How long will creationist beliefs go on for?

Delphiki · Apr 15, 2011

There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

Hespera · Apr 15, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

The civilized world already sees it that way.

The trailer parks are a sort of time capsule.

AV1611VET · Apr 15, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

You mean like they're doing now?

Matthew712 · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

That might be a long ways from now, at least for that kind of ubiquitous understanding here in the US anyway. From what I understand polls show a fairly steady public acceptance of creationism over the decades, and I doubt the education system will get better anytime soon.

mark kennedy · Apr 16, 2011

mushy366 said:
Say the human race will survive millions of years into the future in accordace with zarrology. How long will it be possible for bible literalists to hold onto their views, when will people stop being stupid?

In 100,000 years we will have examples of "macro" evolution that they can trace back via betamax, VHS, DVD, Blu ray, Holographic display, thought projection, etc etc

How long before it dies off?

Until the redemption of the purchase price when God creates a new heavens and new earth. Belief in God as Creator spans thousands of years:

He said in a loud voice, "Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come. Worship him who made the heavens, the earth, the sea and the springs of water." (Revelation 14:7 )

By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
their starry host by the breath of his mouth.
He gathers the waters of the sea into jars;
he puts the deep into storehouses.
Let all the earth fear the LORD;
let all the people of the world revere him.
For he spoke, and it came to be;
he commanded, and it stood firm. (Psalm 33:6-9)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome [understood] it. (John 1:1-5)

In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. (Hebrews 1:1-2)

For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him (Colossians 1:16).

And Hezekiah prayed to the LORD: LORD, the God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. (2 Kings 19:15)

With my great power and outstretched arm I made the earth and its people and the animals that are on it, and I give it to anyone I please. (Jeremiah 27:5)

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? Isaiah 40:26

Thou art the LORD, thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them; and thou preservest all of them; and the host of heaven worships thee." (Nehemiah 9:5-6)

"from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female" (Mark 10:6)

When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. (Acts 4:24)

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. (Romans 1:21-23)

"Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?" (Malachi 2:10)

and to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things (Ephesians 3:9)

For every house is built by some one, but the builder of all things is God. (Hebrews 3:4)

That is the literal reading of Genesis in the sense that they (the prophets, apostles and Christ) believed. To worship and serve the creature rather then the Creator is idolatry.

They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. (Romans 1:25)

In addition there are 8 creation Psalms (Ps. 8, 19, 29, 33, 65, & 104) and no evolution Psalms.

This is the clear testimony of the Scriptures, anyone who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Paul had made this final statement: The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your ancestors when he said through Isaiah the prophet:

Go to this people and say,
You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
For this peoples heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them. (Acts 28:26, 27; Isaiah 6:9,10)

Greg1234 · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

Because that's when 747s, Great Pyramids and Men start assembling themselves through undirected naturalistic processes.

Upisoft · Apr 16, 2011

Greg1234 said:
Because that's when 747s, Great Pyramids and Men start assembling themselves through undirected naturalistic processes.

Same Greg, same PRATT... No learning at all.

Tomatoman · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

In England, where I live, creationism already is viewed like that. When I tell people about this forum they usually laugh and say something like "oh yes, I met one of those christian fundamentalists once. Waste of time talking to them, they're nuts." Then they ask why I waste my time arguing with creationists on a forum when the sensible thing to do is to avoid them like muslim fundamentalists or morris dancers. Before I can answer and justify myself they usually lose interest in topic of creationists and creatonism as [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]-numbingly boring. It is this utter indifference and contempt for creationists and their beliefs that I think the bible bashers here find so hard to understand, living, as they do, in communities steeped in religion. I think only about 2% of the population goes to church in England, and the figure is dropping. Religion is for people who don't know any better and is regarded with tolerance but mild impatience when it does rear its head.

