Logo:

32616 Evolution

Creation, how did they do it?

The evolutionists have so far never knowingly made a claim that they know how the heaven and earth had come into existence. They never will from science point of view, and they know it.  This does not mean that there could be in time not a possibility that would lead to the point that they actual could show the proof of how it all was created, but not now. It will disappoint agnosticism and Atheism, the point being that agnostic belief holds the humans down to the knowledge of the natural world only while atheism beliefs that no higher being was behind the start of the universe, while in agnostic view there could be some reason for believing is higher being.


They will be able in future with no doubt proof that a creation has taken place on a different way and that in theory the Earth could have been created out of the big bang theory. However, that on itself is no proof other than a suggestion based on probabilities, which could be true and could be not true. The problem that is arisen massive in front of them is the proof that from nothing came all. Science believes that from nothing can come nothing, rather logic. However logic does not comes into it when they have to out maneuver the creationists. Those creationist drum up the “God principle” as the creator of it all, slight problem here, they also have the same problem as the evolutionist, proof fails.


Funny thing doh, the Greeks had their upper god, Zeus long before the Jewish created their YHWY, their god. However the Jewish say their god is the real one, no proof given, and Zeus was just a mythological story. However their YHWY is also a mythological story as proof fails, mind you their YHWY would not have been known if not for the Roman Catholic popes who promoted the Jewish god to their god to have a back-up for Christ who was real but did not have a mythological back ground.


 However, even if hypothetical the great minds of the evolutionist, the supporters of the big bang theory could make sense out what had happened. Is that proof that the Almighty did not do this on the first day of his creation. If there was a big bang then there had to be something to make the big bang happening. Now we are back with the God Almighty. An Intelligent Creator only could have made such an occurrence possible and so we are back on day one. But does this mean that the Creator could not have created the Big Bang? If there is a God, and if he as God wanted to create something why not do it with a Bang, in this case a Big Bang.


Do the intellectual minds of the evolutionist realize that while calculating the stars distance the light years to travel dating the soil and fossils investigating the history of humankind they fail to see the obvious. The Creation itself. They know what they see but don't see it they hear it but do not listen they read it but do not comprehend what is written, they do not apprehend that all of the world and all what happens on it is an adornment with a show of Divine wisdom of the Almighty. Hence, it is possible that a being of the highest degrees in science to which they can arrive, can give them mingled enjoyment pleasure while their mind is obscured with devotion to the borders of the investigations of science. Is it possible that someone exist in the world that has his life devoted to the highest investigation of search and research of science, and still has doubts to the existence of the Almighty?


 


 


 


 He is filled with pride of his achievements in scientific research, but still sees others with arrogance while looking down on them and sees them as inferior to his own. However, can he enjoy life with delightful emotions, the enjoyments, and happiness, which flow from the knowledge of standing in the shining of the Almighty?


 


 


 


What any good human being feels amides the various problems of life, he can in fact look no further then the result of his search and research. However, he has to accept that this is all he will have, as dead for him will be dead. No eternal salvation, no elevation of the mind, no enjoyment to meet the Creator. Just nothing then dust or ashes.


 


 


 


Even although those scientist reject the Bible, as a message from the Almighty there is no reason for its annunciations should be rejected altogether. As researchers of the evolutions of earth, the constitution of the mind and the circumstances of our existence take into account every view and fact which may have bearing on his search and research. He will have to take into account the book, the Bible, and the actual existence fit the survival over thousands or maybe millions of years. Then they admit that such a book exists.


 


 


 


Many of the most illustrious beings who illustrated their existence on Earth given lead and example to others, having citrated and livid by the word of the Book and acting on it without any hesitation to the glory of the Almighty and successful promoting the welfare and happiness of mankind. A simple fact that even the most severe objector must admit, and to use in his research and search for the truth and the probability that the book is indeed the Revelation. 


 


 


 


Pupils on all kind of schools, but also students and even adults are often asking the same question,
the bible said that all races were descended from the same origin of humans. Every religion has his own version of how that happened. For example the Christians have the belief that this is possible and that it is all down to Noah sons. They pass by, conveniently, that traces are different by statue and color. The creationist insist that the first humans and with that they pointing again at Noah sons, had that kind of genes. That it is possible to create totally different humans in statue and skin color, from the sons of Noah.


 


 


 


That did not happen, which is blatant obvious, but the creationist use it anyway as otherwise they have no explanation. In short, it is a convenient story and they make the rest up as they go along making sure that they never have to supply any proof of this absolute miracle. They have the simplest of explanation, with variations depending from which corner of the discussion it will come, which is that all humans are inter-fertile and therefore that must be the proof that all humans are descended of one original human.


 


 


 


Nothing is further of the truth, that there are mountains of evidence that their thesis is not correct is put aside that there are possible defective genes. The simple fact is that the Creationist has always answers but never any proof; although they say it is proof as it is in the bible. Still being folks tales, as we have all over the world, this with exception that we take most stories for what they are, stories.
This put the Creationist on line with the thousand years ago storyteller, and a fantastic story it is however, without any form of proof.


 


 


 


Saying this Creationist come up with, we do not believe the Evolutionist; they do not believe proof given by science. They do this not because they do not believe it but by saying so casting doubt on the efforts by Evolutionist and science. At the same time, they do not give any proof that science is wrong or that the Creation can be proven. They just act as a confidence trickster by casting doubt. Their main point is, just believe us, and do not ask any questions. This is a natural reaction as they are not able to answer the question in any case, then referring again to the bible. It is something on which the Roman Catholic Church have relied on to make their money.


 


 


 


If they would stop ridiculing the Evolutionists and gave support then it would be possible in time to get the balance to one side or the other side, but basing your defense on a story book regardless how famous it is, is no defense. Evolutionists have proven by argument and science that the study of similarities in biological structures between various species, the similarity between them is clear evidence of a common biological background. The Creationist is more straight forwards they just talk and do not have to proof anything, as they are right. However, they say it is most important that the Evolutionist deliver solid proof of everything they say and do. Their rhetoric is that because the Evolutionist has to deliver the proof they the Creationist do not have to do so. They are acting as a door-to-door sales clerk with nothing to sell then stories. They are convinced that the world was created and that is it, they translating De nihilo nihil fit, as all things possible of from nothing comes nothing.


 


 


 


The argument of the Creationist is a simple one; all what the Evolutionist is saying or do is just imaginary, the sequence of Earths development does not exist. Fossils if they have to admit that they exist are put aside, as accidental embryo logical evidence does not exist.
They accept only one argument, the existence of God the Creator as infinitely self-containing who is and was always there. For this, they do not require any proof.
Their weakest point is the First Clause. God was always there that is the proof.
It does not answer the question but then again Creationist almost never does answer questions, they set new questions to confuse the matter. Like the evolution scientist believes in the way forwards, so should the creationist do all they can do to help them, as the end result will be clear, it was created.


Other pages:


This is the text-only version of this page. Click here to see this page with graphics.
Edit this page | Manage website
Make Your Own Website: 2-Minute-Website.com