Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Fanatics
AlgolagniaVolcae
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 26 (293144)
03-08-2006 3:56 AM


Why I find it hard to respect Creationism, and why I fear it.
Since originally proposing this topic it has come to my attention that Duane Gish(Senior Vice President of ICR(Institute of Creation Research), maybe future president since Morris' death), a public face of Creationism isn't overly respected by the majority of Creationists. This puts to rest the thoughts I had that his and ICR's way of thinking represented a majority in the movement.
I say Gish is a public face, because of his appearance on Penn and Teller: Bullsh*t!(http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=c). The episode he appeared on was ironically enough the same arguement this very website is built around, Evolution versus Creationism. It is partially why I sought out a forum to debate the topic, as he did a very poor job of convincing the hosts and myself that the idea has any merit at all other than an entirely religious one.
He lost me when he claimed the Grand Canyon was cut by a single massive surge of water(great flood) rather than over time by a steady flow.
Though even if people like Gish, and ICR as a whole do not represent a majority the following excerpt from that website is still a prime example of my arguement.
" We believe God has raised up ICR to spearhead Biblical Christianity's defense against the godless and compromising dogma of evolutionary humanism. Only by showing the scientific bankruptcy of evolution, while exalting Christ and the Bible, will Christians be successful in “the pulling down of strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (II Corinthians 10:4,5). " (The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research)
The choice of wording leads me to believe they are at war with everyone that has a different view, the use of "and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" implies that ICR has not outgrown Christianities history of forcing itself onto everyone it encounters yet the Church(as a ruling body) seems to have done just that(you still have isolated members who are not backed by the Church that pressure others, but nothing like the organized group represented in ICR).
ICR also takes every oppurtunity to jump on scientists who falsify their findings, so that they can mention the inherent fallibility of all scientists. (Can We Trust Science? | The Institute for Creation Research)
" We trust science. We trust that scientists have done their work well and honestly when we drive a car over a bridge, ride in an elevator, or undergo a surgical procedure. But we need to be realistic in our trust of scientists. Scientists are human with sin natures just as the rest of the human population. As Christians, when a scientific “breakthrough” is reported we should either examine the evidence for ourselves, or if we are not qualified to discern the data (which in many cases only a specialist in the field would be able to do), we should wait until the data are verified and confirmed by other reputable scientists before claiming it as fact. Unfortunately, many Christians transfer their trust in science to a scientist when he gives an opinion or hypothesis about the origins of the universe, the living world, and humans as well. Many assume that since a scientist said it, “it must be true” even if it apparently contradicts Scripture. From the recent events depicting the problems that a few scientists have had with honesty and integrity, we should remember that they are human and just as prone to sin as the rest of us. When can we fully trust scientists? Just as soon as people stop running red lights! "
Usually when I hear that phrase it goes more like this, "they are human and just as prone to mistakes as the rest of us" though they get a B+ for effort in trying to hide it because the last I checked falsifying findings isn't a sin. Though as it says scientists are prone to mistakes like anyone else, so their findings should be checked by other reputable specialists ... why then do they ignore the fact that many specialists who are not part of their club consider Creationist "science" to be untrue and in some cases entirely speculative?
After reading a bit of ICR's website, and a few more like it there is no doubt in my mind that I would not be safe from discrimination living in an area where these people were a majority or had integrated themselves into local politics to a point where they could initiate change(such as forcing a strictly religious topic to be taught in schools).
A current example of problems which could arise from fanatical and uncompromising Creationists like ICR gaining any type of political power(putting aside just for the moment the threat from individuals who support the movement) can be seen in Salt Lake City, which has long had problems seperating Church from State.
I am not saying that these problems in SLC have not been bettered over the years, but there still remain the many stories of discrimination against business owners and even private citizens who excersized their right to freedom of religion instead of following what was in power. The infamous blacklist is probably the best known discrimination in the city, business owners and private citizens(usually those who voiced their concerns the loudest) on the list had trouble getting licenses, unbiased health inspections and fair pricing on water and power. A few people even claimed that they had been framed for drug possession, and other charges. Their claims were supported by friends and family that knew them, and the fact they had no prior criminal record of any kind.
What about the extremists in the Creationist movement? The individual zealots, every religion has them and to think a few have not latched onto Creationism is very bad judgment.
The very idea of the movement as put forth by ICR and other similar groups is to wage war against those who refuse to believe, so I ask you what is to stop them from bombing museums and other institutes of learning which don't support Creationism?
If I were to put myself in this persons shoes these buildings and the people who visit them laugh in the face of god and Creationism by merely existing and resisting the inclusion of Creationism as a serious subject which should coexist in classrooms with Evolution.
Those are the reasons I am afraid of Creationism gaining any type of real power or overwhelming following, the majority of people who believe it may coexist with those who don't ... but the fanatics that can't coexist are the ones that have my attention and influence my opinions the most.
Suffice to say, I think there's a far greater number of things to fear from Creationism than there are from Evolution. The prime one being a degradation of our culture to a more superstitious time, after all what are the wrathful events in the bible if not prettied up magic?
This message has been edited by AlgolagniaVolcae, 03-10-2006 05:42 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminPhat, posted 03-08-2006 9:09 AM AlgolagniaVolcae has replied
 Message 7 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 1:19 PM AlgolagniaVolcae has not replied
 Message 17 by Buzsaw, posted 03-14-2006 8:45 PM AlgolagniaVolcae has replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 26 (293196)
03-08-2006 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by AlgolagniaVolcae
03-08-2006 3:56 AM


