• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Creationism/Creation Science... approved by Arkansas house

Discussion in 'News & Current Events (Articles Required)' started by BobRyan, May 2, 2021.

  1. durangodawood

    durangodawood Dis Member

    +9,009
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    So let me see if I understand the scientific standard you are proposing:

    No explanation for a process that takes longer than can be scientifically documented by direct observation in real time should be considered valid.

    Is that right?
     
  2. HARK!

    HARK! Well-Known Member Staff Member Purple Team - Moderator Supporter

    +3,722
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
  3. Larnievc

    Larnievc Well-Known Member

    +4,025
    Atheist
    Married
    UK-Labour
    Crikey. Arkansassanians really want their kids to grow up to be economically disadvantaged.
     
  4. Larnievc

    Larnievc Well-Known Member

    +4,025
    Atheist
    Married
    UK-Labour
    It doesn’t. It’s makes no claims about the origin of life.
     
  5. HARK!

    HARK! Well-Known Member Staff Member Purple Team - Moderator Supporter

    +3,722
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
    We've covered this ad nauseam. How about first, we dispense with the strawman arguments, and begging the question; and then you demonstrate how macroevolution meets the commonly accepted definition of science, that I presented?

    I assert that macroevolution is not a scientific fact.

    If you wish to make the positive assertion that it is; then the onus is on you to support that argument.
     
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    I have a question for you - and any other evolutionists that occasionally get into discussions with Creationists on this sort of topic --

    @stevil @HARK! @MIDutch @Jimmy D @Larnievc @Pommer and others also free to comment of course :)

    On the occasions when atheists and creationists enter into a discussion about the merits or flaws of each version of origins (as if to compare notes if not to actually convince the other side) I notice that very often the evidence each side gives is debunked by the other side as if no one would take that evidence seriously unless they were already Creationist or already atheist.

    Suppose that the Evolutionist discovered that there was a meeting of the minds among Creationists where many of the leading creation science proponents, well-known to creationists worldwide, were in attendance. And “as it turned out” one of the well-respected scientists among the Creationists (who did not claim to believe evolution at all) said something like this

    "we know that as Creationists we often accuse evolutionists of pleading ignorance of the means and affirming only the fact, when it comes to some of the more difficult unanswered questions in evolution"

    “But let me be honest with you about something. It seems me that this is the same feeling I get when talking to creationists today. They plead ignorance of the means , but affirm only the fact (saying): 'Yes it has...we know it has taken place as Creationism describes!"

    "...Now I think that many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from Creation Science as knowledge to Creation Science as faith alone. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here...

    "...,Creation Science not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge , apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to some of our key science claims about the evidence for the origin of all life on Earth"

    “Can you tell me anything you know about Creation Science, any one thing…that is true?

    "I tried that question on the geology department at one of our leading conservative Christian Universities and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Creation Science Seminar at another one of our Universities, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said “I know one thingit ought not to be taught in our private schools up through high school

    "... last year I had a sudden realization. For over twenty years I thought that I was working on Creation Science in some way. One morning I woke up, and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it. "That was quite a shock that one could be misled for so long...

    “It does seem that the level of knowledge about Creation Science is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not to be taught in high school, and perhaps that's all we know about it...

    “about eighteen months ago...I woke up and I realized that all my life I had been duped into taking Creation Science as revealed truth alone rather than delving into it as science."
    =================== end

    So here is my question for atheists –

    QUESTION1 :would it be of interest to you to have the reference for that meeting so as to share it with Creationists who say that evolutionism is a religious belief that has an opposing doctrine on origin to Creation – and the Creationist model is the one that is the best most reasonable conclusion for the origins question?

    QUESTION2: Would it surprise you to learn that Creationists don’t want Evolutionists to know about those statements much less to quote them in a discussion with Creationists since the people they would be quoting are still Creationists and not evolutionists, and those people don't want evolutionists to see anything helpful to them in what was said (since nobody in that meeting believed in evolution) ?
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2021
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    I mention that in the OP -
    1. Young Earth Geochronometers
    2. Evidence for intelligent design vs random undirected results.
    3. And young life biometric markers such as soft tissue and certain biomolecules in fossils
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    It is tantamount to "miracle goes here" for evolution
     
  9. durangodawood

    durangodawood Dis Member

    +9,009
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    Almost every single biologist considers macroevolution a scientific fact. So you are misunderstanding something about what makes scientific fact.

