Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Few Questions For Creationists
Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 1 of 86 (481294)
09-10-2008 10:58 AM


As a person who accepts Evolutionary Theory, I want to understand the Creationist position a bit better. I want to understand exactly what it is that creationists believe. To this end, I have a few questions that I hope some of you can answer, and give YOUR opinion, and if you don’t know, saying you don’t know is a valid answer. Some of these questions are relevant only to “young-earthers” and some only to “old-earthers”, so I am breaking the questions out into groups, so you don’t need to answer questions that are not relevant to your beliefs.
I know there are a number of these types of things on various websites meant to be “stumpers“, but that is NOT the intent of this post. These are questions I honestly want to hear answers for from the “other side”, so I can better understand that position.
Also, I am giving a typically understood definition of creationists, and their two main sub-types, if you disagree with these definitions, please let me know why.
All Creationists (you believe that “god” create “types” of animals, and that species do not evolve into other species through means of natural selection. You may accept micro-evolution [breeds of dogs can evolve from a single dog type] but you reject macro evolution [dogs, cats, apes, humans, birds, reptiles, etc all evolved from a common ancestor]):
  1. How old is the earth (roughly)?
  2. And how old is the universe?
  3. How much have you yourself read or studied the Theory of Evolution?
  4. Of that reading/studying (if any), how much was reading or studying the works of evolutionary biologists or others who accept evolution as valid (such as Charles Darwin, Steven J Gould, Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, Eugenie Scott, etc) as opposed to reading anti-evolution sources (such as the Discovery Institute)?
  5. What is the BEST evidence in your opinion that supports the idea of creation? I’m not asking here for “holes” that you feel exist in evolution, but for specific evidence that positively supports creationism.
  6. What would it take to convince you that evolution is the means by which all species were “created”, over the course of billions of years (this could be as simple as “god” telling you personally, or some amount of evidence you’d require)?
Old Earth Creationists (you believe that Genesis is not a historical account and accept the age of the universe as being 13-15 billion years old):
  1. What is about evolution that you believe is inconsistent with “god” using it as a means to create new species over millions over years?
  2. If you accept the age of the earth in billions of years, then do you think that there was one “creation” of animals, and that mankind walked with dinosaurs hundreds of millions of years ago, or were there multiple “creations” and every so often “god” creates a new “type” of animal, with humans being created long after many other species had gone exinct (such as the dinosaurs)?
  3. If there was ONE creation millions (or billions) of years ago, why does our recorded history only go back a few thousand years (i.e. if we’ve been this “smart for so long, why did we only start writing things down so recently)?
    If there were multiple creations over time, how does a “creation” happen, does a new “type” just appear where before there was none (let’s use dogs as an example, at some point there were no dogs, but there were many other animals, and then there were dogs, what happened in that moment where dogs were created (were just two created, or many, were all different breeds created at once, or did dobermans and chiwawas, etc come from a single ancestor, etc)?
  4. Do you find the claims of “young-earthers” to be valid and reasonable claims based on your understanding of holy books and science?
Young Earth Creationists (you believe that Genesis is a literal account of history, and the earth is roughly 6-10 thousand years old):
  1. Why does the evidence of geology, astronomy, physics, chemistry, etc all make it seems as if the earth and the universe are much older than your beliefs say they should be? Is it a “test” or “joke” of some sort from “god”?
  2. Why, if the earth is as young as you claim, would so many branches of science (geology, physics, astronomy, biology, cosmology, anthropology, chemistry, etc), and scientists claim otherwise? Are they intentionally lying, or deluded, or does “god” want to hide the truth from some people, or is there some other reason?
  3. Other religions than yours (whatever yours may be) have different accounts of creation than your religion does, and these accounts are not based on science, or evolution, etc. Why do you think there are so many accounts of how things came to be that differ from your own view?
  4. What type of evidence would you require to accept the age of the earth and the universe as being billions of years old, as opposed to thousands of years old (as before, this could be as simple as “god” telling you personally, or some specific evidence you’d require)?
Also if there is anything else you have to say on the subject of evolution and/or creationism, feel free to add it, as I’m sure that my questions may not cover all of your specific thoughts on the subject.
[Originally posted at: A few questions for creationists | Rodibidably ]
Edited by Rodibidably, : [Edited for mod approval]
Edited by Rodibidably, : No reason given.
Edited by Admin, : Make numbered lists easier to read.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 09-10-2008 11:26 AM Rodibidably has replied
 Message 6 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-10-2008 5:58 PM Rodibidably has replied
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 09-10-2008 6:05 PM Rodibidably has replied
 Message 14 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 09-11-2008 1:46 PM Rodibidably has not replied
 Message 15 by ICANT, posted 09-11-2008 2:10 PM Rodibidably has not replied
 Message 20 by Syamsu, posted 09-11-2008 5:31 PM Rodibidably has not replied
 Message 31 by mike the wiz, posted 09-13-2008 2:17 PM Rodibidably has not replied

Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 3 of 86 (481301)
09-10-2008 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
09-10-2008 11:26 AM


Re: Bring them here
Edited for your approval (not a link, now it's the questions from the original source)...
As for your idea of restricting to only answers, that's your call.
My idea is not to start arguments, but to get answers from creationists. I have some ideas on what their answers MAY be, but those may very well be "straw-man" arguments, which is why I'd like to hear "from the horse's mouth" as it were...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 09-10-2008 11:26 AM AdminNosy has not replied

Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 4 of 86 (481305)
09-10-2008 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
09-10-2008 11:26 AM


Re: Bring them here
I'd also like to point out, that the individual questions are not meant to be divisive. I took great pains to make them as uncontroversial as possible, while still be able to learn about the beliefs of others.
As for how people reply to comments that people may make, I can' really control that, but the questions themselves should not offend anybody on either "side" of the debate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 09-10-2008 11:26 AM AdminNosy has not replied

Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 10 of 86 (481425)
09-10-2008 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by New Cat's Eye
09-10-2008 5:58 PM


Theistic evolutionists should be considered creationists because they still believe that God CREATED species even though they accept that he used evolution to do it.
I agree that on one sense there are theists who accept evolution as a valid scientific means of creating the species on the planet.
I also understand that in some circles they are refered to as "creationists", because they believe that technically everything was created by "god".
However for the purposes of this thread, their opinions and views are not really relevant, as they accept evolution, and I am trying to understand the beliefs of people who do not accept evolution.
Most, if not all of these questions would be irrelevant towards anybody who accepts evolution, since their answers will generally be the same as my own, whether they believe in a "god" or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-10-2008 5:58 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 11 of 86 (481426)
09-10-2008 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by mike the wiz
09-10-2008 6:05 PM


Re: A bried opinion
mike,
I am not questioning your faith in god, your belif in god, your religion, etc.
I'm not even implying that your view is wrong.
I am only trying ot understand more clearly what it is creationists believe (beyond the obvious that "god" created things).
I think all of these questions are fair questions that are not offensive to creationists, and will help me personally understand the views of others, so that I do not have a "straw-man" in my mind.
If you're unwilling ot answer the questions you can say so, but to say that you are not bothered by the questions, and then not give any answers to them is a bit odd.
None of my questions are "attacking" creationism.
I understand that "your side" has many things that you feel show holes in evolution, however I fail to see how that is relevant, as nothing I said (or asked) is in any way showing a negative towards creationism.
Obviously you've thought about some of these questions before, so I'd appreiecate your answers. If you're going ot avoid what are relavily begnin questions, I do hope you'll explain what problems you see in the questions, as I intended them to specifically NOT be contriversial, but only to help me gain a better understanding.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 09-10-2008 6:05 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by mike the wiz, posted 09-12-2008 6:38 PM Rodibidably has not replied

Rodibidably
Junior Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 09-10-2008


Message 12 of 86 (481427)
09-10-2008 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by onifre
09-10-2008 7:49 PM


Re: A bried opinion
Rodibidably your intentions are great by trying to get answers but, I suspect that you'll get this type of response,(like mike the wiz's), which is to try and show the supposed problems with evolution from creo websites rather than get a straight answer on their position.
I'm afraid you may be correct, but I'm hoping that at least some creationists will share their thoughts.
I feel these questions are not at all contriversial (which was intentional), so I don't see any particular reason to avoid answering.
I don't want ot jump to conclusions as to the reason mike avoided answering, but I'm hopeful (naive?) that he and others will give me a better understanding of their position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by onifre, posted 09-10-2008 7:49 PM onifre 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