Are evolution and creationism always mutually exclusive?

Asked by: Elusivetruth
  • Biblically speaking, yes.

    The Bible claims that after God had created everything (to include man) it was all declared "very good". Millions of years of death, destruction, and brutal natural selection to slowly and painstakingly arrive at mankind, and all declared very good? Nonsense. No God would declare such a process very good. At any rate it also claims that man was created in God's image. If mankind wasn't created at all, however, and was the product of millions of years of evolution, what indeed was created in God's image? Single celled organisms without the ability to reason? Nonsense.

  • Yes by far.

    Yes, until we don't have a reasonable explanation about the way Noah was able to fill up a ship with a couple of each one of the 6.5 million species found on land and the other 1.5 million of insects and other stuff. For now, the evolution theory sounds quite more logic.

  • According to the dictionary.

    Below is quoted the definition of "creationism" from Collins Dictionary. Other dictionaries give more or less the same results. The first definition is the only one in the 1913 edition of Webster's, giving concrete evidence that a second definition has evolved. Its creation was a defensive reaction of conservative Biblical literalists against Darwin's theory as it gained traction among the scientific community.
    Quote /
    1. The belief that God brings individual human souls into existence at conception or birth Compare traducianism
    2. The doctrine that ascribes the origins of all things to God's acts of creation rather than to evolution
    / Unquote

  • Evolution and Creationism cannot work together

    Creationism is the concept a superior being designing and creating our universe and all of its inhabitants. It suggests that the design of humans and other animals are based upon the whims of a being that is itself unexplained.

    The structure, appearance and habits of animals that have developed through evolution do not show signs of a divine creator - they do not need a creator.

  • True or false

    They are ALWAYS exclusive because one is true and the other is false. They contradict each other on a high level. Some have tries to fuse them together only resulting in a mess. Science has evolved (no pun intended) and religion is now trying to keep up. There was a time when people believed the world was merely 5000 years old. Since science has shown this to be false, religious people have had to either change their view or try to mesh the two together; or they had to give up their views that taught them that the world was created by this god altogether.

  • A supreme being could have designed the principles that guide and cause evolution.

    There is no reason to believe that Evolution by necessity eliminates the idea of a supreme being creating the universe(and Earth). On the contrary, it is us humans and the conflict between science and religion that has caused this divide between the two concepts.

    Many (atheists and agnostics) who believe in evolution argue that evidence suggests no need for a supreme being to have designed the universe and created life. Does this however preclude the possibility of a supreme being designing evolution and the various principles by which our known universe operates?

  • Evolution doesn't explain the creation.

    We are all here, so how did we get here? Biology has never provided a replicable answer to the mystery that is 'Life'. If biologists did manage to create life, all it would prove is that new life requires creation. Until we observe the spontaneous rendering of living organisms, we are nowhere near settling this ancient debate. Evolution seems undeniably evident in what humans have observed. It can be observed and predicted. It is a reflection of life's adaptive response to its experiences, programmed into our very DNA. The more you explore the great mysteries of existence, the better you come to recognize the Creator's fingerprints on everything. The nature of the Creator; now there's a topic worth debating!

  • It doesn't disprove God.

    R=Regardless of what you think you know, the theory of evolution doesn't disprove God it just explains the creation of the world, the story of creation is just a story, just as most of the old testaments are. They were stories passed down generation from generation explaining God, many people take these stories to be literate and that's what creates ignorance. Pope Benedict XVI invited all Catholics to open up to the theory of revolution, not many people know this but he was heavily involved in the science community and published a lot of books both on theology and science but mostly science.

  • Not always. Especially among those who are not Evangelical Christians.

    We often confuse Creationism with Christianity here. I understand why, because Christians often teach Creationism with a Christian bent disguised as Intelligent Design in public schools. But without that specific context, in the question asked, the word "always" implies all contexts everywhere. The Catholic Church, which most certainly believes in Creationism, has in recent years said that evolution as defined by science is a part of God's process.

    Essentially, the Catholic Church accepts that the Creation account is not necessarily literal. Therefore, there is at least one denomination whose official policy is that Creationism and Evolution are not mutually exclusive.

    "[Theistic evolutionism] is the official position of the Catholic church. In 1996, Pope John Paul II reiterated the Catholic TE position, according to which God created, evolution occurred, human beings may indeed have been descended from more primitive forms, and the Hand of God was required for the production of the human soul"[3]
    —Eugenie Scott, Director of the US National Center for Science Education

    Muslims also believe that God created the world. This too, is a form of Creationism. But many Muslims puzzle at Evangelical Christianity's rejection of science and specifically all of the scientific evidence for evolution.

    In fact, there are many Christians who puzzle at Evangelical insistence upon a literal reading of Genesis. Those same Christians (myself included) believe that the Creation story as laid down in Genesis is based upon tales passed down orally for generations. Who knows truly what the original form of the tales took, and it would certainly be contrary to our understanding of science to believe the stories to be literal accounts of events no humans witnessed, according to the Bible itself.

    Webster provides the key word here. Look for it in the definition below:
    "Creationism: a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis"

    The key word there is usually. As in, not always. Webster, alongside the examples above, should indicate to anyone cognizant of the details here, that there are at least a sizable minority of religious folks who do not find creationism and evolution to be incompatible.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.