The Other Side of the COin: Truths About Creationism

January 20, 2010
Try to imagine that, millions of years ago, small particles hit together and collided, spinning out of control, till BANG- they created multiple solar systems, stars, and planets. Does that sound reasonable? I think not. What kind of person would believe that? There are many scientists who devote their lives to trying to prove this so-called “fact”, but, of course, have not been able to. Even though there is no real proof, the Big Bang Theory has been taught in schools for quite along with evolution, which also has no solid proof. However, they are only telling one side of the story. In many schools today, evolution and the Big Bang Theory are taught to students, while Creationism is left for "church only". That is not fair. Creationism should be taught in public schools as well.

To begin with, if evolution and the Big Bang Theory can be taught, why not creationism? First, consider evolution. Scientifically speaking, simple life-forms cannot evolve into “more complex life-forms” (Problems), therefore, man could not have possibly come from apes. Also, if man came from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys? Some evolutionists answer this question by saying “Survival of the fittest”. However, that does not account for the weaker apes that are still living on earth. If they were to follow this “survival of the fittest” theory, then they should have died long ago, when man first appeared. In Mark 10:6, the Bible says, “But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female,” thus proving without a doubt that God created man.

Then, of course, there is the Big Bang Theory. There is not a single scientific law or demonstration that can be preformed that supports the “something from nothing” theory. How could two small particles hit together to create the universe and all the life in it, when, technically speaking, those two particles had not even been created yet? “Design demands a designer” (Wood), and it is as simple as that. Take for example the position of the earth. If it was just a little closer to the sun, everything on it would burn up. If it was just a little farther away, we would all freeze (Wood). Also, Earth is the only planet with free oxygen and water in its liquid form (Wood). In other words, our planet is the only one in our solar system capable of sustaining life. How could that have happened by chance? In Genesis 1:1, the Bible says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” so, only God could have done so.

Also, creationism should be taught in public schools because, according to the Bible, God created the earth (Gen. 1:1). So, why would anyone teach anything else? Of course, there are those out there who question the fact that the Bible is God’s written word. They say that it is nothing but a book written by a bunch of different men. The Bible is made up of sixty six books- thirty nine in the Old Testament and twenty seven in the New- written over a time span of 2,000 years, on three different continents (Asia, Europe, and Africa), in three different languages (Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic), however, there are no contradictions. This could only be the work of an all-powerful being. And so it was. II Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God…”. So, basically, God told the writers what to say. He inspired them.

What proof is there that the Bible was inspired by God? To begin with, in Leviticus 17:11a, Moses said that, “For the life of the flesh is in the blood…”, yet this fact was unknown even in George Washington’s day (Thompson). People would use leeches to bleed out supposed ‘bad blood’ to help the sick get well. So, how did Moses know? Secondly, in Ecclesiastes 11:3a and Amos 9:6b, the writers both refer to rain falling from the clouds, but the water cycle was not completely accepted or understood until the 16th century. Pierre Perrault, Edme Marriot, and Edmund Halley all made discoveries on and added data to the idea of a complete water cycle. However, the Bible indicated a water cycle 2,000 years before their discoveries (Thompson). Next, in Job26:7, Job says that the Lord “hangs the earth on nothing.” Back in Job’s day, people had different beliefs on what kept the earth suspended in space, such as four elephants on a giant turtle, or the shoulders of an abnormally strong man. Job was way ahead of his time by suggesting that the earth “hung on nothing” (Thompson) (Job 26:7). How could he have known when everyone else was wrong? And finally, in I Corinthians 15:39, the apostle Paul says, “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish, and another of birds.” Paul is right! All four of these fleshes have a different biochemical makeup (Thompson). But how did he know? All of these situations point to one solution: God told the men what to write. Therefore, there is no possible way that the Bible could be made up by men because of the advanced sciences used in it. Given the sufficient evidence, Creationism should be presented alongside other theories of creation.

There are those in this world who say that allowing creationism to be taught in schools is a breech on their First Amendment rights. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”, however, this does not mean that it is against the law to say “One nation, under God,” in the Pledge of Allegiance, print, “In God we trust,” on money, or teach creationism to students in school. It merely is saying that the Government will not make an established religion. One can believe in and worship anything or anyone they want. But, men can preach and teach about their religion to others. It is only fair.

