22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution

[BTCWizard]

Anyone find it ironic that creationists ask for evidence of evolution but they accept god based on nothing but a book?

I have been trying to point out that it takes "faith" to believe in evolution just as it takes "faith" to believe in God.  

In some ways the debate can seem a bit futile.  I often wonder why I even bother because I am usually just ridiculed, called stupid, etc.  Even though there is excellent science that supports Intelligent Design. I guess deep down the hope is that somehow there will be a small seed of doubt in all the evolution propaganda that is being taught like it is the "truth" and that will help someone realize that perhaps there is more to the "big picture" than they have shown.  Maybe they will crack open a Bible and begin to read it, maybe even with the plan to prove me wrong, but in doing so God will begin to reveal Himself and then the person will realize that they have a need for God in their life. That is my true hope in it all.  Really, God could have used a big bang if He wanted to so the creation/evolution debate really is not the main issue.  The point that is the most important is "Is God real?"  And if God is real, "What will I do about that?"  

You believe the world was created in one day a few 1000 years ago and that you can put dinosaurs and humans in one big boat and they will walk away without a scratch, and people call you stupid? Wonder why they would say something like that.

And who created the god that created god?

In theory, a god has always been around.

Why is it matter can't come from nothing, but a fully formed god is perfectly reasonable? Why can god always have existed, but not the universe?

Only something "supernatural", that is governed outside of the laws of nature, would be able to have existed forever.

And you base this on? If this is true then any god or being could exist so what makes one god particularly stand out? Why can't the universe or multi/metaverses have existed for ever or be "supernatural"?

What make the God of the Bible unique?

All religions are based on ways to earn salvation by something we do to attain a "higher position" or some sort of nirvana.

Christianity is the only religion that says the only way to salvation is to admit that there is no way we can earn it.  It is not about being "good enough."  Salvation is a free gift from God.  All it takes is humbly asking God for forgiveness of falling short of his laws (the 10 commandments which we have all broken) Humility is something people just don't want to have!  From the beginning of time it has been a struggle.  Men just think that they are smart as God, or that they don't need Him.

However, we all need Him!  We can't get to heaven on our own merit.  

Why would someone need an imaginary friend? After some age you really should grow out of it.
And we can't go to heaven on our own merit? Try a spacecraft.  

Man, that there are still nutjobs like this in 2014, go read a book and think a little bit about how stupid your ideas really are with the knowledge we have today. 2000 years ago I can imagine it was perfectly sane to believe these things, now we know better. You can still believe something created the universe, but at least acknowledge the things that are just plain wrong.

[BTCWizard]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

[markjamrobin]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

Assuming you are referring to the Christian Bible specifically, it never refers to a specific distance from the creation of the earth, to modern days; Christ ≠ World Creation.

[markjamrobin]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

Also, a day has not always been standardized, assumedly the "7 Days", is not made up of 24 hour days. The way it is written, it likely refers to a period of time only.

[hilariousandco]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

Also, a day has not always been standardized, assumedly the "7 Days", is not made up of 24 hour days. The way it is written, it likely refers to a period of time only.

Or it's probably just not true and written by plebs. Read the first page of the bible and do you honestly think it's an acceptable explanation for the creation of the entire universe? I think it would be pretty insultive to god's intelligence if there was one.

[markjamrobin]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

Also, a day has not always been standardized, assumedly the "7 Days", is not made up of 24 hour days. The way it is written, it likely refers to a period of time only.

Or it's probably just not true and written by plebs. Read the first page of the bible and do you honestly think it's an acceptable explanation for the creation of the entire universe? I think it would be pretty insultive to god's intelligence if there was one.

Do enlighten me, how it is "insultive" to someone's intelligence...

[hilariousandco]

But in theory, ID and Evolution could easily coexist.

No, they cannot!

One is knowledge the other is propaganda from a particular christian sect.

Secondly, one could believe that a world was created by an intelligent being, and that creatures evolved since then.

Sure, you can believe the big bang was done by an intelligent being, it's a theory. I don't think it's a good one but we don't exactly know the right answer yet, so in the meantime someone can call it god. There is no reason to believe there is a personal god though and there is enough evidence that we can say the world isn't created in a week and surely not some 1000 years ago.

