Guide Form Specifications Ge Evolve Led Series: Fill & Download for Free

Thanks for A2A Lyju Kuruvilla .Lets discuss the Creation and Evolution as i am not a follower of any of the so called religions whose doctrines are rarely scientific. I am interested only in the Truth and am the follower of the Truth as revealed by God in His Word.Do you think that life has a purpose? Evolutionist William B. Provine says: “What we have learned about the evolutionary process has enormous implications for us, affecting our sense of meaning in life.” His conclusion? “I can see no cosmic or ultimate meaning in human life.”Consider the significance of those words. If ultimate meaning in life were nonexistent, then you would have no purpose in living other than to try to do some measure of good and perhaps pass on your genetic traits to the next generation. At death, you would cease to exist forever. Your brain, with its ability to think, reason, and meditate on the meaning of life, would simply be an accident of nature.That is not all. Many who believe in evolution assert that God does not exist or that he will not intervene in human affairs. In either case, our future would rest in the hands of political, academic, and religious leaders. Judging from the past record of such men, the chaos, conflict, and corruption that blight human society would continue. If, indeed, evolution were true, there would seem to be ample reason to live by the fatalistic motto: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”—1 Corinthians 15:32.By contrast, the Bible teaches: “With [God] is the source of life.” (Psalm 36:9) Those words have profound implications.If what the Bible says is true, life does have meaning. Our Creator has a loving purpose that extends to all who choose to live in accord with his will. (Ecclesiastes 12:13) That purpose includes the promise of life in a world free of chaos, conflict, and corruption—and even free of death.—Psalm 37:10, 11; Isaiah 25:6-8.With good reason, millions of people around the world believe that learning about God and obeying him give meaning to life as nothing else can! (John 17:3) Such a belief is not based on mere wishful thinking. The evidence is clear—life was created.Evolution Definition: Organic evolution is the theory that the first living organism developed from lifeless matter. Then, as it reproduced, it is said, it changed into different kinds of living things, ultimately producing all forms of plant and animal life that have ever existed on this earth. All of this is said to have been accomplished without the supernatural intervention of a Creator. Some persons endeavor to blend belief in God with evolution, saying that God created by means of evolution, that he brought into existence the first primitive life forms and that then higher life forms, including man, were produced by means of evolution. Not a Bible teaching.Is evolution really scientific?The “scientific method” is as follows: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true; test the theory by further observations and by experiments; and watch to see if the predictions based on the theory are fulfilled. Is this the method followed by those who believe in and teach evolution?Astronomer Robert Jastrow says: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.”—The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York, 1981), p. 19.Evolutionist Loren Eiseley acknowledged: “After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.”—The Immense Journey (New York, 1957), p. 199.According to New Scientist: “An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”—June 25, 1981, p. 828.Physicist H. S. Lipson said: “The only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (Italics added.)—Physics Bulletin, 1980, Vol. 31, p. 138.Are those who advocate evolution in agreement? How do these facts make you feel about what they teach?The introduction to the centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species (London, 1956) says: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.”—By W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.“A century after Darwin’s death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.”—C. Booker (London Times writer), The Star, (Johannesburg), April 20, 1982, p. 19.The scientific magazine Discover said: “Evolution . . . is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent.”—October 1980, p. 88.What view does the fossil record support?Darwin acknowledged: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution.” (The Origin of Species, New York, 1902, Part Two, p. 83) Does the evidence indicate that “numerous species” came into existence at the same time, or does it point to gradual development, as evolution holds?Have sufficient fossils been found to draw a sound conclusion?Smithsonian Institution scientist Porter Kier says: “There are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around the world.” (New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129) A Guide to Earth History adds: “By the aid of fossils palaeontologists can now give us an excellent picture of the life of past ages.”—(New York, 1956), Richard Carrington, Mentor edition, p. 48.What does the fossil record actually show?The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29.Might it be that the evolutionary process took place as a result of mutations, that is, sudden drastic changes in genes?Science Digest states: “Evolutionary revisionists believe mutations in key regulatory genes may be just the genetic jackhammers their quantum-leap theory requires.” However, the magazine also quotes British zoologist Colin Patterson as stating: “Speculation is free. We know nothing about these regulatory master genes.” (February 1982, p. 92) In other words, there is no evidence to support the theory.The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: “The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed, mutants illustrated in biology textbooks are a collection of freaks and monstrosities and mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process.”