Creationism VS Atheism
by CountNovember 28th, 2007 at 9:26 PM
Filed under: Other Discursive Dialogue, Philosophy & Religion, Science & Technology
 |
|
Creationism VS Atheism: Which view do you subscribe to (and why)? This is an issue that tends to polarize a great deal of people. People can be friends and agree on a multitude of issues and still hold different beliefs on the origins of the universe. I'll do my best to present both sides of the issue and hopefully open the window for the expression of new ideas on both sides. If theres anything important I missed (which will be 100% guaranteed), please add it in your comments below. But I'd like to hear not just what you believe, but why as well. Creationism Creationists can vary widely in their beliefs but most share some fundamental views. They believe that God created the earth as well as the universe. One of their main arguments is that of first cause. They argue that everything as we know it had an original cause, and that if you trace everything back to it's original cause, the big bang (yes, some creationists believe in the big bang), the big bang itself had to be caused by a first cause. Since nothing can cause the first cause, this first cause is God. Another argument is the perfection of our world and the unlikelihood of all of the conditions that make life possible to be found together in the exact amounts necessary. For example, water: without it, life would not be possible. It has the unique ability of having a high boiling point and a low freezing point. It is perfect for its job of regulating the internal temperature of organisms, and is the reason it comprises the largest percentage of matter in an organism. If our solar system had more than one sun, the mass of our sun, its distance from the center of our galaxy, or the earth's distance from the sun were any different, life would not be possible. If the sun were too far away, earth would be buried under ice. If it were too close, it would be far too hot to sustain life. In addition, if the earth's gravity, magnetic field, and amount of hydrogen in our atmosphere varied greatly, life would not be possible. There are more factors, and they all have to be right for life to be sustainable. Obviously, the likelihood of ALL of these factors coexisting independently, and in the right amounts is ridiculously unlikely. Another argument is the complexity of our brains. Why would evolution select for such a complicated brain? No other organism comes close to the intelligence we possess. What purpose does it serve? We are capable of inventing rocket science and nuclear fission, why would a hominid roaming the plains of Africa need such a luxurious brain? Yet another creationist argument is the religious experience. Some people claim to have experienced the presence of God beyond the shadow of doubt. Obviously, this claim isn't falsifiable, and therefore unscientific, but should we not consider anecdotal evidence simply because it doesn't fit the stringent criteria of science? There are more arguments, and I will leave the argument of faith out of this discussion, but these are some of the more compelling arguments for creationism. Atheism Atheism isn't technically a set of beliefs, it's defined as the absence of belief. Like creationists, they vary considerably on what they hold to be true, but most atheists accept the theory of evolution. A quick note here. Belief in evolution, be it macro or micro does not mean you have a disbelief in creationism. That being said, a quick note about science and theories. Science does not answer a yes or no to the question of God. Science only deals with theories that are falsifiable. God cannot be falsified (proven to not exist). Theories, in scientific terms are ideas that are widely accepted to be true and have a great deal of evidence backing them up. A scientific theory does not have the same meaning as a theory in the general sense. They are much closer to 'fact' than they are to the common definition of the word 'theory', which is why scientists use the term the 'fact of evolution'. By and large, the scientific community overwhelmingly believes in evolution, but that is not part of the argument itself. So what is? Evolution has not been falsified. All the scientific evidence of the last 150 years has corroborated the theory of evolution. One of the strongest arguments for it are fossil records. A succession of animals can be seen by looking at fossils, and dating them to their respective time period. This is done by radiocarbon dating, which is beyond the scope of this article. A progression of complexity (and in few cases a digression) can be seen from earlier to later fossils. For some organisms, the record is incomplete, for others (such as whales, and, arguably, apes) there are a great amount. Another argument for evolution is that of genetic records. Comparison of the DNA sequences of organisms allows them to be grouped by the similarity of their sequences (how genetically related they are). Humans and chimpanzees are 99% identical genetically. This grouping from sequencing places humans as a successor of common ancestors that included other forms of apes. In other words, the sequences show humans gradually evolved from ape-like animals (who in turn evolved from other ape-like animals). This "branch" on the genetic "tree" can be traced all the way back to single-celled bacteria. A much clearer example of this is that of chromosome #2. We have two fewer chromosomes than the great apes; we have 46 and they all have 48. We get 23 each parent, adding up to 23 pairs in total. Apes have 24 from each parent, totaling 24 pairs. So, if humans and the other apes evolved from the same common ancestor, all humans are "missing" one pair of chromosomes. What happened to it? If the whole chromosome (which comprises a whopping 8% of our total DNA) were lost, the humans body (the remaining 92%) could not possibly function, let alone sustain life. So if humans share a common ancestor, it either had 48 chromosomes or 46. If it had 48 pairs, one pair had to have gotten fused. If that's the case, we should be able to examine our genome and see evidence for one of our chromosomes resulting from the fusion of two primate chromosomes. Centromeres are markers in DNA sequences used to separate them. They have telomeres on the end of them. Fusion would place telomeres in center of chromosome (where they aren't found). The resulting fused chromosome should have two centromeres. Upon examination of chromosome two, we find two centromeres that are the result of fusion between two chromosomes that remain separate in other primates. There are literally dozens of other pieces of evidence for evolution, including continental distribution, comparative anatomy, etc. Evolution has also been observed in the form of resistance to antibiotics, resistance to disease, and the chemical spraying of crops becoming ineffective due to pest mutation and resistance. All of this evidence is independently testable and falsifiable and has never been proven wrong. The overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution is why most scientists and virtually all scientists involved in the biological sciences refer to the theory of evolution as a fact, and why atheists do not believe in the existence of God. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I hope I have presented both sides fairly, objectively, and accurately. I'd like to hear from some of the members here what side they are on and why. If it seems like I am favoring one side over another, I'm not. As for my own beliefs, I'll say what I personally believe after this has gotten a few responses. I look forward to your opinions. |
 |
Rate this Article
Submit a Critique
Critiques
Show Oldest First
AB, you make some good points. I agree there are good people that live practice what they preach as well as those who just are in it for the social contacts/gossip.
