Why do Creationist call the theory of evolution a leap of faith...?

Ignorance - especially since there IS viewable evidence that one species evolved into another. There is a lot of it. As a fundie might argue to provide evidence for God, so too can "evolutionists" say to provide evidence for evolution - "Just look around you!" It's likely that most creationists actually own proof of evolution and don't know what it is that they've got.

I'm still shocked by the "it's just a theory" argument. A theory is a well established concept explaining a fact that has a large body of evidence to support it. So when they say "it's just a theory", they are, without knowing it, admitting that evolution is completely true.

Psychologically, it can be explained as stemming from a subconscious weakness of faith. Their belief in God may have saturated every aspect of their life so much that it changes from genuine faith to simply a way of life. It infuses in a way, into their very personality - weakening their faith without them every realizing it. And with a weakened faith and with their beliefs so ingrained, they instinctively find anything forcing them to think out of their box to be a threat to them.

Personally, I can't stand those kinds of Christians. They have made themselves so closed minded that they are not even willing to accept loving correction from their fellow believers. Many people say that satan's greatest trick is getting people to think he doesn't exist. I say that his greatest trick is getting people to turn their faith into an unhealthy obsession.

Creationist don't neglect the fact that their beliefs system has faith as a major element in it. But just like evolutionists they point out that they have evidence to support their beliefs.

No one can get in a time machine and go back to see whether a supernatural being formed plants and animals and human beings all at once or if these entities are the result of natural forces operated upon by chance over long periods of time with natural selection canceling out all of the mistakes along the way,

Each side has the same physical evidence to consider in the form of fossils but they have different beliefs about what that evidence is indicating regarding past occurrences. It seems to me like evolutionists are for the most part the people who get offended when people use the word "faith" when talking about their beliefs about past events that have no human witness to verify what happened.

I would guess that this is because belief in the theory of evolution is what is known as a "Scientific naturalism" which is a world view that presupposes that everything cane be explained through natural causes and that to consider anything outside of that realm is to engage in superstition which is contrary to science.

Here's an excerpt from an article on this.

Scientific naturalism is a philosophical position which argues that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes and laws. Many people who are scientific naturalists are also metaphysical naturalists; they believe that nature is all there is, and that there is no reality outside of the natural realm.

In today's universities, science students are taught they must be philosophical naturalists in order to be good scientists. If they don't know the answer to the questions "why" or "how" in nature, they need to research until they find a natural explanation. To do otherwise is cheating. For instance, if they get stuck on an answer to the question, "why does the wind blow?" it's not scientific to say, "Well, it blows because God makes it blow." That’s giving up. They are taught that a good scientist keeps hunting until a natural explanation is found.

Scientific naturalism is easy to appreciate. It encourages tenacity in scientific research and erases the images of angry gods in volcanoes or thunderclouds. A philosophy of scientific naturalism has helped scientists to push past superstition and find the bacteria that cause disease and the poor farming practices that cause famine. Scientists have been able to show that disease and famine have natural causes that go beyond the anger of local gods.

Yet, a healthy dose of scientific naturalism can become a strangling dose of metaphysical naturalism when it comes to the origins debate. This is an area in which faith and science naturally butt heads. It is one thing to say that a good scientist needs to find the natural explanation for things, and quite another thing to say that nature is all there is.

Consider this

The Young Age of the Earth

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-127254205...

The Origin of Man by Dr. Duane Gish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3FZDysZKFQ

The Origins of Life

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3181822797...

Creation In The 21st Century From Where did these Layers Come (From) 1 of 3 (Global Flood)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyoXQJ5Al0

Creation in the 21st Century - Overwhelming Evidence 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o226umqLdsU

Skull Fossils - As Empty as the Evolutionary Theory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yu5jN897kM

Neanderthals - Smarter Then We Thought

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxL636n3w2o

Dinosaurs: Those Terrible Lizards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVvGByvp13Q

Evolution is a leap of faith because it contradicts all the evidence.

This is probably the 100th time that I've explained all this, but I'll repeat it all again in the hopes that maybe (JUST maybe) SOME one will pay attention and learn something. Please read it all the way through - and then reread it. You WILL be tested on this material.

First I want to quote Sherlock Holmes (AKA Sir Arthur Conan Doyle), who said, “When you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” (I'll come back to this later.)

Let's start with origins.

The origin of this theory (yes, it IS still an unproven theory, unlike gravity or Einstein's theories of relativity, et cetera, which are considered "LAWS of science") was from a man (Charles Darwin) who developed his theory on a faulty premise, and used logic to complete his conclusions.

Anybody who knows anything at all about logic will tell you that if you begin with a false premise, the conclusion will likewise be wrong.

