A culture of alienation?

Hi Mike,

My personal view is that Christianity would like to keep people thinking science is "evil" hoping that they stay away from it. I live in Texas and I am an EX-Christian. What you say is correct. I could not take the stupidity and completely uninformed, head in the sand, jabber that went on in Bible study. I remeber the day I ran for the exit sign- never to heard from again. The tree of knowledge has always been presented as an enemy by the church/Christianity from the very beginning. I have heard many Christians here in Texas refer to education as "dangerous knowledge of this world".....

Atheists think that creationists are close-minded dimwits, not the scientific community. And I understand why they might, too (yes, I am an atheist). Some of their stuff truly does come from willful ignorance.

It depends on which christians you're talking about. I classify them into a few basic sub-groups.


Fundamentalists/Literalists- People who believe that the bible is 100% infallible, literal 6 day creation, Noah's flood happened, etc... Yes, I am condescending to these people. When you hear an Atheist bashing christians they are most likely referring to this group of people. In my experience they are the most close minded, dogmatic, and ignorant of science and general knowledge. Much h8.

Average Everyday Christian - They have a passing interest in just about everything and are at least willing to listen. They usually don't feel the need to try and provide factual support and argue for their beliefs, they just believe and are happy with that. See the Bible as a guide to moral living and spirituality more than a book of science. From my experience these people are OK. I'll argue with them about morality and spirituality. Rarely see them try and argue about science and facts.

Theistic Evolutionists and Liberal Christians - Like your average Christian but more of an affinity towards science and factual knowledge. Probabbly the easiest to talk to and get along with. Willing to actually listen to your arguements and debate evidence vs evidence, in a scientific sense. Mostly see the Bible as a moral guide and realize that it's not a scientific document. To them scientific evidence is God's word since it is his creation. They believe that their interpretation of the Bible is more likely to be fallible and that's why a particular belief doesn't align with real world evidence. From my experience these guys are ok, easiest to get along with and often much more knowledgeable about logic and science.


It really depends on which group of christians you're talking about. Christianity has such a diverse set of beliefs that it's impossible to properly encompass them all with just the label of "Christian". However we use Christian to refer to anybody who believes in that particular gods existence and Jesus and that jive. If you see me ripping on somebody and calling them a spoony christian then odds are they're a fundamentalist who just said something so stupid that a 6th grader half way thru JHS science would laugh at.

I agree, that both sides can be close minded. Although I would say that those that say those things to you ("how can you teach science and be christian", or "how can you be smart and still be christian") Are proving their misunderstands and ignorance of a large part of the debate. Often these people equate Evolution with atheism.

You will find here that there are many atheists that debate here, who understand that evolution is not atheism.

Personally, part of the reason I debate is because I like christianity (Im an atheist Pagan BTW ) and I really dont like to see people destroy it and hurt it through ignorance, which, unfortunatly, is what creationist organizations seem to do.

the_malevolent_milk_man said:

It depends on which christians you're talking about. I classify them into a few basic sub-groups.


Fundamentalists/Literalists- People who believe that the bible is 100% infallible, literal 6 day creation, Noah's flood happened, etc... Yes, I am condescending to these people. When you hear an Atheist bashing christians they are most likely referring to this group of people. In my experience they are the most close minded, dogmatic, and ignorant of science and general knowledge. Much h8.

Click to expand...

Here in Texas I am surrounded by this group. They will actually ARGUE that Jonah went for a ride in the mouth of a whale. One guy told me he knows there is a heaven because the prodigal son was a real person and really had to "sleep with those pigs!!" He then went on to add that, "most people do not know what they are talking about."

They come off SO dumb! Sometimes I turn red and become embarrassed for them, because of the foolishness they utter. They are SO uninformed and SO unaware they are completely oblivious to how ignorant they make themselves appear. This is really an odd group here because they almost celebrate stupidity. Not only can they not find there a** with both hands- they would rather NOT know anything and they do not want to listen to anything that even hints of education or anything that could cause them to question their fairy tale!! Some of them send there children to college so they can say, (say with southern drawl)"My boy went to college and he knows what Jesus did for us"...like that settles it!! These folks were sure the world was going to end New Years day 2000 now they have pushed it back until 2012. UGGHHH another 11 years of listening to this silly fodder. On the sufrace my city appears ultra modern, high rises, public transportation etc. but then you stop to talk to the average person ... my young daughter knows more than they do!! (There are quite a few intelligent educated people but they are not the majority.) A friend went to college here in the city I live in. She said during her Biology class in undergrad the Professor made a statement the first day that he, Refuses to teach Evolution because he does not believe in it. I told her that I was unaware that evolution was a "belief system", like Christianity, and how the h*** did this guy become a professor?? She said she bit her tongue during the course and after report cards came out she went back to tell him what an utter imbecile he is. She said he just looked at her with a blank and told her he would "pray for her".