Greetings, AlgolagniaVolcae and welcome to the forums! You do bring up a good point about discrimination in our current right wing neocon society! I want you to do two things for me before this post gets promoted.
1) Rewrite the post and leave out the first three lines. There are several ways we could go with this topic. I invite feedback from other admins...you seem to have a valid question for the secular majority among us! You can go back to your original post, push the EDIT button on the bottem right, and polish it up.
2) Give yourself a good week or more to participate in the forum by responding to other posts before starting one yourself. Get to know our style, and read the Forum Guidelines . We will get back to you by March 15th. I want you to interact with other people in the forum in their posts before starting your own---but we will consider you for promotion!
This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 03-08-2006 07:12 AM


GOT QUESTIONS? You may click these links for some feedback:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • Forum Guidelines
    ***************************************
    New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
  • "Post of the Month" Forum
    "DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU"
    AdminPhat

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 3:56 AM AlgolagniaVolcae has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 3 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 9:50 AM AdminPhat has replied

      
    AlgolagniaVolcae
    Inactive Member


    Message 3 of 26 (293217)
    03-08-2006 9:50 AM
    Reply to: Message 2 by AdminPhat
    03-08-2006 9:09 AM


    How's that, better?
    I can't help but notice the lack of a private message feature here, any specific reasons why?
    This message has been edited by AlgolagniaVolcae, 03-10-2006 05:58 AM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 2 by AdminPhat, posted 03-08-2006 9:09 AM AdminPhat has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 4 by AdminPhat, posted 03-08-2006 1:32 PM AlgolagniaVolcae has not replied

      
    AdminPhat
    Inactive Member


    Message 4 of 26 (293310)
    03-08-2006 1:32 PM
    Reply to: Message 3 by AlgolagniaVolcae
    03-08-2006 9:50 AM


    OK good...im putting it in Miss. topics.
    This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 03-14-2006 03:00 AM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 9:50 AM AlgolagniaVolcae has not replied

      
    AdminPhat
    Inactive Member


    Message 5 of 26 (295109)
    03-14-2006 5:01 AM


    Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

      
    IrishRockhound
    Member (Idle past 4436 days)
    Posts: 569
    From: Ireland
    Joined: 05-19-2003


    Message 6 of 26 (295119)
    03-14-2006 7:26 AM


    Welcome to EvCForum, AlgolagniaVolcae!
    Nice to see such a well-written and articulate post. I hope you decide to stick around here.
    The Rock Hound

    "Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do."

    Replies to this message:
     Message 20 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-16-2006 2:43 AM IrishRockhound has not replied

      
    LudoRephaim
    Member (Idle past 5084 days)
    Posts: 651
    From: Jareth's labyrinth
    Joined: 03-12-2006


    Message 7 of 26 (295240)
    03-14-2006 1:19 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by AlgolagniaVolcae
    03-08-2006 3:56 AM


    Re: Why I find it hard to respect Creationism, and why I fear it.
    Hey dude. Welcome to da' forum
    Creationist fanatics? Heck their is fanatics on both sides of the border (Creationism: Kent Hovind. Evolution: Richard Dawkins)but I wouldn't be fearing bombings like that. We have more things to worry about (Like Marraige, which is arguably far worse LOL)

    "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by AlgolagniaVolcae, posted 03-08-2006 3:56 AM AlgolagniaVolcae has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 8 by NosyNed, posted 03-14-2006 2:36 PM LudoRephaim has replied
     Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 03-14-2006 2:58 PM LudoRephaim has replied

      
    NosyNed
    Member
    Posts: 8996
    From: Canada
    Joined: 04-04-2003


    Message 8 of 26 (295255)
    03-14-2006 2:36 PM
    Reply to: Message 7 by LudoRephaim
    03-14-2006 1:19 PM


