Reasons for Creationist Persistence

Given a clique of two or three minimum, they will have the confidence and superiority complex to laugh at all the evolution/secular teaching - this attitude is carefully nurtured on Sundays.

jar writes:should they actually get exposed to truth the result is a total abandonment of their religious beliefs.

Jar writes:In the world of science, you are expected to make your finding public and freely distributed throughout the community, for the purpose of criticism, testing and replication. (...)There is nothing comparable to the ethics system found in science in the realm of theology.

Mere Orthodoxy writes:... The Existence of Truth. In C.S. Lewis’s masterful dream-like novel, The Great Divorce, he records a conversation with an Anglican priest who rejects heaven for hell. At the core of the priest’s resistance to heaven is the idea that heaven is a place of facts. He is far more interested in his opinion, and consequently refuses to enter heaven. “To travel hopefully is better to arrive,” he claims. Questions are more important than answers. Answers bring finality and stagnation”they are the way to dogmatism, which in our contemporary climate can only be said with a sneer.But inquiry”discussion, questions, conversation”is about finding answers, not about endlessly questioning. It is about finding a deeper understanding of both the questions and the answers, whether those answers are revealed to us in Scripture or are simply products of experience.As the Priest’s friend from heaven puts it, “Once you were a child. Once you knew what inquiry was for. There was a time when you asked questions because you wanted answers . Thirst was made for water, inquiry for truth.”[1] The irony, of course, is that the Priest leaves heaven to return to an eternity of isolation and solitude. In fact, he laments the fact that his normal group of friends have lost their intellectual abilities. The conversation in heaven”a conversation of inquiry and understanding”is only possible in light of the fact that there are facts in the world. Outside the existence of answers, no genuine conversation is possible.The point is a simple one: if no final answers exist, then ultimately the best that we can do is opinion. This has three potential effects, though, on conversation. One, it destroys the notion of progress. Because there are no facts to measure opinions or interpretations by, there is no standard to which opinions must be measured. And consequently, there is no possibility of progress in the discussion.The whole notion of progress depends upon a fixed goal, and in learning, that fixed goal is facts. It is easy to see how a rejection of facts is an invitation to despair.The second effect of this worldview, though, is more pernicious. If only opinions count, then “persuasion” changes from persuading someone to see the way things are to persuading someone to see things how I see them. In other words, the discussion moves away from a spirit of inquiry to a spirit of power. May the most rhetorically persuasive person win. Besides being antithetical to the Christian gospel, that sort of environment will stifle any real conversation.Thirdly, if a conversation is not focused on knowing the truth, then what often happens is “opinion-lobbing.” In other words, people simply say their opinions without opening themselves to hard questions or criticisms.This happens a lot, I think, in Church small groups. Because we are afraid of making others feel bad, we sometimes allow opinions to be stated without rebuttal or question. This sort of opinion-lobbing, though therapeutic and sometimes necessary, will eventually stifle conversation. The only thing that keeps a great conversation alive is the pursuit of a truth that is independent of anyone’s minds.The existence of truth”whether about the world, about texts, about beauty, about anything”is absolutely essential if discussion is going to be something more than opinion-lobbing or power struggles.

There is no surefire way to test theology.

I am going to reprint an argument that I read on an orthodox blog website.

But inquiry”discussion, questions, conversation”is about finding answers, not about endlessly questioning.

It is about finding a deeper understanding of both the questions and the answers, whether those answers are revealed to us in Scripture or are simply products of experience.

The point is a simple one: if no final answers exist, then ultimately the best that we can do is opinion.

Jar writes:We can do more than just "opinion"... we can have "opinion backed up by fact or reason." In fact, you can have a whole series, a body of knowledge backed up by fact or reason yet still go on questioning.

Phat writes:... if you question everything, including whether you even exist or not, you can never have a foundational belief.

To me, that is like throwing away the sample of a substance that I wished to test.

My point is that if you question everything, including whether you even exist or not, you can never have a foundational belief.

Jar writes:But look at your example, the old Biblical Christian Cult of Ignorance fall back trick of spouting "including whether you even exist or not" as though it even made sense or had significance. They trot this old piece of dead meat out just like they trot out the dead meat of Absolute Morality and Absolute Truth. It's just another method to misdirect folks attention while the conman palms the pea.

Where is this conman?

Why is it that you portray virtually every Christian who disagrees with you as some caricature of P.T. Barnum who is sneaking out the back of the tent with all of the loot?

All I am saying is that Theology does not always have to defer to Science when it comes to honest appraisals of the world we inhabit.

jar writes:The kids that are being brainwashed under systems such as ABeka Books have almost no chance of ever learning the truth about either science or Christianity and all too often, should they actually get exposed to truth the result is a total abandonment of their religious beliefs.

Phat writes:My point is that if you question everything, including whether you even exist or not, you can never have a foundational belief.

Jar writes:The problem is there is no Ethics Committee in religion that will catch folk lying like that and sanction them as there is in science.(...) The person you were quoting was lying, was pulling a con, was trying to misdirect the audience.

Jar writes:Endlessly questioning does not exclude finding answers. By endlessly questioning you find the answers and then go on to find even more answers.

anastasia writes:The persistence of CCOI is a problem similar to inter-city violence and solved by getting kids to know there is another world outside of this. Religion being untouchable, it is hard to reach the kids.