    The part you are misunderstanding is that observation includes observation of evidence of past events.
     
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    It does not allow the government to establish a federally mandated denomination (so avoiding the European model at the time) or to in anyway interfere with freedom of religion.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2021
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    Well let's take an extreme example of censoring -- Dover


    In that trial the biology course begins with a short statement that boils down to this.
    • This biology class will only teach evolution
    • we do not yet have all knowledge - so some gaps in our knowledge still exists
    • There EXISTS A BOOK in the Library that students can check out if they want to see an example of a competing explanation for all life on Earth based on Intelligent design.

    So the first part of the statement is questionable from my POV - I don't blame the judge for striking that part down.

    But blocking the "there exists a book in the library" part of the statement is not the kind of orthodoxy in censorship one "expects" from liberal open minds. Science Bias-through-censorship is not a long lasting solution.
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +5,774
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    So then you might find this interesting -- #226
     
  13. Confused-by-christianity

    Confused-by-christianity Well-Known Member

    616
    +187
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Private
    I heard a lot about students not being allowed to pray at school or have bible studies.

    is this true or is it propaganda?
     
  14. durangodawood

    durangodawood Dis Member

    +9,009
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    Wow quite the effort you made there. Will go through it over lunch soon.
     
  15. TLK Valentine

    TLK Valentine You will be who you will be. We are our choices.

    +25,834
    Agnostic
    Single
    I hope you don't make logical arguments in front of them, either.
     
  16. essentialsaltes

    essentialsaltes Stranger in a Strange Land

    +21,206
    United States
    Atheist
    Legal Union (Other)
    Largely propaganda.

    In the public schools, prayers organized by the school are illegal. Individual students praying before tests or meals have every right to do so. Student led clubs for Bible study are allowed as long as they meet other rules for such groups.

    Students who are disruptive through praying or proselytizing can be punished.

    There have been some cases where schools have taken bibles away from students and things like that. Those are violations of student rights and school districts are generally quick to remedy these things when they happen.
     
  17. Confused-by-christianity

    Confused-by-christianity Well-Known Member

    616
    +187
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Private
    That’s sounds a little more believable.
     
  18. Whyayeman

    Whyayeman Well-Known Member

    +646
    United Kingdom
    Atheist
    Married
    Thank you for the reference, Hark!

    Ah, I see a name I recognise - Phylis Schlafly! I know her record as a Daughter of the American Republic. She is not exactly objective about this issue.

    The relevant article in New American refers to a legal ruling in 1987 and a statement by Schlafly made in 1980:

    'In March 1987, U.S. District Judge W. Brevard Hand ruled that Secular Humanism was a religion. Indeed, Phyllis Schlafly, a graduate of Harvard Law School, wrote in 1980, “Secular Humanism has become the established religion in the U.S. public school system.”'

    I wonder, have you a reference less than 40 years old? the discussion is about a very recent attempt to change the curriculum in Arkansas.
     
  19. durangodawood

    durangodawood Dis Member

    +9,009
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    One guy losing faith in his position isnt that interesting to me, even he's coming around toward seeing things my way.


    People want to protect their intellectual turf. Even scientists behave that way. But scientists will come around to a different view before too long when the evidence starts to proliferate.
     
  20. Whyayeman

    Whyayeman Well-Known Member

    +646
    United Kingdom
    Atheist
    Married
    For Hark!

    From the New American:

    'The only difference between a theistic religion and a non-theistic, or atheist “religion” is a matter of semantics. They are both religions in the sense that they deal with the meaning of life and provide human beings with'

    The differences are much more than 'semantics'. Atheism does not deal with the meaning of life or provide human beings with guidance in how to morally conduct one’s life. That would be humanism, I expect.

    What follows is just an attack on humanism. I was disappointed.
     
Loading...