ArrogantlyBlunt- Sorry, you misread that, I made no claim.
The quote was from Jesus of Nazareth. I was not saying “they all lead to the same place, (which is) Jesus”. I have been looking for the complete quote. I thought it was in ‘The Gospel of Mary Magdalene’. I will find the complete quote soon. :O(
My apologies, I totally misread that. Rereading it in the context of a quote gives your original statement a totally different meaning.
Evidence is subjective.
Agreed, but it shouldn't be that hard to find at the very least anecdotal evidence that supports creationism.
When you say “plausible” I have to think you are asking about His “miracles’. Miracles do not give a person life. I cannot prove, nor can any one else prove, He did miracles.
I was referring to anecdotal evidence, such as the stories you provided in your angels article and the link you gave earlier in this thread. They don't prove his existence, but it's still evidence, no matter how unfalsifiable and unscientific, and should not just be so easily dismissed. As long as they're somewhat plausible (meaning Jesus wasn't a blonde guy when they saw him). Untimately, this thread is about evidence for both sides, and so far none has been posted.
In the language we speak we call him "Yuus". I grew up not understanding who is Yuus and JesuKristo (Jesus Christ). The island back then was mostly catholic. Being a convert I expect some inquiries and I am prepared for what comes. I'll look up the references you gave. Thanks AB
I'm happy totally. I have so much to study and learn. -- Julita
Having peace of mind in a troubled world is part of Gods promise. Do not let the ignorance of others cause trouble in your happiness. It is fun to read and learn and ALWAYS to keep an open mind. Follow your heart and, above all, keep learning. Right now I am trying to get 'The Veda'. The Veda contains the Vedashig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva including over 100,000 verses. Their oldest parts may date back as far as 6,000 BCE. "The Vedas open a rare window into ancient Indian society, proclaiming life's sacredness and the way to oneness with God." WWW.ExperienceFestival.Com
In College, one of my classes was "The Bible as Literature". That class was very rewarding. As a New Convert you may not want to, or need to, read anything other then the Bible and The Book of Mormon. I will say one thing about reading other Books, about other encounters with God, it reinforced my belief that God has been here a very long time, and that He is. He has left small bits and pieces of Himself, and his plans, in each culture. God is God no matter what believers call Him, "God", "Yahweh", "JEHOVAH", "Allah", "Brahma", "Vishnu", "Shiva", "Manco Capac", "Xiuhtecuhtli", "Nusku", "Gibil" etc, etc. www.TheNamesOfGod
May God Bless You. AB
Good morning dear AB. You are very smart! You pick up on important details. So as everybodyelse on this site and what anyone says mattereth not. I feel that if Mr. President is looking for all good men, he should start here. Women to! I have been a member since February 10th, 2008 and I'm happy totally. I have so much to study and learn. It is my first time to ever read the Bible and The Book of Mormon. I find it answers a lot of questions and more. Getting to know JESUS AND GOD.
Have a good day everyone, julita
THE ARTICLES OF FAITH (THERE'S THIRTEEN OF THEM), ARTICLE 11 -- Julita
So, you are 'LDS'? I spent a few months in an 'LDS' chat room, typing, reading and not learning very much. There was always a problem in the room, caused by haters. One hater was a Pagan and some others were just rude 'LDS christian bashers'. I am amazed at the things people will do and go through to disrupt peaceful, God worshiping rooms. They are not excepting of other beliefs. They came in the chat and proved that they do not believe in the First Amendment. ... free exercise of religion ... or ... freedom of speech, ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble, ... That kind of 'Christian', I have no use for. “Christian is as Christian does”, they claim to know Christ and his teachings but act like worshipers of Satan. I really like this Article 11: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty GOD according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."
Thank you for sharing this. I have found a site and am reading all 13 Articles, EXCELLENT! You will read this in the morning so, good morning, AB.
Good morning everybody. What's important is that you all have read the Gospel and no doubt believe that there is a JESUS AND A GOD. If I am to be asked if I have proof go to: James 1:5...
