I would tell your teacher that you are a Christians and your beliefs differ from those of the THEORY of evolution.  That is what my daughter did and she had a really good teacher who wanted her to learn to think critically.  So she had her write a paper on the pros and cons of Creation vs The Theory of Evolution.  She got an A on the paper and her and her teacher agreed to disagree.  But at least she was given the chance to voice it.  That is what a real education is studying all views.  God bless you!!! :):)  

No I believe in God so I believe what the Bible tells us about Creation. What people need to remember is that there is no proof of evolution.  That is why they call it the Theory of Evolution.  Those who express doubts about the theory are often labeled “unscientific” or “backwards” by some in the pro-evolution camp. At times, the popular perception of evolution seems to be that it has been proven beyond all doubt and there are no scientific obstacles left for it. In reality, there are quite a few scientific flaws in the theory that provide reasons to be skeptical. Granted, none of these questions necessarily disproves evolution, but they do show how the theory is less than settled.

There are many ways in which evolution can be criticized scientifically, but most of those criticisms are highly specific. There are countless examples of genetic characteristics, ecological systems, evolutionary trees, enzyme properties, and other facts that are very difficult to square with the theory of evolution. Detailed descriptions of these can be highly technical and are beyond the scope of a summary such as this. Generally speaking, it’s accurate to say that science has yet to provide consistent answers to how evolution operates at the molecular, genetic, or even ecological levels in a consistent and supportable way.

Other flaws in the theory of evolution can be separated into three basic areas. First, there is the contradiction between “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism.” Second is the problem in projecting “microevolution” into “macroevolution.” Third is the unfortunate way in which the theory has been unscientifically abused for philosophical reasons.

First, there is a contradiction between “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism.” There are two basic possibilities for how naturalistic evolution can occur. This flaw in the theory of evolution occurs because these two ideas are mutually exclusive, and yet there is evidence suggestive of both of them. Gradualism implies that organisms experience a relatively steady rate of mutations, resulting in a somewhat “smooth” transition from early forms to later ones. This was the original assumption derived from the theory of evolution. Punctuated equilibrium, on the other hand, implies that mutation rates are heavily influenced by a unique set of coincidences. Therefore, organisms will experience long periods of stability, “punctuated” by short bursts of rapid evolution. 

Gradualism seems to be contradicted by the fossil record. Organisms appear suddenly and demonstrate little change over long periods. The fossil record has been greatly expanded over the last century, and the more fossils that are found, the more gradualism seems to be disproved. It was this overt refutation of gradualism in the fossil record that prompted the theory of punctuated equilibrium.

The fossil record might seem to support punctuated equilibrium, but again, there are major problems. The basic assumption of punctuated equilibrium is that a very few creatures, all from the same large population, will experience several beneficial mutations, all at the same time. Right away, one can see how improbable this is. Then, those few members separate completely from the main population so that their new genes can be passed to the next generation (another unlikely event). Given the wide diversity of life, this kind of amazing coincidence would have to happen all the time.

While the improbable nature of punctuated equilibrium speaks for itself, scientific studies have also cast doubt on the benefits it would confer. Separating a few members from a larger population results in inbreeding. This results in decreased reproductive ability, harmful genetic abnormalities, and so forth. In essence, the events that should be promoting “survival of the fittest” cripple the organisms instead.

Despite what some claim, punctuated equilibrium is not a more refined version of gradualism. They have very different assumptions about the mechanisms behind evolution and the way those mechanisms behave. Neither is a satisfactory explanation for how life came to be as diverse and balanced as it is, and yet there are no other reasonable options for how evolution can operate.

The second flaw is the problem of extending “microevolution” into “macroevolution.” Laboratory studies have shown that organisms are capable of adaptation. That is, living things have an ability to shift their biology to better fit their environment. However, those same studies have demonstrated that such changes can only go so far, and those organisms have not fundamentally changed. These small changes are called “microevolution.” Microevolution can result in some drastic changes, such as those found in dogs. All dogs are the same species, and one can see how much variation there is. But even the most aggressive breeding has never turned a dog into something else. There is a limit to how large, small, smart, or hairy a dog can become through breeding. Experimentally, there is no reason to suggest that a species can change beyond its own genetic limits and become something else.

Long-term evolution, though, requires “macroevolution,” which refers to those large-scale changes. Microevolution turns a wolf into a Chihuahua or a Great Dane. Macroevolution would turn a fish into a cow or a duck. There is a massive difference in scale and effect between microevolution and macroevolution. This flaw in the theory of evolution is that experimentation does not support the ability of many small changes to transform one species into another.

Finally, there is the flawed application of evolution. This is not a flaw in the scientific theory, of course, but an error in the way the theory has been abused for non-scientific purposes. There are still many, many questions about biological life that evolution has not answered. And yet, there are those who try to transform the theory from a biological explanation into a metaphysical one. Every time a person claims that the theory of evolution disproves religion, spirituality, or God, they are taking the theory outside of its own limits. Fairly or not, the theory of evolution has been hijacked as an anti-religious mascot by those with an axe to grind against God.