—(1977), Vol. 10, p. 742.What about those “ape-men” depicted in schoolbooks, encyclopedias and museums?“The flesh and hair on such reconstructions have to be filled in by resorting to the imagination. . . . Skin color; the color, form, and distribution of the hair; the form of the features; and the aspect of the face—of these characters we know absolutely nothing for any prehistoric men.”—The Biology of Race (New York, 1971), James C. King, pp. 135, 151.“The vast majority of artists’ conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. . . . Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.”—Science Digest, April 1981, p. 41.“Just as we are slowly learning that primitive men are not necessarily savages, so we must learn to realize that the early men of the Ice Age were neither brute beasts nor semi-apes nor cretins. Hence the ineffable stupidity of all attempts to reconstruct Neanderthal or even Peking man.”—Man, God and Magic (New York, 1961), Ivar Lissner, p. 304.Do not textbooks present evolution as fact?“Many scientists succumb to the temptation to be dogmatic, . . . over and over again the question of the origin of the species has been presented as if it were finally settled. Nothing could be further from the truth. . . . But the tendency to be dogmatic persists, and it does no service to the cause of science.”—The Guardian, London, England, December 4, 1980, p. 15.Evolutionists may wonder why humans have the ability to discern a wide range of colors, since the ability to see in color is not needed for survival. However, if we acknowledge that a Creator designed us with the ability to enjoy so many colors, we view this gift as an act of love intended to help us enjoy life.Jehovah God the Source. Life has always existed, because Jehovah God is the living God, the Fountain of life, and he has no beginning or end of existence. (Jer 10:10; Da 6:20, 26; Joh 6:57; 2Co 3:3; 6:16; 1Th 1:9; 1Ti 1:17; Ps 36:9; Jer 17:13) The first of his creations was given life, namely, his only-begotten Son, the Word. (Joh 1:1-3; Col 1:15) Through this Son, other living angelic sons of God were created. (Job 38:4-7; Col 1:16, 17) Later, the physical universe was brought into existence (Ge 1:1, 2), and on the third of earth’s creative “days” the first forms of physical life: grass, vegetation, and fruit trees. On the fifth day, living earthly souls, sea animals, and winged flying creatures were created, and on the sixth day, land animals and, finally, man.—Ge 1:11-13, 20-23, 24-31; Ac 17:25;Consequently, life on earth did not have to wait for some chance combination of chemicals to occur under certain exact conditions. Such a thing has never yet been observed and, in fact, is impossible. Life on earth came to be as the result of a direct command of Jehovah God the Source of life and by the direct action of his Son in carrying out that command. Only life begets life. The Bible account tells us in each instance that the thing created brought forth offspring in its likeness, or, “according to its kind.” (Ge 1:12, 21, 25; 5:3) Scientists have found that there is indeed discontinuity between the different ‘kinds,’ and, except for the question of origin, this has been the chief obstacle to the theory of evolutionA thoughtful study of birds gives convincing proof of the Biblical teaching that they are of divine creation. While birds and reptiles are both oviparous, reptiles are cold-blooded, often sluggish, whereas birds are warm-blooded and among the most active of all earth’s creatures; they also have an unusually rapid heartbeat. The evolutionary view that reptilian scales and front limbs eventually developed into feathered wings is both fanciful and baseless. The fossils of birds called by scientists Archaeopteryx (or, ancient wing) and Archaeornis (or, ancient bird), though showing teeth and a long vertebrated tail, also show that they were completely feathered, had feet equipped for perching, and had fully developed wings. No intermediate specimens, exhibiting scales developing into feathers or front legs into wings, exist to give any semblance of support to the evolution theory. As expressed by the apostle Paul, birds are of a distinct “flesh” from others of earth’s creatures.—1Co 15:39Does the Bible allow for the idea that God used evolution to produce the various kinds of living things?Genesis 1:11, 12 says that grass and trees were made to produce each “according to its kind.” Verses 21, 24, 25 add that God created sea creatures, flying creatures and land animals, each “according to its kind.” There is no allowance here for one basic kind to evolve or change into another.Regarding man, Genesis 1:26 reports that God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.” So he was to have godlike qualities, not traits that were simply a development of those of a beast. Genesis 2:7 adds: “Jehovah God proceeded to form the man [not out of some preexisting life form but] out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life.” There is no hint of evolution here, but, rather, description of a new creation.Did God create all the millions of varieties of organisms that exist on earth today?Genesis chapter 1 says simply that God created each “according to its kind.” (Gen. 1:12, 21, 24, 25) In preparation for the global Flood in Noah’s day, God directed that representative members of each “kind” of land animal and flying creature be taken into the ark. (Gen. 7:2, 3, 14) Each “kind” has the genetic potential for great variety. Thus there are reportedly more than 400 different breeds of dogs and upwards of 250 breeds and types of horses. All interfertile varieties of any animal are just one Genesis “kind.” Similarly, all varieties of humans—Oriental, African, Caucasian, those as tall as the seven-foot Dinka in the Sudan and as short as the four-foot-four-inch Pygmies—stem from the one original pair, Adam and Eve.