Darwin thought that the cell was the smallest divisible part of a living body.

He "decided" (with no scientific evidence) that the cell was filled with what he referred to as an "ambiotic" fluid. He also decided that this fluid controlled the final destiny of the being, and the "undesignated cells" could be molded or reformulated by external stimulii.

Do YOU see a problem with this starting premise? (In case you missed it, this premise of Darwin's was totally unscientific).

The cell has a nucleus within which are several other items. Here are a few of them:

The mitochondria converts raw materials into usable energy in the cell. The first step of this "energy cycle" is to LOSE 1 or 2 units of energy. This violates the concept behind evolution in that if this "energy converter" was supposed to generate energy, the process would have been terminated the moment it began LOSING energy. This, along with several other components in the cell, also violates the laws of entropy and thermodynamics.

I'll skip right down to the most amazing machine known to man.

The DNA is a highly complex data information storage and retrieval system pre-programmed right out of the package, that makes the Cray Supercomputer look like child's play in comparison both in size as well as storage capacity.

If you were to bother studying information technologies, you would quickly come to realize that data and meaningful information is never, and I mean NEVER randomly generated! It takes INTELLIGENCE to create intelligent and meaningful data and information.

Now, we KNOW that the Cray was designed, built AND programmed by intelligent scientists, and yet some people think that this DNA which is far more complex, came about through a series of accidents - even the coded information programmed into it!

Furthermore, the fossil records, WRITTEN IN STONE indicate a sudden burst of life in all its variegated forms, rather than a slow gradual increase of life.

Then we have the problem with the skeletal "evidence" presented to push this nonsense.

Lucy, Piltdown man, Java man, Nebraska man and others have been demonstrated to all be hoaxes! Some overly-zealous evolutionist (one who believes in evolution) planted some bones as "evidence" so that he could later uncover them as the "find of the century", since nature refused to provide any skeletal evidence! One such skeleton was built from the tooth of a boar - a WILD PIG! (That's what you call the "scientific method"? It sure doesn't look scientific to ME when evidence is created to support a lie!

Even the Neanderthal was finally given the title of "hoax". It has the same skeletal structure as an old person stooped over with arthritis!

Now, what about the theory itself? It says that life began very simply and evolved into more complex forms.

First, we can not simplify the cell. When scientists have made that attempt, the cell simply disintegrated! Each component is highly complex, and a cell must contain all components! The cell wall can not survive without the components all in place, nor can the components exist outside the cell wall. They must all come into existence within a fraction of a second of each other. Leave out one, *POOF* the cell disintegrates! Remove one of the components, and *POOF* it disintegrates! The cell is NOT simple.

Even the simplest single-celled protozoa has all the same complex components as any cell in YOUR body. From this, I must draw one of two conclusions: Either YOUR body is a simple life form that hasn't developed intelligence yet, or the "simple" single-celled life forms is complex after all. You can not have it both ways, since your cells are identically as complex as the amoeba!

One scientist who has been studying the internal structure and operation of the DNA, had to finally renounce his belief in evolution because of his studies. He said in an interview that to continue to believe

Both ways of looking at life are by faith. Faith is believing something without seeing or feeling its evidence.That is why we say you need faith to believe that we came from rocks.We have never denied that we walk by faith, not by sight. We even do this on purpose. Because it is impossible to please God without faith. Any honest person is pleased when you believe what he said on his word only.If Joe from down the street told you that he just put 1,000,000,000 into your account, would you start to write checks? I think not without checking your account balance. That is because you would have no faith in his word.Only if you see the money in the account. Now if his name was Bill Gates, you would be more inclined to write those checks by faith.

We believe what God says on His word alone. He says that if we believe that Jesus was raised from the dead and make Jesus Lord, we will be reborn from death to life. Faith believes it on His word alone. I do not have to die to " see" if he is lying or not. The more I read His word, the more confidence I have that He said exactly what He means.But that is just me.

1. There is no way to prove it ever happened. The fossil record does NOT point to evolution, despite what evolutionists claim.

2. The more facts there are that contradict a belief, the more faith it takes to continue believing. There are many problems with evolution, so its adherents have to exercise a LOT of faith and denial.

There's none so blind as those that will not see. Some religious organisations have active elements dedicated to convincing the members that there is no evidence for evolution.

Because the Creationists believe in the Truth, the Creator, what the creator has created, the soul and the final destination, the eternity.

May God Bless you

Probably because a "leap of faith" could be construed as jumping to conclusions!!!!

or their idea that saying "something can't come out of nothing" somehow disproves evolution. And then they have no problem believing in a god who "has always existed," and was "never created."