Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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:   Why I call myself a Conservative, Republican, Christian Creationist Evolutionist
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 10 of 81 (374772)
01-05-2007 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by subbie
01-05-2007 4:52 PM


Re: Why you should not call yourself that...
subbie writes:
... try to change the meaning of the term "Creationist." People are using it now with a fair amount of precision....
You do understand the difference between "precision" and "accuracy", don't you?
A "creationist" means precisely "somebody who believes in creation". Tacking on a lot of young-earth, anti-evolution baggage doesn't add to the precision. It detracts from the accuracy.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by subbie, posted 01-05-2007 4:52 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by subbie, posted 01-05-2007 5:42 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 15 of 81 (374796)
01-05-2007 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by subbie
01-05-2007 5:42 PM


Re: Why you should not call yourself that...
subbie writes:
But you cannot seriously dispute that most people today understand the term "Creationist" to have the meaning I provided above.
Of course I can.
The term "creationist" has been co-opted by a small but vocal minority to fool people into thinking that their anti-evolution, anti-education agenda is spiritually based. It is not and they do not represent "most people today".
The word "creationist" as abused by YECs is akin to the word "pro-life" as abused by anti-abortion crusaders. They can fool some of the people some of the time, but that is not the proper meaning of the word.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by subbie, posted 01-05-2007 5:42 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by subbie, posted 01-05-2007 8:10 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 17 of 81 (374821)
01-05-2007 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by subbie
01-05-2007 8:10 PM


Re: Why you should not call yourself that...
subbie writes:
... there is no question that their agenda is based on their spirituality.
Plenty of question.
There are many motivations behind the YEC movement. The word "creationist" is calculated to fool the gullible followers into thinking that the leaders' motivations are the same as their own.
My use of the phrase "most people today" was in reference to what most people think the term "creationist" means, not whether or not they ascribe to what anti-evolutionists say.
I would suggest that a lot of people don't associate "creationist" with "anti-evolutionist" at all. Outside the U.S., where people aren't so steeped in fundyism, "creationist" often just means a quaint belief in "God" - somewhat akin to a belief in fairies.
... we can certainly argue about what the word should mean. But that is a vastly different discussion from what the word does mean to most people.
The meaning of words is not a popularity contest. Words can have a variety of acceptable usages. "Creationist" happens to have at least two common usages and it is not your place to count noses and decide which one somebody "should" use in reference to himself.
... if you're advocating that the definition be changed to deprive creos with the ammunition of apparent support from Christianity, I'd go along with that.
I'm advocating that you shouldn't swallow their "definition" of the word any more than you should swallow their "definition" of science or kind or transitional.
It appears to have become entrenched in its current meaning to the point that I suspect any such attempt would be an exercise in futility.
Here's my chance to quote Tal's signature:
quote:
Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking.
--Ferdinand Foch-- at the Battle of the Marne
"Futility" is my middle name.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by subbie, posted 01-05-2007 8:10 PM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 01-06-2007 12:32 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 31 of 81 (374928)
01-06-2007 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Phat
01-06-2007 12:32 PM


Re: Questions--for Mister Ringo
Mr. Phat,
I think most of your questions are (or should be) rhetorical - but I'm going to answer them individually anyway (ornery me).
Phat writes:
If everyone thought alike, would Jesus approve?
Depends. If everybody thought that they should love their neighbour as themselves, I'm sure He would approve of that. If everybody thought that the earth was 6000 years old, I'm equally sure He would not approve of that.
Does the Creator really care if His creation believes in Adam and Eve and a Snake and a Flood?
I think He "really cares" that they understand the message behind the stories. If they cling to a belief in a literal Adam and Eve, they have missed the point. If they cling to a belief in a literal snake, they have missed the point. If they cling to a belief in a literal flood, they have missed the point.
He cares about the point, not the fairy tales told to illustrate the point.
Does He not want us to use our minds that He created (directly or indirectly) within us?
Are there not too many negatives in that sentence to make it incomprehensible?
I think you meant to ask, "Does He want us to use our minds?"
Yes.
Are we expected to turn our backs on the hallowed halls of education that brought society out of the ignorance of the past?
No.
Perhaps we really are hopeless victims of Original Sin....
Since the fiction of "Original Sin" is supposedly right at the beginning of the Bible, the "hopeless victims" scenario would make the rest of the Bible redundant.
... we really shouldn't try and deify our own human wisdom....
You've made an Olympic-caliber long jump from "should we use our brains?" to deification of our human wisdom.
We should use our feet for walking, but that doesn't deify them. We should use our hands to make a living, but that doesn't deify them. Why single out the brain for atrophy?
... the best answer for a universe full of problems.
Bear in mind that the unused brains of religionists have probably created more problems than they have solved.
Can a man be a critical thinker and also believe that Jesus lives within him?
I think jar - among others - illustrates that he can.
The problem is that some people don't believe that he believes. Could that be a flaw in their beliefs? Or a flaw in their critical thinking?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 01-06-2007 12:32 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by subbie, posted 01-06-2007 1:30 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 36 of 81 (374940)
01-06-2007 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by subbie
01-06-2007 1:30 PM


Re: Questions--for Mister Ringo
subbie writes:
... do you think the Creator cares whether we believe any of the bible is factually accurate?
No.
Maybe the Creator wants us to believe that all of The Clan of the Cave Bear is factually accurate.
Would the Creator be satisfied if we conclude that every word of the bible is a fairy tale that teaches us important lessons of life and live those lessons?
He'd be more than satisfied. He'd be delighted.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by subbie, posted 01-06-2007 1:30 PM subbie has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 41 of 81 (374961)
01-06-2007 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Admin
01-06-2007 2:33 PM


Re: The Administrative Position
Admin writes:
... very confusing.
If confusion prompts people to actually think instead of having a knee-jerk reaction, is that such a bad thing?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Admin, posted 01-06-2007 2:33 PM Admin has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 48 of 81 (375038)
01-06-2007 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Hyroglyphx
01-06-2007 10:12 PM


Re: Oxymoronic
nemesis_juggernaut writes:
Being apart of "The Church"....
I'm going to be nit-picky here because you're criticizing somebody else for using "loose terminology".
Are you aware that "apart of the Church" and "a part of the Church" are opposites?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-06-2007 10:12 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-06-2007 10:32 PM ringo 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