Why are evolution and creationism mutually exclusive?

Hey, im new to the forum.

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

Being from the UK, more christians muslims and Jewish people here take their respective holy book's view on a creation as a metaphor - I myself don't fall into any religious category (I'm definately not atheist, i think there is the potential for a higher power in some form).

For example, the big big. A popular theory. According to this theory, a giant explosion caused all matter to be hurled appart which then swirled up into planets and then life came togerther on a planet (or planets) and evolved etc etc until we are here today.
Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

twinbanj writes: Hey, im new to the forum.

Welcome. :)

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

Literal creation as in the bible and evolution can't work side by side, because the evidence only supports evolution. What can be done is say that god used evolution to diversify life.

For example, the big big.

I'm assuming you mean the Big Bang?

A popular theory. According to this theory, a giant explosion caused all matter to be hurled appart which then swirled up into planets and then life came togerther on a planet (or planets) and evolved etc etc until we are here today.

Not exactly. The Big Bang wasn't an explosion, it was a rapid expansion of space-time. This is a common misconception. And the matter existing after the big bang was mostly Hydrogen and a little bit Helium. All other matter was formed in the first stars, and this matter then eventually became planets and the life we see today.

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

It's certainly possible, but there's no evidence for it.

---

I hunt for the truth

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

There are many scientists that believe in theistic evolutionism. They are not mutually exclusive terms. However one cannot prove the supernatural i.e. God through science because by its very definition science is used to describe and provide evidence for natural not supernatural phenomena.

I myself do not believe in the existence of the supernatural at this time due to the lack of evidence. Though if sufficient credible evidence is provided, I am not objected to switching my position.

A popular theory.

Mere popularity has little to do with it. Is it accepted by mainstream science due the preponderance of evidence supporting it. Yes.

According to this theory, a giant explosion caused all matter to be hurled appart which then swirled up into planets and then life came togerther on a planet (or planets) and evolved etc etc until we are here today.

Huntard explained this well enough I feel. It seems you need to do some more research on this subject.

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

Then you would have to be relinquished to say that the energy of heat which burns your toast in your toaster or the light energy of photons streaming from the sun is God as well. Most people's definition of God is the image of a sentient, thinking being. Energy in itself does not fit this category.

Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Welcome to the fray twinbanj

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

They can work together, but it depends on the type of creationism. There are many christians that feel that evolution is a means of creation (see theistic evolution)

Note that there is also muslim creationism (Harun Yahah is a particularly odiuos example), jewish creationism, hindu creationism, etc. What they all include are different degrees of fundamentalist belief, up to the point of rejecting all scientific knowledge because if contradicts a part of their fundamental belief/s.

Generally, when people have a conflict, it is not just evolution, but all of science that is at odds with their belief/s.

Being from the UK, more christians muslims and Jewish people here take their respective holy book's view on a creation as a metaphor - I myself don't fall into any religious category (I'm definately not atheist, i think there is the potential for a higher power in some form).

And many people in the US fall into that category. We just have a number of "nut" sects (like Fred Phelps) as well as people in between.

Most people in the US have little more than a High School education and have not really been exposed to the concepts of evolution, and thus remain ignorant about it (or confused by poor partial education).

Fundamentalists have also been successful in castrating science education in many US elementary, middle and high schools, because we have this system of schools being run by local populations.

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

Perhaps it was god becoming the universe ... and the final words were "surprise me ... " (says the resident Deist)

Enjoy

... as you are new here, some posting tips: type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: quotes are easy or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes: quote: quotes are easy also check out (help) links on any formating questions when in the reply window. For other formating tips see Posting Tips If you use the message reply buttons (there's one at the bottom right of each message): ... your message is linked to the one you are replying to (adds clarity). You can also look at the way a post is formated with the "peek" button next to it.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi there twinbanj and welcome,

quote:

---

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

---

It depends on the particular creationist belief in question. Many modern Christians (and Jews, Muslims and others) agree with evolution, taking the opinion that God "kick-started" the process and then left it to run it's course, or some similar idea. The problem comes when the claim is made that, say, "The universe was created 6000 years ago in just 6 days.". That is very clearly in direct contradiction to much of known geology and cosmology. The two ideas cannot be held simultaneously.

