Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-21-2019 5:25 AM
43 online now:
Tangle, vimesey (2 members, 41 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,522 Year: 3,559/19,786 Month: 554/1,087 Week: 144/212 Day: 11/49 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Author Topic:   Are Creationists shooting themselves in the foot?
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5953
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 16 of 80 (510673)
06-02-2009 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Huntard
06-02-2009 10:19 AM


I thought you accepted scientific facts? Don't contradict yourself.

And when pressed they cannot provide any scientific facts in support of YEC. The root of the matter is that not only do they not understand what science is, but they REFUSE to understand what science is. They truly believe that if they call it creation "science", it magically becomes science.

Isn't it funny that fundies protest things like Harry Potter, but expect everyone to believe their magical tales.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Huntard, posted 06-02-2009 10:19 AM Huntard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Perdition, posted 06-02-2009 11:46 AM Theodoric has not yet responded
 Message 18 by Lokins, posted 06-02-2009 9:41 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Perdition
Member (Idle past 1313 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 17 of 80 (510675)
06-02-2009 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Theodoric
06-02-2009 11:42 AM


Isn't it funny that fundies protest things like Harry Potter, but expect everyone to believe their magical tales.

That's because they believe magical tales. Perhaps they are worried that Hogwarts is a real place that their children could be swept off to.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Theodoric, posted 06-02-2009 11:42 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Lokins
Junior Member (Idle past 3167 days)
Posts: 23
From: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Joined: 05-28-2009


Message 18 of 80 (510708)
06-02-2009 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Theodoric
06-02-2009 11:42 AM


Pourquoi?
Theodoric writes:

They truly believe that if they call it creation "science", it magically becomes science.

What is their basis for calling it a "science" anyway? They obviously have no idea what science actually is. Is it because the things they talk about concern concepts that scientists discovered? Because it uses fancy terms that scientists made up?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Theodoric, posted 06-02-2009 11:42 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Son
Member (Idle past 1905 days)
Posts: 346
From: France,Paris
Joined: 03-11-2009


Message 19 of 80 (510712)
06-02-2009 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by mike the wiz
06-02-2009 5:31 AM


In science, you don't start with the conclusion but with observations and test with evidence. That's why evolution is science and creationism isn't. By saying that creationism is science, I feel that you are just trying to usurp its merits without the hard work most scientists did. Why don't you say that it's religion? Shouln't your faith be enough by your standard to discover the "TRUTH"?
It feels like you think that science is superior to religion in this regard so you must put your religion in equal footing with science to lend your religion more credibility.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by mike the wiz, posted 06-02-2009 5:31 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

    
Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 2884 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 20 of 80 (510716)
06-03-2009 12:58 AM


Let's get back on topic, shall we?
mike the wiz writes:

The whole point of being born again is that you give everything to Christ (your life in all areas). It is clear that Christ was the second Adam, according to the NT.

When you're saying Jesus was the second Adam, aren't you using a metaphor? ^^ Don't you realize how silly you sound when you use a metaphor to justify a literal interpretation?

Having said that, let's please get back on topic. Most of us seem to be in agreement that creationism isn't proper science, let's not discuss that. Let's discuss the various ways in which creationists are screwing up their own agenda. Those of you who want to stand up for creationism, please tell us in what ways creationism has helped bring awareness of God (or an intelligent designer) to people, and provide actual numbers if you can. Everyone else, feel free to add to my list in the OP, or give accounts of how you see creationism is harming itself.

This could be interesting.


    
Ichneumon
Junior Member (Idle past 3486 days)
Posts: 16
Joined: 06-09-2008


Message 21 of 80 (510881)
06-04-2009 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Fallen
05-30-2009 11:31 AM


"Fallen" writes:

At that point, out of curiosity, I got a copy of Darwin’s Blackbox from the library. Frankly, that book changed the course of my life. Unlike any of the dozen or so YEC books I had read, Behe took the time to extensively discuss the objections to his work. After reading the book and going through his online articles, I was able to present a reasonably defensible case for intelligent design to the same evolutionary biologist who had shredded my creationist beliefs.


Oh dear...

If you're basing your "reasonably defensible case for intelligent design" on Behe's material, I'm afraid you've been misled.

Sure, it looks kind of solid at first blush if you're not really familiar with the topic or the underlying science, but I've read it and it's shot full of fallacies, flaws, and false claims.

If you'll tell us what you think are the very best 2-3 things Behe says that appear to you to be "reasonably defensible", we'll be glad to show you where and why he's actually just hand-waving. This might not be the most appropriate thread for that however, but feel free to start a new thread in the appropriate forum.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Fallen, posted 05-30-2009 11:31 AM Fallen has not yet responded

    
slevesque
Member (Idle past 2716 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 22 of 80 (511096)
06-06-2009 5:01 AM


Creationism as an identifiable movement is around since the 70's I think.

But using the biblical account of creation as historical is as old as christianity itself, so I doubt it is really shooting christianity in the foot.

I would rather think the opposite, that YEC helps sustain christianity. As a 'proof' of this, I can say that there is no creationist movement over here in Quebec (canada) and christianity is on a much more steep decline then in the US.


Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Meldinoor, posted 06-07-2009 12:16 AM slevesque has responded
 Message 25 by Nuggin, posted 06-08-2009 12:10 AM slevesque has not yet responded

  
Meldinoor
Member (Idle past 2884 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009


Message 23 of 80 (511152)
06-07-2009 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by slevesque
06-06-2009 5:01 AM


Got the cart before the horse?
I think you have it backwards. In Canada and many other secular countries (like Sweden, where I'm originally from) creationism is virtually extinct because evangelical Christians are a small minority. Not that evangelical Christians have to be creationists (I'm not) but creationism depends on a large demographic of fundamentalists.

In the US, at least half of the population is Christian, so they have LOTS of political sway, and their "science" stands a lot better chance of getting recognized. They are sustaining creationism, not the other way around.

That's just my humble opinion.

Note: Not that I know much about Canadian demographics. I'm probably wrong to lump them in with a highly secular country like Sweden.

Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by slevesque, posted 06-06-2009 5:01 AM slevesque has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by slevesque, posted 06-07-2009 12:48 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded

    
slevesque
Member (Idle past 2716 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 24 of 80 (511154)
06-07-2009 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Meldinoor
06-07-2009 12:16 AM


Re: Got the cart before the horse?
Quebec is very different from Canada. In western Canada (BC, Alberta, etc.) there is a good creationist movement with religious percentages very similar to the US. Lots of evangelical christians over there.

Here in Quebec, its is not evangelical, it is catholic. In fact up to the 1950's, 99% of the population were practising catholics. In a time-span of 50 years, that pourcentage went down to maybe 5%. (and I'm being generous here). I think the fact that catholics compromised on the issue of origins with evolution had a negative impact on the number of christians here, not a positive one.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Meldinoor, posted 06-07-2009 12:16 AM Meldinoor has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 568 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 25 of 80 (511205)
06-08-2009 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by slevesque
06-06-2009 5:01 AM


I would rather think the opposite, that YEC helps sustain christianity.

When Christians cling to claims which are so obviously and demonstrably false, they make themselves look foolish.

Eventually they are forced to admit that they've been wrong and they look even worse.

See "The Earth is the Center of the Universe and the Sun goes around it"
See "Lighting is God's wrath"
See "Rainbows are made by God"

All the Christians have to do to fix the problem is say "We are interested in these books for their message, not their inaccurate account of the pre-historical world."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by slevesque, posted 06-06-2009 5:01 AM slevesque has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by dwise1, posted 06-08-2009 1:46 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3309
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 26 of 80 (511208)
06-08-2009 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Nuggin
06-08-2009 12:10 AM


Let's put it more directly. We observe creationists repeatedly making contrary-to-fact claims which are blatantly false. We are told by the creationists themselves that if those claims are wrong then Christianity itself is false and God does not exist.

It is not so much that they are making themselves look foolish (though they most certainly do that, and with surprising enthusiasm). They have placed a disproof of the very existence of God on a silver platter and handed it to atheists. What greater service to mankind could anyone imagine than to dispell all belief in the Judeo-Christian god?

Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!

Edited by dwise1, : word choice


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Nuggin, posted 06-08-2009 12:10 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

    
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1502 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 27 of 80 (511244)
06-08-2009 2:51 PM


Fundamental Evolution?
Young Earth Creationists (YEC) do teach against evolution. Many of their children go off to college and end up rejecting Christianity. If the YEC are wrong, they are shooting themselves in the foot. The Bible might call this Millstone Theology. (Matt 18:6) Interestingly, there is nothing that insists the Adam of Gen 1 is the same as Adam of Gen 2. If they are different, that would allow for a huge amount of time between the two, allowing for evolution. If Gen 2 is talking about the advent of agriculture, it becomes surprisingly accurate. http://sites.google.com/site/gardenineden/ is my summary of Gen 2,3,4. So, is fundamentalist theology evolving to fit science? Or is it beginning to Biblically challenge wrong theology that iconoclasts hammer everyone for questioning? If so, it is not much different than many scientists receive from other scientists for their new theories.
Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2009 3:11 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 80 (511246)
06-08-2009 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by greentwiga
06-08-2009 2:51 PM


Re: Fundamental Evolution?
is nothing that insists the Adam of Gen 1 is the same as Adam of Gen 2.

Where does it say "Adam" in Gen 1?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by greentwiga, posted 06-08-2009 2:51 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1502 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 29 of 80 (511261)
06-08-2009 5:23 PM


Adam in Gen 1
Gen 1:27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Adam is the word for man meaning mankind. Male is Ish and female is Ishah. Here, Adam refers to mankind, both male and female. Notice that there could have been more than two. Using Adam for a name in Chap 2 follows a long line of Hebrew tradition of naming children according to some characteristic. Adam means red, derived from the word dam meaning blood. Edom (the same name as Adam) was so named because he had red hair. Adam might have been red haired. Adamah is a word for reddish, fertile soil. He might have the name because he was made from red dirt. There is no reason why Adam has to be the same person as Ish of 1:27.
Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Percy, posted 06-09-2009 8:29 AM greentwiga has not yet responded
 Message 31 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-09-2009 10:30 AM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18308
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 30 of 80 (511313)
06-09-2009 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by greentwiga
06-08-2009 5:23 PM


Re: Adam in Gen 1
greentwiga writes:

There is no reason why Adam has to be the same person as Ish of 1:27.

God created only one man and one woman. Who else could it be?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by greentwiga, posted 06-08-2009 5:23 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
Prev1
2
3456Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019