Christianity & Evolution Are Compatible...A Reflection

[BananaSlug]

I think critical analysis can be taught at a younger age than just high school. Even sixth graders have enough brain power to analyze concepts and ideas. I'm not going to lie, critical thinking can cause agnosticism/atheism.

In my experience, people who don't accept evolution either:
1. Do not have a proper understanding of evolutionary theory.
2. Believe you have to be an atheist to accept evolution.
3. Do not have a proper grasp of basic scientific methods and/or definitions.

 

[AV1611VET]

The basic tenets of creationism are so stupid that an adult with an open mind would discard it in a heart-beat.

Ya --- I can see why you guys think they're so "stupid" too.

 

[AV1611VET]

In my experience, people who don't accept evolution either:
1. Do not have a proper understanding of evolutionary theory. [guilty]
2. Believe you have to be an atheist to accept evolution. [not guilty]
3. Do not have a proper grasp of basic scientific methods and/or definitions. [not sure]

Words in red are mine.

 

[Amoeba]

Well you are just going to have to live with the fact that you don't know.

Right. When you say something, be prepared for the implications of its meaning...

You do, because you keep going on about how fantastic Science is.

I see you're now resorting to hostile rhetorical statements...That's unfortunate...

Was not presented as an argument to the truthfulness of evolution at all. Once again you have deliberately misrepresented me.

It seems like your only defense is to holler "straw man"..A statement such as,

"Well your lot is not doing a very good job of teaching evolution. From these few references it is showing that roughly 50% of people beleive in creation instead of evolution."

...is a blatant attempt to use popular polls to prove a point. What that point is is vague itself. What are you trying to say? You've excelled at being as vague as possible in this debate, maybe so you can call out straw man for every rebuttal. I don't know.

That is either arrogance or ignorance.

I find it amusing that as this debate goes forward, your statements become increasingly hostile and insulting. I'll take that as a job well done for myself.

If evolution is such a fact and its taught so well why do so many people disagree with it?

First of all. It's irrelevant what popular opinion is. Popular opinion can be flat out wrong, as the fallacy to the majority should have made clear to you. Second, there are several reasons people probably don't believe in the fact of evolution. I'll list some off the top of my head.

1) Ignorance: people don't know enough about evolution.
2) Misunderstanding of Science: people have a distorted view of what science is, which allows for the misguided attempt to bring a literal religious view of natural history into the realm of science.
3) Indoctrination: years of being indoctrinated in churches, religious schools, home schools, religious camps, etc.

But again, it's irrelevant how many people believe this or that. It proves nothing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evolution does not disprove God. In fact, evolution demonstrates the glory of God and the miracle that all of us are by just existing. Think about it. 13.7 billions years of events, all came together in just the right way, so that you were born. If just one event changed, you or me, could not have been born. Imagine if your parents never met. That's all it takes! But they did. And their parents met. And your grandparent's parents met. The odds of this happening are astronomical. But it happened! And you were born. Look up "Chaos Theory", it really is amazing. Creationism limits God, puts him in a box, simplifies God. God is much grander than that. God is also scientific! He is the ultimate scientist! There is no need for the hostility to science that you have!

My mission here to break you out of this misconception and hostility you have towards the scientific view of natural history. If I can just sow that seed, I've done my job. Evolution does not disprove God. Rather it glorifies God!

 

[Amoeba]

Thomas Aquinas said it best!

In the thirteenth century Thomas Aquinas, like Augustine, asserted the need to hold the truth of Scripture without wavering while cautioning "that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should not adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false; lest holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.

Forster, Roger; Marston, Dr Paul (2001). "Chapter 7 - Genesis Through History". Reason Science and Faith. Chester, England: Monarch Books. ISBN 1854244418.

 

[marktheblake]

First of all. It's irrelevant what popular opinion is. Popular opinion can be flat out wrong.

Absolutely correct am glad we are getting somewhere now.

What that point is is vague itself. What are you trying to say?

Couldnt possibly be vague, because I said it like 5 times already. You even answered 'the point' directly yourself, with three well articulated reasons, without even misrepresenting what i said, and I thank you for that.

3) Indoctrination: years of being indoctrinated in churches, religious schools, home schools, religious camps, etc.

America must be an unusual place. They (creationists) want Creation taught in High School but according to you it's already very well taught indoctrinated elsewhere.

