Can creationism be proven?

[CheeseSandwich]

"i dont believe in god but i do believe there might be sómething"

That phrase ring a bell?

That is an agnostic, not an atheist.

[GodlyBob]

Like the pope lol

The pope isn't a real catholic. Only those people who fit my narrative are true scottsman!

[Adam Jensen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world

Basicly add every religion to that list and there we are. I could look up every religion in the world and its followers and make a rounded off number but 3 billion, when 1.6 billion is muslim and we still have 5 religions to go, its pretty accurate to assume its around 3 bil if not on the low side.

So a lot of people believe in it. Doesn't make it right. Argumentum ad populum.

[Frozen Death Knight]

"Can creation...."

No. /end thread

---

In all seriousness, no, because creationism is incapable to present solid evidence to make a solid case. Some of the most asinine arguments I have seen come from creationism that it is frankly hard to take anything about it seriously. The only worrying thing is that there are enough people who believe this nonsense to actually affect education in some parts of the world. It is just baseless nonsense.

[Florena]

A lot of religious people believe in evolution theory as well.

No atheists believe in creationism.

Yeah, all too often creationists equate atheism and evolution simply because evolution disproves a literal interpretation of genesis. Though to be fair I can see why they fought against it. Many people are able to say 'okay evolution happens but it's just god doing it and genesis isn't literal.' But for me, realizing that genesis was full of crap was one of the factors that led to me leaving Christianity. Because if the bible is built on a faulty beginning, why should I believe the rest of it? There was more to my deconversion than that but it was a part of it.

[ranzino]

.... You can be a very rational person and know the earth is older than 6000 years but still think that being nice to people around you is a good thing.

i can do both as an atheist easily too. being nice to others requires faith ? i hope not.

[slime]

Ah, i see. But also strange, because this deity is out of work for billions of years ? Why pray to such a lazy thing, sitting around idle and twirling its thumbs ( or whatever deities do in leisure time...) ?

Sorry, to much logic i guess.

As if you can explain or even comprehend how time works for a deity. Pathetic human.

[klogaroth]

Religious belief and belief in evolution are not mutually exclusive.

It is perfectly possible to believe that a deity or several deities created the universe and the systems that govern it. Including evolution.

When you look at the idea of the idea of creation occurring over a literal 6 days, this is an idea that has been contested amongst Christians for a very long time. Saint Augustine wrote the following in the 5th century:

"in matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision ... we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it. That would be to battle not for the teaching of Holy Scripture but for our own, wishing its teaching to conform to ours, whereas we ought to wish ours to conform to that of Sacred Scripture"

I stress, in the 5th century AD, people were open to the idea that creationist theory did not have to mean that the world as we know it came to exist in the literal timescale presented in scripture, and that scripture did not describe in full all of the events that led up to the current day.

[slime]

Because of the speed of light, we can literally look into the past, and we have. We know what the universe looked like when it was a mere 300,000 years old, we can see it through our telescopes and space probes. We can see the universe is expanding, and thus the big bang is simply taking this expansion and putting it in reverse.

Claiming we can't figure out what happened because "no one was there" invalidates every police detective ever, I guess we better empty the prisons.

Not really, some crimes actually have witnesses.

[Dezerte]

Well, yes. The problem is there already exists evidence that disproves creationism. Creationism needs to re-define it's hypothesis such that it doesn't contradict evidence but still remain falsifiable.

[GodlyBob]

i can do both as an atheist easily too. being nice to others requires faith ? i hope not.

No, but it's kind of the corner stone of Jesus' teachings. My point is that there can be people who don't believe that a single part of their religious script is literal but still believe that the writings can still serve as good allegorical stories and live their life according to the lessons.

[Deleted]

I've always said; the day God or whatever form of great being it is that made the world, comes down and says 'BEHOLD I AM GOD (or other)' and then like, randomly spawns new humans in front of the world to see, then that will prove it for me.

Otherwise....I'm not entirely sure you can 'prove' creationism is true in the sense of that it has already happened. If it's true and 'God' made the world and everything in it then left it alone, that's all we have to work with and theoretically could even be true. Otherwise it's the science point of it all with the big bang and it exploded into existence, which we know pretty much for sure happened.

