Faith?

[TheReasoner]

I`ll keep this really really simple.

I haven't really had faith in creationism for years, and my education has only served to show me ever more clearly how foolish the whole thing is.
However, I keep running into people who insist it is the sole true faith. That Christianity has no meaning without it - or who insist in one way or another to try to use sophism or fallacious logic in an attempt to undermine the theory of evolution - which they claim they have no real problem with. Far be it from me to discourage intellectually honest criticism of the set paradigm. However, I see no reason to accept or give any respect to woolly thinking or shoddy logic. And frankly, I see more and more of that within Christian ranks. I have, I confess, reached a point where I m asking myself the following question:
What validity does faith have if it cannot survive science without attempting to undermine and explain it away? Oh sure someone will come along and say they aren`t, that they are just showing genuine and valid scepticism and criticism, as is proper for any intellectual. However, even from academics I am yet to see any sound criticism of the paradigm as a whole. Single points, yes. Of course. But even those who dismiss the paradigm as a whole do not appear to have backing for this, yet it would seem their faith requires them to dismiss or attempt to explain away reality itself.

Now, my faith is not threatened by science. If it were not for creationists I'd have no problem. No, it is threatened by Christians who apparently cannot accept science yet need to fight it at any bend and curve. Either openly, like AV, Dad etc. or through shallow excuses they might even believe themselves. Yet it always comes down to the same point it would seem: Faith does appear to be in conflict with creation. So, I am asking why should one believe? If Christianity had been about Christ's teachings I'd have had no problem at all, those are awesome. But as it appears to be about how the universe is wrong and subject to mental gymnastics which need not concern themselves with such troublesome things as hard data. So the question "What validity does faith have?" inevitably arises. Now, why should I exchange my cross for a brain, or why should I NOT do so? I asked a chaplain here, but he gave me a thoroughly unsatisfactory answer, to say the very least, more along the same worn out and shallow lines. So... What are your thoughts?

 

[CabVet]

I couldn't agree with you more. Creationists created (like that?) this false dichotomy of creation versus evolution, and they think that by discrediting evolution they are providing more evidence for creation, which is not the case.

OFF-TOPIC! Love your signature by the way. We would have a different world if more Christians thought we shouldn't kill our enemies (and people in general), but they only seem to care about fertilized eggs.

 

[AV1611VET]

I asked a chaplain here, but he gave me a thoroughly unsatisfactory answer, to say the very least, more along the same worn out and shallow lines. So... What are your thoughts?

Perhaps you would like to share with us what this chaplain told you, so someone won't repeat it here and waste your time.

You want my thoughts?

Okay -- the creation event had nothing to do with science whatsoever.

 

[AV1611VET]

... and they think that by discrediting evolution they are providing more evidence for creation, which is not the case.

There is no evidence for the creation event.

Discrediting evolution is not going to do anything more than discredit evolution.

Only the Holy Spirit can provide the necessary information to persuade one into believing creationism; and He did, in Writing.

 

[TheReasoner]

Perhaps you would like to share with us what this chaplain told you, so someone won't repeat it here and waste your time.

No worries. I do expect someone to deliver something vacuous.

You want my thoughts?

Okay -- the creation event had nothing to do with science whatsoever.

So... Looking at what God did shows us nothing about what God did...
Right!

This is part of the whole thing, AV. You don't even know what you are saying. You're saying that God's creation has nothing to do with creation. That the world has nothing to do with the world. And.... That's nonsense. So, you're basically yelling at me to abandon faith and become a staunch anti-christian atheist, aren't you?

 

[AV1611VET]

No worries. I do expect someone to deliver something vacuous.

If that's what he said to you, then he must have misunderstood your question, eh?

So... Looking at what God did shows us nothing about what God did...

You start with the Manual first, then the product.

I have an alarm clock that has sixteen buttons on it, with some of the buttons working in conjunction with other buttons.

I can get it to work to a point, but then I need the manual to go further.

Without the manual to guide me, I'd be forever figuring it out.

Right!

Wrong!

This is part of the whole thing, AV.

What is?

You don't even know what you are saying.

Believe me, FG, I know more than you think I do; creation is my forte.

You're saying that God's creation has nothing to do with creation.

I'm saying that the creation had nothing to do with science.

More appropriately, science had nothing to do with the creation.

That the world has nothing to do with the world.

Someone went off on a tangent and lost his way, didn't he?

And.... That's nonsense.

It sure is -- I'm glad you noticed.

Could you backtrack and get back on the right road, please?

So, you're basically yelling at me to abandon faith and become a staunch anti-christian atheist, aren't you?

No.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

There is no evidence for the creation event.

Discrediting evolution is not going to do anything more than discredit evolution.

