The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Evolution V Creation

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/1/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 685 times Debate No: 113346
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)




I believe that evolution is the more believable of the 2, due to the fact that we have seen species evolve before our very eyes in the case of bacteria, as well as other animals.


I believe that we were created, due to the fact that evolution is faulty in many ways. As well, evolution and adaption are confused much of the time. One involves the change of specific parts of a creature while the other involves the creation of an entirely new creature.

We can believe that beings as brilliant as humans could be made on accident, but we wouldn"t believe that a car would make itself, right, even if it had millions of years?
Debate Round No. 1


True but cars are a man made thing steal doesn't naturally occur, how ever what makes up the human body's basic parts, carbon, water, calcium, are naturally occurring. And adaptation is what drives evolution. Lets say a fish get trapped in a cave with a few hundred of its relatives, due to the lack of light the fish with better sensory organs other than sight are they ones that survive. These fish breed due to the lack of use the fishes eyes wither and eventually disappear completely. This leads to a new species of cave fish thus evolution in action.


Time magazine, while saying that there are "many solid facts" backing the evolution theory, nonetheless concedes that evolution is a complex tale with "many holes and no shortage of competing theories on how to fill in the missing pieces."

ON September 30, 1986, The New York Times published an article by a New York University professor, Irving Kristol...
"Though this theory is usually taught as an established scientific truth," Kristol said, "it is nothing of the sort. It has too many lacunae [gaps]. Geological evidence does not provide us with the spectrum of intermediate species we would expect. Moreover, laboratory experiments reveal how close to impossible it is for one species to evolve into another, even allowing for selective breeding and some genetic mutation. . . . The gradual transformation of the population of one species into another is a biological hypothesis, not a biological fact."

Decades ago, evolutionary biologist George Christopher Williams began questioning whether natural selection had such power. In 1999, evolutionary theorist Jeffrey H. Schwartz wrote that natural selection may be helping species adapt to the changing demands of existence, but it is not creating anything new. Take Finches for example, a bird with varying beak sizes and shapes but still pertain to the same species, even though having different physical qualities.

As you mentioned with the fish, changing a specific part of the body does not mean it can become an entirely new species on its own. Natural selection is presumed to be overestimated in its capabilities. Rather than creating a new species, it improves the species itself, not change it.

Meanwhile, the beginning of life is still a hypothesis. As well, if you believe we can"t create inferior objects as cars, but expect to believe that beings as brilliant and complex as humans could be made on accident, there is much to question in this understanding.
Rather, such complex ecosystems such as the water cycle, and systems such as cell replication, can not have occurred alone.

If we believe that only a human can create a car, and it can"t create itself, then something much more intelligent and Superior must have created a human being.
Debate Round No. 2


Ok good point but how do you explain the variety of life over millions of years, the ice age the age of marsupials. Most of the animals that came after the extinction of the dinos would be completely under prepared to survive the more hostile weather conditions as the earth went through it's cycle. And why do we find different fossils throughout the fossil layer obviously the older bones are toward the bottom, and more resent bones toward the top, if there was no evolution shouldn't we find mammoth bones on the same level with dinosaurs, and find giant cave sloths on the same level with saber tooth cats? See we as humans have the collective ability to create the reason why cars don't occur in nature is because steal, plastic, and rubber don't naturally occur in nature, however once again what makes up the basics of your anatomy can be found in nature. And your right the theory has holes, but so does creation

First if god made the world then why doesn't he keep improving it
Second why has god not made himself visible to the people who don't believe if he truly wanted us to believe creation that would fix the problem real fast
Third tell me why we haven't found fossils of current animals like cows in the same layer with say mastodons?
Fourth please give me any proof of god making animals because right now your argument is a car can't make it's self, the flaw with this statement is that a car isn't alive or self reproducing that's why there aren't herds of SUVs on the plains. However we have found species of bacteria that are found no other place on earth if evolution were false shouldn't they be everywhere?
A good example of this is the blood falls in the Arctic, a flow of water coming up through the ice, the water is stained red from rust and a new species of bacteria that eat the rust, this species hadn't been documented before, so please explain that for me.
The reason we teach evolution is because it is universal, how ever all cultures have their own story of creation what makes yours right? In viking mythology the world was shaped from the body of a giant named Ymir how do we know this is right if your story of creation is true why can't this one be true?