Overall, there are many solidly scientific reasons to question the theory of evolution. These flaws may be resolved by science, or they may eventually kill the theory all together. We don’t know which one will happen, but we do know this: the theory of evolution is far from settled, and rational people can question it scientifically.  God bless you!!! :):)

A careful examination of the Hebrew word for “day” and the context in which it appears in Genesis will lead to the conclusion that “day” means a literal, 24-hour period of time. The Hebrew word yom translated into the English “day” can mean more than one thing. It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my grandfather’s day…”). It is used to refer to a 24-hour period in Genesis 7:11. It is used to refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk in Genesis 1:16. And it is used to refer to an unspecified period of time in Genesis 2:4. So, what does it mean in Genesis 1:5-2:2 when it’s used in conjunction with ordinal numbers (i.e., the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day, the fifth day, the sixth day, and the seventh day)? Are these 24-hour periods or something else? Could yom as it is used here mean an unspecified period of time?

We can determine how yom should be interpreted in Genesis 1:5-2:2 simply by examining the context in which we find the word and then comparing its context with how we see its usage elsewhere in Scripture. By doing this we let Scripture interpret itself. The Hebrew word yom is used 2301 times in the Old Testament. Outside of Genesis 1, yom plus a number (used 410 times) always indicates an ordinary day, i.e., a 24-hour period. The words “evening” and “morning” together (38 times) always indicate an ordinary day. Yom + “evening” or “morning” (23 times) always indicates an ordinary day. Yom + “night” (52 times) always indicates an ordinary day.

The context in which the word yom is used in Genesis 1:5-2:2, describing each day as “the evening and the morning,” makes it quite clear that the author of Genesis meant 24-hour periods. The references to “evening” and “morning” make no sense unless they refer to a literal 24-hour day. This was the standard interpretation of the days of Genesis 1:5-2:2 until the 1800s when a paradigm shift occurred within the scientific community, and the earth’s sedimentary strata layers were reinterpreted. Whereas previously the rock layers were interpreted as evidence of Noah’s flood, the flood was thrown out by the scientific community and the rock layers were reinterpreted as evidence for an excessively old earth. Some well-meaning but terribly mistaken Christians then sought to reconcile this new anti-flood, anti-biblical interpretation with the Genesis account by reinterpreting yom to mean vast, unspecified periods of time.

The truth is that many of the old-earth interpretations are known to rely upon faulty assumptions. But we must not let the stubborn close-mindedness of some scientists influence how we read the Bible. According to Exodus 20:9-11, God used six literal days to create the world in order to serve as a model for man’s workweek: work six days, rest one. Certainly God could have created everything in an instant if He wanted to. But apparently He had us in mind even before He made us (on the sixth day) and wanted to provide an example for us to follow.  God bless you!!! :):)

The answer to this question depends greatly on what is meant by “conclusive” proof. Can we reach out and touch God or see Him in the same way that we touch and see people? No. But there are countless ways one can know assuredly that God does exist, that He is real, and He is who He says He is. We will look briefly at three ways of proving His existence using both science and the Bible.

1. The Law of Cause and Effect. This law of science states that every cause has its effect and every effect has its cause. This law is the basis of all science. As such, this law bears a relationship to the origin of the heavens and the earth. In fact, scientists agree that the universe has not existed forever, that it had a beginning at some point in time.

The theory of relativity which is almost universally accepted among scientists has certain implications for this Law of Cause and Effect. One is that the universe, defined as time, space, matter, and physical energy had a beginning, that it is not eternal. And it is through Einstein’s equations that scientists can trace the development of the universe back to its very origin, back to what is called the “singularity event” when it actually came into being. Science has proven that the universe really did have a beginning. This obviously means that if the universe had a starting point in history, then it obviously began to exist, and it must have a cause for its existence. 

Therefore, if the universe needs a cause for its coming into being, then that cause must be beyond the universe—which is time, space, matter, and physical energy. That cause must be something similar to what Christians call “God.” Even Richard Dawkins, probably the most prominent proponent for atheism of our modern times, admitted in a “Time” magazine article that “there could be something incredibly grand and incomprehensible and beyond our present understanding.” Yes, and that is God!

We can best summarize this cosmological evidence with the following statements:

1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause for its existence.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause for its existence.

4. The attributes of the cause of the universe (being timeless, existing outside of space, and so on) are the attributes of God.

5. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be God (Genesis 1:1).

2. The Law of Teleology is the study of design or purpose in natural phenomena. This law of science essentially means that when an object reflects a purpose, goal or design, it must have had a designer. Simply put, things do not design themselves. This holds true for the things in the universe which proves that it had to have a Designer. 