You're preaching to the choir buddy, you need to call the Hovinds and let them know.

 

[Miami Marlins 2012]

I used to be a Christian like you, until the Fundamentalist Evangelicals (ie. Young Earth Creationists) talked me out of my belief. I'm sorry, but the Kent Hovinds of this world are doing a huge disfavor to religion.

Disregarding most of the scientific evidence, twisting scientific laws and threories, and sherry picking scientific research to support a religious belief doesn't make sense. It's gotten so bad that at the new "Creationist Museum" they have models of dinosaurs with horse saddles on them, and cavemen children ridding on the back of carnivorous dinosaurs and playing with them.

Then there is Erik Hovind, the son of Kent Hovind, who points at "evidence of creationism" such as the "fact" that the oldest living tree is only 4,900 years old....and therefore proof of creationism. Which is nice, except that the oldest living organism is actually a plant that is over 11,000 years old. But since that doesn't fit their beliefs, they disregard that as the work of Satan.

The worst one is Kent Hovind's theory of the Flood. He proposes that since there is not enough water on Earth to cover the land, that there was a large cap of water orbiting the earth...hundreds of miles thick. Sounds good unless you've ever dived in the ocean and noticed how water filters sunlight. You go down a few dozen feet and it starts to get pretty dark. If his "theory," and I use the terms science and theory rather loosely when it comes to "creation science," were true then the whole Earth would have been pitch dark and killed all life on the surface. But you see, creationists don't care about science. When you point things like that out to them, they just roll their eyes and say, "Well, God did it, and he can suspend the laws of the Universe."

Anyway, I hear you! They are not doing any favors to your religion with those twisted views.

 

[Miami Marlins 2012]

One last piece of advise. If your search leads you to the conclusion that science is best to provide the answers to the workings of our Universe and the development of life, that does not mean that you have to outright reject your religious traditions.

Yes, there are some militant atheists and agnostics out there, but many atheists and agnostics still choose to embody their Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Jewish/polytheist, or whatever other religious upbringing simply out of a sense of tradition. So even if you conclude that Christianity does not explain these things, you can still maintain an appreciation of the traditions you were raised with, and practice some of its rituals, even though your views have expanded.

I know that last bit of advise sounds like a contradiction, and I acknowledge that it doesn't work for everyone. So in the end others and I can advise you, but the decisions are yours to make. Do what makes sense for you. As an agnostic I can only give you my opinion, but I can't force you to do anything on pain of eternal damnation or torture...I'll leave that to the religious folks.

 

[TheReasoner]

more of the same old

Check my faith icon.

Thanks AV. In part, your doing.

M.M. Aye, I know many good atheists or agnostics out there. I guess I am one, now. I do think Jesus might be God's son. I hold His teachings dear and would like to follow them as closely as I can. But Christians such as AV and other evangelicals have killed my faith in Christianity. CabVet had another good point, concerning the evangelicals. I'd elaborate, but that's off-topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

I used to be a Christian like you, until the Fundamentalist Evangelicals (ie. Young Earth Creationists) talked me out of my belief. I'm sorry, but the Kent Hovinds of this world are doing a huge disfavor to religion.

Disregarding most of the scientific evidence, twisting scientific laws and threories, and sherry picking scientific research to support a religious belief doesn't make sense.

Yet I'm just the opposite -- I don't claim any evidence whatsoever, and I even say no evidence was generated, yet I too get told I'm pushing people away, not drawing them in.

So I don't buy that at all.

I will however, admit that I'm not a YEC, so if you were just exclusively talking about YECs, then I don't apply.

As far as the water canopy you mentioned, that's basic doctrine.

I always contended that it was ballooned out in space far enough that it was paper thin, so the inhabitants of earth could see the stars through it, but I have now moved to it being a giant ice ball (or ice cube) in space.

 

[AV1611VET]

One last piece of advise. If your search leads you to the conclusion that science is best to provide the answers to the workings of our Universe and the development of life, that does not mean that you have to outright reject your religious traditions.

I have made up a set of standards I use for just this purpose:

My Boolean standards:

1. Whatever the Bible supports: support.
2. Whatever the Bible trumps: trump.
3. If the Bible is silent and science supports it: support it.
4. If the Bible is silent and science trumps it: trump it.

 

[TheReasoner]

I have made up a set of standards I use for just this purpose:

And which interpretation, AV? Aren't you just pushing your own interpretation as God's word? Most Christians do not share your interpretation on many points. Some of the directions within Christianity that are truly ancient and traced back to the apostles directly hold views diametrically opposed to yours.

So how can you claim to support the bible, and not just your own mind?

 

[AV1611VET]

Check my faith icon.

Thanks AV. In part, your doing.

I'm glad I could help you see your true self.