Haha, I live in a very conservative part of Texas too, Waco to be exact. You pass more churches than fast food chains coming into this town.

My roomate, a biblical literalist and art major, has said some really stupid things, here are my 2 favorite quotes.

"How long do fish hold their breath under water?"

"1, 3, 5 and **** are even numbers right?"

I just looked at him blankly and asked him to repeat himself. He said it again and I was even more horrified. Couldn't help but to laugh as I explained how gills work and that water has dissolved oxygen in it.

Not going to tell him I'm an atheist, think I'd laugh myself to death if he wanted to have a serious discussion.

Materialistic evolution is most definitely a belief system, one that requires more faith than I am able to muster, ie: all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own.
Doesn't that at least require as much faith as believing that it was created by a creator?

The problem as I see it, is not that science is thought to be evil (I have never heard that from anyone I know). After all, science was the natural offspring of Judea-Christian culture. It is that schools teach evolution as if it is true, without ever mentioning the fallacies and problems with it. They also never give an alternate theory. That is why allowing Intelligent Design to be taught alongside of evolution and presenting them both as ideas thinking men have come up with to explain our existence is a good thing.

You guys are amazing. I think there needs to be a few more categories in your Christian list. Have you ever read Thomas Aquinas? Jaroslav Pelikan? John Zizioulas? C.S. Lewis? Dostoyevsky? Any Orthodox writers? If you want to willfully view Christians as either liberal or stupid, (or just going with the flow) you are not seeing reality.

brewmama said:

Materialistic evolution is most definitely a belief system, one that requires more faith than I am able to muster, ie: all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own.
Doesn't that at least require as much faith as believing that it was created by a creator?

The problem as I see it, is not that science is thought to be evil (I have never heard that from anyone I know). After all, science was the natural offspring of Judea-Christian culture. It is that schools teach evolution as if it is true, without ever mentioning the fallacies and problems with it. They also never give an alternate theory. That is why allowing Intelligent Design to be taught alongside of evolution and presenting them both as ideas thinking men have come up with to explain our existence is a good thing.

Click to expand...

You don't understand what evolution is and isn't. Evolution has nothing to do with the creation of life, it is the genetic variability in already existing populations of organisms. You are lumping abiogenesis and evolution into the same word which is wrong.


Abiogenesis is just one of the probable scientific theories. Also your understanding of abiogenesis is flawed. It doesn't state that life "all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own". It is founded on chemical reactions and materials, all of which are naturally occuring and do NOT come from nothing.

I was referring to three basic everyday christians you'll run into. The writers you mentioned do not represent the average person.

"Materialistic evolution is most definitely a belief system, one that requires more faith than I am able to muster, ie: all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own."

As was mentioned, this is Not evolution. First of all, Scientific evolution is Agnostic. And second, the theories begining of the universe, and Begining of Life have Nothing to do with Evolution.
Evolution starts after the first bits of life appeared and Evolution could Care Less how the life got there.


"Doesn't that at least require as much faith as believing that it was created by a creator?"

Evolution Does Not leave out an inteligent creator (nor does it include one). First cause (theories about how the universe was started, before the big bang) Does Not leave out a creator or diety either.


"It is that schools teach evolution as if it is true, without ever mentioning the fallacies and problems with it."

That is because there are very few if any problems especially at the level High schools teach it at.
However, feel free to post them in a new thread and we (people here) can talk about them.


"They also never give an alternate theory."

Thats because there are no other valid alternative theories.


"That is why allowing Intelligent Design to be taught alongside of evolution and presenting them both as ideas thinking men have come up with to explain our existence is a good thing."

Unfortunatly its not. Because first of all ID really isnt science, as it uses an unprovable, unfalsifiable Diety to do quite a bit of work. Beyond that IC (Irreducible Complexity) has been pretty much disproven.

brewmama said:

[snip]

Click to expand...

the_malevolent_milk_man said:

You don't understand what evolution is and isn't. Evolution has nothing to do with the creation of life, it is the genetic variability in already existing populations of organisms. You are lumping abiogenesis and evolution into the same word which is wrong.