For example, the earth in orbiting the sun departs from a straight line by only one-ninth of an inch every 18 miles—a very straight line in human terms. If the orbit changed by one-tenth of an inch every 18 miles, it would be vastly larger and we would all freeze to death. If it changed by one-eighth of an inch, we would be incinerated. The sun is burning at approximately 20 million degrees Celsius at its interior. If the earth was moved 10% further away, we would soon freeze to death. If it was moved 10% closer, we would be reduced to ashes. Are we to believe that such precision “just happened”? Think about it: the sun is poised at 93 million miles from earth, which happens to be just right. Did this happen by chance or by design? It’s no small wonder that the Psalmist alludes to God as the grand designer when he declared: “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other” (Psalm 19:1, 6).

3. The Laws of Probability and Fulfilled Prophecy. There are 1,093 prophecies in the Bible that refer to Jesus and His Church, and each one of those prophecies was fulfilled! The Old Testament contains 48 prophecies that pertain to the crucifixion of Jesus. When applying the laws of probability to calculate the likelihood of several events taking place at or near the same time, all probabilities have to be multiplied together. For example, if the probability of a single even occurring randomly is 1 chance in 5 and the probability of a separate event occurring is 1 chance in 10, then the probability that both events will occur together or in sequence is 1 in 5 multiplied by 1 in 10 which yields 1 in 50. 

In considering the fact that several different prophets who lived in separate communities over a span of a 1,000 years made predictions of Christ 500 years before His birth, the odds against these prophecies coming true are simply beyond our wildest comprehension. For example, the chances of one man (Jesus) fulfilling just 8 of the prophecies attributed to Him are one in 10 to the 17th power (that’s a number with 17 zeroes). 

Consider this: imagine covering the entire state of Texas with silver dollars to a level of two feet deep. The number of silver dollars needed to cover the whole state would be 10 to the 17th power. Drop one of those silver dollars marked with an “X” from an airplane and thoroughly stir all the silver dollars all over the state. Then blindfold a man and tell him he can travel wherever he wishes in the state of Texas. Then somewhere along the way, stop and reach down into the two feet of silver dollars and pull up the one silver dollar that has been marked. What are the chances of his doing this? The same chance the prophets had of eight of their prophecies being fulfilled in any one man in the future.

The Bible with all its fulfilled prophecies proves the existence of God. Through the law of probability and the mathematical odds of prophecy being fulfilled we can know assuredly that there was a divine Designer and Author of the Bible. The same One who brought into existence the universe. “You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?’ If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously” (Deuteronomy 18:21-22).

Finally, God, the Creator of the universe and author of our salvation tells us: “Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please” (Isaiah 46:9-10).  God bless you!!! :):)

Many people don’t realize that paleontology (the study of past geological ages based primarily on the study of fossils) is a relatively new science. In fact, the concept of “dinosaurs” only surfaced in its present form less than 180 years ago. Prior to that, anyone who found a large fossilized bone assumed it came from an elephant, dragon or giant. It wasn’t until 1841 that English scientist Richard Owens suggested that the group of “newly discovered” animals be called “dinosaurs” (meaning, “terrible lizards”). Therefore, we shouldn’t expect to see dinosaurs in the Bible, but we should expect to see descriptions of “dragons” and other large creatures. In fact, we do!

A search for the word “dragon” in the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible produces 34 separate matches across 10 different books written between approximately 2000 BC and 90 AD. The word “dragon” ( Hebrew: tannin) is used throughout the Old Testament, and most directly translates as “sea or land monsters.” Interestingly, Genesis 1:21 describes God’s creation of sea dragons (tannin) on the 5th day. Today’s Bible translations use the following terms instead: “great whales” (KJV), “the great creatures of the sea” (NIV), “the great sea monsters” (NASB), and “great sea creatures” (NLT, NKJV). However, the original Hebrew is more descriptive of the sea-going dinosaurs we now see in numerous museums throughout the world. Even more dramatic is the Book of Job, where the author describes the great land creature, Behemoth (Job 40), and the great water creature, Leviathan (Job 41). Although the latest Bible translations use the words elephant, hippo or crocodile instead of Behemoth and Leviathan, the original Hebrew and the context of the descriptions do not allow for these interpretations.

Descriptions of dinosaur-like creatures are nearly universal throughout the world’s ancient cultures. Where did this global concept originate? How did societies throughout the world describe, record, draw, etch, sew and carve such creatures in such uniformity, if they did not witness these creatures during their lifetimes? Of course, these accounts are by no means limited to the Bible. Dragon accounts from China, Europe, the Middle East, and Latin America share similar accounts of dinosaur-like beasts. Records of Marco Polo in China show that the royal house kept dragons for ceremonies, and records of the Greek historian Herodotus and the Jewish historian Josephus describe flying reptiles in ancient Egypt and Arabia. In many cultures it was a great honor to kill these creatures. There are numerous records of warriors killing great beasts in order to establish credibility in a village. Gilgamesh, Fafnir, Beowulf and other famous legends, including the mythology of Egypt, Greece and Rome, provide specific descriptions of dragons and other dinosaur-like creatures.