—Gen. 1:27, 28; 3:20.What accounts for the basic similarities in the structure of living things?“God . . . created all things.” (Eph. 3:9) Thus everything has the same Great Designer.“All things came into existence through him [God’s only-begotten Son, who became Jesus Christ when on earth], and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.” (John 1:3) Thus there was one Master Worker through whom Jehovah performed his works of creation.—Prov. 8:22, 30, 31.What is the origin of the raw material of which the universe is made?Scientists have learned that matter is a concentrated form of energy. This is demonstrated with the explosion of nuclear weapons. Astrophysicist Josip Kleczek states: “Most and possibly all elementary particles may be created by materialization of energy.”—The Universe (Boston, 1976), Vol. 11, p. 17.From where could such energy come? After asking, “Who has created these things [the stars and planets]?”, the Bible states regarding Jehovah God, “Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing.” (Isa. 40:26) So God himself is the Source of all the “dynamic energy” that was needed to create the universe.The Bible is scientifically accurate. It even contains information that was far ahead of its time. For example, the book of Leviticus contained laws for ancient Israel on quarantine and hygiene when surrounding nations knew nothing about such matters. At a time when there were wrong ideas about the shape of the earth, the Bible referred to it as a circle, or sphere. (Isaiah 40:22) The Bible accurately said that the earth is suspended “upon nothing.” (Job 26:7) Of course, the Bible is not a science textbook. But when it touches on scientific matters, it is accurate. Is this not what we would expect of a book from God?The Bible is also historically accurate and reliable. Its accounts are specific. They include not only the names but also the ancestry of individuals. In contrast to secular historians, who often do not mention the defeats of their own people, Bible writers were honest, even recording their own failings and those of their nation. In the Bible book of Numbers, for instance, the writer Moses admits his own serious error for which he was severely reproved. (Numbers 20:2-12) Such honesty is rare in other historical accounts but is found in the Bible because it is a book from God.Yes Creation and Evolution are opposed to each other.Ref- http://www.jw.orgInteresting brochures on the topic-Was Life Created?What you believe about how life began really does matter.https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/was-life-created/#?insight[search_id]=01fcc24e-2a1d-4eb7-9ca8-2b66076831dd&insight[search_result_index]=12The Origin of Life​—Five Questions Worth AskingExamine the evidence and then decide for yourself whether to believe in evolution or creation.https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/origin-of-life-5-questions/#?insight[search_id]=681ec506-eb5b-451d-a779-ac6e5677d79e&insight[search_result_index]=1An interesting magazine on the topic -Your Cells—Living Libraries!The discovery of the structure of DNA has proven to be a watershed in our scientific understanding of life.https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201508/#?insight[search_id]=fcf1f014-d532-429a-be77-6f79cd2b0fc7&insight[search_result_index]=13

Thanks for the A2A Glen Steen.Is it true that humans are descendants of monkeys or gorillas?Not at all. Absolutely false.None of the life forms have evolved from something ,they were all created directly.Do you think that life has a purpose? Evolutionist William B. Provine says: “What we have learned about the evolutionary process has enormous implications for us, affecting our sense of meaning in life.” His conclusion? “I can see no cosmic or ultimate meaning in human life.”Consider the significance of those words. If ultimate meaning in life were nonexistent, then you would have no purpose in living other than to try to do some measure of good and perhaps pass on your genetic traits to the next generation. At death, you would cease to exist forever. Your brain, with its ability to think, reason, and meditate on the meaning of life, would simply be an accident of nature.That is not all. Many who believe in evolution assert that God does not exist or that he will not intervene in human affairs. In either case, our future would rest in the hands of political, academic, and religious leaders. Judging from the past record of such men, the chaos, conflict, and corruption that blight human society would continue. If, indeed, evolution were true, there would seem to be ample reason to live by the fatalistic motto: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”—1 Corinthians 15:32.By contrast, the Bible teaches: “With [God] is the source of life.” (Psalm 36:9) Those words have profound implications.If what the Bible says is true, life does have meaning. Our Creator has a loving purpose that extends to all who choose to live in accord with his will. (Ecclesiastes 12:13) That purpose includes the promise of life in a world free of chaos, conflict, and corruption—and even free of death.