Milder forms of creationist thought are usually compatible with science, but the people who hold such beliefs are more likely to identify as "theistic evolutionists" if they identify as anything specific (probably the vast majority of UK Christians would qualify as theistic evolutionists, but very few will have heard the term since the issue is not so fractious here). In practise, "creationism" usually involves some level of disagreement with the theory of evolution, as well as a host of other disciplines, depending on the particular flavour of creationism.

quote:

---

Being from the UK, more christians muslims and Jewish people here take their respective holy book's view on a creation as a metaphor

---

Whilst this is broadly true of European theists, I think you might be surprised at how many UK theists, especially Muslims hold creationist ideas. They are just not as vocal as their US counterparts.

quote:

---

I myself don't fall into any religious category (I'm definately not atheist, i think there is the potential for a higher power in some form).

---

I don't mean to try and fence you in to a specific label, but doesn't that make you an agnostic?

quote:

---

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

---

I find this kind of reasoning slightly disingenuous. Most religions, definitely including Christianity, have always been quite specific about what is meant by "god". The term refers to a distinct sentient being of great power. It does not apply to a burst of energy or any such thing. The idea of God as an "all-pervading energy field" or some such vagueness, is very modern and quite removed from the very simple and clear definition of god that has stood for centuries.

I see this as a rather desperate attempt to define God into existence by means of pointing to something that can be demonstrated to exist and saying "Well, that's God.", despite the fact that it redefines God's nature to the point where he (it?) no longer resembles the original concept at all. In my opinion, this is most likely the result of those theists who find themselves dwindling in belief attempting to rationalise a way of clinging on to a last vestige of religious mentality rather admit that they do not believe in gods.

I hope that you find this useful and that you enjoy your time at EvC.

Mutate and Survive

---

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

Hi twinbanj,

Welcome to EvC.

I am one of those literalist who believe in creation by God.

I do not believe in nor do I believe the Bible teaches the universe was created 6k years ago in six days.

I believe it was created in 1 light period as declared in Genesis 1:1.

twinbanj writes: Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

If the big bang happened the energy had to be a God.

Because it was all that ever was, is or ever will be.

God makes that claim in the Bible.

Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

I AM everything that exist.

Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

In God we have our being (existence}

Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

If you check you will find the Greek preposition ἐν translated by is the second meaning with the first being, in.
If you check you will find the Greek verb συνίστημι translated consist the primary meanins is 1) to place together, to set in the same place,to bring or band together.

So this passage says all things are banded together in God.

So my definition of God is, everything that ever was, is or will be.

God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi twinbanj,

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

I guess it comes down to what one believes is created. If by created you mean the universe, then science and religion, I believe, can co-exist. However, if by creation one means every single species, planet, solar system, etc, requires a hands on creator, then they cannot since evolution, and many other scientific theories, show evidence to the contrary.

A popular theory.

Popular amongst who...? Accepted by physicist seems better, don't you think?

According to this theory, a giant explosion caused all matter to be hurled appart which then swirled up into planets and then life came togerther on a planet (or planets) and evolved etc etc until we are here today.

No explosion, nothing caused anything, matter required for planets appears much, much later.

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

It is not an explosion that takes a certain amount of energy. An explosion would need to happen at a point in space and in time, since there is no surrounding spacetime no such explosion can occur.

Compressed space expanded, where, right where you are right now, no energy required.

Is that God...?

Does that sound like any God you have ever heard of...?

Is God mearly any point in the history of our universe that needs a bit more explaining...?

Personally, the God of the Gaps never seemed like a good argument. I respect more so fundamentalist who are forced to stick to scriptures and those scriptures can be challenged. People who take the God of the Gaps approach are sneaky because they just keep moving the goal post to where ever it suits them.

Edited by onifre, : spelling...

---

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks

"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

OP

quote:

---

Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

---

Huntard

quote:

---

Literal creation as in the bible and evolution can't work side by side, because the evidence only supports evolution. What can be done is say that god used evolution to diversify life.

---

They seem to be SO exclusive there in the Netherlands that the economic crisis has been blamed on Creationism (see an email to me below)

Petition for Evolutionary Biology in the Netherlands‏ From: morphmet-request@morphometrics.org on behalf of morphmet (morphmet_moderator@morphometrics.org) Sent: Wed 1/21/09 1:16 PM To: morphmet (morphmet@morphometrics.org) As a special case, I thought this appropriate for the attention of the list membership. I leave it to individual members to deal with it as they see fit. -the morphmet mod (dslice) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Petition for Evolutionary Biology in the Netherlands Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 01:33:36 -0800 (PST) From: andrea cardini To: morphmet@morphometrics.org Dear friends and colleagues, generally I tend not to circulate emails concerning petitions but this one seems worth a look for everybody directly or indirectly working in evolutionary biology. And probably most of the subscribers of this list are indeed interested in this field. I leave it to the list moderator to decide whether it is appropriate to send this message to all subscribers. All the best Andrea >Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:31:25 +0000 (GMT) >From: Isabella Capellini >Reply-To: isab972@yahoo.co.uk >Subject: Fw: Other: Petition for Evolutionary Biology in the Netherlands >To: Biologia Evoluzionistica , > Vertebrati >X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090119-0, 19/01/2009), Inbound message >X-Antivirus-Status: Clean > >--- On Tue, 20/1/09, evoldir@evol.biology.mcmaster.ca wrote: > >> Dear Evoldir members, >> >> I would like yo bring to your attention the >> following situation. Because of reorganization in >> some Dutch Universities and money cutting in >> research, several colleagues from Leiden >> University will be fired by the end of the year >> if we do not react. They might be fired anyway, >> but I think that we should at least do our best for this >> not to happen. >> >> The following evolutionary biologists will be >> fired or will not be able to continue their research: >> Jacques van Alphen (Marie Curie professor of Excellence), >> Tom Van Dooren, >> Frietson Galis (president of the European Society >> for Evolutionary Developmental Biology), >> Sacha Gultyaev, >> Patsy Haccou (Executive vice-president of the >> European Society of Evolutionary Biology), >> Ken Kraaijeveld, >> Femmie Kraaijeveld, >> Hans Metz (retired, but still very active) >> Rino Zandee. >> >> People in Leiden have just set up a petition, which you >> will find here : >> <http://evodevo.eu/petition/>http://evodevo.eu/petition/ >> >> I strongly encourage you to sign this petition, >> which will be sent to every person in the >> Netherland government who might be able to do something. >> >> I think it is quite incredible that Darwins'year >> will see an entire and excellent department of >> evolutionary ecology close down and leave people >> without a job (even those with a "permanent" >> job!) because of budget restrictions. As written >> in the petition, although evolutionary biology >> will be heavily cut, molecular biology will be >> spared. This is part of an alarming national >> trend. Unfortunately, with growing creationism in >> Europe, and budget cuttings elsewhere (including, >> alas! France) I am afraid the Dutch trend will soon become >> international. >> >> Please react ASAP ! >> >> Isabelle Olivieri >> President of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology >> 2007-2009 >> >> >> >> >> Université Montpellier 2, cc 65 >> Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution (ISEM, UMR 5554) >> Place Eugène Bataillon >> 34095 Montpellier cedex 05 >> Tel. 33 (0)4 67 14 37 50 >> Fax 33 (0)4 67 14 36 22 >> Portable 33 (0)6 86 43 19 45 >> >> Isabelle Olivieri >

Can you explain this situtation. I have a hard time understanding this!! It seems to me that ID has caused evos to blame creos for what was really a molecular vs organismal biological academic dispute? It doesnt even look like we can say what you said for god.

Brad

Hey Brad.

I haven't heard of this, I'll look into it. But let me say this first, here in The Netherlands (and Europe in general) There isn't really a very strong creo movement. Certainly not strong enough to make the University of Leiden, one of our leading universities, fire anyone. It could be due to the crisis, but it is certainly not due to ANY pressure they received from creo's/ID'ers. How this ties in with what I said about god, I don't really see. I think the mail is not blaming ID as is, more that they are alarmed that people won't get a well enough education in biology to fend of creationism. Why I don't know, since our high schools already teach a lot about biology anyway. I even got taught some genetics in my high school, and biology wasn't even one of my graduate classes. In all, I think the person who sent the e-mail is overreacting, once the crisis is over, and money is available again, and a healthy faculty can be run, I'm sure they'll hire new biology professors.