Dinosaurs are depicted on numerous objects of ancient art throughout the world. Dinosaur-like creatures are featured on Babylonian landmarks, Roman mosaics, Asian pottery and royal robes, Egyptian burial shrouds and government seals, Peruvian burial stones and tapestries, Mayan sculptures, Aboriginal and Native American petroglyphs (carved rock drawings), and many other pieces of ceremonial art throughout ancient cultures. If dinosaurs supposedly went extinct at least 50 million years ago, how did ancient man of the last few thousand years precisely and uniformly depict them? The Bible is clear — sea creatures were created by God on Day 5 and land creatures were created by God on Day 6. These creatures included dinosaurs, which co-existed with man until they died off for various reasons, including most dramatically, the worldwide flood of Noah.  God bless you!!! :):)

Given the fact that, according to the Bible, Adam was created on the sixth day of our planet’s existence, we can determine a biblically-based, approximate age for the earth by looking at the chronological details of the human race. This assumes that the Genesis account is accurate, that the six days of creation were literal 24-hour periods, and that there were no ambiguous gaps in the chronology of Genesis.

The genealogies listed in Genesis chapters 5 and 11 provide the age at which Adam and his descendants each fathered the next generation in a successive ancestral line from Adam to Abraham. By determining where Abraham fits into history chronologically and adding up the ages provided in Genesis 5 and 11, it becomes apparent that the Bible teaches the earth to be about 6000 years old, give or take a few hundred years.

What about the billions of years accepted by most scientists today and taught in the vast majority of our academic institutions? This age is primarily derived from two dating techniques: radiometric dating and the geologic timescale. Scientists who advocate the younger age of about 6000 years insist that radiometric dating is flawed in that it is founded upon a series of faulty assumptions, while the geologic timescale is flawed in that it employs circular reasoning. Moreover, they point to the debunking of old-earth myths, like the popular misconception that it takes long periods of time for stratification, fossilization and the formation of diamonds, coal, oil, stalactites, stalagmites, etc, to occur. Finally, young-earth advocates present positive evidence for a young age for the earth in place of the old-earth evidences which they debunk. Young-earth scientists acknowledge that they are in the minority today but insist that their ranks will swell over time as more and more scientists reexamine the evidence and take a closer look at the currently accepted old-earth paradigm.

Ultimately, the age of the earth cannot be proven. Whether 6000 years or billions of years, both viewpoints (and everything in between) rest on faith and assumptions. Those who hold to billions of years trust that methods such as radiometric dating are reliable and that nothing has occurred in history that may have disrupted the normal decay of radio-isotopes. Those who hold to 6000 years trust that the Bible is true and that other factors explain the “apparent” age of the earth, such as the global flood, or God’s creating the universe in a state that “appears” to give it a very long age. As an example, God created Adam and Eve as fully-grown adult human beings. If a doctor had examined Adam and Eve on the day of their creation, the doctor would have estimated their age at 20 years (or whatever age they appeared to be) when, in fact, Adam and Eve were less than one day old. Whatever the case, there is always good reason to trust the Word of God over the words of atheistic scientists with an evolutionary agenda.

God bless you!!! :):)

I think it is nonsense.  Your friend has no idea what he is talking about.  If he studied science he would know that people from all over the world have stories of the great flood in their history.  For almost two hundred years, those who study biblical archaeology have been working in the Middle East in their quest to recover the past. There have been thousands of archaeological finds that have advanced the study greatly, but some are more significant than others. Some of these finds have been: the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Tel Dan Inscription, Caiaphas Ossuary, the Crucified Man, the Ketef Hinnom Amulets, House of God Ostracon, and the Pilate Inscription. Let’s briefly look at each one of these to see why they are significant.

Dead Sea Scrolls: One of the most important finds of in the field of biblical archaeology is the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 in the Qumran area on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea. There are approximately 900 documents and fragments that comprise the find. The scrolls predate 100 A.D. and include a complete copy of the Book of Isaiah. The significance of the find is the age of the documents and the astonishing lack of variants to documents that have been most trustworthy such as the Masoretic Text, Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus. The vast majority of the variants (about 99%) are punctuation or spelling errors. Incredibly, none of the variants changed the meaning of the text, nor did they contain any significant theological differences. This gives us the assurance that the text we have today in our Bible is the same as the early church had two thousand years ago. No other secular manuscripts can make the same claim.