—Psalm 37:10, 11; Isaiah 25:6-8.With good reason, millions of people around the world believe that learning about God and obeying him give meaning to life as nothing else can! (John 17:3) Such a belief is not based on mere wishful thinking. The evidence is clear—life was created.Evolution Definition: Organic evolution is the theory that the first living organism developed from lifeless matter. Then, as it reproduced, it is said, it changed into different kinds of living things, ultimately producing all forms of plant and animal life that have ever existed on this earth. All of this is said to have been accomplished without the supernatural intervention of a Creator. Some persons endeavor to blend belief in God with evolution, saying that God created by means of evolution, that he brought into existence the first primitive life forms and that then higher life forms, including man, were produced by means of evolution. Not a Bible teaching.Is evolution really scientific?The “scientific method” is as follows: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true; test the theory by further observations and by experiments; and watch to see if the predictions based on the theory are fulfilled. Is this the method followed by those who believe in and teach evolution?Astronomer Robert Jastrow says: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.”—The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York, 1981), p. 19.Evolutionist Loren Eiseley acknowledged: “After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.”—The Immense Journey (New York, 1957), p. 199.According to New Scientist: “An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”—June 25, 1981, p. 828.Physicist H. S. Lipson said: “The only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (Italics added.)—Physics Bulletin, 1980, Vol. 31, p. 138.Are those who advocate evolution in agreement? How do these facts make you feel about what they teach?The introduction to the centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species (London, 1956) says: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.”—By W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.“A century after Darwin’s death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.”—C. Booker (London Times writer), The Star, (Johannesburg), April 20, 1982, p. 19.The scientific magazine Discover said: “Evolution . . . is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent.”—October 1980, p. 88.What view does the fossil record support?Darwin acknowledged: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution.” (The Origin of Species, New York, 1902, Part Two, p. 83) Does the evidence indicate that “numerous species” came into existence at the same time, or does it point to gradual development, as evolution holds?Have sufficient fossils been found to draw a sound conclusion?Smithsonian Institution scientist Porter Kier says: “There are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around the world.” (New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129) A Guide to Earth History adds: “By the aid of fossils palaeontologists can now give us an excellent picture of the life of past ages.”—(New York, 1956), Richard Carrington, Mentor edition, p. 48.What does the fossil record actually show?The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29.Might it be that the evolutionary process took place as a result of mutations, that is, sudden drastic changes in genes?Science Digest states: “Evolutionary revisionists believe mutations in key regulatory genes may be just the genetic jackhammers their quantum-leap theory requires.” However, the magazine also quotes British zoologist Colin Patterson as stating: “Speculation is free. We know nothing about these regulatory master genes.” (February 1982, p. 92) In other words, there is no evidence to support the theory.The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: “The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed, mutants illustrated in biology textbooks are a collection of freaks and monstrosities and mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process.”—(1977), Vol. 10, p. 742.What about those “ape-men” depicted in schoolbooks, encyclopedias and museums?“The flesh and hair on such reconstructions have to be filled in by resorting to the imagination. . . . Skin color; the color, form, and distribution of the hair; the form of the features; and the aspect of the face—of these characters we know absolutely nothing for any prehistoric men.”—The Biology of Race (New York, 1971), James C. King, pp. 135, 151.“The vast majority of artists’ conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. . . . Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.”—Science Digest, April 1981, p. 41.“Just as we are slowly learning that primitive men are not necessarily savages, so we must learn to realize that the early men of the Ice Age were neither brute beasts nor semi-apes nor cretins. Hence the ineffable stupidity of all attempts to reconstruct Neanderthal or even Peking man.”—Man, God and Magic (New York, 1961), Ivar Lissner, p. 304.Do not textbooks present evolution as fact?“Many scientists succumb to the temptation to be dogmatic, . . . over and over again the question of the origin of the species has been presented as if it were finally settled. Nothing could be further from the truth. . . . But the tendency to be dogmatic persists, and it does no service to the cause of science.”