Well argued.
Okay, the discovery of fossils at different layers of sediment doesn"t prove evolution. Rather, it proves that animals existed a long time ago but fails to support the claim that many of modern day animals evolved from ancient animals, such as the saber tooth.

You should also note that having similar DNA does not prove that that species has evolved from a similar species.
For example, humans share over 50 percent of their DNA with a banana, and does that mean that we are the descendants of the fruit. No, it only means much of our coding that allows our own body cells to perform critical life functions is the same code for banana cells allowing them to perform critical life functions.

Now, why is there so much variety of life? That question remains unknown to us humans as Christians. But there is a logical reasoning behind that. Think of this, what purpose would it serve to discover our beginning (which is unlikely) when we are already suffering so much right now. God has provided what is necessary to maintain our faith in him, since the world in modern times is infested with all types of corruption, conflicts, and moral decay. As well, we are only children compared to God, do we really expect to understand the level of complexity required to form a system capable of self replication and the creation of sentient beings. God is wise, and has reasoned that we would never be capable to comprehend his level, we can as much as only hear a whisper of his unbound intelligence.

"When the dinosaurs had fulfilled their purpose, God ended their life. But the Bible is silent on how he did that or when. We can be sure that dinosaurs were created by Jehovah for a purpose, even if we do not fully understand that purpose at this time. They were no mistake, no product of evolution. That they suddenly appear in the fossil record unconnected to any fossil ancestors, and also disappear without leaving connecting fossil links, is evidence against the view that such animals gradually evolved over millions of years of time"

Wouldn"t you say organic beings are more impressive then synthetic ones? If it requires a intelligent being to create a car, a house, or anything man-made, we have to think in the same manner in terms of organics. Yes, organic beings occur naturally, but how can we expect systems capable of that to be formed of nothing.

Why can"t we reason that a superior being was needed in order to create organic beings? We are taking it for granted because it occurs naturally, but the level of ingenuity required to create a perfect system of self replicating organic beings is astounding. We can"t seriously believe that such a system that complex was created because a small planet collided with Earth, or was made from nothing.

Creation has holes left out on purpose by God. He wants us to focus on the present and future because that is what he warns us of.

God made the world perfect. Only when he placed human beings in it, and the first two committed a sin against God did the world become littered with imperfection. Yet, the world today is still perfect for sustaining life, it"s just that humans are destroying the Earth.

Anyone who views God dies. But Has sent his son, messengers, and performed miracles, but all of them were widely rejected by the Pharisees and common people, so if that doesn"t convince them, then what less of an effect it will have now, due to all the special effects and stuff.
To fix the problem "real fast" is that of a human quality. God wants all those worthy of salvation to have a chance at it, that is why He has been waiting for centuries to gather all his sheep, all those that believe and follow him according to his laws.

Layers of sediment are for age and time, not for the proof required for evolution. God has the right to create whatever he wants. And most likely, He cherished the moments with those creatures, but fairly knew that those creatures had not the slightest idea that God existed, for their minds were not as intelligent as humans.

Why don"t we see herds of SUVs? Because those are imperfect and extremely faulty creations. Organic beings are amazingly complex and intricate creations. God has the capability of creating beings that are able to replicate, repair, and perform independent actions (most impressive are humans).

Humans can only meld metal and atoms at a large scale, but God can move and bend atoms at levels we can"t even comprehend. We have theories on what lies beyond a proton, we even believe there to be smaller parts.