Tel Dan Inscription: This stone tablet contains an inscription that is the first reference to the Davidic dynasty outside of the Bible. It was erected by Hazael King of Aram which is present day Syria. The inscription makes reference to a military victory and corresponds to the biblical account in 2 Chronicles 22. This inscription dates to the 9th century B.C., thus giving us accurate dating to the Davidic dynasty as well verifying its existence. This is the first extra-biblical reference to the House of David that has been discovered to date.

Caiaphas Ossuary: An ossuary is a stone or pottery box in which the remains of the deceased person is buried (ancient casket). The Caiaphas ossuary bears the inscription “Yeosef bar Qafa” and is dated to the second temple period. Yeosef (Joseph) was the son of Caiaphas. This verifies that there was a high priest at the time of Jesus and his name was Caiaphas. Caiaphas was the priest that presided over the false trial of Jesus (Matthew 26:57-67).

Crucified Man: This is the remains of a full skeleton of a man crucified in the first century. The foot bone contained a bent crucifixion nail. There have been those that argued that the crucifixion of Christ was a hoax because that was not a form of capital punishment in Christ’s time. These remains verify that crucifixion was being done and that the crucifixion of Jesus was done exactly as outlined in the biblical narrative.

Ketef Hinnom Amulets: In 1979, two silver scrolls that were worn as amulets were found in a tomb at Ketef Hinnom, overlooking the Hinnom Valley, where they had been placed around the 7th century B.C. The delicate process of unrolling the scrolls while developing a method that would prevent them from disintegrating took three years. Brief as they are, they rank as the oldest surviving texts from the Hebrew Bible. Upon unrolling the amulets, biblical archeologists found two inscriptions of significance. One is a temple priest blessing from the Book of Numbers: “The Lord bless you and protect you. The Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you. The Lord lift up his countenance to you and give you peace” (Numbers 6:24-26). The other is the tetragrammatonxt “YHWH,” the name of the Lord, from which we get the English “Jehovah.” The amulets predate the Dead Sea Scrolls by 500 years and are the oldest known example of the Lord’s name in writing.

House of God Ostracon: Ostraca—writings on pottery—are common finds in archeological digs. The House of God Ostracon was found in Arad, a Canaanite city in the Negev. Over 100 pieces of ostraca were found and have been dated to the early part of the 6th Century BC. Of significance are the references to the temple in Jerusalem and to names of people that are recorded in Scripture. This not only helps to date the temple, but it verifies the existence of people listed in the biblical text.

Pilate Inscription: This stone tablet was found in Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast. The tablet was found in the theater of Caesarea and bears an inscription mentioning the name of Pontius Pilate the procurator of Judea, and the Tiberium, which was an edifice built in honor of the Emperor Tiberius by Pilate. There has been much written to discredit the biblical narrative in regard to the existence of Pilate; this tablet clearly says that it was from “Pontius Pilate, Prefect of Judea” and verifies that he was a person that lived during the time of Jesus, exactly as written in the biblical narrative.

These finds are interesting from an educational point of view and do validate the historical accuracy of the Bible. But for the believer, finds like these should add nothing to our understanding of the importance or credibility of the Bible. The Bible is the written word of God, inerrant and infallible and was God-breathed to human writers and is useful for edifying and teaching believers in the ways of God: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). The Bible needs no corroborative evidence to verify its truth, but it is interesting to note that no scientific or archeological find has ever disproven a single word of Scripture, and many, many findings have attested to its historical and scientific accuracy.  If anything science has proved the Bible to be true.  In my own live I have heard the voice of God tell me that He was holding me in His arms before I went through lung cancer surgery.  When I awoke the doctor was amazed.  You see I have small cell lung cancer that should have spread to my brain, bones, lymph nodes, and it didn’t move.  They were dumbfounded.  One of them told me that someone up there liked me and I smiled and said His name is Jesus and He is my Savior.  I was up and walking 3 hours after surgery and went home in 3 days.  They called me a walking miracle.  I know who took care of me and it was the Lord Jesus Christ.  He has taken care and loved me my whole life and He will do the same for you if you allow Him to.  God created us in His own image so we can know Him personally and have a joy-filled life. He did not make us as robots to automatically love and obey Him, but gave us a will and a freedom of choice. Since the beginning of time, we have chosen to disobey God and go our own willful way. We still make this choice today. This results in separation from God and ends in misery. The Bible says that disobeying God results in being separated from Him.  Our attempts can never unite us with God. Through the ages, people have tried many ways to bridge this gap and reach God – without success.  I believe that each one of us has a little puzzle piece in each of our bodies that only the love of God can fill.  We try to fill it with all kinds of things like sex, boyfriends, children, drugs, alcohol, education, clubbing, partying and everything else that you can think of.  The thing is nothing fits right in there.  Only God can quench the longing of your soul.

³ Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” ⁴ “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second into their mother’s womb to be born!” ⁵ Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. ⁶ Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. John 3:3-6

If you want a new life in Christ Jesus, ask Him into your heart today.  Simply pray this:  Lord Jesus Christ, I believe that you took the pain of the cross to give me new life. I ask you to come into my heart and to give me your peace and joy. I confess that I am a sinner that I have gone my own way and have done wrong. Please forgive me for my sins. I receive you now as my Lord and Savior. Please fill me with your Holy Spirit. Help me to follow you and to serve you all my life. Thank you, in Jesus name I pray, Amen.  If you prayed that prayer you are a new creature in Christ Jesus!  You are Born Again!

Next, as a new Christian it is so important that you be fed. The best way that you can get a strong bond with the Lord is to read the Bible.  Jesus is the Word made flesh, so it makes sense that if you want to get to know Him and have a closer walk with Him you need to get into the Bible.  Read it daily i have it e-mailed to me daily so that i can get into the habit of reading the Bible every day.  Go to:  http://bible.cbn.com/#!/nlt/John/1, They will e-mail you two scriptures one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament.  Once you get in the habit of reading the Bible every single day, you will want to read more and more.  I also downloaded the app to my cell from Bible.is, I love listening to the Word when I am out and about or walking.  It is such a blessing.  When you are truly into the Word you will notice a huge difference in your walk with the Lord.  You will become stronger as a Christian and you will want less and less of the “world” in your life.  Jesus can change your life if you allow Him to, the choice is yours.  God bless you!!! :):)

Get back to the Bible.  It is the same yesterday today and forever.  Evolution is only a “theory”  that is why they call it the “theory of evolution”.  It simply amazes me how quick people are to believe something that nobody has even proven.  When we have the real thing with the Lord and His Word.  Christians and non-Christians alike often question whether the theory of evolution is accurate. Those who express doubts about the theory are often labeled “unscientific” or “backwards” by some in the pro-evolution camp. At times, the popular perception of evolution seems to be that it has been proven beyond all doubt and there are no scientific obstacles left for it. In reality, there are quite a few scientific flaws in the theory that provide reasons to be skeptical. Granted, none of these questions necessarily disproves evolution, but they do show how the theory is less than settled.

There are many ways in which evolution can be criticized scientifically, but most of those criticisms are highly specific. There are countless examples of genetic characteristics, ecological systems, evolutionary trees, enzyme properties, and other facts that are very difficult to square with the theory of evolution. Detailed descriptions of these can be highly technical and are beyond the scope of a summary such as this. Generally speaking, it’s accurate to say that science has yet to provide consistent answers to how evolution operates at the molecular, genetic, or even ecological levels in a consistent and supportable way.

Other flaws in the theory of evolution can be separated into three basic areas. First, there is the contradiction between “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism.” Second is the problem in projecting “microevolution” into “macroevolution.” Third is the unfortunate way in which the theory has been unscientifically abused for philosophical reasons.

First, there is a contradiction between “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism.” There are two basic possibilities for how naturalistic evolution can occur. This flaw in the theory of evolution occurs because these two ideas are mutually exclusive, and yet there is evidence suggestive of both of them. Gradualism implies that organisms experience a relatively steady rate of mutations, resulting in a somewhat “smooth” transition from early forms to later ones. This was the original assumption derived from the theory of evolution. Punctuated equilibrium, on the other hand, implies that mutation rates are heavily influenced by a unique set of coincidences. Therefore, organisms will experience long periods of stability, “punctuated” by short bursts of rapid evolution. 

Gradualism seems to be contradicted by the fossil record. Organisms appear suddenly and demonstrate little change over long periods. The fossil record has been greatly expanded over the last century, and the more fossils that are found, the more gradualism seems to be disproved. It was this overt refutation of gradualism in the fossil record that prompted the theory of punctuated equilibrium.

The fossil record might seem to support punctuated equilibrium, but again, there are major problems. The basic assumption of punctuated equilibrium is that a very few creatures, all from the same large population, will experience several beneficial mutations, all at the same time. Right away, one can see how improbable this is. Then, those few members separate completely from the main population so that their new genes can be passed to the next generation (another unlikely event). Given the wide diversity of life, this kind of amazing coincidence would have to happen all the time.

While the improbable nature of punctuated equilibrium speaks for itself, scientific studies have also cast doubt on the benefits it would confer. Separating a few members from a larger population results in inbreeding. This results in decreased reproductive ability, harmful genetic abnormalities, and so forth. In essence, the events that should be promoting “survival of the fittest” cripple the organisms instead.

Despite what some claim, punctuated equilibrium is not a more refined version of gradualism. They have very different assumptions about the mechanisms behind evolution and the way those mechanisms behave. Neither is a satisfactory explanation for how life came to be as diverse and balanced as it is, and yet there are no other reasonable options for how evolution can operate.