    Anecdotal only
    Both sides above may be tending to take extreme views. However these extreme views are only within their respective sides.
    This is not something that I will back up but I did have an email exchange with someone expert in a specific area of dating. He will not publically become involved in the creationism debate. This is because he has recieved death threats.
    I am sure this is the fault of a very small number of the YEC side however the most extreme of them are, indeed, fanatics and if you apply that word to them then I don't think you can use the same word to apply to Dawkins relative-within-his-own-camp extremism.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 1:19 PM LudoRephaim has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 9 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 2:58 PM NosyNed has not replied

      
    LudoRephaim
    Member (Idle past 5084 days)
    Posts: 651
    From: Jareth's labyrinth
    Joined: 03-12-2006


    Message 9 of 26 (295257)
    03-14-2006 2:58 PM
    Reply to: Message 8 by NosyNed
    03-14-2006 2:36 PM


    Re: Anecdotal only
    True. Last time I heared, Dawkins hasn't given peopled death threats (though I dont doubt he has recieved some himself) But when it comes to holding a radical view, Dawkins does fit the bill (I've heared also that he has done several documentaries that tried to show how evil religion is, and had scenes from the Sept 11th attacks and footage of one of the tunnels in Lodon that was bombed last year in it. I'll have to do my best to confirm it though). He is after all called "Darwin's Rottweiler". And on the opposite side, Kent Hovind I believe has said that we shouldn't have public schools: he thinks only the parents should teach their kids (AAAAAHHHHHH)
    I haven't heared much about death threats to scientists, but I dont doubt it. After all, Madeline Murray O'hare (The woman who went to the supreme court to get rid of prayer in schools, and a major Atheist in her own right) lived in Texas for a while, and I believe had a cable television show based there that promoted Atheism (It's been a while since I heared this. I dont know where to start to confirm it) But whatever the case, she did end up "Missing" (Yeah right) and to this day I dont know if they ever found her.
    It is sad that people often associate science with atheism Indeed, some of the major scientists in history where or are religious (Isaac Newton, Gallileo, and in modern times Dr Bakker (The Dinosaur Heresies) and Francis Collins (Director of the National Human Genome research Institute)
    I still think marraige is a greater threat LOL

    "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 8 by NosyNed, posted 03-14-2006 2:36 PM NosyNed has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by MangyTiger, posted 03-14-2006 4:13 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

      
    Chiroptera
    Inactive Member


    Message 10 of 26 (295258)
    03-14-2006 2:58 PM
    Reply to: Message 7 by LudoRephaim
    03-14-2006 1:19 PM


    Re: Why I find it hard to respect Creationism, and why I fear it.
    Hi, Ludo.
    quote:
    Evolution: Richard Dawkins
    Do you mean that Dawkins is a fanatic about atheism? Because, from what I have heard from other sources, he may very well be. But a fanatic about evolution?
    Is it possible to be a fanatic about an issue supported by reality, and contradicted only by an opposition armed with a fantasy?

    "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 1:19 PM LudoRephaim has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 3:09 PM Chiroptera has replied

      
    LudoRephaim
    Member (Idle past 5084 days)
    Posts: 651
    From: Jareth's labyrinth
    Joined: 03-12-2006


    Message 11 of 26 (295263)
    03-14-2006 3:09 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by Chiroptera
    03-14-2006 2:58 PM


    Re: Why I find it hard to respect Creationism, and why I fear it.
    Hi there dude
    No, I was just saying that on both sides of the camp (creation/evolution) there are "radicals". Dawkins Doesn't represent evolution properly, and he is radical in his views of atheism (though not "blow up congress" radical LOL) but since he is on the evolution side, and is radical in his religious views, I was justshowing that evolution has it's radicals. Now radical for evolution? I really dont know for sure. But he often tries to influence evolution with his form of atheism (I believe his best seller "THe Blind Watchmaker" is an example)
    Dr Hovind is a"radical" in the creo tradition, not in the sense of Creationism as much as his own interpretation of scripture and science, and his dishonest use of so-called "scientific facts".
    Heck, Pat Roberston could be considered a radical of the Christian faith, though not necessarily in his religious views as much as his political views and explosive comments.Yet despite that, it doesn't take away from the truths of Christianity, anymore that dawkin's explosive comments dont take away from the legitimacy of Biological sciences (which evolution is a part of)
    I was just trying to say that on either side, there are a few radicals, though their actions and words dont necessarily mean their respective sciences (or "sciences" if you prefer with creationism/ID)are faulty or wrong.
    This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 03-14-2006 03:11 PM