Only advanced beings can replicate themselves. That is why an even superior being is required.

Evolution is a simple being becoming into an even more complex being. I don"t see bacteria turning into large scaled animals, nor algae. Those bacteria that eat rust don"t eat rust. They most likely absorb the rust and perform some chemical reaction with to creat their energy, then they dispose of it. But I"m not to sure.

Why is my story of creation true? It is the most plausible and most supported. It comes from the Bible and the Bible has never been disproven, everything in it is accurate and all its prophecies have come true are are coming

"Not surprising, then, that Harold Morowitz, a Yale University physicist, has calculated that the chances of getting the simplest living bacterium by random changes is 1 in 1 followed by 100,000,000,000 zeros."

The great complexity of DNA as blueprint for life is evidence of there NEEDING to be a creator.
The Bible has proven true in all aspects.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TheTrueBeliever 3 years ago
I'm a devout Christian. Not at all certain why many Christians seem to obliviously think this subject is a "hill to die on". Clearly there were many Christians in the past (way before Darwin) who explained, in detail, why the first chapters of Genesis are clearly metaphorical. This includes St Augustine, who is probably the most influential Christian, apart from St Paul, in the history of Christendom. There were Jewish scholars (preceding Christ), who asserted the same. I consider myself a "fundamentalist Christian", but I hear my friends, at length, explain what the "7 headed best" really means, metaphorically, as explained in Revelation.
Clearly, any fundamentalist (such as myself), must learn to distinguish the various differences in Biblical interpretation. 1) What exactly did the author state? 2) What was their intention? 3) What was the context that they wrote this sacred scripture? Clearly, when the Psalms states that we are "sheep", God is not telling us that we have wool, and we bleet. He is not saying that He is actually some guy with a staff, that corrals us. When John the Baptist stated "Behold the lamb of God", he was clearly not stating that Jesus Christ was a baby sheep, with four legs and wool. Anyhow, Christians need to seriously think about the over-arching message that God is telling us in The Bible (which is infallible), within the context.
There are SO MANY scholars that explain the first chapters of Gen in metaphorical ways, it simply is not a hill to die on. The Great Commission is not "Go tell the world that world was created in exactly 6 days". The Great Commission is to tell the world that Jesus Christ came on earth, died for our sins (The Atonement), and that He rose from the dead.
To my fellow Christians: Focus on Mere Christianity. Focus on Jesus Christ. That is a hill to die on.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
And @Follower why can't I mention any sort of microscopic life, we inhabit the same realm there is no clear defined lines when your entered the micro verse, or did you say that to try and fend off any mentioning of the different changes of bacteria because you have no defense against it?
Posted by judaism 3 years ago

What proof would you need to prove HaShem?
Posted by judaism 3 years ago

So the rabbis are attempting to appease man desire for what. . .? Evolution wasn't a concept, or at least not Darwinian evolution, the Greeks had their own thing. We won't get into that here. These texts, such as the Talmud and Zohar, were written two millennium ago, how are you going to dare suggest that I'm being apoplectic here? It's impossible!

Christian creationists are the minority. Now why is that so? Are all scientists children of the devil now (we don't believe he exists by the way)? No, of course not, they're good people with humble motives, they don't want to disprove G-d, they want to just understand the workings of the universe, to study nature as it is. There's a reason why every person in the world believes in evolution, because it happened, and we have proof that it did.

So why did G-d use evolution but not mention this in Genesis? He didn't have too, because we've got the sages, they had revelation too, y'know, just look at R. Nachmanides.

Genesis is metaphorical. The Rambam said so, he was a rational man. I have to agree with him. In fact, not just the Rambam, but almost all the rabbinic sages agreed with him on this point also.