From THE ARTICLES OF FAITH (THERE'S THIRTEEN OF THEM), ARTICLE 11: We claim the priviledge of worshipping Almighty GOD according to the dictates of our own consience, and allow all men the same priviledge, let them worship how, where, or what they may. Thanks, julita
what makes one religion more creditable than another -- Marc
ArrogantlyBlunt- Nothing! " ..., there are many paths to God -- ... they all lead to the same place." -- JESUS
Do you have any evidence to support this claim? – Count
Sorry, you misread that, I made no claim.
The quote was from Jesus of Nazareth. I was not saying “they all lead to the same place, (which is) Jesus”. I have been looking for the complete quote. I thought it was in ‘The Gospel of Mary Magdalene’. I will find the complete quote soon. :O(
“… as I know there is not one bit of credible hard evidence supporting the claim that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed in the first place.” – Count
I am not going to try to convert you. I call myself a Christian; because, that is what I relate to most. I was raised as a Christian, and I respect a true Christ-like person. Some people are just Christians in name only. These “Christians” bring disrespect to, should I say, “real Christians”. This comment about “real Christians” will come back and bite me in the butt. I’ve been bite before.
I will, of course, have a discourse about what you have written.
Evidence is subjective. The Books used in the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, all tell some of Jesus’ life. We have the written letters of Paul to the Churches of the early Christians. These make just part of the New Testament. There are many other books not in the Bible, two being The Gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalene. Paul had never met Jesus; but, he spoke to others that had. You will hear that Jesus never was, from people that want others to ‘not believe’. The real question is not if He was or not, it should be was he God, or the Son of God. In order to make sure Christianity fails, some individuals need to kill off the possibility of ‘Jesus’ being here, not just the proposition that He is God.
anecdotal evidence, e.g. somewhat plausible or consistent accounts of Christ, -- Count
When you say “plausible” I have to think you are asking about His “miracles’. Miracles do not give a person life. I cannot prove, nor can any one else prove, He did miracles. When I read His normal life story, I must think He was here. He was born and died; and, if you “believe”, He has been given new life, eternal life. As far as being a miracle worker or God Himself, I have no proof. There is one thing that the Church has, that is interesting, The Shroud of Turin.
“With all due respect your Grandma sounds like she was a very sweet lady but that is not evidence that either Jesus or creationism is real.” – Count
I go by “Christian is as Christian does”. The only thing I wanted to make clear is my Grandmother was “not a fair weather Christian”, she believed in the meaning of true brotherhood. She understood what it means to love a stranger as much as you love yourself. “We had very little … but… Grandmother would share our food with any one.” “She never saw a persons color, or faults.” Some times I can go on and on. You should see what I type before I edit things out. Maybe you should not see it.
For the record, I'm 100% for freedom of religion, and I believe people should have a right to worship whatever they want however they want, so long as I and everybody else is permitted to do the same. Pray to a mythical flying lampshade for all I care, just don't pass laws saying I have to as well.
I look forward to a real free exchange of ideas. – Count
There are many different religions. I even know 5 or 6 Pagans, friends. You should not worry about, people of faith, no matter what faith. What you should worry about should be the people that want to take your rights away to have religion. The first amendment, if it is not ignored, protects you and others. It says no state religion and no prohibiting of religion. It does not say no religion at all, like the media tells us.
Well, got to go. I have written this three times, The American Critic froze, my MS Word closed out, and I ended up writing this in MS Outlook. I am not doing it again. ;o)
The Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
what makes one religion more creditable than another -- Marc
ArrogantlyBlunt- Nothing! " ..., there are many paths to God -- ... they all lead to the same place." -- JESUS
Well I'm not saying you're right and I'm not saying you're wrong. I'll merely ask:
Do you have any evidence to support this claim?
I'll even take anecdotal evidence, e.g. somewhat plausible or consistent accounts of Christ, because as far as I know there is not one bit of credible hard evidence supporting the claim that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed in the first place. With all due respect your Grandma sounds like she was a very sweet lady but that is not evidence that either Jesus or creationism is real. I don't want you to take this as an attack on your beliefs, but rather an opportunity to provide evidence to a hopefully mostly open-minded group of people.
ArrogantlyBlunt- Your idea to have an open discourse on "Creationism VS Atheism" was doomed to fail and promote anger with no real free exchange of ideas.
Not from me it won't. I'll hold up my end and listen to everything you and anyone else have to say with an open mind. I enjoyed the link of personal experiences you provided below. You even make good points for your claim that there is a push to demonize Christianity (though I would have to expand that to religion in general. But I'd like to see some evidence in this thread (other than "faith" alone).
For the record, I'm 100% for freedom of religion, and I believe people should have a right to worship whatever they want however they want, so long as I and everybody else is permitted to do the same. Pray to a mythical flying lampshade for all I care, just don't pass laws saying I have to as well.
I look forward to a real free exchange of ideas.
Thanks AB. It wasn't much believing but how would they know.
Count,
Tonight I will be giving a critique about your Religious and Racial 'bigotry' which both appear in these two threads. I am sure you will 'back track' and explain every thing. 'Bigots' do have a way of explaining every thing they say and do. Or they scream that their rights are being denied.
Have a great day 'Big.gut.Count' You are a great piece of work.