Perhaps thats what the evolutionists should be doing, having Darwin camps for the kiddies. You could even buy Dino dirtland cheap (400k) all you gotta do is change the dates on the exhibits and its ready made.

 

[Hespera]

The problem for creationists is that they have absolutely no data to back their ideas. This would be very strange, if in fact the world had been created 6000 yeras ago, and since then there had been a great flood.

Instead every relevant data point from astronomers thru geneticists indicates that the ToE is a valid theory, and that the earth is very ancient.

So what is left for the creationist to use as an argument? See the above.

 

[marktheblake]

this is so sad. i saw a photo of this little muslim girl one time, ..... It broke my heart

That little girl is my favourite niece, so I hear what you are saying.

Get 'em young and make em into good little commies or nazis or scientologists or or or. Its so sad

It was a joke, wasnt it obvious? because like you said, it already happens. Smilies are against my religion.....

Little children are programmed to just believe whatever they are told by their parents.

This is a reality, every parent the world over does exactly that. I am not sure if that is the best way to describe it, but thats how it works and it will never be another way.

However the world is full of people that are not followers of the faith that they were 'indoctrinated' with as a child. I can count on one hand the people I know that have been christians for life, likewise the opposite.

A child can only be 'indoctrinated' so far, eventually their belief systems are based on their own experiences, choices, and decision. If that is not true, it would be impossible for someone to change their religion, particularly in a country where the religion is very strict, even enforced.

People are not robots.

 

[Hespera]

That little girl is my favourite niece, so I hear what you are saying.

It was a joke, wasnt it obvious? because like you said, it already happens. Smilies are against my religion.....

This is a reality, every parent the world over does exactly that. I am not sure if that is the best way to describe it, but thats how it works and it will never be another way.

However the world is full of people that are not followers of the faith that they were 'indoctrinated' with as a child. I can count on one hand the people I know that have been christians for life, likewise the opposite.

A child can only be 'indoctrinated' so far, eventually their belief systems are based on their own experiences, choices, and decision. If that is not true, it would be impossible for someone to change their religion, particularly in a country where the religion is very strict, even enforced.

People are not robots.

Be nice now. You are supposed to say something I can argue against and prove wrong!

 

[marktheblake]

That's twice in 10 mins. I'm Gobsmacked - you have got a sense of humour!

 

[Nathan Poe]

Absolutely correct am glad we are getting somewhere now.

The opinion of one's Pastor/Sunday School teacher/ voice in head referred to as "Holy Spirit" can also be wrong -- can we go there as well?

America must be an unusual place. They (creationists) want Creation taught in High School but according to you it's already very well taught indoctrinated elsewhere.

Perhaps thats what the evolutionists should be doing, having Darwin camps for the kiddies. You could even buy Dino dirtland cheap (400k) all you gotta do is change the dates on the exhibits and its ready made.

There are science camps and Bible camps for those parents willing to send their children, but perhaps "willing" is the key issue. Creationists already preach to the choir -- they want a captive audience now.

 

[Amoeba]

Absolutely correct am glad we are getting somewhere now.

So why throw out a pointless public opinion poll? What is your point? That public high school is deficient in the quality of education? How does that in any way say anything as to the fact of evolution?

Couldnt possibly be vague, because I said it like 5 times already. You even answered 'the point' directly yourself, with three well articulated reasons, without even misrepresenting what i said, and I thank you for that.

You've managed to imply certain things then back away from them when I address them. I hope I'm getting through to you about what science is and isn't, the compatibility of evolution with a belief in a creator, and the utter lunacy of creationism/intelligent design.

America must be an unusual place. They (creationists) want Creation taught in High School but according to you it's already very well taught indoctrinated elsewhere.

Why do you think so many creationists are so set in their ideology? No matter how much evidence is presented before them, they are so blinded by their belief, they dismiss outright the most rational, logical, sensible explanation of natural history.

Perhaps thats what the evolutionists should be doing, having Darwin camps for the kiddies. You could even buy Dino dirtland cheap (400k) all you gotta do is change the dates on the exhibits and its ready made.

I don't get this term "evolutionist". It implies that evolution is an ideology instead of a scientific finding. I believe the earth is round, does that make me a, "round earthist"? It's a ridiculous term.