Philip Larkin wrote a poem called Church Going over 50 years ago, which talks about the passing of religion. Given the title of this thread it seems relevant and worth a read.

http://www.artofeurope.com/larkin/index.html

Philip Larkin - Church Going

Once I am sure there's nothing going onI step inside, letting the door thud shut.Another church: matting, seats, and stone,And little books; sprawlings of flowers, cutFor Sunday, brownish now; some brass and stuffUp at the holy end; the small neat organ;And a tense, musty, unignorable silence,Brewed God knows how long. Hatless, I take offMy cycle-clips in awkward reverence,Move forward, run my hand around the font.From where I stand, the roof looks almost new-Cleaned or restored? Someone would know: I don't.Mounting the lectern, I peruse a fewHectoring large-scale verses, and pronounce"Here endeth" much more loudly than I'd meant.The echoes s[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] briefly. Back at the doorI sign the book, donate an Irish sixpence,Reflect the place was not worth stopping for.Yet stop I did: in fact I often do,And always end much at a loss like this,Wondering what to look for; wondering, too,When churches fall completely out of useWhat we shall turn them into, if we shall keepA few cathedrals chronically on show,Their parchment, plate, and pyx in locked cases,And let the rest rent-free to rain and sheep.Shall we avoid them as unlucky places?Or, after dark, will dubious women comeTo make their children touch a particular stone;Pick simples for a cancer; or on someAdvised night see walking a dead one?Power of some sort or other will go onIn games, in riddles, seemingly at random;But superstition, like belief, must die,And what remains when disbelief has gone?Grass, weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky,A shape less recognizable each week,A purpose more obscure. I wonder whoWill be the last, the very last, to seekThis place for what it was; one of the crewThat tap and jot and know what rood-lofts were?Some ruin-bibber, randy for antique,Or Christmas-addict, counting on a whiffOf gown-and-bands and organ-pipes and myrrh?Or will he be my representative,Bored, uninformed, knowing the ghostly siltDispersed, yet tending to this cross of groundThrough suburb scrub because it held unspiltSo long and equably what since is foundOnly in separation -- marriage, and birth,And death, and thoughts of these -- for whom was builtThis special shell? For, though I've no ideaWhat this accoutred frowsty barn is worth,It pleases me to stand in silence here;A serious house on serious earth it is,In whose blent air all our compulsions meet,Are recognised, and robed as destinies.And that much never can be obsolete,Since someone will forever be surprisingA hunger in himself to be more serious,And gravitating with it to this ground,Which, he once heard, was proper to grow wise in,If only that so many dead lie round.

http://plagiarist.com/poetry/1685/

SkyWriting · Apr 16, 2011

Skavau said:
Sure. But you could admit that your beliefs are based on nothing more than assuming that said theology is actually true rather than trying (and failing) to repeat it constantly to those who you can't even provide a coherent reason to accept..

The secular belief systems are based on popular opinion or majority rule. Their foundation is built on being correct until being proven wrong. Is there a coherent reason to stick with such a system? I didn't find one.

Instead of hanging with people who only know what people tell them is true, for today anyway, I found a belief system where even the least "educated" member could discover & reveal truth or facts about why people behave the way they do. This includes the actions of TV preachers, Catholic priests, or deceptive self-deceiving scientists (my coworkers).

Even people gathering "facts" in the name of science do so with agendas that drive them blindly into folly.

Search for life in the universe

The Search for Life: Are We Alone?

The search for life on Mars will begin in Siberia

Robot Swarms Could Help Search for Life in Martian Caves

Robot Swarms Could Help Search for Life in Martian Caves

The search for life on other planets

[FONT=georgia, bookman old style, palatino linotype, book antiqua, palatino, trebuchet ms, helvetica, garamond, sans-serif, arial, verdana, avante garde, century gothic, comic sans ms, times, times new roman, serif]-Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house.[/FONT]

-[FONT=georgia, bookman old style, palatino linotype, book antiqua, palatino, trebuchet ms, helvetica, garamond, sans-serif, arial, verdana, avante garde, century gothic, comic sans ms, times, times new roman, serif]"Well, basically, there was this little dot, right? And the dot went bang and the bang expanded. Energy formed into matter, matter cooled, matter lived, the amoeba to fish, to fish to fowl, to fowl to frog, to frog to mammal, the mammal to monkey, to monkey to man, amo amas amat, quid pro quo, memento mori, ad infinitum, sprinkle on a little bit of grated cheese and leave under the grill till Doomsday."[/FONT]

- [FONT=georgia, bookman old style, palatino linotype, book antiqua, palatino, trebuchet ms, helvetica, garamond, sans-serif, arial, verdana, avante garde, century gothic, comic sans ms, times, times new roman, serif]"Scientists should always state the opinions upon which their facts are based. [/FONT]"

SkyWriting · Apr 16, 2011

Tomatoman said:
.... I think only about 2% of the population goes to church in England, and the figure is dropping. Religion is for people who don't know any better and is regarded with tolerance but mild impatience when it does rear its head. .....

