Connect with us

Creation Corner

Intelligent Design v. Evolution: Ironic?

Published

on

Flowers like this do not happen by accident, but by design. Intelligent design.

Texas is at it again. The Evolutionists are fighting to remove anything remotely connected to Intelligent Design or Creationism from the classroom by objecting to the appointment of six Creationists to review the science textbooks. What isn’t properly reported is that these six people also happen to be scientists with supporting credentials in their fields. But they also happen to be Creationists. And that scares the daylights out of the Evolutionists who fear anyone knowing that credible scientists do believe in Creationism and Intelligent Design.

They would like you to think that Evolution is true and no one with a lick of common sense thinks otherwise. It is their objective to have it believed worldwide that that science contradicts what the Bible says about origins. While the prevailing scientific stronghold is that everything evolved through natural causes, it really is just “common” atheistic dogma masquerading as truth worldwide. This dogma has prevailed because the Evolutionists have managed to censor everything that contradicts their hypothesis from the classroom. And now that the State of Texas had the good sense to appoint these qualified reviewers, the Evolutionists are rightfully afraid – afraid that their house of cards is about to topple. They know what few believers know: that Evolution will lose its stronghold if the known errors and hoaxes are taken out of the textbooks.

Does Intelligent Design infer God?

Flowers like this do not happen by accident, but by design. Intelligent design.

Tall, 7″ flower with the raspberry eye that is typical of crosses involving Clarification. Photo: Michael Bouman, CC BY-SA 2.0 Generic License

The argument that has been accepted in the United States is that Intelligent Design cannot be taught in the classroom because it infers there is a god, and thus violates the separation of church and state. I will leave the argument about the invalidity of the “separation clause” for another time. If that argument were valid, then it would also be a violation of the separation clause to teach Evolution in schools because it infers that there is no god. That is the main tenet of the religion of atheism. Additionally, Intelligent Design isn’t something that is taught; it is something that is observed. And whether the atheists like it or not, it is hard to discredit something that can be so easily observed.

Whether or not the existence of God can be proven is an interesting theological/philosophical/scientific question that most likely will never be answered conclusively. People come to their own conclusions based on various contributing factors and they usually dig their heels in regardless of the data presented. The irony is that there is an abundance of data that supports Creationism that isn’t getting the exposure it should because many get chills up and down their spines at the mere mention of the word “science” or “God.” Worse, many have lost the Creation debate by default. They have believed the lie that science contradicts the Bible, so they stuff the conflict instead of facing it. This is truly unfortunate because science can be one of the greatest evangelical tools at our disposal. There are a myriad of scientific statements that were made hundreds, and in some cases, millennia before they were “discovered” by modern day science.

Evidence can support either theory

Dr. Charles Jackson once pointed out that if data supports two conflicting theories, that data doesn’t prove either theory. Dr. Jackson was absolutely correct and the Big Bang Theory is one of the best examples of Jackson’s statement. In the Big Bang Theory we are often told that there is much evidence to support it. That is true. There is. However, the evidence that supports the Big Bang also supports the Creation account, such as expansion, light, and water. Moses wrote about these in Genesis and there are 17 verses in the Old Testament that also speak about God expanding or stretching out the cosmos. If people of the Book didn’t buy into the lie that the evidence points to Evolution and its supporting theories, they would be taking full advantage of these discoveries.

The real debate: existence of God

And so the irony continues: the arguments we should be using to support Biblical Creationism are being ignored and worse: perverted by atheists and used to support Evolution. Make no mistake about it, the Evolution/Creation debate isn’t a debate about science at all; it is a debate about the very existence of God and whether or not the Bible can be trusted.

For example, Evolutionists tell students that at the beginning of time there was a small speck of matter that could fit on the head of a pin. At first it was believed this was a monopole but since NASA couldn’t find evidence of monopoles, plasma physicists now believe it was some form of pure water. Then somehow something happened and that speck of matter started expanding into the universe we see today – probably using light and a sound wave. We have proof of this expansion because we can now observe it and NASA has been able to go back in time and record the actual sound wave that expanded the universe, which can be seen on their website.

Creationists should be telling students that the Bible says that at the beginning there was water, which plasma physicists currently believe as well. Then God spoke and said “let there be light.” And God spoke again and expanded the universe by His Word (sound wave) and the light He created. Today NASA has recorded the sound wave that God spoke at the beginning of the universe and it is available to see on their website. We can also observe the expansion God spoke about nearly 4000 years ago when Moses wrote Genesis, and there is also supporting scientific theory regarding God’s use of light for the expansion.