I also don't understand why we're talking about a public opinion poll about people who question evolution. Okay, the American education is deficient. Why are we even talking about that in a thread about the validity of evolution and invalidity of creationism? Do you agree with the fact of evolution by natural selection?

I guarantee you this. The university level natural science course certainly is of much higher caliber than a puny high school science class. Do a public poll of those students and I'm positive you'll get a much different result.

 

[uke2se]

I don't get this term "evolutionist". It implies that evolution is an ideology instead of a scientific finding. I believe the earth is round, does that make me a, "round earthist"? It's a ridiculous term.

Please read my sig for the truth about the 'evolutionist' canard.

 

[marktheblake]

I don't get this term "evolutionist".

ev⋅o⋅lu⋅tion⋅ist [ev-uh-loo-shuh-nist or, especially Brit., ee-vuh-] –noun 1. a person who believes in or supports a theory of evolution, esp. in biology.

Thats what it implies. Dictionary.com doesn't have the meaning that you think it implies.

I also don't understand why we're talking about a public opinion poll about people who question evolution.

I dont know why you are talking about it either. The point stands alone, you understood it, and you responded to the point. Well done, it is finished.

Why are we even talking about that in a thread about the validity of evolution and invalidity of creationism?

Why are you even talking in a thread about the compatibility of Christianity and Evolution.

The university level natural science course certainly is of much higher caliber than a puny high school science class.

I would have thought that about any subject at University, but you make a good point, the indoctrinated can be saved if they go to university, and study Life sciences.

 

[marktheblake]

There are science camps and Bible camps for those parents willing to send their children, but perhaps "willing" is the key issue. Creationists already preach to the choir -- they want a captive audience now.

As I said, USA must be a different world cos none of that happens here.

Frankly I don't even know where all the creationists are coming from.

 

[Nathan Poe]

As I said, USA must be a different world cos none of that happens here.

Frankly I don't even know where all the creationists are coming from.

Nor do I -- but I sincerely wish they'd go back.

 

[Hespera]

ev⋅o⋅lu⋅tion⋅ist [ev-uh-loo-shuh-nist or, especially Brit., ee-vuh-] –noun 1. a person who believes in or supports a theory of evolution, esp. in biology.

Thats what it implies. Dictionary.com doesn't have the meaning that you think it implies.



I dont know why you are talking about it either. The point stands alone, you understood it, and you responded to the point. Well done, it is finished.



Why are you even talking in a thread about the compatibility of Christianity and Evolution.


I would have thought that about any subject at University, but you make a good point, the indoctrinated can be saved if they go to university, and study Life sciences.

The term "evolutionist" is used for a specific reason and we all know what it is. Its argumentative and is about attitude on the part of the person using it, not principles.

So is the use of the word "indoctrination' with regard to the teaching of science in public schools.

Church doctrine is called that for a reason.

 

[marktheblake]

The term "evolutionist" is used for a specific reason

It is used to serve as a distinction between those who support evolution and those who do not. Just like how the evolutionist uses the word creationist.

Is there a more politically correct word to use? A spade is a spade.

So is the use of the word "indoctrination' with regard to the teaching of science in public schools.

You might have missed the use of the word, I was referring to indoctrinated 'creationists' that cannot learn science properly, that apparently america has a plague of.

 

[Hespera]

It is used to serve as a distinction between those who support evolution and those who do not. Just like how the evolutionist uses the word creationist.

Is there a more politically correct word to use? A spade is a spade.



You might have missed the use of the word, I was referring to indoctrinated 'creationists' that cannot learn science properly, that apparently america has a plague of.

The word does carry some baggage with it, but its not worth much talk.
I can always counter with "theocreologist".

Thought you meant indoctrination in public schools. As for indoctrinated creologists, yes they are here in force. Nice to hear that Oz isnt like that.

 

[Cabal]

It is used to serve as a distinction between those who support evolution and those who do not. Just like how the evolutionist uses the word creationist.

Is there a more politically correct word to use? A spade is a spade.

"People who accept evolution" works.

"ToE proponents" also works and is a bit shorter.

Don't get too hung up on it though, although it is worth noting that people tend not to ideologise theories, i.e. no fuss is made over gravityists, atomists, electromagneticists, etc.

It might seem trite, but scientists' hackles are likely to rise over it if it's implied that science is ideological rather than factual - other people might think so, but they will not.