In addition, the First Amendment was added by the founding fathers to keep the church from controlling the government, and they had good reason to be fearful of this. “Early settlers” in America wanted religious liberty; however, they refused to grant it to others (Gay). They set up the Anglican Church as the main religion (Gay). Others set up their own churches, but, they still had to pay taxes for the maintenance of the Anglican Church, even though they did not attend there (Gay). Laws demanded people to attend church (Gay), and if they did not, they could be fined, and even imprisoned. Other rules covered clothing, business conduct, education, and recreation (Gay). “Only members of the… established religion were allowed to vote (Gay)”. It is no wonder James Madison was careful about how much control the church would receive. All in all, separation of church and state was established to keep government control in the proper hands, not to forbid the teaching of creationism.

In conclusion, creationism should be taught in public schools because, even though some say it cannot be proven, it is the most reasonable solution to the creation of the world, and, if evolution and the Big Bang Theory can be taught, why not creationism? It has not been proved either. If schools are going to teach unproven theories, then why not add creationism to the list? One might as well tell both sides of the story if they are going to tell it at all. Besides, if Evolutionists are so sure that man came from monkeys, then what are they afraid of?

“Evolution.” The American Colledge Dictionary. 1964.
Gay, Kathlyn. CHurch and State. Brookfield: The Millbrook Press, 1992.
The History of Man. Sanford: Riebers.
The Holy Bible, New King James Version. Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1982.
Isaak, Mark. “Five major misconceptions about Evolution.” 1 Oct. 2003. 18 Jan. 2009 <>.
McIntosh, Kenneth, and Marsha McIntosh. Issues of Church, State, and Religious Liberties. Broomal: Mason Crest Publishers, Inc., 2006.
“Problems for atheistic evolutionists.” 10 Nov. 2008. 18 Jan. 2009 <>.
The Reality of God. Sanford: Riebers.
Roberts, Hill. The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 1986.
Suggs, Bill. “When did the U.S. Government pass a law dictating the separation of church and state? Where can this law be found?” 18 Jan. 2009 <>.
Thompson, Bert. Scientific Evidences of the Bible’s Inspiration. Montgomery: Apologetics Press, Inc., 1981.
Wood, James. We Believe. 2005.

Works Cited
Gay, Kathlyn. CHurch and State. Brookfield: The Millbrook Press, 1992.
The Holy Bible, New King James Version. Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1982.
“Problems for atheistic evolutionists.” 10 Nov. 2008. 18 Jan. 2009 <>.
Thompson, Bert. Scientific Evidences of the Bible’s Inspiration. Montgomery: Apologetics Press, Inc., 1981.
Wood, James. We Believe. 2005.

Join the Discussion

This article has 345 comments. Post your own now!

