Genesis" Story Of The Bible Vs Charles Darwin's Creation Scientists Look To Prove That Creation Is Right And Science Is Wrong.

and creation are religious and scientific in the same way. There is no controversy between science and religion, but between the science of a religion and the science of other. The Creator-honouring science is made upon the religion of Biblical creation. It depends upon the term (the Bible) of the One who asserts His presence in the past. He sends men by His Holy Spirit to carve His sayings to make next generation find out and understand they require knowing regarding the creation of God from an adequate source (Newton).

It is declared by Lynch that the truth of God is exchanged them for a lie, and worshiped things created by them instead of the Creator of all – who is commended forever. A significant element in the context of evolution versus creation argument is that evolution is believed by the most number of scientists and they are also agnostics and atheists. Some of the scientists are there in the literature who embraces a shape of theistic evolution. However, a deistic scrutiny of God is taken by others, having a belief in His existence but believe that He has no role in this world, and the entire things advance along an endless, natural route. A number of scientists honestly and genuinely inspects the data and draw a conclusion from it that evolution correlates the data well. Nevertheless, the foremost arguments in this debate say that evolution is, one way or another, not compatible with faith in God and the Bible both. It is significant to understand that few of the scientists who believe in evolution also hold to a belief in the Bible and the God without seeing anyone opposing (Robbins). On the other hand, a larger number of scientists of evolution also believe that life progressed completely without any involvement of God. In practice, advanced evolution theories are approximately fully a naturalistic science. Some spiritual drivers exist behind few of such positions. For the truthfulness of atheism, there is a need to have alternate justification – rather than one Creator – for the way life and this universe came into being. While Charles Darwin predated belief in any shape of evolution, he was the very first individual to create a reasonable, natural source for evolution process: natural selection. Once Darwin recognized him as Christian, however, as an outcome of few tragedies happened in his life, the existence of God and the faith of Christianity were rejected by him later (Stern and DiFonzo). The objective of Darwin was not to contradict the existence of God, nor is the theory seen by him as doing so. Unluckily, that is how the beliefs of Darwin have been advanced by such individuals seemed to facilitate atheism. A reason why the modern evolutionary theory is resisted by a number of believers today is because it usually comes wrapped with an unnatural, atheistic perspective. The scientists of evolution possibly would not acknowledge that their objective is to provide an alternation justification of beginning of life and thus to provide a base for atheism. However, with respect to Bible, that is a reason the evolution theory is approached in how everyone sees today.

It is written in the Bible that fools believe in their heart that there is no God. It is also proclaimed by the Bible that individuals do not have any excuse why they do not have belief in the existence of the Creator God. Ever since this world has come to existence the invisible qualities of God – His divine nature and His eternal power – have been seen apparently, being implicated from what has been created, so that people are without excuse (Bobo). With respect to the Bible, ones who do not believe in God’s existence are foods. Here, foolishness does not mean a deficiency of intellect. By the need, evolutionary scientists are very intelligent. But, foolishness exhibits a lack of ability to apply knowledge properly. Proverbs 1:7 says that God’s fear is the origin of knowledge, but fools execrate discipline and wisdom.

Atheists who support the theory of evolution tend to mock intelligent and/or creation design as irrational and do not worth to examine scientifically. They believe that for something to regard as science needs to be naturalistic. By the definition, Creation is away from natural world’s rules. Since the existence of God cannot be tested, therefore the dispute goes, intelligent and/or creation design cannot be regarded science (Clark).

Harshly speaking, testing and observation of evolution cannot be done less than intelligent and/or creation design, but this does not look to contradict with evolutionists who are non-believers. As an outcome, the complete data is passed through the pre-accepted, presupposed, and preconceived perspective of naturalism, without consideration of any alternate justifications. The first book of the Bible, the narrative of Creation in Genesis’ first two chapters, clearly points out that creation work was done in six, twenty-four-hour days. This is opposed directly to the theory of evolution and it also denies the creative power of God. Just as miracles were performed by Christ immediately while He was on earth, also He performed the creation work immediately during His stay on Earth in Creation week. It is written in the Bible that heavens were created by the word of God; everything is done by His command. He just says happen by the breath of His mouth and it stood fast. It is said by God that I created the earth and then made men on it and then it is said by Him that He created the heavens and their host.

It is not possible to directly test or observe origin or life and the origin of this universe. Both evolution and creation need a degree of faith to accept these. One cannot go into the past and test and observe the creation of life and creation of this universe. Those who obdurately do not accept the creation of this universe and man would logically reject evolution also.      
Evolution, specifically when considered with the creation of life, doesn’t correlate with the definition of science anymore in comparison to the creation. Those scientists who support entirely atheistic evolution are not accepting a credible origins’ theory, usually due to the reason that it does not correlate with their narrow and illogical definition of science (Newton).

According to Lynch, if there is truthfulness of creation, then there exists a Creator God to whom everyone is answerable to his/her deeds. Evolution, as usually defined today, is a facilitator of atheism. A foundation for defining how life is created distant from the Creator God is provided to atheists by evolution. As such, advanced evolution theories serve as an alternative “creation story” for atheism religion.           

Works Cited

Bobo, Luke Brad. A Layperson's Guide to Biblical Interpretation: A Means to Know the Personal God. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2016.

Clark, Kelly James. "Darwin, God, and Creation." Religion and the Sciences of Origins. Palgrave Macmillan US, 2014. 61-77.

Lynch, John. "Prepare to Believe": The Creation Museum as Embodied Conversion Narrative." Rhetoric & Public Affairs 16.1 (2013): 1-27.

Newton, Tim. "Has Evolution Disproved God?: The Fallacies in the Apparent Triumph of Soft Science." Liberty University Law Review 4.1 (2015): 2.

Robbins, Richard Howard, Richard H. Robbins, and Mark Nathan Cohen. Darwin and the Bible: the cultural confrontation. Routledge, 2015.

Stern, Ruth C., and J. Herbie DiFonzo. "Dogging Darwin: America's Revolt against the Teaching of Evolution." N. Ill. UL Rev. 36 (2015): 33.