—The Guardian, London, England, December 4, 1980, p. 15.Evolutionists may wonder why humans have the ability to discern a wide range of colors, since the ability to see in color is not needed for survival. However, if we acknowledge that a Creator designed us with the ability to enjoy so many colors, we view this gift as an act of love intended to help us enjoy life.Jehovah God the Source. Life has always existed, because Jehovah God is the living God, the Fountain of life, and he has no beginning or end of existence. (Jer 10:10; Da 6:20, 26; Joh 6:57; 2Co 3:3; 6:16; 1Th 1:9; 1Ti 1:17; Ps 36:9; Jer 17:13) The first of his creations was given life, namely, his only-begotten Son, the Word. (Joh 1:1-3; Col 1:15) Through this Son, other living angelic sons of God were created. (Job 38:4-7; Col 1:16, 17) Later, the physical universe was brought into existence (Ge 1:1, 2), and on the third of earth’s creative “days” the first forms of physical life: grass, vegetation, and fruit trees. On the fifth day, living earthly souls, sea animals, and winged flying creatures were created, and on the sixth day, land animals and, finally, man.—Ge 1:11-13, 20-23, 24-31; Ac 17:25;Consequently, life on earth did not have to wait for some chance combination of chemicals to occur under certain exact conditions. Such a thing has never yet been observed and, in fact, is impossible. Life on earth came to be as the result of a direct command of Jehovah God the Source of life and by the direct action of his Son in carrying out that command. Only life begets life. The Bible account tells us in each instance that the thing created brought forth offspring in its likeness, or, “according to its kind.” (Ge 1:12, 21, 25; 5:3) Scientists have found that there is indeed discontinuity between the different ‘kinds,’ and, except for the question of origin, this has been the chief obstacle to the theory of evolutionA thoughtful study of birds gives convincing proof of the Biblical teaching that they are of divine creation. While birds and reptiles are both oviparous, reptiles are cold-blooded, often sluggish, whereas birds are warm-blooded and among the most active of all earth’s creatures; they also have an unusually rapid heartbeat. The evolutionary view that reptilian scales and front limbs eventually developed into feathered wings is both fanciful and baseless. The fossils of birds called by scientists Archaeopteryx (or, ancient wing) and Archaeornis (or, ancient bird), though showing teeth and a long vertebrated tail, also show that they were completely feathered, had feet equipped for perching, and had fully developed wings. No intermediate specimens, exhibiting scales developing into feathers or front legs into wings, exist to give any semblance of support to the evolution theory. As expressed by the apostle Paul, birds are of a distinct “flesh” from others of earth’s creatures.—1Co 15:39Does the Bible allow for the idea that God used evolution to produce the various kinds of living things?Genesis 1:11, 12 says that grass and trees were made to produce each “according to its kind.” Verses 21, 24, 25 add that God created sea creatures, flying creatures and land animals, each “according to its kind.” There is no allowance here for one basic kind to evolve or change into another.Regarding man, Genesis 1:26 reports that God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.” So he was to have godlike qualities, not traits that were simply a development of those of a beast. Genesis 2:7 adds: “Jehovah God proceeded to form the man [not out of some preexisting life form but] out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life.” There is no hint of evolution here, but, rather, description of a new creation.Did God create all the millions of varieties of organisms that exist on earth today?Genesis chapter 1 says simply that God created each “according to its kind.” (Gen. 1:12, 21, 24, 25) In preparation for the global Flood in Noah’s day, God directed that representative members of each “kind” of land animal and flying creature be taken into the ark. (Gen. 7:2, 3, 14) Each “kind” has the genetic potential for great variety. Thus there are reportedly more than 400 different breeds of dogs and upwards of 250 breeds and types of horses. All inter fertile varieties of any animal are just one Genesis “kind.” Similarly, all varieties of humans—Oriental, African, Caucasian, those as tall as the seven-foot Dinka in the Sudan and as short as the four-foot-four-inch Pygmies—stem from the one original pair, Adam and Eve.—Gen. 1:27, 28; 3:20.What accounts for the basic similarities in the structure of living things?“God . . . created all things.” (Eph. 3:9) Thus everything has the same Great Designer.“All things came into existence through him [God’s only-begotten Son, who became Jesus Christ when on earth], and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.” (John 1:3) Thus there was one Master Worker through whom Jehovah performed his works of creation.—Prov. 8:22, 30, 31.What is the origin of the raw material of which the universe is made?Scientists have learned that matter is a concentrated form of energy. This is demonstrated with the explosion of nuclear weapons. Astrophysicist Josip Kleczek states: “Most and possibly all elementary particles may be created by materialization of energy.”