Also, a day has not always been standardized, assumedly the "7 Days", is not made up of 24 hour days. The way it is written, it likely refers to a period of time only.

Or it's probably just not true and written by plebs. Read the first page of the bible and do you honestly think it's an acceptable explanation for the creation of the entire universe? I think it would be pretty insultive to god's intelligence if there was one.

Do enlighten me, how it is "insultive" to someone's intelligence...

Why don't you tell me how it isn't?

[FalconFly]

If by age, you mean the observable evidence that they are young enough to have red blood cells still in the marrow and usable DNA, then yes.  I believe they were created with all the other land animals and man on Day 6.  Two of each kind were passengers on Noah's Ark.  And they were seen after the flood by every nation from Daniel, Alexander the Great, Nebuchadnezzar, Chinese emperors, Europeans, American Natives, etc.  The last known sighting of a small dragon was in 1611.

Hilarious, really hilarious, thanks for the laugh. That stuff made my day

Now seriously, since we've spent some time talking about genetics... Are you aware (rhetorical question, since I'm 100% certain you have no clue whatsoever) that 2 individual members of a species cannot procreate beyond a small number of inbred generations before dying out due to deterioating genetic fitness ?

It's due to the genetic effect called homozygosity, leading to the following (Wikipedia quote) :

- Reduced fertility both in litter size and sperm viability
- Increased genetic disorders
- Fluctuating facial asymmetry
- Lower birth rate
- Higher infant mortality
- Slower growth rate
- Smaller adult size
- Loss of immune system function

So whenever you hear someone (anyone) talking about "Adam and Eve" or Noah's Ark - you know they are talking pure BS. And any stories and myths that originated from these fables are identical BS.

An actual Dragon (as displayed by ancient or modern drawings or descriptions) has never existed outside the fantasy of human storytellers and naturally not a single piece of evidence exists.
(my best guess is that thousands of years ago people found the remains of a pterodactyl or similar bones and - lacking any scientific skills or knowledge but lots of superstition at that time - started the rumors of "dragons" which made it into today's fantasy stories over time)

I guess if you're into Dragons, you also believe in elves, orcs, hobbits etc. and likely are a frequent World of Warcraft player with severe personality disorders....

PS.
The last sighting of the Loch Ness monster in the UK was in 2011...
Still, we all know that Loch Ness monster never existed, but that detail doesn't matter, right?  

PPS.
The old saying (now considered "politically incorrect") still holds true :
There's some smart people and there's a whole lot of dumb people roaming the earth. The dumb however, generally seem to multiply in greater numbers. Always has been that way.

While it may seem harsh to say - it's unfortunately 100% correct - and in the end, it always boils down to that simple fact of life.

Not sure why I am bothering to reply but the inbreeding would not have been as big of an issue back then.  There were less mutations.  There are more mutations each generation.  The amount of mutations that have occurred is steady and observable and would be much more if the world was millions of years old.  One more piece of evidence that supports creation.

Stories of dragons throughout history were most likely exaggerated, but that does not mean that they did not exist.  If all cultures have stories about them, the Chinese still believe in them, we should sit back and ponder this at least.  Of course there are other creatures that are myths.  But these "dinosaur" bones that have just been discovered are nothing "new" in the world.  

And as for the ark, the animals would have most likely been very young and small.

Of course we are considered crazy.  That is fine. It really doesn't matter if you think we are crazy or not.  What matters more is everyone's personal relationship with God.  Each person will be accountable with what they do, or don't do with what they are given and everyone will be accountable to God's law, regardless of their belief in the law or not.  To stand before God and say, "It all seemed to stupid" or even "I was a good and moral person" is not enough to avoid eternal punishment.  You can shoot the messenger but it does not change the message or the truth behind the message.