The second flaw is the problem of extending “microevolution” into “macroevolution.” Laboratory studies have shown that organisms are capable of adaptation. That is, living things have an ability to shift their biology to better fit their environment. However, those same studies have demonstrated that such changes can only go so far, and those organisms have not fundamentally changed. These small changes are called “microevolution.” Microevolution can result in some drastic changes, such as those found in dogs. All dogs are the same species, and one can see how much variation there is. But even the most aggressive breeding has never turned a dog into something else. There is a limit to how large, small, smart, or hairy a dog can become through breeding. Experimentally, there is no reason to suggest that a species can change beyond its own genetic limits and become something else.

Long-term evolution, though, requires “macroevolution,” which refers to those large-scale changes. Microevolution turns a wolf into a Chihuahua or a Great Dane. Macroevolution would turn a fish into a cow or a duck. There is a massive difference in scale and effect between microevolution and macroevolution. This flaw in the theory of evolution is that experimentation does not support the ability of many small changes to transform one species into another.

Finally, there is the flawed application of evolution. This is not a flaw in the scientific theory, of course, but an error in the way the theory has been abused for non-scientific purposes. There are still many, many questions about biological life that evolution has not answered. And yet, there are those who try to transform the theory from a biological explanation into a metaphysical one. Every time a person claims that the theory of evolution disproves religion, spirituality, or God, they are taking the theory outside of its own limits. Fairly or not, the theory of evolution has been hijacked as an anti-religious mascot by those with an axe to grind against God.

Overall, there are many solidly scientific reasons to question the theory of evolution. These flaws may be resolved by science, or they may eventually kill the theory all together. We don’t know which one will happen, but we do know this: the theory of evolution is far from settled, and rational people can question it scientifically.

God bless you!!! :):)

They call it the Theory of Evolution for a reason there is no proof.  I am a Christian and I believe that the Bible is God’s Word and the truth.  In the  Bible, the creation vs. evolution debate even exists. Romans 1:25 declares, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.”

A key factor in the debate is that the majority of scientists who believe in evolution are also atheists or agnostics. There are some who hold to some form of theistic evolution and others who take a deistic view of God (God exists but is not involved in the world, and everything proceeds along a natural course). There are some who genuinely and honestly look at the data and arrive at the conclusion that evolution better fits with the data. However, these represent an insignificant percentage of the scientists who advocate evolution. The vast majority of evolutionary scientists hold that life evolved entirely without any intervention of a higher being. Evolution is by definition a naturalistic science.

For atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence. Although belief in some form of evolution predated Charles Darwin, he was the first to develop a plausible model for the process of evolution—natural selection. Darwin once identified himself as a Christian but as a result of some tragedies that took place in his life, he later renounced the Christian faith and the existence of God. Evolution was invented by an atheist. Darwin’s goal was not to disprove God’s existence, but that is one of the end results of the theory of evolution. Evolution is an enabler of atheism. Evolutionary scientists likely would not admit that their goal is to give an alternate explanation of the origins of life, and thereby to give a foundation for atheism, but according to the Bible, that is exactly why the theory of evolution exists.

The Bible tells us, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1). The Bible also proclaims that people are without excuse for not believing in a Creator God. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” (Romans 1:20). According to the Bible, anyone who denies the existence of God is a fool. Why, then, are so many people, including some Christians, willing to accept that evolutionary scientists are unbiased interpreters of scientific data? According to the Bible, they are all fools! Foolishness does not imply a lack of intelligence. Most evolutionary scientists are brilliant intellectually. Foolishness indicates an inability to properly apply knowledge. Proverbs 1:7 tells us, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.”

Evolutionary scientists mock creation and/or intelligent design as unscientific and not worthy of scientific examination. In order for something to be considered a “science,” they argue, it must be able to be observed and tested; it must be “naturalistic.” Creation is by definition “supernatural.” God and the supernatural cannot be observed or tested (so the argument goes); therefore, creation and/or intelligent design cannot be considered science. Of course, neither can evolution be observed or tested, but that does not seem to be an issue with evolutionists. As a result, all data is filtered through the preconceived, presupposed, and pre-accepted theory of evolution, without alternate explanations being considered.

However, the origin of the universe and the origin of life cannot be tested or observed. Both creation and evolution are faith-based systems in regards to origins. Neither can be tested because we cannot go back billions (or thousands) of years to observe the origin of the universe or of life in the universe. Evolutionary scientists reject creation on grounds that would logically force them to also reject evolution as a scientific explanation of origins. Evolution, at least in regard to origins, does not fit the definition of “science” any more than creation does. Evolution is supposedly the only explanation of origins that can be tested; therefore, it is the only theory of origins that can be considered “scientific.” This is foolishness! Scientists who advocate evolution are rejecting a plausible theory of origins without even honestly examining its merits, because it does not fit their illogically narrow definition of “science.”

If creation is true, then there is a Creator to whom we are accountable. Evolution is an enabler for atheism. Evolution gives atheists a basis for explaining how life exists apart from a Creator God. Evolution denies the need for a God to be involved in the universe. Evolution is the “creation theory” for the religion of atheism. According to the Bible, the choice is clear. We can believe the Word of our omnipotent and omniscient God, or we can believe the illogically biased, “scientific” explanations of fools.