All you have to do now is repent and ask Jesus into your heart, and your journey is over, eh?

 

[TheReasoner]

I'm glad I could help you see your true self.

I forgot you're a fanatic. You just can't be wrong. So of course you only helped me see how terrible I am, you've never made a mistake. No no.

All you have to do now is repent and ask Jesus into your heart, and your journey is over, eh?

Jesus I have no problem with. It's your nonsense I can't abide. Lying and cheating - believing in your own lies. I'm through with that.

 

[AV1611VET]

And which interpretation, AV?

The literal interpretation.

Aren't you just pushing your own interpretation as God's word?

No -- I'm 'pushing my interpretation of God's word.'

Most Christians do not share your interpretation on many points.

And I can almost guarantee that each and every single one of those points come with an "IMO" attached.

You need to remember that, for the most part, we are not asked questions that are explicitly supported by a literal interpretation of the Scriptures; we get questions that are geared to making us say, "I don't know", and I won't do that, unless I absolutely have to.

In other words, I'm not afraid to speculate.

That's like Joe, who believes in basic math, getting questions like: "I know the math book says 2 x 2 = 4, but what does 2a x 2b equal?"

Some of the directions within Christianity that are truly ancient and traced back to the apostles directly hold views diametrically opposed to yours.

I doubt that very seriously.

So how can you claim to support the bible, and not just your own mind?

I can't trust my mind to talk and drive at the same time, and I have recently given up playing Chess seriously, telling myself that my mind is always letting me down at a crucial point.

 

[AV1611VET]

I forgot you're a fanatic.

I might be a religious nut, but I'm screwed on to the right Bolt.

You just can't be wrong.

I've been wrong once or twice --

So of course you only helped me see how terrible I am,

Not by design -- and is that what you truly think of yourself?

... you've never made a mistake. No no.

I'm prone to error like the next guy, and I had 2nd and 3rd place trophies to remind me.

Jesus I have no problem with.

That's nice to hear.

Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. (Mark 12:34)

It's your nonsense I can't abide.

Then don't ask me nonsense questions, and you won't get nonsense answers.

Lying and cheating -

Now you're getting provocative, and even accusing me of something Jesus was accused of.

- believing in your own lies.

Then by definition, it isn't a lie if I believe it, myself -- is it?

I'm through with that.

Ya -- you made that abundantly clear.

 

[CabVet]

You start with the Manual first, then the product.

I have an alarm clock that has sixteen buttons on it, with some of the buttons working in conjunction with other buttons.

I can get it to work to a point, but then I need the manual to go further.

Without the manual to guide me, I'd be forever figuring it out.

Yet the manual tells nothing about how the clock was built.

I'm saying that the creation had nothing to do with science.

More appropriately, science had nothing to do with the creation.

I completely agree with you on that. Science doesn't explain any of the thousands of creation myths out there.

 

[Miami Marlins 2012]

AV1611VET has just proven my point:

Science
1) Hypothesis
2) Experiment
3) Observation
4) Peer review

And if an idea doesn't stand up to that, it gets thrown out and replaced. We are not a religion. If something doesn't stand up to scrutiny as science advances, we go back and try to find a better answer that actually explains the thing we are looking at.


Religion
1) Begging
2) Insisting
3) Demanding
4) Torture
And when all else has failed to convince you of the "truth:" DEATH

Religion is inflexible. Each of the thousands of religions/cults on Earth demand that you believe what an ancient book or legend says....and that they are the true religion because that's what they were taught to believe. If you don't believe they will either harm you or threaten you with eternal damnation.

Let me ask you a question. When you get to your heaven, how do you know you won't find the Roman Gods, or the Greek Gods, or the Hindu Gods, or Allah, or one of the thousands of other Gods there are....instead of yours? If I was a believer I'd be afraid of that. Surely with every religion saying they are the only true faith, they all can't be right!!!

 

[Michael]

I`ll keep this really really simple.

I haven't really had faith in creationism for years, and my education has only served to show me ever more clearly how foolish the whole thing is.
However, I keep running into people who insist it is the sole true faith. That Christianity has no meaning without it - or who insist in one way or another to try to use sophism or fallacious logic in an attempt to undermine the theory of evolution - which they claim they have no real problem with. Far be it from me to discourage intellectually honest criticism of the set paradigm. However, I see no reason to accept or give any respect to woolly thinking or shoddy logic. And frankly, I see more and more of that within Christian ranks. I have, I confess, reached a point where I m asking myself the following question:
What validity does faith have if it cannot survive science without attempting to undermine and explain it away?

I think a more fundamental question is in order actually. *WHICH* sect of 'Christianity' shall we believe? Does it alone speak for the whole of 'Christians'? I don't know of any Catholics for example that have a problem with the theory of evolution.