Saying a god did it? Totally different experiments needed =p

[Dsonsion]

I'll just say I can't believe the other thread reached 100 pages of discussion and "debate".

[GodlyBob]

I'll just say I can't believe the other thread reached 100 pages of discussion and "debate".

Is there actually a sizeable opposition over there? I first saw it at like 4 pages with one guy staunchly against evolution and didn't think I needed to be a part of it.

[ranzino]

No, but it's kind of the corner stone of Jesus' teachings. My point is that there can be people who don't believe that a single part of their religious script is literal but still believe that the writings can still serve as good allegorical stories and live their life according to the lessons.

Well, a lot of then commandments is stuff anybody should agree upon ( without the more godly parts). Be nice for whatever reason you are and feel welcome then ?

[Powerogue]

Honestly this was pretty well covered in the first thread.

The answer is simply, undeniably, no.

The reason it's not a scientific theory is because of this. Creationism has demonstrated no testable, repeatable hypotheses that have been shown to be true.

And how can it be expected to? At its core, it is based on a literalist interpretation of the bible. That there is a being out there that can do literally anything. Any premise based around that will inevitably fail.

Why can't we see him? He's invisible.
Why can't we touch him? He's intangible.
Why do these dinosaur bones demonstrate the earth is older than 6000 years old? Because God planted them there to mess with us, artificially aging them and everything!

Any "theory" that cannot be disproven, simultaneously cannot be proven, and is useless, even to those who claim it's true.

I've always said; the day God or whatever form of great being it is that made the world, comes down and says 'BEHOLD I AM GOD (or other)' and then like, randomly spawns new humans in front of the world to see, then that will prove it for me.

That would indeed demonstrate the hypothesis. Witness the creator creating something. If this is where all things come from, then whenever a new thing arises, in nature or space, we should be able to see him there, hear the magic words he says (as is claimed in the bible, he primarily creates by this method), or something else detectable by our current technology.

But, as when this happens we detect nothing, creationists simply claim this creator is hiding all evidence of its own existence from us, returning to my point of this being a nonfalsifiable, and thus useless, claim, due to the supposed being's omnipotence.

It is functionally identical to have a universe-wide conspiracy by an all-powerful being to hide any and all evidence that the universe isn't purely natural, and the universe to be purely natural. From there, we take the claim that makes the fewest assumptions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

[Garnier Fructis]

Yes. All God has to do is send some angels down. That he hasn't done this is very perplexing, considering that angel sightings used to be a relatively common occurrence near the beginning.

[Deleted]

Where did the first bacteria come from? What was before the Big Boom (if you say another universe, please tell, what was before all universes)?
Not even bacteria can appear from nothingness. A universe can't appear from nothingness. So science says. But religion says it can, so then, by the very fact that the universe exists and life exists in it, I believe in a higher force.

From where I stand, I believe a higher force did these things. And while I believe in evolution, I believe this higher force was the one that influenced it. I call this higher force God. It could be one, it could be many, it could be something I'm not even capable of understanding. But from my point of view, it exists.

[Dezerte]

Not even bacteria can appear from nothingness. A universe can't appear from nothingness. So science says.

No, science doesn't say so. This may be a common misconception, but the big bang theory does not state or imply that the universe came from nothing.

[Powerogue]

So, can creationism be proven? I heard stuff about starfish and "round of the earth" being stated in ancient books without the knowledge of galileo back then but i remain sceptical.

Discuss.

I have no idea what starfish have to do with creationism. The best I can find is the hoax site Answers in Genesis addressing the incompatibility of the two theories by mentioning, among other things, when starfish arose in their respective timelines.

"Round of the earth" is referring to a circle, or disc. Obviously a massive problem for a literal interpretation of the bible, so every creationist you find confronted on this will attempt to "re-interpret" those passages to mean a sphere, but the bible is clear. We live on a disc-shaped earth submerged in an infinite cosmic ocean. The only thing separating the oceans above from the oceans below is the firmament, a solid, crystal-like dome that separates water from water. On this God placed the stars, sun, and moon, which circle alternatively around the earth, separating the day (sun) from the night (moon). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

In the end times, among many, many other things you really have to see to believe, 7-Headed-Dragon-Satan will knock down a third of the stars from the firmament onto the earth.


Source for context: http://www.bricktestament.com/revela.../rv12_04a.html