While presenting the evidence in this manner doesn’t prove the existence of God, it sure lends credibility to His Word.

Website | + posts

RoseAnn Salanitri is a published author and Acquisition Editor for the New Jersey Family Policy Council. She is a community activist who has founded the Sussex County Tea Party in her home state and launched a recall movement against Senator Robert Menendez. RoseAnn is also the founder of Veritas Christian Academy, as well as co-founder of Creation Science Alive, and a national creation science speaker.

CATEGORY:Creation Corner
9 Comments

9 Comments

  1. Fergus Mason

    August 12, 2013 at 12:24 am

    “the evidence that supports the Big Bang also supports the Creation account, such as expansion, light, and water”

    Uh what? Can you please explain to me what water has to do with the Big Bang theory? I’m afraid my studies in astronomy seem to have missed that bit.

  2. Fergus Mason

    August 12, 2013 at 12:24 am

    “Today NASA has recorded the sound wave that God spoke at the beginning of the universe and it is available to see on their website.”

    No. Really, I can assure you, it isn’t.

  3. Rod Martin, Jr.

    August 12, 2013 at 9:59 am

    God is good. God is love. And that is why He created evolution.

    Why pit one aspect of God’s creation against all of creation? It shouldn’t be “evolution vs. creation,” but “evolution AND creation.”

    I applaud the non-believers keeping out the religionists from secular education. Personally, I wouldn’t want any religion in the world asking to have its members determine what my children are to learn.

    Religion has no place in secular education. However, students should be allowed to discuss all manner of religion in school.

    Evolution is true and real, just like everything else God created.

    Why do so many believers become skeptical about science? Why do they disbelieve evolution? It all goes back to INTERPRETATION of scripture and they are wrong in their interpretation!

    Please show some humility for a change. Get off your pedestal and quit acting like a know-it-all. We don’t!

    I know that a great deal of wisdom has been hidden in the Bible and I’ve found a little of it. But I only found it because I was humble and hungry for answers. I asked and God showed the way.

    And part of what was shown to me was a biblical timeline compatible with those of science. (see http://www.GenesisCode.Net for details)

    Am I right in my interpretation? I don’t know. But it seems more right than the theories put forth by so-called “creationists.”

    I believe God created the universe. I have seen creation first hand — miracles, dozens of them. But I don’t believe any of the “creationist’s” theories about history and biblical interpretation. Their “creation science” is illogical and not at all scientific.

    Besides, forcing your limited interpretation of scripture into the school system will only make war and that does not help anyone. Scripture has truth, but your version is a lie. Scripture has much, much more than you could ever dream of through your small view of the universe. The cosmos really is billions of years old and humanity, by a new Genesis timeline, has been around for 10.5 million years. It looks as though scientists have some catching up to do.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut

      August 12, 2013 at 10:43 am

      Rod:

      I’ll gladly argue the point with you, because your heart is (I think) in the right place.

      Many of the theories on the origin of the universe, the earth and life, not to mention the comprehensive theory of the Global Flood, no doubt strike you as fanciful, mystical, the stuff of science fiction, and something one can only dramatize using animated cartoons or Computer Generated Imagery. (Which, by the way, is merely the next refinement on the concept “animated cartoon.”) OK. I get that.

      Now I would urge you to examine critically the Grand Evolutionary Paradigm. The fact of the matter is: it’s full of holes.

      And then I would ask you to examine the various creation theories. As a panel of deep thinkers is, as we speak as it were, examining the three most prominent theories on the origin of the earth and the Global Flood.

      Need I remind you: if the Global Flood did not happen as the Bible says, what shall we make of Jesus Christ’s specific references to it, and to Noah, who led an eight-person party who became its only survivors?

      And if the facts on (and in) the ground back up the Flood account, shall we bow to the Agagites of Political Correctness and not discuss them before the very people who need to hear them?

      That would be folly. Especially when at least one of those theories has a very real implication, not only for origins, but also for prophecy.

  4. Fergus Mason

    August 16, 2013 at 10:15 am

    “plasma physicists now believe it was some form of pure water.”

    WTF?? No they don’t! Where is this rubbish coming from? Water contains oxygen. How…could there be oxygen at the point of the Big Bang? This is utter idiocy!

    • Terry A. Hurlbut

      August 16, 2013 at 10:27 am

      Don’t assume the original author is talking about the classical Big Bang theory, with its de novo formation of elements from subatomic particles. Your statement (which I have edited for family friendship) is a prize example of the logical fallacy known as “Your theory does not work under my theory; therefore your theory must be wrong.”

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trending