—The Universe (Boston, 1976), Vol. 11, p. 17.From where could such energy come? After asking, “Who has created these things [the stars and planets]?”, the Bible states regarding Jehovah God, “Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing.” (Isa. 40:26) So God himself is the Source of all the “dynamic energy” that was needed to create the universe.The Bible is scientifically accurate. It even contains information that was far ahead of its time.For example, the book of Leviticus contained laws for ancient Israel on quarantine and hygiene when surrounding nations knew nothing about such matters. At a time when there were wrong ideas about the shape of the earth, the Bible referred to it as a circle, or sphere. (Isaiah 40:22) The Bible accurately said that the earth is suspended “upon nothing.” (Job 26:7) Of course, the Bible is not a science textbook. But when it touches on scientific matters, it is accurate. Is this not what we would expect of a book from God?The Bible is also historically accurate and reliable. Its accounts are specific. They include not only the names but also the ancestry of individuals. In contrast to secular historians, who often do not mention the defeats of their own people, Bible writers were honest, even recording their own failings and those of their nation. In the Bible book of Numbers, for instance, the writer Moses admits his own serious error for which he was severely reproved. (Numbers 20:2-12) Such honesty is rare in other historical accounts but is found in the Bible because it is a book from God.Yes Creation and Evolution are opposed to each other.Thank you for reading.Interesting brochures on the topic-Was Life Created?What you believe about how life began really does matter.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio...The Origin of Life​—Five Questions Worth AskingExamine the evidence and then decide for yourself whether to believe in evolution or creation.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio...An interesting magazine on the topic -Your Cells—Living Libraries!The discovery of the structure of DNA has proven to be a watershed in our scientific understanding of life.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio...

Thanks for the A2A Pertachi Selvam.I can answer only a part of the question ie why do i not subscribe to Darwins theory of evolution.Because evolution is just not true.Do you think that life has a purpose?Evolutionist William B. Provine says: “What we have learned about the evolutionary process has enormous implications for us, affecting our sense of meaning in life.” His conclusion? “I can see no cosmic or ultimate meaning in human life.”Consider the significance of those words. If ultimate meaning in life were nonexistent, then you would have no purpose in living other than to try to do some measure of good and perhaps pass on your genetic traits to the next generation. At death, you would cease to exist forever. Your brain, with its ability to think, reason, and meditate on the meaning of life, would simply be an accident of nature.That is not all. Many who believe in evolution assert that God does not exist or that he will not intervene in human affairs. In either case, our future would rest in the hands of political, academic, and religious leaders. Judging from the past record of such men, the chaos, conflict, and corruption that blight human society would continue. If, indeed, evolution were true, there would seem to be ample reason to live by the fatalistic motto: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.”—1 Corinthians 15:32.By contrast, the Bible teaches: “With [God] is the source of life.” (Psalm 36:9) Those words have profound implications.If what the Bible says is true, life does have meaning. Our Creator has a loving purpose that extends to all who choose to live in accord with his will. (Ecclesiastes 12:13) That purpose includes the promise of life in a world free of chaos, conflict, and corruption—and even free of death.—Psalm 37:10, 11; Isaiah 25:6-8.With good reason, millions of people around the world believe that learning about God and obeying him give meaning to life as nothing else can! (John 17:3) Such a belief is not based on mere wishful thinking. The evidence is clear—life was created.Evolution Definition: Organic evolution is the theory that the first living organism developed from lifeless matter. Then, as it reproduced, it is said, it changed into different kinds of living things, ultimately producing all forms of plant and animal life that have ever existed on this earth. All of this is said to have been accomplished without the supernatural intervention of a Creator. Some persons endeavor to blend belief in God with evolution, saying that God created by means of evolution, that he brought into existence the first primitive life forms and that then higher life forms, including man, were produced by means of evolution. Not a Bible teaching.Is evolution really scientific?The “scientific method” is as follows: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true; test the theory by further observations and by experiments; and watch to see if the predictions based on the theory are fulfilled. Is this the method followed by those who believe in and teach evolution?Astronomer Robert Jastrow says: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.”—The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York, 1981), p. 19.Evolutionist Loren Eiseley acknowledged: “After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.”—The Immense Journey (New York, 1957), p. 199.According to New Scientist: “An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”—June 25, 1981, p. 828.Physicist H. S. Lipson said: “The only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (Italics added.)