Secondly, don't confuse yourself, G-d could have still been the author of all life, and used evolution as a means to this end. There's no contradiction here. I hope I've explained it well enough.
Posted by Truesaiyanrose 3 years ago
Honestly dont know why this is a thing ppl have their opinions it sould b left like that personaly tho to believe in creation over evolution (evolution being the very thing that animals and humans depend upon with rapid changes going on in the world) is beyond me respect to all creationists out there but wheres the evidence of this creation (besides a bible tora ect that were written by evolved humans who were still evolving to become us) you give me proof n ill drop to my knees n start praying until then evolution for life
Posted by Dinis 3 years ago
That"s is the problem. How can the Bible tell man was created by God then explain that he was derived from animals?
No, those rabbinic sages attempt to appease the human desires with the Holy desires. It is the same as the Catholic Church accepting the concept of homosexuality. It destroys what God demands and has been used to drown the truth, therefore many people live lost in this world because of these false leaders.
Posted by judaism 3 years ago
For everyone,

Does the Bible contradict evolution? Not if you believe in the rabbinic sages. The Talmud says as follows:

Erubin 18a teaches us that "Man was first created with a tail like an animal," and Bereshit Rabbah (Genesis 23:9) says: "Up to the generation of Enoch the faces of people resembled those of monkeys."

See? Judaism and scientific fact are harmonized after all. But evolution, we're told, takes millions of years, right? How does that fit with a 6 day creation account found in Genesis? It doesn't, and that's because Genesis is to be understood metaphorically. Even the Rambam admits this.

Rabbi Yitzchak of Acco calculated the age of the universe to be 15 billions years old, and the Zohar states clearly that G-d created multiple people before Adam - meaning - the perfect human, fully formed: our homosapeian.

The Midrash is key too, for it states that G-d created and destroyed worlds before this one. Keep in mind that Yitzchak of Acco lived 700 years before modern science. So don't listen to people like FollowerofChrist1955, they don't have the truth and they are creationists. The true G-d would not lie, or not say, that He used evolution as a means for an end.

Lastly, the Rambam said that we must reinterpret Torah if it goes against science. By these standards then, Judaism, as long as it is true, will always be such.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
And sir this is meant to be a civilized debate keep your " you'd better believe or you'll go to HELL!!!!" out of it as you seem to have a habit of using it as an argument, and you said that there is only an opinion for the existence of evolution however is there really any proof of god? Other than the bible witch was written hundreds of years ago, and multiple civilizations had gods so how do you know yours is the right or real one?
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
And in order for me to take you seriously you'll need to provide 1 scientifically accepted piece of evidence of god. And a good example is the coy-wolf a new sub-species of wolf that resulted from over hunting of the wolf this species was originally incredibly small, how ever as the coy-wolf began to re-breed back with wolves they became stronger, larger, and faster. Thus natural selection killed off the coy-wolves that were still pure too say, and the cross breed, became different both in habit, size and color. How well a coy-wolf is a cross between a coyote and a wolf, the wolves where larger and stronger however being larger than coyotes by a significant amount any would be mothers that had been breed by the wolves died in labor. Only the ones born to wolves lived and they preformed better then the few born to coyotes due to their pack. And this is what gave rise to a new species of canine, and its change to what it is today.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
everyone who believes in evolution go here and see the reality of evolution.


Because it HAS been shown that people cannot provide evidence of any kind but opinion.

Because it HAS been shown that people can only CHANGE the subject in lieu of providing evidence.

To be eligible for this debate YOU MUST PROVIDE one Scientific evidence of fact revealing the creation of a Living/air breathing/ procreation animal created under evolutionary experimentation proving the Origin of actual Real Living creature life in OUR Reality and realm.

It cannot be microscopic, because animal Life/Human Life is in THIS realm. Babies are born of all creatures in THIS realm, and it is THIS realm that is in the truest sense TRUE LIFE! as demonstrated by gnats, ants, to elephants and whales! Each animal exists in THIS reality not in the unseen realm.

If you cannot show this please don"t bother commenting your wasting valuable space, with your stupidity (the condition- not the insult)
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.