Abiogenesis is just one of the probable scientific theories. Also your understanding of abiogenesis is flawed. It doesn't state that life "all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own". It is founded on chemical reactions and materials, all of which are naturally occuring and do NOT come from nothing.

Click to expand...

Where DO they come from?

Arikay said:

"Materialistic evolution is most definitely a belief system, one that requires more faith than I am able to muster, ie: all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own."

As was mentioned, this is Not evolution. First of all, Scientific evolution is Agnostic. And second, the theories begining of the universe, and Begining of Life have Nothing to do with Evolution.
Evolution starts after the first bits of life appeared and Evolution could Care Less how the life got there.


"Doesn't that at least require as much faith as believing that it was created by a creator?"

Evolution Does Not leave out an inteligent creator (nor does it include one). First cause (theories about how the universe was started, before the big bang) Does Not leave out a creator or diety either.


"It is that schools teach evolution as if it is true, without ever mentioning the fallacies and problems with it."

That is because there are very few if any problems especially at the level High schools teach it at.
However, feel free to post them in a new thread and we (people here) can talk about them.


"They also never give an alternate theory."

Thats because there are no other valid alternative theories.


"That is why allowing Intelligent Design to be taught alongside of evolution and presenting them both as ideas thinking men have come up with to explain our existence is a good thing."

Unfortunatly its not. Because first of all ID really isnt science, as it uses an unprovable, unfalsifiable Diety to do quite a bit of work. Beyond that IC (Irreducible Complexity) has been pretty much disproven.

Click to expand...

The point is that Darwinists are materialistic, and biogenesis is the beginning of evolution. I don't think it is as separate as you think. (I know they are separate in some ways, but both require naturalistic, scientifically "explained" reasoning.)

How has IC been disproven?

There are certainly flaws in evolution theory, but it is presented as if there weren't. We can go into detail laater, but I need to figure out how to use quotes and go watch football!

the_malevolent_milk_man said:

Haha, I live in a very conservative part of Texas too, Waco to be exact. You pass more churches than fast food chains coming into this town.

My roomate, a biblical literalist and art major, has said some really stupid things, here are my 2 favorite quotes.

"How long do fish hold their breath under water?"

"1, 3, 5 and **** are even numbers right?"

I just looked at him blankly and asked him to repeat himself. He said it again and I was even more horrified. Couldn't help but to laugh as I explained how gills work and that water has dissolved oxygen in it.

Not going to tell him I'm an atheist, think I'd laugh myself to death if he wanted to have a serious discussion.

Click to expand...

Oh my goodness. I live in Dallas. I was through Waco last month, we stopped there for lunch. We went to San Antonio for a 4 day get away before school started up again. Small world. As large and progressive as Dallas seems there are many VERY small minded ignorant, I was very surprised by this!!. I will will have to make list when I get more time of comments I have heard in Dallas. The most recent was that a guy could not believe that the Sun was a star!! (My little girl know that!) He actually said (when I probed him on what exactly he thought it was) that he thought it was a "light God made so we could see". !!!!! I have met MANY people here who REALLY think "Universe" means our solar sytem. I showed one guy (A neighbor) The famous Hubble pick or Millions of other Galaxies each with 4 Billion stars or so like our Sun and he looked at it for a minute and said, "Well where is Earth?" Then he pointed at one of the Galaxies and said, "Is this a Sun?" (AFTER-I had explained the WHOLE deal to him).

Brewmama

Materialistic evolution is most definitely a belief system, one that requires more faith than I am able to muster, ie: all of creation sprang from nothingness all on it's own.
Doesn't that at least require as much faith as believing that it was created by a creator?

Click to expand...

In as much as you seem so assured in your opinion, I assume you have a very good handle on it and could speak intellegently on the subject. So, what I would like to know is, just how is this "belief system" constructed? What are its components and how do they interact to form this system?

The problem as I see it, is not that science is thought to be evil (I have never heard that from anyone I know). After all, science was the natural offspring of Judea-Christian culture.

Click to expand...

Oh really! I suggest ANY good book on the history of science to bring you up to speed, and to dispels this erroneous notion.

[the problem] is that schools teach evolution as if it is true, without ever mentioning the fallacies and problems with it.

Click to expand...

Despite what your beliefs dictate you must hold to be true, evolution is a fact (true). And, the few text books I've seen (probably no more than seven or eight), ALL addressed some of the problems that confront evoluionists--most of it dependent on the grade level of the text.

They also never give an alternate theory.

Click to expand...

There is no alternate theory within the science community that is as robust and well accepted as evolution and the theories it engenders, so there is little reason to consider anything else. Fringe theories, no matter what the subject, usually do not merit mention.

That is why allowing Intelligent Design to be taught alongside of evolution and presenting them both as ideas thinking men have come up with to explain our existence is a good thing.

Click to expand...

If ID was based on science and the principles of acceptable research, And done so by those educated in the fields in which they spoke, and passed peer reviewal, then PERHAPS it would merit inclusion. Until then, it remains a silly--not even veiled--attempt by creationists to sneak unscientific garbage (disguised as science) into the minds of our children. ID has been exposed for what it is for quite some time now, and if you honestly think it is based on good science, let me know, and I will direct you to various sources that will give you the other side of the story. But, first: I want to know just how this "belief system" you mention, is constructed? What are its components and how do they interact to form this system?

"The point is that Darwinists are materialistic, and biogenesis is the beginning of evolution."

"Darwinist" is a very old term that is rarely used anymore. The Theory of Evolution is generally what its called now. And Evolution is agnostic.

"I don't think it is as separate as you think. (I know they are separate in some ways, but both require naturalistic, scientifically "explained" reasoning.) "

Yes, your right, it is similiar in the sense that none of the theories will take "and then a miracle happend" or "god did it" as a scientific explination.

However, for all evolution cares, the Eternal flying tye dyed unicorn could have sneezed and started life.

In that sense, they are seperate theories, and they rise and fall on their own merrits.

"How has IC been disproven?"

Examples of IC (such as the famous eye) have been shown to be able to evolve from less complex versions.

Just recently a computer program called Avida, that simulates evolution on "organisms" (bits of code) was able to evolve technically IC bits of code without the intervention of an inteligent designer.

"There are certainly flaws in evolution theory, but it is presented as if there weren't. We can go into detail laater, but I need to figure out how to use quotes and go watch football!"

Yes, I would like to see them.

Quotes:

(QUOTE=persons name you are quoting here) Their quote (/QUOTE)

Just replace the ( and ) with [ and ]

persons name you are quoting here said:

Their quote

Click to expand...

brewmama said:

[snip]

Click to expand...

Brewmama
The point is that Darwinists are materialistic, and biogenesis is the beginning of evolution. I don't think it is as separate as you think. (I know they are separate in some ways, but both require naturalistic, scientifically "explained" reasoning.)

Click to expand...

The point is NOT that Darwinists are materialistc--at least not necessarily any more than Buhdists, Jews, or Christians. They may APPEAR to be more materialistic because they refuse to use needles notions of Biblical scripture, but the same could be said of astronomers, cosmologists, chemists, physicists, x-ray techinicans, barbers, etc.

Second great misconception: "biogenesis is the beginning of evolution," which is usally meant to mean, "biogenesis is vital to evolution and the only accepted beginning of evolution." If you read any of the introductory literature on the subject, you will quickly find that evolution is NOT dependent on biogenesis (abiogenesis). Evolutionists couldn't care less if the initial cause was a Great Creator or the Great Goop Soup. Their only concern is the reason for the diversity of life and the process.

That is of course, the danger with ID. It rests completly on something unscientific. ID can work Only if there is a creator. They can not prove nor falsify this creator, thus ID will forever be stuck in philosophical limbo trying to be science. While it sits there, there are parts of it that can be falsified and have been, like IC.

The large difference is,
Theistic Evolutionists say,
God created and this is how god created:...
IDists say,
God created, but we dont know how. He just did.

Just think how far behind we would be in things like medicine if this view was taken with it.
"he was cured"
"how?"
"I dont know, god did it, it was a miracle"
"Ok, that explains that, next patient"
say bye to modern medicine.

Mike Flynn said:

However, while ID and IC have some persuasive arguments, I am convinced that these theories will never yield undeniable proof of the existence of an intelligent creator, that will always remain an unprovable supposition of the theory. The only proof you'll have for this is through faith.

Click to expand...