The Bible is not a scientific book, yet not a soul is aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. Trying to contradict the Bible, Charles Darwin studied wildlife and noticed variation in the appearance of the individual animals; then he devised and distributed his “Evolution Theory.” With normal evolution, then and now, after a series of microevolutionary changes, a frog may be larger or changed in color, but it is still a frog or an Ape would still be an Ape and not a Man. God created man and the universe. Challenge The challenge is how to explain to a scientific individual that God is the Creator and “maker of heaven and earth”(Nicene Creed, 381 C.E). Bereshith in Hebrew means “ In the beginning”; Genesis in Greek means – the process of “becoming” or “being made” Both bears the meaning of how things began and how things became as they are.
An accidental universe is as likely as a caused one There are many modern scientific theories that attempt to grasp why the universe is here, who put it here and who created everything in it. Modern theories such as the Big Bang theory and the Steady State theory have been brought to our attention, giving people sense as to why we are here. If you relate these theories to Aristotle’s Prime Mover, do they really make sense? Many people today use scientific ideas and believe the religious beliefs are mistaken views developed in the past. Atheists believe that the forming of
Creatio ex nilho simply put means creation out of nothing. Creatio ex nilho is a topical subject since it opposes the idea of God as a craftsman. It is unclear in the first Genesis account in Genesis 1 whether there was actually pre-existent material to craft whether he really did create ‘ex nilho’. There has also been a point made that when they said that God created ‘ex nilho’ he brought order to chaos rather than created ‘ex nilho’ Genesis 1 states it was only when God commanded on day 1, that the heavens and earth appeared. Whereas, Genesis 2 says our world was created by pre-existent material such as the creation of man from ‘dust.’ The idea ‘Creatio ex nilho’ lies originally with Augustine, he said ‘creation out of nothing’ does not relate to one particular moment but in fact the universe has its own time and space, which is eternal.
For the notion (a), though scientific evidences, such as the Big Bang Theory, suggest the “space-time” universe began to exist a finite time ago, but they may not be persuasive enough to show that the world truly had a beginning. For the notion (b), Mathematical equation “1+1=2” and logical principle “if P then P” are examples of non-physical things, and the relationship between God and other non-physical things becomes tricky. They seem eternal and it’s not very plausible to say that they began to exist at the Big Bang. They seem to be independent from God’s creation. Thus it’s problematic to claim that God is responsible for everything in such kind of universe.
Very few people today maintain such a belief. Lastly, Modern Geocentrism is the belief that God recently created a spherical world, and placed it in the center of the universe. The Sun, planets and everything else in the universe revolve around it. All scientific claims about the age of the Earth are lies. They also believe that evolution does not occur.
Introduction Evolution is truly an endless debate. Evidence for and against it has been found all over the globe and no one had agreed to an ultimate conclusion so far. It is hard to overstate just how brilliant and huge an idea Charles Darwin had when he thought of the theory of natural selection, but it was created in a time without the genetic technology we possess today. Evolution, a theory first banned by churches and its believers prosecuted, but today it is the basis of biology in schools and Universities, but how much of it is actually proven and flawless? Evolution though supported by facts, is not a scientific law or a law of biology.
Josh Weiss Reading Response: Sex, Drugs, Disasters and the Extinction of Dinosaurs Prof. Smith Questions drive science, not conclusions. According to Stephen Jay Gould, many conclusions from science are impossible to prove, and these lead to stagnant claims that develop no prolonged interest in society. Fascinating claims are not fascinating to real-world scientists unless their methods can be tested. In Gould’s essay “Sex, Drugs, Disasters, and the Extinction of Dinosaurs”, Gould uses three theories on the extinction of dinosaurs to display impactful scientific discoveries only come from testable theories, not solely from interesting claims. To attract attention, Gould titles the three main theories for dinosaur extinction “Sex, Drugs, and Disasters”.
It has recently become common for religious groups to call for creationism (or ‘Intelligent Design’ as it is now called) to be recognised as having scientific support, but this is not as convincing as it seems. As the theory most supported by scientists, the onus of proof is on the creationists to show why a hundred years of solid science is now believed to be faulty. They have convincingly failed to do so. One of the fundamental flaws of creationism is that is begins with the assumption that a creator is responsible for life on earth, that the earth is
Mayr (2000) begins by stating that many notions of biology in the last 150 years have been in opposition to popular belief. Those beliefs have ultimately been modified due almost entirely to the influential theories of Charles Darwin. Darwin’s first key influence, he claims, is the concept of evolution itself. At the time this notion was proposed, the majority of leading scientists and philosophers believed that the world as it existed now was the creation God, not the result of gradual natural forces. He goes on to say that branching evolution, a notion which suggests common decent, was also an alien concept at the time of proposition, as was the notion that evolution must be a gradual process with its fundamental mechanism being natural selection (Mayr, 2000).
I said that the universe started out as a dot smaller than an atom which was created by itself. However my friend disagreed and said that God created the dot which lead to the big bang. Now though it is not true that the universe was really created by the big bang, it is a matter of which theory you agree with; science or religion. It is not possible for everyone to agree on the same thing. A strong example is in an election year, people can’t always vote on the same president.