    "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 03-14-2006 2:58 PM Chiroptera has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 03-14-2006 5:54 PM LudoRephaim has replied

      
    MangyTiger
    Member (Idle past 6354 days)
    Posts: 989
    From: Leicester, UK
    Joined: 07-30-2004


    Message 12 of 26 (295296)
    03-14-2006 4:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 9 by LudoRephaim
    03-14-2006 2:58 PM


    Re: Anecdotal only
    I've heared also that he has done several documentaries that tried to show how evil religion is, and had scenes from the Sept 11th attacks and footage of one of the tunnels in Lodon that was bombed last year in it. I'll have to do my best to confirm it though
    You are probably refering to The Root Of All Evil, a two part documentary - perhaps more of a polemic - shown by Channel 4 over here around late January or early February this year.

    I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 9 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 2:58 PM LudoRephaim has not replied

      
    Chiroptera
    Inactive Member


    Message 13 of 26 (295316)
    03-14-2006 5:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by LudoRephaim
    03-14-2006 3:09 PM


    quote:
    But he often tries to influence evolution with his form of atheism
    In what way does he try to "influence" evolution with his form of atheism? I'm not trying to be difficult here, I just don't know what you mean. I do know that he often justifies his atheism with the theory of evolution. Is this what you meant?
    -
    quote:
    I believe his best seller "THe Blind Watchmaker" is an example
    I don't recall much overt atheism in The Blind Watchmaker, but it is possible that I missed it or don't remember it. He does make the point that blind, non-conscious evolution is an adequate explanation for what we see in biology, without the need for an "intelligent designer". In fact, the only agenda that I recall in the book is a swipe at Stephen Jay Gould.

    "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 3:09 PM LudoRephaim has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 14 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 7:03 PM Chiroptera has not replied
     Message 15 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 7:11 PM Chiroptera has not replied
     Message 16 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-14-2006 7:14 PM Chiroptera has not replied

      
    LudoRephaim
    Member (Idle past 5084 days)
    Posts: 651
    From: Jareth's labyrinth
    Joined: 03-12-2006


    Message 14 of 26 (295331)
    03-14-2006 7:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 13 by Chiroptera
    03-14-2006 5:54 PM


    Hey dudes.
    Im sorry I wasn't clear. I do that at times.
    No, what I meant was is that his atheism influences his scientific studies. I've heared, for example, that his book "The Selfish Gene" was trying to show that all the things we do, whether marrying somebody we love, helping others, and many other things we do are nothing more than our Body's attempt to pass on it's genes, more or less. And with "The Blind Watchmaker", the name it'self seems to smack at the "watchmaker" analogy that was meant to show that if the Universe looks designed, it obviously had a designer (I forgot who thought this idea up, but I'll find it again later. I believe the watchmaker analogy is called "teleology")If you read the book and it doesn't attack the idea, I stand corrected, but it's hard not to see a connection there.
    THere is a Book at a nearby Bookstore where I live (called "Borders") that has the subtitle "Science's crusade against religion" (I'm sorry I dont remember the full title. I'll do a little google search and find the full title later)which is written by a reporter and as far as I know not a creationist of any sort. It devotes a chapter on "celebrity Scientists" and tells a great deal about Dawkins. In it he seems to say that those who have religious beliefs are "not Educated" (which is ironic, since there are professors of Theology at Oxford University where Dawkins works, and I would not call them "uneducated)I believe the "education" he is talking about is the Biological sciences.
    You can read more of his beliefs about religion on the link that MandyTiger provided in this thread ( BTW: Hi MandyTiger THank you for the Link )
    Let me find the full title to that book. Be back in a minute or so.

    "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 03-14-2006 5:54 PM Chiroptera has not replied

      
    LudoRephaim
    Member (Idle past 5084 days)
    Posts: 651
    From: Jareth's labyrinth
    Joined: 03-12-2006


    Message 15 of 26 (295337)
    03-14-2006 7:11 PM
    Reply to: Message 13 by Chiroptera
    03-14-2006 5:54 PM


    Okay! Im back with the title and author of that book.
    "A Jealous God: Science's Crusade against Religion" by Pamela R. Winnick
    This book has an evil twin. I saw it a Borders before, and it was written before the above book. I'll get the title later.
    Back to the issue: When Richard Dawkins said that those with religious beliefs are "uneducated" as I have said, this would probably mean education in the biological sciences (Dawkins is a Zoologist)thus he aquaints science with atheism/agnosticism. I believe he himself said that Evolution made it possible for people to be inttelectually fulfilled Atheists. (That was a paraphrase, but it is pretty close to what he said)

    "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 03-14-2006 5:54 PM Chiroptera has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024