a laymans theory (a hypothesis, conjecture or guess). A scientific theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. It NEEDS empirical evidence, of which there is a lot. The theory of evolution, and the common decent of man and apes, is based of the observable facts and evidence.

OK...so evolution has a lot of empirical evidence as you like to say, but what does the words "a lot of" mean? A lot does not mean complete. It merely states that there is collected data that suggests the idea of evolution. The evidence is not complete and in many situations, disputable. If you are going to base your beliefs solely on science theories or propositions, then your data or evidence needs to be complete. Otherwise, it is flawed and amongst your "a lot of evidence," there is personal beliefs.

 

[Nomi]

OK...so evolution has a lot of empirical evidence as you like to say, but what does the words "a lot of" mean? A lot does not mean complete. It merely states that there is collected data that suggests the idea of evolution. The evidence is not complete and in many situations, disputable. If you are going to base your beliefs solely on science theories or propositions, then your data or evidence needs to be complete. Otherwise, it is flawed and amongst your "a lot of evidence," there is personal beliefs.

To be complete we would need every organism ever. A scientific theory is based on empirical evidence, otherwise known as facts, and it's the best we got. There is more to learn, but what we have yet to learn is the specifics of how evolution works, it is well established that evolution is the reality. If your argument were true, for any of us to accept the theory of gravity we would need to test every single square centimeter of the universe, but that doesn't stop the fact that when you drop something, it falls.

Let me put it another way, the fact is that organisms change and become other species, the theory of evolution explains how.

 

[Wishing on a star]

...the fact is that organisms change and become other species, the theory of evolution explains how.

I do not believe that man has ever witnessed any species 'evolve' into another different species.
I do not necessarily believe that this is a 'fact'.

I do not believe that there is any empirical evidence of this.


PS: from my Websters New Dictionary
empirical : based on observation