A report on "Churchgoing in the UK" published by Tearfund in April 2007 shows that 15% go to Church at least once a month.
Trends in UK Church attendance

There is notable difference between the UK and the US.
But that still leaves 1 of 5 in the UK rejecting Evolution.
So if you have 4 believers around you, then you are number five. But really, I'm sure you keep "your people" gathered around you at all times for protection.

SkyWriting · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
There will be a time in the future when people will look back on creationism just like we do with flat earth believers and say "I can't believe people actually believed that!"

Like the idea that atoms were the smallest unit of "solid" matter?
Or that space is not curved?
or

Superficial anatomy researches forms and proportions of the human body and the surface landmarks which correspond to deeper structures hidden from view.
Biophotons, a postulated communication mechanism of cells by the means of light, sometimes claimed to be the scientific substrate of Qi.
Vitalism, theories claiming that understanding of the living matter should be radically different from that of non-living matter, e.g. biodynamic agriculture.
Odic force a theory that all life is permeated and bound together by a vital property.
Morphogenetic fields as proposed by Rupert Sheldrake supposedly cause living things to grow or behave in patterns laid down by similar previous living things. Not to be confused with morphogenetic field in developmental biology.
Biological transmutation, see Corentin Louis Kervran, the hypothesis that organisms can convert chemical elements, e.g. copper to iron.
Chiromancy, also known as palm-reading, asserts that predictions can be made from examining the appearance of a person's hands.

Lamarckian evolution refers to the once widely accepted idea that an organism can pass on characteristics that it acquired during its lifetime to its offspring (also known as based on heritability of acquired characteristics or "soft inheritance").

How quickly we forget the past when attempting to make fun of others.

Hespera · Apr 16, 2011

SkyWriting said:
Like the idea that atoms were the smallest unit of "solid" matter?
Or that space is not curved?
or

Superficial anatomy researches forms and proportions of the human body and the surface landmarks which correspond to deeper structures hidden from view.

Biophotons, a postulated communication mechanism of cells by the means of light, sometimes claimed to be the scientific substrate of Qi.

Vitalism, theories claiming that understanding of the living matter should be radically different from that of non-living matter, e.g. biodynamic agriculture.

Odic force a theory that all life is permeated and bound together by a vital property.

Morphogenetic fields as proposed by Rupert Sheldrake supposedly cause living things to grow or behave in patterns laid down by similar previous living things. Not to be confused with morphogenetic field in developmental biology.

Biological transmutation, see Corentin Louis Kervran, the hypothesis that organisms can convert chemical elements, e.g. copper to iron.

Chiromancy, also known as palm-reading, asserts that predictions can be made from examining the appearance of a person's hands.

Lamarckian evolution refers to the once widely accepted idea that an organism can pass on characteristics that it acquired during its lifetime to its offspring (also known as based on heritability of acquired characteristics or "soft inheritance").

How quickly we forget the past when attempting to make fun of others.

You are missing what makes creationism funny:

Creationists are like Charlie Brown, they just keep trying to kick the football, and never ever learn that its not going to be there.

SkyWriting · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
Regardless of how often much the Theory of Evolution is improved and refined in the future, as long as there's some kind of evolutionary process being explained in it, it will still be the Theory of Evolution. All theories are open to improvement - that's how they always provide the best explanation of the facts.

Biblical creationists, on the other hand, have been stuck with basically the same information since 1611. Since nobody's allowed to change it, it's the interpretation of it that changes instead of the "theory" itself. And when you do change it, it's a new denomination....

There is no truth in that.

- Not even one denomination is based on Creation interpretation.

- A biblical creationist would be a person who read the scripture and believed what it said. I imagine the writer would be included at about 500 BC.

You are speaking outside your experience base.

SkyWriting · Apr 16, 2011

Delphiki said:
At the time they did, and you can say they were. They were going off the evidence that wherever fruit rotted there were fruit flies. Wherever meat rotted, there were maggots that grew into flies. It wasn't until mankind was better able to control their experiments and see things invisible to the naked eye that we opened the floodgates of biological knowledge.

