Your “Faith” is Stronger than Mine!

One of the strangest assertions of the latest incarnation of Creationism, is the idea that an atheist/agnostic’s “faith” in evolution is as strong, or stronger, than a Creationist’s “faith” in Jesus Christ as their savior. The way this works is to conflate two different definitions of “faith” as if they were the same. One definition is “a firm belief in something for which there is no proof,” while another is “something that is believed especially with strong conviction.” (from the Merriam-Webster online dictionary). The Collins English dictionary puts it this way: “a strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp. without proof or evidence,” vs. “a complete confidence or trust in a person, remedy, etc.” Obviously a “faith” held as an unshakable belief not relying on evidence is not the same as trust or confidence in something, that in the case of evolution, is based entirely on physical evidence. However, Creationists like to pretend these definitions are the same, as part of their penchant for the use of sophistry to score points for “God’s side.”

The question of course, is why do this? I believe the primary goal is to gain parity for creationism with evolution, in support of the assertion that if evolution is taught in a biology class, then creationism should be as well. In addition, Creationists are feeling inferior to their opponents in the debate, and want to feel equal to them. The question is, at what cost?

Creationists use the assertion that evolution supporters have “faith” in evolution as a kind of accusation. “You have as much faith in evolution as I do in Christ!” Or even worse, “It takes more faith to believe in Evolution than it does to believe in God!” WHAT? That’s right… here we have a Christian accusing a non-believer of having more faith than he or she has! It should be the other way around. A Christian to be asking non-believers, “why don’t you have more faith?” rather than accusing them of having more than they do! What does this do to the Creationist’s own religious belief? It demeans it. “Faith” in Jesus Christ becomes equivalent to having “Faith” that the Sun will come up in the morning, or that the Fire Department will come in time to save your house if a fire starts inside it. So in a poor attempt to gain “equality” with their opponents, the Creationists have reduced their own faith in Jesus Christ as their savior into something one might attribute to a light switch. How very sad.

__________________
“The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense." -Bishop John Shelby Spong

"It is not the obligation of the State to reconcile various faiths with reality. Do it yourself." -Atomweaver

"We have designed our civilization based on science and technology and at the same time arranged things so that almost no one understands anything at all about science and technology. This is a clear prescription for disaster."
- Carl Sagan (Demon Haunted World)

If there were a scientific support for an idea, then there is little need for faith. If so, why would creationist suggest that it take faith to support the idea of evolution?

Yes, in the theory of evolution, there are MANY links (or more realistically, gaps) that lack scientific support. That is why. So, the nature of faith for both evolutionist and creationist is the same.

Because they don't know evolution from a hole in the ground?

Evolution = useful real-world applied science
Creationism = religious belief

How is the "nature of faith" the same again?

__________________
Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution

It's like you say, to gain parity. The same way they claim evolution is just as much a "religion" as creationism.

__________________
Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution

I agree 100%.

I answered that question in the O.P. Please read it again.


Please, do tell. What are some of these MANY links/gaps that lack scientific support?


How so? The Theory of Evolution is based on physical evidence, not unquestioned belief in a savior/God or in a book written thousands of years ago by people who understood little of the origin of species.

Can you explain why so many Creationists who do not understand what evolution actually is, and do not know what the evidence is that evolution is based on, have all concluded that it requires faith?

Can you explain why a Creationist would see faith as a bad thing (ie something he would accuse his worst enemy of having)?

Can you explain why a Creationist would think an atheist has more faith than himself? Is it because a Creationist's faith is by it very nature a weak and vulnerable thing?

__________________
“The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense." -Bishop John Shelby Spong

"It is not the obligation of the State to reconcile various faiths with reality. Do it yourself." -Atomweaver

"We have designed our civilization based on science and technology and at the same time arranged things so that almost no one understands anything at all about science and technology. This is a clear prescription for disaster."
- Carl Sagan (Demon Haunted World)

I agree. The whole "evolution is a religion" thing is basically the same as the "equal faith" assertion. It also does its best to undermine and make petty the Creationist's own religion, as well.

__________________
“The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense." -Bishop John Shelby Spong

"It is not the obligation of the State to reconcile various faiths with reality. Do it yourself." -Atomweaver

"We have designed our civilization based on science and technology and at the same time arranged things so that almost no one understands anything at all about science and technology. This is a clear prescription for disaster."
- Carl Sagan (Demon Haunted World)

The "applied" part needs little faith. The rest would need the same "religious belief".

Not every one with creationism belief is scientist. So they said that because someone who knows said that. I said that, because I can argue with you in reason.

Believe in "wrong" thing is always bad.

If one believed that a system which is 50% supported by science and 50% not, is a truth, then there is no better word for it but to call it "religion".

An alternative is to call that system a model. I accept that evolution is a working model, but not a truth.

Originally Posted by juvenissun

If one believed that a system which is 50% supported by science and 50% not, is a truth, then there is no better word for it but to call it "religion".

You like to tell us that there are these big holes in evolutionary theory, but you haven't shown us many of them

An alternative is to call that system a model. I accept that evolution is a working model, but not a truth.

And why do you think it works?

__________________
"There is much we do not understand about the history of life, and the same will be true of our grandchildren. But, then, if we knew all there was to know, scientific interest would cease. Textbooks may portray science as a codification of facts, but it is really a disciplined way of asking about the unknown." - A.H. Knoll, Life on a Young Planet

"Come on, put your bloody thinking caps on!" - Dr Tony Prave, geology lecture