Creation vs. Evolution

Introduction

This article will talk about the debate over Creation and Evolution. What they, creation and evolution, are actually all about will also be described, besides  the different views that different people have over this subject.

In the Creation v. Evolution debate there are two main parties; the science and the religious party. Most of the scientific party accepts the theory of Evolution, or also called Darwinism, after the british scientist who set up the theory of Evolution and whom this article will talk about later on, as a fact. Although the greatest number of scientist think of it as a fact that's just needs a little more fossil remains to really be able to prove that they are right, they are not the only group of scientists who deals with this question of the origin of life.

There is also the scientific view that is  called the "ateistic" point of view. These scientists don't take any of the sides, or at least they claim not to do so, and they collect facts, and let the audience have its own conclusion, but it seems to me that they tend to prove a little that evolution is wrong, and all the fossils and even just our logic tells that evolution is wrong.

Another group of people who take part in this debate are Christians who believe in Creation, but try to prove that they are right merely by scientific point of view, by fossils, and other scientific poofs. These people are also a little liberal, or open-minded, and they don't treat creation as a mere fact, just because that Bible tells it so. There are two main groups of Cristians regarding the issue; those who take the encounter in the Bible literally, as it is written down, and those who believe in intelligent design.

Before the last two groups there are another major group of people who are in between the two most widely accepted views, or some people say beliefs. These people take the Bible and the theory of Evolution and "joins them together". These people say that science is not against the Bible, and neither the Bible is against science. Rather they build and make up each other, that is, they are not total oposites, but, in a way the same. The only difference is in the way science and religion tries to explain different question, in this case the question of the origins of life  on earth. There are things too that seem  to be opposites to us, as the actual age of our planet. These christians say a number in between the estimated age given by the Bible and by the scientists. This number, although is between the biblical and the scientific age, it tends to be closer to the age suggested by the Bible.

Last of all, there are probably the two biggest groups. These two groups are the two extremes. The evolutionary group accepts evolution as a solid and mere fact, and when they just ignore the questions and the fact of the mossing linds. They also ignore the the proven fact that there is no such thing as spontaneous generation, or in other word life does not come from nonliving materials. The christian group accepts creation as a solid and mere fact just because it is said by the Bible and they take everything the Bible says literally, or word by word, even though they don't really have any scientific proof for it. These two group are not open-minded at all, and will not even listen to what others have to say about the subject and the debate. These people take their believes to the extremes. These are believes, because as it stands right now, both evolution and creation are just what we are believeing in, because neither group can prove that they are right just by "scientific"proofs and by logic.

Next I will describe what Creation  and Evolution are all about.

Creation

Creation is the idea, or belief, that everything is created by a supreme God. Creation is based on the verses three to thirty-one of the first chapter of the book of genesis of the Bible. It says:

"And God said,' Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light 'day' and the darkness he called 'night'. And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.

And God said ,'Let there be an expanse between the water to separate between the to separate water from water.' So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse 'sky'. And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day.

And God said, 'Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.' And it was so. God called the dry ground 'land', and the gathered waters he called 'seas'. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said,' Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.' And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and the trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning-the third day.

And God said,'Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.' And it was so. God made two great lights- the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning-the fourth day.

And God said,' Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.' So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, ' Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.' And there was evening, and there was morning- the fifth day.

And God said,' Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its own kind.' And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their own kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'

So God created man

in his own image,

in the image of God

he created him;

male and female

he created them.(...)"

The Creation theory says that God created everything in six days. Scientists and believers debate over what a day in creation really means. Most Christian say that it is the period we know today, in other words, a 24 hour period. Scientists say that it is probably a period that we today see as millions of years. This is another fact that noone can prove.

Evolution

Evolution, or Darwinism, is based on the theories of a british scientist called Charles Robert Darwin, although he wasn’t the first person to propose this ideas. In 1859 he published a book called On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In it Darwin wrote that up till the present forms of lifeon earth, many species died out either competely, or by evolving, or by going through a series of changes to stay fit for the changing environment. Evolution says that there was no such thing as creation, or by suddenly having life on earth.

Today we have a thing called "Neo-Darwinism. It combines Darwin's theory with Gregor Mendel's theories of genetics. Besides natural selection, it is now believed that chance may play a large part in deciding which genes become characteristic of  a particular species. This is called the "genetic drift". It also says that evoutionary change does not always occur at a constant rate.

Which do you believe

  • Creation
  • Evolution
  • Other
See results without voting

Conclusion

In my opinion we will never be able to really answer the ongoing problem and dabate of Creation and Evolution. It is impossible to prove either of the theories about the origins of life on earth merely by scientific proofs. There are also unbelieveably and unexplained parts in both Creation and in Evolution, that's why I don't really believe in neither of them.

Books on Creation

More by this Author


Comments 6 comments

PrometheusKid profile image

PrometheusKid 6 years ago from Heaven


jesus 6 years ago

why on earth is this still a debate in 2010? evolution has been a fact since th 1800's


Sterling Sage profile image

Sterling Sage 6 years ago from California

Good point, tonymac.

I'll add that the phrase "Theory of Evolution" is used only because everyone is familiar with it. For decades now, it has ceased to be a theory, scientifically speaking, because there is such good evidence for it.

Evolution is not just one likely explanation for the way life has come to be as it is; it is now accepted as a scientific fact, and for good reason. It has been proposed, revised, tested, re-tested, reviewed by scientists all over the world, re-re-tested, refined and thoroughly explained.

It is as factual as our understanding electricity and optics, without which we would not be able to make cell phones or eyeglasses.

The real scientific debate has been over for a long time now. No competing theory has come close to passing scientific muster in the last half century.


tonymac04 profile image

tonymac04 6 years ago from South Africa

Not true - Darwin did years of meticulous observation before coming up with a theory which seemed to fit what he had observed. Other scientists have devised hypotheses to test the theory and have, by and large, confirmed that the theory of evolution is the best explanation of the observable facts.

Evolution is not pseudo-science but is an excellent example of the scientific method at work.

Observations are made

Atheory is advanced as a tentative explanation of what has been observed

Hypotheses are formulated as to how certain poarticular observations could be explained

Hypotheses are tested.

Those that are not confirmed are rejected.

Belief is not a factor in science, knowledge is.

Creationists are starting out from belief and trying to make a science of it. If you want pseudo-science then creationism is in fact an excellent example. Creatisnism is religion and proof is not possible. I have no problem with religion per se. Just don't try to make a science of it. Religion works in a different set of metaphors which are relevant to that set. Not to the metaphors of science.


Csanad profile image

Csanad 6 years ago from Budapest, Hungary Author

The problem with evolution is that evolutionists reversed the scientific process. Scientific process is the following:

1. Make an experiment,

2. record results of experiment,

3. observe results of experiment,

4. make conclusions based on the observation of results of the experiment.

What evolutionists do, is the exact reverse:

1. Come up with a theory,

2. find evidence

3. observe evidence,

4. make conclusions that prove their initial theory.

Evolution is a PSEUDO-SCIENCE, not real science. At least creationists admit they just believe creation and then try to prove it, evolutionist don't admit that they just believe and then try to prove it.


tonymac04 profile image

tonymac04 6 years ago from South Africa

Creationism and evolution are two different sets of metaphors. Creationism is not science and uses the metaphors of religion. Evolution is science and usesthe metaphors of science. Each is true within its own metaphorical sphere but should not be confused.

Thanks for sharing

Love and peace

Tony

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working