How many creationists practise what they preach?

[Celticroots]

If you don't believe the modern science that debunks creationism, how do you justify going to a hospital for medical care where the exact same science is used?

Exactly. Or they think having an illness is because they lack faith in God. Or get mad because God didn't heal them. God can heal, but the majority of the time He points us to the men and women who have used science to help treat/cure diseases. The way He provided is clear. People just choose not to listen and be ignorant.

 

[Celticroots]

This is lunacy.

When you're dealing with people who reject reality, then yep that is what happens.

 

[Murby]

When you're dealing with people who reject reality, then yep that is what happens.

 

[Extraneous]

You don't understand what a theory means in science. It's a well substantiated hypothesis of some aspect of the natural world, acquired using the scientific method and then repeatedly tested. A scientific theory explains facts. Evolution is the foundation of biology, nothing in biology makes sense without it.

I heard all that before. I do know what a theory is. The truth is that ToE is just a theory, in every sense of the word, yet people try to pass it off as fact.

 

[Extraneous]

If we taught neither position for any subject in which a small minority of professionals in that subject reject the consensus, there would be virtually nothing taught at school.

Nonsense.

 

[Extraneous]

Yes, it is a theory, just like Atomic Theory in chemistry. "Teach biology but not the theory of evolution" is like saying "teach chemistry but not atomic theory." It sounds like you might be a bit confused on the definitions of the words Fact and Theory in terms of science.

Ok, keep teaching your fallible ToE in school, i don't really care. Do whatever pleases you. Don't complain about creationism though, because its a valid theory in its own right, its just a different kind of theory.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

All modern, western democracy was built on the Bible, the church, and Christianity. Granted, the modern west now holds a predominantly skeptical and critical view of Scripture. But it's not really possible to totally ignore Scripture, nor is it beneficial. As evolution is taught in public schools, if it is done with a total disregard and ignorance of the Biblical foundations of the west, students are done a great disservice. . . . .

The modern west learned about honesty, fact checking, avoiding hypocrisy, fact based judgments from the Bible. It is honoring these biblical principles that leads us to teach evolution. The idea of determining truth by listening to authority instead of the evidence is what maintains creationism, and is contrary to the Biblical message . . . see my signature quote below.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

I heard all that before. I do know what a theory is. The truth is that ToE is just a theory, in every sense of the word, yet people try to pass it off as fact.

Do you also reject gravity as a fact because the theory of general relativity is "just a theory"?
What about the germ theory of disease? Do you also reject that germs can cause disease?

Evolution is a fact as much as gravity or germs. Scientific theories explain the facts.
This is the definition: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.

Don't complain about creationism though, because its a valid theory in its own right, its just a different kind of theory.

It's an unfalsifiable hypothesis which means it has no explanatory or predictive abilities about the natural world. It's nonsense and can be demonstrated to be nonsense with the abundance of facts and overwhelming evidence that evolution has from several independent lines of study that all reach the same conclusion.

 

[Extraneous]

Do you also reject gravity as a fact because the theory of general relativity is "just a theory"?
What about the germ theory of disease? Do you also reject that germs can cause disease?

Evolution is a fact as much as gravity or germs. Scientific theories explain the facts.
This is the definition: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.



It's an unfalsifiable hypothesis which means it has no explanatory or predictive abilities about the natural world. It's nonsense and can be demonstrated to be nonsense with the abundance of facts and overwhelming evidence that evolution has from several independent lines of study that all reach the same conclusion.

Ok then.

 

[Goonie]

This is lunacy.

Welcome to Christianforums lunacy occurs on a daily basis.

 

[Hoghead1]

You are forgetting, Extraneous, that evolution became a central concept in science because of the overwhelming evidence in its favor. I also question your understanding of how the real world of science really works. Also you are misusing the term "theory." A theory is simply two or more assumptions brought together. Whether these are true or not , it is still called a theory.

 

[Hoghead1]

You are overlooking some key points, Tree of Life. Academia recognizers a division of labor. That is only being practical, as you can only cover so much in a class. The question of God is definitely not a question for science. I know scientists may comment on God, but then they have stepped outside science. So, the question of God is best explored in classes on philosophy and theology. In point of fact, evolution is neural on teh question of God. For example, I and other contemporary theologians believe that evolution would be impossible without God and that God is continually evolving. This is a very complicated matter that requires teh use of some heavy-duty theological equipment, which is totally beyond the reach of science to provide. Here, in addition to God, we are also addressing questions of meaning, value, significance, questions which science was never equipped to deal with.