—Physics Bulletin, 1980, Vol. 31, p. 138.Are those who advocate evolution in agreement? How do these facts make you feel about what they teach?The introduction to the centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species (London, 1956) says: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.”—By W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.“A century after Darwin’s death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.”—C. Booker (London Times writer), The Star, (Johannesburg), April 20, 1982, p. 19.The scientific magazine Discover said: “Evolution . . . is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent.”—October 1980, p. 88.What view does the fossil record support?Darwin acknowledged: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution.” (The Origin of Species, New York, 1902, Part Two, p. 83) Does the evidence indicate that “numerous species” came into existence at the same time, or does it point to gradual development, as evolution holds?Have sufficient fossils been found to draw a sound conclusion?Smithsonian Institution scientist Porter Kier says: “There are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around the world.” (New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129) A Guide to Earth History adds: “By the aid of fossils palaeontologists can now give us an excellent picture of the life of past ages.”—(New York, 1956), Richard Carrington, Mentor edition, p. 48.What does the fossil record actually show?The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29.Might it be that the evolutionary process took place as a result of mutations, that is, sudden drastic changes in genes?Science Digest states: “Evolutionary revisionists believe mutations in key regulatory genes may be just the genetic jackhammers their quantum-leap theory requires.” However, the magazine also quotes British zoologist Colin Patterson as stating: “Speculation is free. We know nothing about these regulatory master genes.” (February 1982, p. 92) In other words, there is no evidence to support the theory.The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: “The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed, mutants illustrated in biology textbooks are a collection of freaks and monstrosities and mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process.”—(1977), Vol. 10, p. 742.What about those “ape-men” depicted in schoolbooks, encyclopedias and museums?“The flesh and hair on such reconstructions have to be filled in by resorting to the imagination. . . . Skin color; the color, form, and distribution of the hair; the form of the features; and the aspect of the face—of these characters we know absolutely nothing for any prehistoric men.”—The Biology of Race (New York, 1971), James C. King, pp. 135, 151.“The vast majority of artists’ conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. . . . Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.”—Science Digest, April 1981, p. 41.“Just as we are slowly learning that primitive men are not necessarily savages, so we must learn to realize that the early men of the Ice Age were neither brute beasts nor semi-apes nor cretins. Hence the ineffable stupidity of all attempts to reconstruct Neanderthal or even Peking man.”—Man, God and Magic (New York, 1961), Ivar Lissner, p. 304.Do not textbooks present evolution as fact?“Many scientists succumb to the temptation to be dogmatic, . . . over and over again the question of the origin of the species has been presented as if it were finally settled. Nothing could be further from the truth. . . . But the tendency to be dogmatic persists, and it does no service to the cause of science.”—The Guardian, London, England, December 4, 1980, p. 15.Evolutionists may wonder why humans have the ability to discern a wide range of colors, since the ability to see in color is not needed for survival. However, if we acknowledge that a Creator designed us with the ability to enjoy so many colors, we view this gift as an act of love intended to help us enjoy life.Jehovah God the Source. Life has always existed, because Jehovah God is the living God, the Fountain of life, and he has no beginning or end of existence. (Jer 10:10; Da 6:20, 26; Joh 6:57; 2Co 3:3; 6:16; 1Th 1:9; 1Ti 1:17; Ps 36:9; Jer 17:13) The first of his creations was given life, namely, his only-begotten Son, the Word. (Joh 1:1-3; Col 1:15) Through this Son, other living angelic sons of God were created. (Job 38:4-7; Col 1:16, 17) Later, the physical universe was brought into existence (Ge 1:1, 2), and on the third of earth’s creative “days” the first forms of physical life: grass, vegetation, and fruit trees. On the fifth day, living earthly souls, sea animals, and winged flying creatures were created, and on the sixth day, land animals and, finally, man.