ColdplayForever said...
Feb. 13, 2016 at 11:18 pm
First, before anything else, I would like to acknowledge the efforts that you put in to write this article. Second of all, I would like to ask you how you can be 100% sure that the Bible is not a fictional story. You are using phrases from the Bible to prove that the Bible is correct. This makes your argument irrelevant. I don't believe in forcing the theory of the Big Bang upon anybody, but from what I have experienced, many religious people force the theory of Creationism upon atheists. "Freed... (more »)
m-ashreaderThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. said...
Oct. 22, 2015 at 7:46 pm
This was amazing. God truly did create it all! Thank you for sharing you view. There is way to many evidences that point to something more divine and powerful than science can explain.
JesusandHisLawyers said...
Aug. 9, 2014 at 11:40 pm
I wil never cease to be amused by the theist stance of "If I cry really loud and wave around my Bible, they HAVE to cave and let me do whatever I want!" People like this are not worth your time, energy, or brain cells. Don't even humor them.
Chloe123 said...
Jul. 16, 2014 at 6:38 pm
These are horribly illogical arguments... It astounds and saddens me how blinded people can become by religion. Religion can arguably a valid system to teach morality and in essence there is nothing wrong with it, but once we get into the territory of believe whole-heartedly in talking snakes and virgin births, people need to begin thinking for themselves. I would happily write a point-by-point rebuttal to this article, but that would take a long time. One of the primary problems is that you are... (more »)
ScarletCity This work has been published in the Teen Ink monthly print magazine. replied...
Nov. 20, 2015 at 10:52 pm
By forcing the theories of Evolution and the Big Bang down my throat, you are taking away my rights as a christian to practice what I believe in and believe in whatever I want. Be careful, @Chloe123 there are 2 sides to every story.
Michael S. said...
Jun. 17, 2014 at 10:44 pm
I am not in any way trying to attack you, but please consider what I have to say.   Your beliefs on creation are based on myth, supported by warped, circular logic.  That aside, the tone of your article suggests that you want creationism to be true, along with the existence of God, etc.  This presents a major problem: bias.  Ignored is the large amount of scientific evidence; focused on is trying desperately to connect the dots back to God being our creator.  As an athei... (more »)
Michael S. said...
Jun. 17, 2014 at 10:27 pm
I have to respectfully disagree.  Creationism is defined as a "pseudoscientific view", lacking any empirical evidence to support the encompassing claims.  Rather than seek supporting evidence, many creationists revert to attacking the evidence for evolution, violating the very basis of the burden of proof.  While I disagree with your views, I can certainly respect the effort it took to formulate this article, as well as your courage to speak to the contrary. Your article... (more »)
ebf3141 said...
Apr. 16, 2014 at 7:56 pm
  First, I would like to thank you for putting the effort in to write a well-written essay. Yours is much better written than many other essays on TeenInk. However, I must disagree with the content of your essay. I don't want to be mean to your religion -- that is not my intent -- but I would like to point out some parts of your essay that strike me as wrong.  First of all, you seem to have a misconception of the big bang. The formation of solar systems, stars, planets, and oth... (more »)
. said...
Apr. 14, 2014 at 5:02 pm
I'm impressed! You really did your research! I really enjoyed this article. I am a Christian, and I agree with you, ecspecially the part about the light that the 1st A. is presented in. Good job!
Evey said...
Apr. 9, 2014 at 3:14 am
Not to be rude, but I have spent at least two years now devouted to the spreading of the truth about evolution and the big bang theory and debating and arguing countless creationists. Up to hours. Have you watched the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham? That should really explain many hypotheses and false claims about evolution and the big bang theory you have there in your post. If you did any studys at all you would see why evolution and the big bang theory are facts. Creationism should not b... (more »)
AuddersPressers said...
Mar. 11, 2014 at 7:34 pm
I must kindly disagree. Your argument in favor of creationism is severely flawed, and your understanding of evolution is clearly warped.  Mankind has not evolved from apes, but from beigns that can be described as ape-like. While the lineage of monkeys and humans is very much similar, but like with all mammals they diverge far back and went on to become very separate beings.  Creationism is just as much of a theory as the Big Bang theory. However, creationism conflicts with the con... (more »)
Seller_of_Purple said...
Mar. 9, 2014 at 6:29 pm
Thanks you so much for supporting creationism. Great job! But I would disagree with you saying that creationism is "unproven" we may not know every detail but there is a LOT of evidence. It's not just some theory. But I agree with a lot of what you said!!
SomethingWitty said...
Feb. 20, 2014 at 5:50 pm
Just so we're on the same page, you wrote that sarcastically, right?
Elanelane07 replied...
May 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm
Hahaha I really hope so. That was one of the worst arguments ever.
SomethingWitty replied...
May 25, 2014 at 5:04 pm
My thoughts exactly
Bones96 said...
Feb. 2, 2014 at 5:28 pm
While your writing isn't bad there are couple things I think you've been misunstood. Firstly the Big Bang Theory is just as it title says, a theory. It's a very good theory but as of today can't be proven. Scientist and others who accpet the theory don't say it's fact. And like many other things it's worth studying and looking in to. Also it was particles hiting something then bang there's the universe.The Big Bang happened 5 billion years before stars, 10 billion... (more »)
LoveMuchHateLess replied...
May 23, 2014 at 8:47 pm
You say that scientists who accept the Big Bang Theory don't say it is factual. But why then is this theory taught in our schools? If it is only a theory and not accepted as fact, shouldn't our schools also teach creationism as an alternate theory? I am a creationist, by the way. And I accept it as fact.
SomethingWitty replied...
May 31, 2014 at 7:01 am
I agree! No one can disprove that The Flying Spaghetti Monster created the world, so let's teach my religion's version of what happened as another alternate theory! Intelligent Design With Balls!
Safeleo replied...
Sept. 4, 2014 at 6:10 pm
Wow, you're my new hero. And to everyone out there, they have actually found substantial proof for the big bang theory in cosmic background radiation. 
Zaraclaylime This work has been published in the Teen Ink monthly print magazine. said...
Jan. 20, 2014 at 2:02 am
I support this so strongly! Everyone should read this!
bRealTime banner ad on the left side
Site Feedback