Re: Why is it mistaken to think that God could have created living things by evolution ?



Congratulations!

You have been able to pack more ignorance and bad assumptions into one post
than I have ever seen.

Here's a tip: If you're going to try to refute something, at least try to
have a basic understanding of that subject.

If you base your arguments on the bullshit fed to you by religious people,
you'll just look like a silly twit arguing the bullshit fed to you by
religious people.

Evolution is true, beautiful, and interesting. Spend some time with the REAL
thing.


"harunyahya" <harunyahya2011@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1126563845.744192.54770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Why is it mistaken to think that God could have created living things
> by evolution ?
>
> While it has been scientifically proven that the magnificent design
> apparent in all living and non-living things in the universe could not
> have come about by the blind forces of nature and chance, some people
> nevertheless claim that there is indeed a Creator, but that He created
> life through an evolutionary process.
>
> It is evident that God, the Almighty, created the whole universe and
> life. It is His decision whether creation should be instantaneous or by
> stages. We can only understand how it happened by means of the
> information God has given us (in other words, from the verses of the
> Qur'an), and the scientific evidence apparent in nature.
>
> When we look at these two sources, we see no case for "creation by
> evolution."
> God has revealed many verses in the Qur'an which deal with the creation
> of man, life, and the universe. None of these verses contains any
> information about creation through evolution. In other words, not one
> verse indicates that living things came about by evolving from one
> another. On the contrary, it is revealed in those verses that life and
> the universe were brought into being by God's command "Be!"
>
> Scientific discoveries have also revealed that "creation by means of
> evolution" is out of the question. The fossil record shows that
> different species emerged not by evolving from one another, but
> independently, suddenly, and with all their individual structures. In
> other words, creation is different for every species.
>
> If there were such a thing as "creation by means of evolution," we
> should be able to see the proof of it today. God has created everything
> in a particular order, within a framework of causes and laws. For
> instance, it is most certainly God Who makes ships float on water.
> However, when we look for the cause of this, we see that it is the
> creation of the supporting power of water. It is nothing other than the
> might of God that allows birds to fly. In fact, when we examine how it
> happens, we find the laws of aerodynamics. For this reason, if life had
> been created by a process of various stages, there would obviously be
> systems that provide the laws and advances in genetics to explain it.
> Furthermore, other physical, chemical, and biological laws would be
> known. There would be proof from laboratory research to show that one
> living species could turn into another. Yet again, it should be
> possible thanks to that research to develop enzymes, hormones, and
> similar molecules that a species lacks in order to bring advantages to
> it. In addition, it would be possible to create new organelles and
> structures that the living thing in question had never possessed
> before.
>
> Laboratory studies would be able to show examples of creatures that had
> been mutated and actually benefited from the process. We would
> furthermore see that these mutations could be passed on to subsequent
> generations and actually become a part of the species. Then again,
> there would be millions of fossils of intermediate forms that had lived
> in the past, and there would be living things in our time that had not
> yet completed their transition processes. In short, there should be
> countless examples of such a process.
>
> However, there is not a single piece of evidence that one species
> transmutates into another. As we have already seen, fossil data show
> that living species emerged all at once, with no ancestors behind them.
> In the same way as this fact destroys the theory of evolution, which
> claims that life came about by chance, it also shows the scientific
> invalidity of the claim that God brought life into being and then it
> evolved by stages.
>
> God created living things in a supernatural way, by the single command
> "Be!" Modern science confirms this fact, and proves that living things
> emerged suddenly on the Earth.
> Those who support the idea that "It is possible that God created living
> things by means of evolution" are actually trying to build
> "reconciliation" between creation and Darwinism. They are making a
> fundamental mistake, however. They are missing the basic logic of
> Darwinism and the kind of philosophy it serves. Darwinism does not
> consist of the concept of the transmutation of species. It is actually
> an attempt to explain the origin of living species by material factors
> alone.
> To put it another way, it tries to gain acceptance for the claim that
> living things are the product of nature, by giving it a scientific
> veneer. There can be no "common ground" between that naturalistic
> philosophy and a belief in God. It is a grave error in an effort to
> seek to find such common ground, to cede ground to Darwinism, and to
> agree with the false claim that it is a scientific theory. As 150 years
> of history have shown, Darwinism is the backbone of materialist
> philosophy and atheism, and no search for common ground will ever
> change the fact.
>


.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hawking: God is an unnecessary hypothesis
    ... inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, ... Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something ... it was simply not necessary to believe that God had intervened in the Big ... multiple species afterwards. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: For Ray Martinez (and whomever else it may concern)
    ... Species_ to address Paley's argument from design. ... Ayala say that Darwin wrote specifically to refute Paley's _Natural ... insist on special creation for all species. ... idea that God could build into nature the power to produce new species ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A Few Simple Questions
    ... or the animal species evolved. ... evolution, Ray Martinez is saying the Bible is false. ... Special creation of all life is an interpretation ... believe that God spent tens of millions of years smiting various species ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Why is it mistaken to think that God could have created living things by evolution ?
    ... > Why is it mistaken to think that God could have created living things ... > apparent in all living and non-living things in the universe could not ... It is His decision whether creation should be instantaneous or by ... creation is different for every species. ...
    (soc.culture.usa)
  • Re: "Ark engineering" OR "Biodiversity... huh?"
    ... not species. ... If the kinds were created by God as they were, sans evolution, and God ... God wasn't telling Noah He wanted a reduced creation. ...
    (talk.origins)