Everything written in the bible is true. At least most of the new testament (including Jesus Christ) can and has been proven historically, scientifically, and archeologically (probably misspelled that one). I don't like the fact that people tell me I'm biased when I'm actually not. I spent my whole life being biased when I believed evolution over creation. Non-religous people need to look more at the Christian religion before coming up with their answers. No, I can't assure everyone where they go or not, but sinning does not get you into hell. Everyone is born a sinner. Moses was a murderer and God chose him to write the first five books in the bible. The other writers were adulterers, rapists, incests and anything else you can think of. God knows nobody here is perfect and he made us all that way. We just have to realize what the truth is and what's not. I know the bible is the truth. A thousand years before Jesus was born, prophets fortold his coming down to every last detail. Where he would be born, who his mother was, that his mother was a virgin, how he would live, what he would do, how he would die and the miracles he would do. I wish athiests would look at this proof before their eyes before coming to conclusions because not believing is a sure ticket into hell. Now look at it from the evolutionary side. I've posted all this before, but you cannot turn nothing into something. Nothing cannot suddenly explode into matter. A cell on the newly formed planet earth cannot just suddenly appear and start evolving. A single cell cannot evolve into plants, animals, insects, birds, reptiles and every other life form on this planet. The universe looks well designed and a designer should be the scientific default, not coincidence and believe me, evolution had to have been a gigantically huge, damn near impossibility. Archeology proves the bible right each and every single time. Look it up and tell me what you think

As long as you are not claiming that creationism is a science, I have absolutely no problem with anything that you just said.

creationism is not a science

and whyis creationism not a science?

creationism is a belief and maybe a religion. All science is is a bunch of hypothesis and theories. I like you too Kellalor

Creationism does have scientific evidence to support it.
Lack of proof of speciation is evidence for creationism.
Lack of good transitional fossils is evidence for creationism.
By means of scientific reduction you can get evidence for creationism.
Sure seems scientific too me.

you have a point. Maybe I just don't want to see lies (science) mixed up with the truth (creation)

it's called adapting to your environment. Call that evolution if you want. I know for a fact that insects, animals and even humans adapt to their surrounds, but evolution is a far cry from that

they refuse to believe God exists, but archeology keeps proving all the scientists wrong. Why doesn't the world see this? They teach this crap in school and they don't even know that it's true and there's more evidence to the contrary

Druidus, yes evoloution happens in viruses, and in humans. All animals change on a genetic level over time. But I believe your taking it one step too far.

One animal morphing into another animal has never EVER been proven scientifically. There is no scientific proof of speciation. And because of that other theories need to be considered, i.e.creationism.

religion can and has been proven over and over again. Scientists keep scratching their heads and making the age of the earth older and older because they just don't understand. The so-called facts written in science books now are way different than twenty, even ten years ago. The facts have never changed over four thousand or more years in the bible.

This is gonna turn into another science vs religion, evolution vs creation argument isn't it?

I tried to post creation vs. evolution and they dropped it before it even started. This is my way of getting by that and it worked. Thanks guys!

also, science says that throughout time there have been many periods where everything died out and life had to start all over again and again.

Science doesn't say all life died out periodically! Where are you reading that from?

Wherever it is you got that it is wrong. Science says extinctions occurred but not to the point of all life dying out! In the beginning, when we only had self-promoting proteins we may have had a few false starts but other than that, nope.

oh yeah forgot to mention. yes there were mass extinctions, they think there's been about 6, but like druidus says, not all life died out. in fact, scientist believe that we are in the begining of another mass extinction, don'tcha know.

Religion by itself has never been proven. Sorry but no. No religion has been proven entirely. The bible is just what people saw and tried to write down scientifically. They saw waters disappear and create a path for the Jews, they thought it was a work of God. In reality it could have been attributed to many things. They saw the plagues of Egypt, said it was an act of God, in reality many things could have caused those plagues. Please realize that I do believe in religion. I just make a bastard religion/science crossbreed. It helps everyone and I take the best from both sides and chuck the rest away . Science would have seen clues as to whether or not the biblical flood occurred. There was a flood we have proven that, but the flood was definately not worldwide. And since it wasn't I have proved a part of the bible wrong. Why can't other parts be wrong if one is? Men wrote it. Men are prone to mistakes, fallacies and fiction. All of the bible may be based of of facts but warped instead of crystal clear. Anyways, my Gods want me to question everything, even to the point of questioning them, so I do. They want us to be scientific and religious.

I didn't say the religons were proven, just proven to have existed.. as in proven that people believed. The only right or wrong should be left up to the indavidual person. Not forced onto them in mass.

Druidus

760 B.C.? I'm not going to even dignify that by writing all the evidence about it. That's way to close to now. It would be remembered in more books than the bible. LOL!

Budy are you blind??? Its 7640 B.C..

Science is a process. Science is a methodology used to evaluate and analyze data. Part of this process is the formation of a theory. A theory has to be capable of explaining the existing data and either offering the possibility to replicate or predict what its effect will be. An essential factor of this process is falsifiability. In order to avoid self-deception, every theory must have a method allowing it to be proven incorrect. It must also be verified by peer-review. This means that a credible panel of people educated in a particular topic must agree that the data, controversial or otherwise, is nonetheless valid. Occam's Razor is a proven standard. In the vast majority of cases, the simplest solution has been proven to be the correct one.

Self-correction is inherent. Data is not static; it grows and changes with further research. Theories must be able to explain the new data as well as the old. If the theory does not explain the data, the theory must change. And many, many theories have changed with the advent of new information.

The reason why I cannot consider creationism a theory is because there is no central theory which can be used to evaluate and analyze data; at best, the general argument can be summed up as "God did it." There is no way to predict any event; how guaranteed is a prayer? There is no falsifiability; if a prayer fails, it's because God knows best. And there is little consensus with peer-review; how many different Judeo-Christian variations are there? Occam's Razor need not apply. "God did it" is certainly simpler to say, but is hardly a simpler explanation.

Most importantly, there is no self-correction. If the data that we have does not fit the creationist theory, no creationist will admit that the theory is incorrect. The only option left is to change the data to fit the theory.

Creationism is a postulate. It is a statement of belief and faith. There is no requirement in the bible for scientific verification of God. There is no need for independent non-bias verification. In short, there is no need to call it a science.

why start this again? nobody is gonna be convinced either way...