 

[bhsmte]

Kids are intelligent people generally and will be able to make up their own minds about life's great mysteries as they develop. Some of the examples above are about science that has been verified in the lab (e.g. AIDS, DNA), while others deal with relatively recent history (e.g., The Holocaust), so one ought to be able to make a decision fairly easily about such topics. Other subjects, like whether the TOE is actual or just bad inference from available evidence are much harder to deal with unless one is an expert scientist, which is why I want my daughter to hear not only what the secular scientists have to say, but also great creation-believing scientists like Dr Menton. In that way, she will get a more balanced view of the issues.

I would agree, most kids do get it eventually.

In fact, rejection of well evidenced science, is one of the major reasons, young people leave churches.

 

[Murby]

The modern west learned about honesty, fact checking, avoiding hypocrisy, fact based judgments from the Bible. It is honoring these biblical principles that leads us to teach evolution. The idea of determining truth by listening to authority instead of the evidence is what maintains creationism, and is contrary to the Biblical message . . . see my signature quote below.

Oh man.. that's priceless.. Do you mind if I use your statement elsewhere? Is hard to come up with good comical material sometmes.

Welcome to Christianforums lunacy occurs on a daily basis.

See quote above.

 

[Celticroots]

I would agree, most kids do get it eventually.

In fact, rejection of well evidenced science, is one of the major reasons, young people leave churches.

That's sad.

 

[Tree of Life]

The modern west learned about honesty, fact checking, avoiding hypocrisy, fact based judgments from the Bible. It is honoring these biblical principles that leads us to teach evolution. The idea of determining truth by listening to authority instead of the evidence is what maintains creationism, and is contrary to the Biblical message . . . see my signature quote below.

I totally respect this position. However, don't you think it's a bit disingenuous to teach evolution without recognizing that there is an apparent incompatibility with the dominant narrative of western culture? I mean it should at least be recognized. Otherwise we're teaching kids to compartmentalize and privatize religious belief.

 

[Hoghead1]

The purpose of science, Tree of Life, is to check out and test out our belief systems to see if they have a true reality basis. Apparently, you as well as creation-science people, feel that your beliefs should be the sole criterion for scientific validity. But that is definitely not the way science is intended to work; and if you are not willing to question and test out your beliefs, then you will automatically lapse into fanaticism, intolerance, ignorance, you name it.

 

[Tree of Life]

The purpose of science, Tree of Life, is to check out and test out our belief systems to see if they have a true reality basis. Apparently, you as well as creation-science people, feel that your beliefs should be the sole criterion for scientific validity. But that is definitely not the way science is intended to work; and if you are not willing to question and test out your beliefs, then you will automatically lapse into fanaticism, intolerance, ignorance, you name it.

I'm afraid I don't see the relevance of this post to the discussion.

 

[bhsmte]

I totally respect this position. However, don't you think it's a bit disingenuous to teach evolution without recognizing that there is an apparent incompatibility with the dominant narrative of western culture? I mean it should at least be recognized. Otherwise we're teaching kids to compartmentalize and privatize religious belief.

Why should science have to recognize a religious culture in it's work?

Should we ask doctors to recognize certain religious cultures when they practice medicine and change their course of treatment based on scientific results because of this?

You are free to follow whatever religious narrative you like, even if it doesn't coincide, with well evidenced science.

 

[Xalith]

Creationists ask that the schools should 'Teach both sides' meaning teach creationism along with evolution in the science class.

I would indeed teach my child that the "Theory" of Evolution exists and it is just that: a Theory.

How many creationists here teach their home schooled children both sides?

If I had a child, I would teach them about the Creation as stated in the Bible, and I would also teach them what the Theory of Evolution says happened, and why I don't agree with it. (and no I'm not going into detail here. many threads have been had about that)

How many creationists here are happy that their children are taught about evolution in school then teach them about creationism at home?

Depends. Was this teaching about evolution taught as a "THEORY", that it might not actually be true? Or is it ram-rodded down the kids' throats as being truth?