That was biblical believers who did that.

Delphiki · Apr 16, 2011

SkyWriting said:
*snip*

How quickly we forget the past when attempting to make fun of others.

All you've done here is listed some theories that have been falsified. Those in the scientific field actually pride themselves on debunking incorrect theories and improving/replacing them. So I'm not sure what your point is here.

Also, there's a huge difference between thinking the universe just appeared out of nowhere, as-is over a 6 day period because a grand invisible wizard got bored and believing atoms are the smallest basic unit making up everything. For one, all matter is made of atoms, it's just that we've since found that atoms consist of other, smaller, components. In comparison, nothing about biblical creation has been found to be true at all, and everything we have found, completely contradicts it.

What makes one a creationist is the inability to recognize that how they the the earth was formed is every bit as ridiculous as still believing the earth is flat. So when someone tells me I've assumed they think the earth is flat, my only response is "They might as well."

Skavau · Apr 16, 2011

SkyWriting said:
The secular belief systems are based on popular opinion or majority rule.

What are you talking about? A government in a democratic nation is supported on popular opinion. But a government is merely a specific representation of a political ideology and those that support that ideology do not support it based on popular opinion (a fallacy in itself) unless they are credulous. This is the same for ethical and philosphical worldviews.

I repeat again: What are you talking about? What secular belief systems are based on popualr opinion or majority rule?

Their foundation is built on being correct until being proven wrong. Is there a coherent reason to stick with such a system? I didn't find one.

[citation needed]

This is just a strawman, and an unclear one. What secular belief systems are you even referring to?

Instead of hanging with people who only know what people tell them is true, for today anyway, I found a belief system where even the least "educated" member could discover & reveal truth or facts about why people behave the way they do. This includes the actions of TV preachers, Catholic priests, or deceptive self-deceiving scientists (my coworkers).

And what belief system is this?

In addition, what evidence do you have that there is mass self-deception and denial rampant in the scientific community?

In addition:

-Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house.

This is such a ridiculous and anti-intellectual quote that it almost defies a serious response. It is effectively deriding the accumulation of information.

Tomatoman · Apr 18, 2011

SkyWriting said:
A report on "Churchgoing in the UK" published by Tearfund in April 2007 shows that 15% go to Church at least once a month.

That report is vastly optimistic and doesn't tally with any other reports I've ever heard about. I don't know how it's managed to skew the data, but every other report I've ever seen agrees that church attendance is 5% and dropping, and anglican church attendance less than 2% and dropping.

That sort of statistic clearly just doesn't register with the bible brigade in america. It doesn't compute for them. They can't understand a mindset where religion is as irrelevant as great grandma's old frocks. I've sometimes been accused of deliberately trying to insult god when I explain this. I'm not. It doesn't even occur to me. I'm just trying to explain how religion is in England is a fusty, dusty, unfashionable, minority interest, mainly for old women (have you ever seen Songs of Praise?). Talk of god or jesus raises the same sort of embarrassed response as mentioning cancer. That's why your president or public figures always mentioning god makes us pass the sick bucket. "Why is he talking about god/cancer?" "I don't know, they just do that in America." "Weird." "Yeah."

AV1611VET · Apr 18, 2011

Tomatoman said:
That's why your president or public figures always mentioning god makes us pass the sick bucket.

Do you 'pass the sick bucket' whenever you see the cross on your flag, or IN GOD WE TRUST on American coins?

Skavau · Apr 18, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Do you 'pass the sick bucket' whenever you see the cross on your flag, or IN GOD WE TRUST on American coins?

No, not really.

Though the point is there. UK Politicians don't do God. It isn't mentioned.

AV1611VET · Apr 18, 2011

Skavau said:
No, not really.

Though the point is there. UK Politicians don't do God. It isn't mentioned.

Then I'll take his point with a grain of sand.

How long will creationist beliefs go on for?

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Matthew712

Guest

Natura non facit saltum

In the beginning was El

CEO of a waterfal

Well-Known Member

The Librarian

The Librarian

The Librarian

Junior Member

The Librarian

The Librarian

Well-Known Member

Ode to the Forgotten Few

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Ode to the Forgotten Few

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads