Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Oct
31
Delicate, Precise Designs
Matthew 6:28
"And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:"
When a flower lives in harmony with and is dependent upon, say, an insect for fertilization, this is known as symbiosis. Creation Moments programs have given many examples of this, and each one...
RSS

Evolution vs. Creation – It’s Not About Science

Richard Dawkins seems like an intelligent chap. He's a bestselling author and has appeared in a number of films. He's also got a charming British accent and appears to knows a lot about evolution. Let us quickly point out that we know someone else with a charming British accent, an author who has appeared in films, a man who knows a lot about evolution and who is a very intelligent fellow - Ian Taylor, host of the Creation Moments radio broadcast.

While there are many similarities, they couldn't be farther apart in their views on evolution.

So why is one of these intelligent men a strident evolutionist and the other an outspoken creationist? Why are they polar opposites? We suggest it has nothing to do with science but has everything to do with their spiritual understanding

Dawkins is an atheist while Taylor is a Christian. For Richard Dawkins, evolution is the only game in town because God does not exist in his worldview. He rejects the Bible and the account of creation given in its opening pages. Ian Taylor, on the other hand, believes in God and His Son, Jesus Christ. He also believes that the Bible's account of creation is true and is supported by good science.

So while there are thinkers on both sides of the issue - like Dawkins and Taylor - it is clear to us that the creation-evolution debate is not about science at all. It is fundamentally a dispute over the existence of God. Because if God exists, it is reasonable to believe He created the universe. But as Dawkins himself stated in The Blind Watchmaker: "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

While Creation Moments does not agree with Dawkins on most matters, we do feel that this God-denying evolutionist is thinking clearly when he says the debate is really about spiritual matters.

Comments

I have no respect for Dawkins. The man is a hypocrite steeped in modern culture. Accuracy doesn't matter to him. He just wants the applause, attention, fame, and fortune that his morally bankrupt stance gives him.

For example, in one interview Dawkins claims Christianity was invented by St. Paul. Even the most casual reader of the New Testament knows this claim is absurd, because Peter, James, and John all knew that Jesus was the Messiah before Paul did. So even if you were going to pretend the prophecies of Christ's birth and mission in the Old Testament don't exist, you'd have a hard time justifying that Paul "invented" Christianity.

Besides throwing out such absurdities, Dawkins relies on unsubstantiated claims that evolution is a fact to degrade and demean anyone who maintains God is our Creator.

At the risk of sounding derogatory, when Dawkins claims that humans and fish came from a common ancestor, he should speak for himself, since he's the one who's acting and sounding fishy.

Evolution is a dead theory.Richard Dawkins has lost all gdrnuos There are 100 million fossils which show that animals which lived hundreds of million years ago are exactly the same as their current counterparts. This is clear evidence against evolution. Also, natural selection does not have the capacity to change the genetic code on the DNA. The rabbits may run faster, and survive but they do not turn out to be other more advanced and advantageous creature because their DNA code is not effected. They die in the end along with their faster running legs. Lamarckism is already an outdated theory.Therefore, creation is a fact, evolution could not have happened. Besides, no graduation can explain the irreducible complexity in for instance body organs. Think of the blood, if all blood cells had presumably evolved without the hemoglobin molecule inside, what use? If the stomach did not have the protective tissue to prevent destroying itself due to hydrocholoric acid, what use? If all organs were there but you could not breathe with your lungs and the oxygen was not transferred to each one of your cells, what use?Please think once again before you decide. Evolution really did not happen, cannot have happened there is no evidence, no mechanism. But all findings and science indeed show that there is an anthropic principle behind the universe with incredibly fine tuned quarks in the atom, nuclear power in the nucleus of the atom, 3 billion lettered vast library with immense information in the DNA.Who encoded the DNA?Who made the quarks in the atom?Who set the oxygen in the atmosphere just in the right ratio so that we are not burnt to death?Who mixed water soil and minerals to bring out thousands of vegetation and fruit with wonderful tastes and scents right from the dark earth?God is the Creator of every detail that we see in this universe, and we will see the intelligence and wisdom behind each and every created thing if we look with an open eye (heart).