Let me correct that statement of yours :
Inbreeding would have been just as big of an issue back then as it was now, as these genetic laws are timeless and not dynamic in nature.  There were near-identical degrees of mutation, but the short timespan would have killed off adam & eve's offspring long before natural mutations (i.e. caused by transgenetic effects or radiation) could have set in, as these occur over far greater timespans.  There are similar amounts of mutations over each generation, as influenced only by environmental factors. The amount of mutations that have occurred are relatively steady and observable and would be nearly identical regardless of earth' age. One more piece of evidence that clearly tells us a) creationists have no clue about reality a.k.a. science and therefor never get their facts straight and b) there's (surprise) no actual evidence that supports creation or any other religion whatsoever.

Anyway, just another religious/superstitious crackpot on the internet that has no education but brabbles ill-derived pseudo-arguments in order to spread its own disease (religion)... Nothing new.

[RodeoX]

This is all ok. 

 I don't believe in any Gods but countless wonderful people do. People I could be friends with, people who share an ancient mystical idea that relies on faith in the supernatural rather than logic and science. That is true of most people on the planet. We should be able to choose as long as we stay out of each others kool-aid, right?

As an atheist I'm not really looking for converts, so there was no need for me to use the " guy" earlier in the thread. I apologize if that offended anyone. I should just stick to the questions people wrote. Assuming these people want to know answers, that would be a better use of time for us all.

[the joint]

Listen to David Berlinski, he basically knocks evolution down to "nothing more than an anecdote."  If you still believe in the THEORY of evolution after listening to him, you are crazy.

What's the less crazy alternative?

Involution.

[pedrog]

Listen to David Berlinski, he basically knocks evolution down to "nothing more than an anecdote."  If you still believe in the THEORY of evolution after listening to him, you are crazy.

Never heard of that guy, watched him talking here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM

Pure nonsense, it's hilarious!  

[hilariousandco]

Listen to David Berlinski, he basically knocks evolution down to "nothing more than an anecdote."  If you still believe in the THEORY of evolution after listening to him, you are crazy.

Never heard of that guy, watched him talking here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM

Pure nonsense, it's hilarious!  

Surely Religions are nothing more than books full of anecdotes?

[Kaligulax]

The entire "debate" can be summed up in one quote: Science is questions which may never be answered, and religion is answers which may never be questioned." I would much rather admit I don't know that accept made up answers based on bad or no evidence!

[Peter Lambert]

Listen to David Berlinski, he basically knocks evolution down to "nothing more than an anecdote."  If you still believe in the THEORY of evolution after listening to him, you are crazy.

Never heard of that guy, watched him talking here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM

Pure nonsense, it's hilarious!  

Surely Religions are nothing more than books full of anecdotes?

There is more to religion than what is written in a book. True religion is about what you do, not what you say. A true Christian is somebody who loves all people, not somebody who says "I am a Christian".

[cp1]

The entire "debate" can be summed up in one quote: Science is questions which may never be answered, and religion is answers which may never be questioned." I would much rather admit I don't know that accept made up answers based on bad or no evidence!

It's always nice to have a catchy phrase, but that implies that evolution is up in the air.

[BitChick]

Listen to David Berlinski, he basically knocks evolution down to "nothing more than an anecdote."  If you still believe in the THEORY of evolution after listening to him, you are crazy.

Never heard of that guy, watched him talking here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5r5cRlctLM

Pure nonsense, it's hilarious!  

Surely Religions are nothing more than books full of anecdotes?

There is more to religion than what is written in a book. True religion is about what you do, not what you say. A true Christian is somebody who loves all people, not somebody who says "I am a Christian".

And we are not questioning those people, unless they happen to also believe that dinosaurs=dragons and were made on the 6th day and shared the ark with all other animals and that because a dog and a cat can't mate then this means that there must be a god (paraphrased from bitchick/bitchick's husband).

I actually have a lot of respect for religious people who live their lives righteously, as I (try) to do too, but believing some of that nonsense in the face of the mountain of scientifically collected evidence we have is just mind-numbingly blind and brainwashed.

As long as people live their lives and do not cause harm to others in any direct or (reasonably) indirect way then I think this is enough.

I agree that true Christianity is all about love.  That pretty much sums up the main point Jesus made when he said the greatest commandment was "to love your neighbor as yourself."  So with that perspective, this debate is not the most important thing. But it does have an effect on the fact that many people discredit the Bible now entirely.

