The Other Side of the COin: Truths About Creationism | Teen Ink

The Other Side of the COin: Truths About Creationism

January 20, 2010
By clumsy_one123 SILVER, Brentwood, Tennessee
clumsy_one123 SILVER, Brentwood, Tennessee
8 articles 1 photo 170 comments

Favorite Quote:
"All daring starts from within." -Eudora Welty

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.

Similar Articles


This article has 345 comments.

on Feb. 13 2016 at 11:18 pm
ColdplayForever BRONZE, San Jose, California
1 article 0 photos 62 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Coldplay fans are the best in the world. If you like Coldplay, then you're obviously very intelligent, good-looking, and all-around brilliant."
~Chris Martin

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. "Freedom of religion," says the Constitution of the USA. So, please, someone respond to this and tell me, WITHOUT (pardon the capitals, please) quoting a holy book, how can you prove that the Bible, the Quran, etc. are not simply a work of fiction?

on Nov. 20 2015 at 10:52 pm
ScarletCity PLATINUM, High Ridge, Missouri
40 articles 4 photos 68 comments
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.

on Oct. 22 2015 at 7:46 pm
m-ashreader GOLD, Homercity, Pennsylvania
11 articles 0 photos 15 comments

Favorite Quote:
"You never know until you try!" -author unknown

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.

Safeleo said...
on Sep. 4 2014 at 6:10 pm
Safeleo, Iwakuni, Other
0 articles 0 photos 118 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Looking up into the night sky is like looking into infinity - the distance is incomprehensible and therefore meaningless."
-Douglas Adams

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. 

on Aug. 9 2014 at 11:40 pm
JesusandHisLawyers SILVER, Austin, Texas
7 articles 0 photos 99 comments

Favorite Quote:
"who the fuck has a favorite personal quote what does that even mean" - me, just now.

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...
on 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 assuming a theory, specifically the theory of evolution and the Big Bang, is essentially incorrect just because you yourself don't understand it. That is exactly why it should be taught--it is a difficult theory to understand which is rooted in scientific fact which has been tested and experimented with for generations. Our founding fathers founded this country during the period of Enlightenment, a period which finally shook of the reins of a tyrannous government which dictated the people's religion. People began searching for answers based in logic, experimentation, and fact. They founded this country and put the establishment clause in the first amendment in order to prevent one religion from taking over the country and repressing other factions. They were protecting our country from the persecution which so often comes from religion, and forcing the theory of "Creationism" upon the children (or anyone) in this country would take away the rights of Muslims, Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, etc. to practice whatever religion they believe in and believe in what they would like. I could go on, but what I am saying is this--people can believe whatever they want in private and within private assemblies, but no government should support the enforcement of one's views on the rest of the public. Just because the majority of this country may be country that doesn't mean we should infringe on the right's of the minorities. America is celebrated as one of the most culturally diverse nations in the world, and I would like it to stay that way. P.S. Please, please end this phenomenon of trying to prove that the Bible is true by quoting passages from the Bible. 

on Jun. 17 2014 at 10:44 pm
Michael Smith, Baltimore, Maryland
0 articles 0 photos 2 comments
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 atheist, I literally have no bias; in fact, I may be slightly biased in the same manner as you.  Do I want God to be real and to go to heaven? Undoubtedly so.  However, my fixation with reason and logic trumps the aforementioned. As an objective viewer of our very existence, I do not care what is proven to be correct.  If it was somehow, beyond a doubt empirically proven that God was our divine creator, I would accept it.  My allegiance is with evidence, and therefore with evolution.

on Jun. 17 2014 at 10:27 pm
Michael Smith, Baltimore, Maryland
0 articles 0 photos 2 comments
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 was both eloquent and intriguing.  Without getting into a debate about God and the like, I will thus conclude.  

on May. 31 2014 at 7:01 am
SomethingWitty, No, Other
0 articles 0 photos 22 comments
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!

on May. 25 2014 at 5:04 pm
SomethingWitty, No, Other
0 articles 0 photos 22 comments
My thoughts exactly

on May. 23 2014 at 8:47 pm
LoveMuchHateLess SILVER, Fort Myers, Florida
7 articles 1 photo 3 comments
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.

Elanelane07 said...
on May. 7 2014 at 7:00 pm
Elanelane07, Gainesville, Florida
0 articles 0 photos 3 comments
Hahaha I really hope so. That was one of the worst arguments ever.

ebf3141 BRONZE said...
on Apr. 16 2014 at 7:56 pm
ebf3141 BRONZE, Bellingham, Washington
2 articles 0 photos 1 comment
  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 other astronomical objects didn't happen in a flash. Current thinking is that balls of gas produced soon after the big bang coalesced into stars after millions of years. It took quite a while for stars to develop planets. And "multiple solar systems" is an underestimate: there are probably, as Carl Sagan used to say, "billions and billions" of them.  And there is quite a large amount of evidence for this theory. The cosmic microwave background radiation, expansion of the universe, and recent discovery of gravitational waves all point to a universe that originated with a big bang.  You point to biblical quotes stating that rain comes from clouds as evidence that the Bible is the word of god. Frankly, I find that ludicrous. It doesn't take an understanding of the water cycle to know that rain comes from clouds. You just have to see rain coming downwards, and see that there are clouds above the rain. It's as simple as that. You also claim that the Bible is free of contradictions. Unfortunately, it isn't. For example, Genesis 1 says that first the sky, earth and light, next the water (it also claims that water is above the sky, which seems ridiculous to me), then plants, then the sun, moon, etc., then animals, then humans. Genesis 2, on the other hand, says that first came the Earth and the Heavens, then Adam, then plants, then animals, then Eve. Creationism should not be taught in schools. The First Amendment prevents the government from endorsing one religion over another. The use of the word "God" in various places does not endorse any one religion -- most religions have one or more gods. The teaching of creationism in schools, on the other hand, would endorse Christianity. And, in response to your last question, we are afraid that people will go around not knowing the truth and believing falsehood.