---

I hunt for the truth

twinbanj writes: Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

Good question. Did you mean Jesus was the Big Bang? Isn't possible that Darwin was the energy in the theorised Big Bang? Or a better question -

A photon is omnipresent and so is God. Who would win in an all out race across the universe?

$10 says the photon wins(the other participant may not show up).

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Hiya, Brad, long time no pee--er--see. Great to see you are still around. I miss Gladyshev, Croizat, etc. :-)

twinbanj writes: Being from the UK, more christians muslims and Jewish people here take their respective holy book's view on a creation as a metaphor

That's probably true as well for a majority of Americans who consider themselves Christians, and for folks with this perspective, I don't think there's anything "mutually exclusive" between their various beliefs and the theory of evolution. Speaking for myself at least, I'd also say that atheists need not find anything "mutually exclusive" between our skepticism/atheism and metaphorical interpretations of holy texts. There can be honest value in understanding many of these metaphors, regardless of one's commitment to religious faith, or lack thereof.

But looking again at the title of the thread: "Why are evolution and creationism mutually exclusive?", I think it's every bit as interesting and valid to ask: Why are creationism and metaphorical interpretations of the bible mutually exclusive? The point is, creationism is what stands out on its own as a system of belief that is mutually exclusive with other kinds of religious belief, as well as all forms of non-belief. Creationism is mutually exclusive with the deeper understanding that one can get from reading the bible as metaphor or as any other sort of non-literal non-historical description, just as it is mutually exclusive with science.

Regarding a completely separate aspect of the OP:

Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

And if so, what would be the importance or relevance of identifying this energy with the name "god"? It would strike me as really bizarre to assert that we must supplicate ourselves, declare our devotion and pray regularly to this "energy" because it is actually some form of sentient being like ourselves (because we were "created in its image") that takes a direct interest in our personal wishes and responds to us in particular (or at least to those of us whose side it is supposed to be on).

The whole concept of a "supreme being", with a capacity for "personal relationships" with every one of us, with a strangely flexible sense of judgment, and with "omni-everything", is just so much linguistic shenanigans -- such a "being" can only "exist" because the structure of human language makes it possible for us to utter sentences that say such a thing exists. "God" seems definable only in terms of logical contradictions, physical impossibilities, and oxymorons. I just don't see the point of it.

Edited by Otto Tellick, : fixed grammar typo in first paragraph

Edited by Otto Tellick, : slight elaboration in last paragraph

Edited by Otto Tellick, : minor grammar repair

---

autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.

I have responded to you here

www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=14&t=1808&m=39#39 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=14&t=1808&m=39#39">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=14&t=1808&m=39#39

Brad

quote:

---

Hey, im new to the forum.
Being a biology student, but having many friends who are church going christians, ive always wonderd why Evolution and creationism are mutualy exclusive? Why can't they both, work side by side?

Being from the UK, more christians muslims and Jewish people here take their respective holy book's view on a creation as a metaphor - I myself don't fall into any religious category (I'm definately not atheist, i think there is the potential for a higher power in some form).

For example, the big big. A popular theory. According to this theory, a giant explosion caused all matter to be hurled appart which then swirled up into planets and then life came togerther on a planet (or planets) and evolved etc etc until we are here today.
Isn't it possible for the energy in the theorized big bang, to be a god?

---

One example of a fundamental difference if that creationists believe the genetic code program that defines the behaviours and variability of life was written by the Creator. Evolutionists don't. They believe that everything was an accident of chance.
No it is not possible for the energy in the Big Bang to be a god. Besides being pantheistic, such a god would be mindless since if you go 14x9 light years in one direction and 14x9 light years in the opposite direction at the speed of light in only 14x9 years you will find that such a "god" cannot communicate with himself!
The big bangers believe in things that don't exist, like dark matter, dark energy, etc.

---

Creation 4140 B.C. Flood 2484 B.C
Exodus 1632 B.C. Online Chronology book: The Scroll of Biblical Chronology