—Ge 1:11-13, 20-23, 24-31; Ac 17:25;Consequently, life on earth did not have to wait for some chance combination of chemicals to occur under certain exact conditions. Such a thing has never yet been observed and, in fact, is impossible. Life on earth came to be as the result of a direct command of Jehovah God the Source of life and by the direct action of his Son in carrying out that command.Only life begets life. The Bible account tells us in each instance that the thing created brought forth offspring in its likeness, or, “according to its kind.” (Ge 1:12, 21, 25; 5:3) Scientists have found that there is indeed discontinuity between the different ‘kinds,’ and, except for the question of origin, this has been the chief obstacle to the theory of evolutionA thoughtful study of birds gives convincing proof of the Biblical teaching that they are of divine creation. While birds and reptiles are both oviparous, reptiles are cold-blooded, often sluggish, whereas birds are warm-blooded and among the most active of all earth’s creatures; they also have an unusually rapid heartbeat. The evolutionary view that reptilian scales and front limbs eventually developed into feathered wings is both fanciful and baseless. The fossils of birds called by scientists Archaeopteryx (or, ancient wing) and Archaeornis (or, ancient bird), though showing teeth and a long vertebrated tail, also show that they were completely feathered, had feet equipped for perching, and had fully developed wings. No intermediate specimens, exhibiting scales developing into feathers or front legs into wings, exist to give any semblance of support to the evolution theory. As expressed by the apostle Paul, birds are of a distinct “flesh” from others of earth’s creatures.—1Co 15:39Does the Bible allow for the idea that God used evolution to produce the various kinds of living things?Genesis 1:11, 12 says that grass and trees were made to produce each “according to its kind.” Verses 21, 24, 25 add that God created sea creatures, flying creatures and land animals, each “according to its kind.” There is no allowance here for one basic kind to evolve or change into another.Regarding man, Genesis 1:26 reports that God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.” So he was to have godlike qualities, not traits that were simply a development of those of a beast. Genesis 2:7 adds: “Jehovah God proceeded to form the man [not out of some preexisting life form but] out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life.” There is no hint of evolution here, but, rather, description of a new creation.Did God create all the millions of varieties of organisms that exist on earth today?Genesis chapter 1 says simply that God created each “according to its kind.” (Gen. 1:12, 21, 24, 25) In preparation for the global Flood in Noah’s day, God directed that representative members of each “kind” of land animal and flying creature be taken into the ark. (Gen. 7:2, 3, 14) Each “kind” has the genetic potential for great variety. Thus there are reportedly more than 400 different breeds of dogs and upwards of 250 breeds and types of horses. All interfertile varieties of any animal are just one Genesis “kind.” Similarly, all varieties of humans—Oriental, African, Caucasian, those as tall as the seven-foot Dinka in the Sudan and as short as the four-foot-four-inch Pygmies—stem from the one original pair, Adam and Eve.—Gen. 1:27, 28; 3:20.What accounts for the basic similarities in the structure of living things?“God . . . created all things.” (Eph. 3:9) Thus everything has the same Great Designer.“All things came into existence through him [God’s only-begotten Son, who became Jesus Christ when on earth], and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.” (John 1:3) Thus there was one Master Worker through whom Jehovah performed his works of creation.—Prov. 8:22, 30, 31.What is the origin of the raw material of which the universe is made?Scientists have learned that matter is a concentrated form of energy. This is demonstrated with the explosion of nuclear weapons. Astrophysicist Josip Kleczek states: “Most and possibly all elementary particles may be created by materialization of energy.”—The Universe (Boston, 1976), Vol. 11, p. 17.From where could such energy come? After asking, “Who has created these things [the stars and planets]?”, the Bible states regarding Jehovah God, “Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing.” (Isa. 40:26) So God himself is the Source of all the “dynamic energy” that was needed to create the universe.The Bible is scientifically accurate. It even contains information that was far ahead of its time. For example, the book of Leviticus contained laws for ancient Israel on quarantine and hygiene when surrounding nations knew nothing about such matters. At a time when there were wrong ideas about the shape of the earth, the Bible referred to it as a circle, or sphere. (Isaiah 40:22) The Bible accurately said that the earth is suspended “upon nothing.” (Job 26:7) Of course, the Bible is not a science textbook. But when it touches on scientific matters, it is accurate. Is this not what we would expect of a book from God?The Bible is also historically accurate and reliable. Its accounts are specific. They include not only the names but also the ancestry of individuals. In contrast to secular historians, who often do not mention the defeats of their own people, Bible writers were honest, even recording their own failings and those of their nation. In the Bible book of Numbers, for instance, the writer Moses admits his own serious error for which he was severely reproved. (Numbers 20:2-12) Such honesty is rare in other historical accounts but is found in the Bible because it is a book from God.Yes Creation and Evolution are opposed to each other.Interesting brochures on the topic-Was Life Created?What you believe about how life began really does matter.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio...The Origin of Life​—Five Questions Worth AskingExamine the evidence and then decide for yourself whether to believe in evolution or creation.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio..An interesting magazine on the topic -Your Cells—Living Libraries!The discovery of the structure of DNA has proven to be a watershed in our scientific understanding of life.https://www.jw.org/en/publicatio...Thank you for reading.