. said...
on 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...
on 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 be taught 1. Cause they have no evidence whats so ever. The only invalid evidence its suppose to have is an old book that has been debunked countless times for it's pseudo-science, pseudo-history pseudo-archeology etc. Teaching creationism well make kids and adolescents will not only make them behind in school, but making them believe in such false indoctarnation lies. Creationism  in the way you are explaining is cleary spreading one religion. You want creationism to be taught? Then go ahead and teach all of them. Every religion and every cullts ideology of the creation of the uinverse. Do you even have any idea how messed up they will turn out to be? If you were to even teach them one, that would be a form of child abuse. 2. Every claim you made has been answered and debunked or explained rationaly. So I can see that you have put little effort into this post which is amusing and insulting at them same time. You clearly have no knowledge of evolution if your best argument is “If we evolve from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?” That is the oldest and most (not to be rude) idiotic argument that creationist have thought of. And theres enourmous amount of evidence for evolution and if you did your reseach properly or been educated you would have seen and learned it. And also you say that our planet is the only one capableto sustain life? You’re wrong again. For we have inconclusive evidence of extraterrestrial liquid water liquid on mars and suspected that Titan has underground seas. I’m trying to make as short as possible but impossible due to so many false claims in your post ;P. I’ll just try and skip to the end or I’ll never get some sleep. Lol. Teaching creationism is not only promoting ignorance and false claims but it’s promoting a specific religion. Creationism is NOT SCIENCE. It is creationism. And I am also against teaching it to children in churches because it will cause problems later on in life. You should know the creationism is nothing a propaganda, teaching false claims to pupils. Not only does the scientific community and the government do not want it in our classes some CREATIONIST also do not support it being taught in classes. Maybe if you did REAL RESEARCH you would have known this. Excuse me if I seemed rude. I tried not to be. I would love some feedback. Thank you :)

on Mar. 11 2014 at 7:34 pm
OddPreston BRONZE, Palm Bay, Florida
4 articles 0 photos 1 comment
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 conclusion that study upon study upon study has resulted in: evolution is true. If you need an example, look to a certain Russian study that brought the world designer domestic foxes. The Domesticated Silver Fox started as a Russian experiment to breed hostility out of foxes. The system was simple. When a researcher reached out to a fox, and the fox snapped at them, they were eliminated from the gene pool. Only the most docile were allowed to breed, until the human-frendly trait became the only one. Also, a physiological change occured. The foxes became black and white colors, much like that of a domestic dog. They are available for purchase today, and behave a lot like the common dog. Evolution isn't about denying your god, its about the idea that certain genes may be preserved in certain environments, leading to them being passed on to the population. The failures die, and the properties of the population change after many, many generations until the makeup of the species has adapted and changed into one better suited to survive in a given environment, and the fox experiment is proof that this can occur naturally, and it makes sense that not all genes would survive the test of time. I don't see why your belief in god can't be reconciled with belief in evolution. Who says that your god didn't create the world to contain beings that evolve? Not everything in the biblehas to be taken as 100% true or relevant. For example, women are often treated like simple livestock instead of autonomous human beings with authority over their own bodies. Exodus 22:16-17 states that "If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride-price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride-price for virgins." I hope that my counteragrument has opened your eyes to what the idea of evolution is about, and how backwards certiain parts of religion can be. I only ask that you take all the bible with a grain of salt, not to abandon it alltogether. Thank you for taking the time to read this, if you are right now.

on Mar. 9 2014 at 6:31 pm
Seller_of_Purple SILVER, North Smithfield, Rhode Island
8 articles 6 photos 7 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Smile; it makes people wonder what you're thinking"

AnInkling - that's ridiculous - someone moving from Europe to America is rather different than people evolving from apes........... One has to do with moving from one area to another, the other has to do with animals somehow transforming into intelligent human beings. The argument is completely valid.

on Mar. 9 2014 at 6:29 pm
Seller_of_Purple SILVER, North Smithfield, Rhode Island
8 articles 6 photos 7 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Smile; it makes people wonder what you're thinking"

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!!

on Feb. 20 2014 at 6:16 pm
SomethingWitty, No, Other
0 articles 0 photos 22 comments
I'm not going to discuss everything you've written, as it wasn't written for me, but I can full-heartedly say that freedom of religion = freedom from religion. The thing is there are more religions that just Christianity. Therefore if you have the right to prectice your religion I have the right to practice mine, or my lack thereof. Ergo, I am free to be an Atheist, Agnostic, Pastafarian, or what have you. And when attending government-regulated schooling I should be taught information gathered through observation and controlled tests. Not a book that I have the right not to believe.

on Feb. 20 2014 at 5:50 pm
SomethingWitty, No, Other
0 articles 0 photos 22 comments
Just so we're on the same page, you wrote that sarcastically, right?

Smith Summer

Parkland Speaks

Campus Compare