Also, you can call it crazy that we take the Bible literally, and many other Christians think we are as well.  But the problem with just picking and choosing which parts of the Bible we agree with or don't agree with is that we are undermining the Bible.  We are in essence saying that it could all be "fairy tales."  Which parts are then made up?  Do we just pick what makes sense based on what scientists are speculating is true?  If we don't like some of God's laws do we just ignore them?  Where is that line?  And in essence, do we trust God or science?  That is what it comes down to for me.  If God is a God of miracles, which I believe He is, then He is able to do anything outside of the "rules" of science anyways.  

[RodeoX]

...
Also, you can call it crazy that we take the Bible literally, and many other Christians think we are as well.  But the problem with just picking and choosing which parts of the Bible we agree with or don't agree with is that we are undermining the Bible.  We are in essence saying that it could all be "fairy tales."  Which parts are then made up?  Do we just pick what makes sense based on what scientists are speculating is true?  If we don't like some of God's laws do we just ignore them?  Where is that line? ...

Logic. I think sometimes unbelievers forget that people of faith are not acting illogically if you understand their premiss that God is magical. If you believe that God is a real and supernatural being then science means noting in discovering the truth of God. There are no laws of nature in religion because they can be changed at any point. Therefore pointing out the impossibility of a 6000 year old Earth cannot be argued.

[pedrog]

LOL, "true Christianity"!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[Peter Lambert]

There is more to religion than what is written in a book. True religion is about what you do, not what you say. A true Christian is somebody who loves all people, not somebody who says "I am a Christian".

I agree that true Christianity is all about love.  That pretty much sums up the main point Jesus made when he said the greatest commandment was "to love your neighbor as yourself."  So with that perspective, this debate is not the most important thing. But it does have an effect on the fact that many people discredit the Bible now entirely.

Also, you can call it crazy that we take the Bible literally, and many other Christians think we are as well.  But the problem with just picking and choosing which parts of the Bible we agree with or don't agree with is that we are undermining the Bible.  We are in essence saying that it could all be "fairy tales."  Which parts are then made up?  Do we just pick what makes sense based on what scientists are speculating is true?  If we don't like some of God's laws do we just ignore them?  Where is that line?  And in essence, do we trust God or science?  That is what it comes down to for me.  If God is a God of miracles, which I believe He is, then He is able to do anything outside of the "rules" of science anyways.  

Ahem, you have it wrong. Jesus said the greatest commandment was to "love God with all your soul", loving others comes in second.

If you believe there is a god, then why not just ask him which parts of the Bible are supposed to be taken literally?

[BitChick]

There is more to religion than what is written in a book. True religion is about what you do, not what you say. A true Christian is somebody who loves all people, not somebody who says "I am a Christian".

I agree that true Christianity is all about love.  That pretty much sums up the main point Jesus made when he said the greatest commandment was "to love your neighbor as yourself."  So with that perspective, this debate is not the most important thing. But it does have an effect on the fact that many people discredit the Bible now entirely.

Also, you can call it crazy that we take the Bible literally, and many other Christians think we are as well.  But the problem with just picking and choosing which parts of the Bible we agree with or don't agree with is that we are undermining the Bible.  We are in essence saying that it could all be "fairy tales."  Which parts are then made up?  Do we just pick what makes sense based on what scientists are speculating is true?  If we don't like some of God's laws do we just ignore them?  Where is that line?  And in essence, do we trust God or science?  That is what it comes down to for me.  If God is a God of miracles, which I believe He is, then He is able to do anything outside of the "rules" of science anyways.  

Ahem, you have it wrong. Jesus said the greatest commandment was to "love God with all your soul", loving others comes in second.

If you believe there is a god, then why not just ask him which parts of the Bible are supposed to be taken literally?

True.  In loving others we are loving God so they very much go together I believe so lving God with all our soul should then cause us to love our neighbors as our self.

I used to believe that evolution was a non-issue but over time have begun to realize that the Bible should be taken as literally as possible.  Granted, not with a legalistic mindset (It can often go hand in hand it seems and I understand that)  But to fear God for me is to respect Him and His word and to live it out as much as possible in every area of my life.