God bless you sister!!! :):)

There are NO PROVEN facts that is why they call it the THEORY of evolution.  Call me crazy but I believe that every word of the Bible is true.  In the Bible, the creation vs. evolution debate even exists. Romans 1:25 declares, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. 

A key factor in the debate is that the majority of scientists who believe in evolution are also atheists or agnostics. There are some who hold to some form of theistic evolution and others who take a deistic view of God (God exists but is not involved in the world, and everything proceeds along a natural course). There are some who genuinely and honestly look at the data and arrive at the conclusion that evolution better fits with the data. However, these represent an insignificant percentage of the scientists who advocate evolution. The vast majority of evolutionary scientists hold that life evolved entirely without any intervention of a higher being. Evolution is by definition a naturalistic science.

For atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence. Although belief in some form of evolution predated Charles Darwin, he was the first to develop a plausible model for the process of evolution—natural selection. Darwin once identified himself as a Christian but as a result of some tragedies that took place in his life, he later renounced the Christian faith and the existence of God. Evolution was invented by an atheist. Darwin’s goal was not to disprove God’s existence, but that is one of the end results of the theory of evolution. Evolution is an enabler of atheism. Evolutionary scientists likely would not admit that their goal is to give an alternate explanation of the origins of life, and thereby to give a foundation for atheism, but according to the Bible, that is exactly why the theory of evolution exists.

The Bible tells us, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1). The Bible also proclaims that people are without excuse for not believing in a Creator God. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” (Romans 1:20). According to the Bible, anyone who denies the existence of God is a fool. Why, then, are so many people, including some Christians, willing to accept that evolutionary scientists are unbiased interpreters of scientific data? According to the Bible, they are all fools! Foolishness does not imply a lack of intelligence. Most evolutionary scientists are brilliant intellectually. Foolishness indicates an inability to properly apply knowledge. Proverbs 1:7 tells us, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.”

Evolutionary scientists mock creation and/or intelligent design as unscientific and not worthy of scientific examination. In order for something to be considered a “science,” they argue, it must be able to be observed and tested; it must be “naturalistic.” Creation is by definition “supernatural.” God and the supernatural cannot be observed or tested (so the argument goes); therefore, creation and/or intelligent design cannot be considered science. Of course, neither can evolution be observed or tested, but that does not seem to be an issue with evolutionists. As a result, all data is filtered through the preconceived, presupposed, and pre-accepted theory of evolution, without alternate explanations being considered.

However, the origin of the universe and the origin of life cannot be tested or observed. Both creation and evolution are faith-based systems in regards to origins. Neither can be tested because we cannot go back billions (or thousands) of years to observe the origin of the universe or of life in the universe. Evolutionary scientists reject creation on grounds that would logically force them to also reject evolution as a scientific explanation of origins. Evolution, at least in regard to origins, does not fit the definition of “science” any more than creation does. Evolution is supposedly the only explanation of origins that can be tested; therefore, it is the only theory of origins that can be considered “scientific.” This is foolishness! Scientists who advocate evolution are rejecting a plausible theory of origins without even honestly examining its merits, because it does not fit their illogically narrow definition of “science.”

If creation is true, then there is a Creator to whom we are accountable. Evolution is an enabler for atheism. Evolution gives atheists a basis for explaining how life exists apart from a Creator God. Evolution denies the need for a God to be involved in the universe. Evolution is the “creation theory” for the religion of atheism. According to the Bible, the choice is clear. We can believe the Word of our omnipotent and omniscient God, or we can believe the illogically biased, “scientific” explanations of fools.  God bless you!!! :):)

I think every word in the Bible is the truth.  The Bible tells us that God created Adam and Eve. When were Adam and Eve created? If Old Testament history and the ages in Genesis chapter 5 are traced, Adam and Eve were likely created in approximately 4000 B.C.  Were Adam and Eve cavemen? Genesis chapter 3 records Adam and Eve having a fully intelligent conversation with God. Adam and Eve were surely “primitive” in their understanding of many concepts, but they were not “ape-like” or intellectually deficient by any means. Adam and Eve were the most perfect human beings in the history of the world.

How long were Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden before they sinned? The Bible does not explicitly tell us how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden before they sinned. It seems as if they were in the Garden for a short amount of time, possibly as little as a day or two. Adam and Eve did not conceive any children until after the Fall (Genesis 4:1-2), so it is unlikely they were in the Garden for very long.

Did Adam and Eve have bellybuttons / navels? A bellybutton is formed by the umbilical cord that connects a baby in the womb to its mother. Adam and Eve were created directly by God, and did not go through the normal birthing process. So, Adam and Eve would probably not have had bellybuttons.  God bless you!!! :):)