Why do YE Creationists insist on a simplistic literal reading of the bible?

[lasthero]

Do enlighten...

You're talking to me?

Well, I already did, actually; about two pages back. But to go on, a scientific theory is a 'well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.'

Atomic theory, gravitational theory, and, yes, the theory of evolution. In the same way that the theory of gravity explains gravity, the theory of evolution explains evolution. A theory is the highest form of evidence science can achieve - the way Crazy is using it, he's treating it more like it's an a guess or speculation. It's not. I don't take the theory of gravity on faith and I don't take the theory of evolution on faith, at least not the same kind of faith that religion requires.

 

[Kellyvee]

yet you are the ones who are so very sure of yourselves, that's obviously not true is it? and you know you're not.

You confuse me with this post... what is it that you think "I know I'm not"?

You're confused? what do you think we are?

All we ever read is creationists complaining about Atheist coming on to a Christian Forum trying to shake the faith of believers, how can we possibly shake the faith of people who are so sure they are right? how is that possible? is the faith of the people here so fragile that they are afraid we might say something that could change their beliefs?

I think you are all afraid that you could lose your faith, even you want to hide yourself away with your family so nothing can come into your world and change what you believe.
I know that it's not easy living in a creationist community and not believing what everyone else tells you they believe, sometimes it's lose your faith and lose your family, that's a pretty big ask of anyone.

Perhaps it's better to lie and live with them than say how you feel and lose them.
I was lucky I moved away to work shortly before I lost my faith completely.

 

[KWCrazy]

A theory is the highest form of evidence science can achieve

No, that would be a law.

the way Crazy is using it, he's treating it more like it's an a guess or speculation.

Please cite any post anywhere where anyone ever said that.

I don't take the theory of gravity on faith and I don't take the theory of evolution on faith, at least not the same kind of faith that religion requires.

The difference is you and jump off a curb and test the theory of gravity. After hundreds of thousands of generations of irradiated fruit flies, nobody has ever been able to validate increasing complexity through benevolent mutations.

There have been millions more people who have had personal experiences with the supernatural world you say doesn't exist than have seen the transitional fossils that you say do.

 

[Kellyvee]

According to the Scriptures, "The fool has said in his heart 'there is no God.' "

They have that back to front, only a fool would say 'There is a God' because only a fool would believe something without evidence, apart from your religion you do not believe anything without evidence.
Do you believe in Bigfoot? if not why not, no evidence, how about fairies? same thing no evidence.
You trust a lot of things because of your experience, you don't trust people you have never met before.

 

[lasthero]

No, that would be a law.

No, it would be theory.

The final step of the scientific method is to construct, support, or cast doubt on a scientific theory. A theory in science is not a guess, speculation, or suggestion, which is the popular definition of the word "theory." A scientific theory is a unifying and self-consistent explanation of fundamental natural processes or phenomena that is totally constructed of corroborated hypotheses. A theory, therefore, is built of reliable knowledge--built of scientific facts--and its purpose is to explain major natural processes or phenomena. Scientific theories explain nature by unifying many once-unrelated facts or corroborated hypotheses; they are the strongest and most truthful explanations of how the universe, nature, and life came to be, how they work, what they are made of, and what will become of them. Since humans are living organisms and are part of the universe, science explains all of these things about ourselves.
These scientific theories--such as the theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, evolution, genetics, plate tectonics, and big bang cosmology--are the most reliable, most rigorous, and most comprehensive form of knowledge that humans possess. Thus, it is important for every educated person to understand where scientific knowledge comes from, and how to emulate this method of gaining knowledge. Scientific knowledge comes from the practice of scientific thinking--using the scientific method--and this mode of discovering and validating knowledge can be duplicated and achieved by anyone who practices critical thinking.

An Introduction to Science

A scientific law is just a description of phenomena.

Scientific law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Theories do not become laws. Get your terms straight. A theory is a high as you can get in science outside of mathematics.

Please cite any post anywhere where anyone ever said that.

I never said you explicitly said it. But that does seem to be what you're getting at.

The difference is you and jump off a curb and test the theory of gravity

Jumping off a curb doesn't test the theory of gravity, it just shows that things tend to fall downwards. You can jump off curbs all day long, it's not going to actually tell you anything about the process involved. The theory of gravity explains WHY that happens.

There have been millions more people who have had personal experiences with the supernatural world you say doesn't exist

I never said the supernatural world doesn't exist, did I? Though I will say that millions of people claiming to have personal experiences with the supernatural world does not, in itself, mean there is such a thing as a supernatural world.

 

[BrianJK]

You're confused? what do you think we are?

All we ever read is creationists complaining about Atheist coming on to a Christian Forum trying to shake the faith of believers, how can we possibly shake the faith of people who are so sure they are right? how is that possible? is the faith of the people here so fragile that they are afraid we might say something that could change their beliefs?

I think you are all afraid that you could lose your faith, even you want to hide yourself away with your family so nothing can come into your world and change what you believe.
I know that it's not easy living in a creationist community and not believing what everyone else tells you they believe, sometimes it's lose your faith and lose your family, that's a pretty big ask of anyone.

Perhaps it's better to lie and live with them than say how you feel and lose them.
I was lucky I moved away to work shortly before I lost my faith completely.

I am not afraid of someone "breaking my faith". I just find it curious that someone spends their time insulting, rather than respectfully discussing, the faith of others.

You can keep calling my faith a lie if it makes you feel good. It just strikes me as more antagonistic than anything else.

 

[BrianJK]

You're talking to me?

Well, I already did, actually; about two pages back. But to go on, a scientific theory is a 'well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.'

Atomic theory, gravitational theory, and, yes, the theory of evolution. In the same way that the theory of gravity explains gravity, the theory of evolution explains evolution. A theory is the highest form of evidence science can achieve - the way Crazy is using it, he's treating it more like it's an a guess or speculation. It's not. I don't take the theory of gravity on faith and I don't take the theory of evolution on faith, at least not the same kind of faith that religion requires.

You take the scientific evidence used to support these theories on faith.

 

[keith99]

Fair enough. For me it isn't a psychological thing, and having faith without demanding irrefutable proof each time isn't unreasonable or illogical IMO

I think I agree with what you are saying here.

Heck I cannot think of any irrefutable proof either for or against the existence of God. Most things I can think of could be done by a society as scientifically advanced as we see in Star Trek, and the few beyond their grasp are quite doable by several entities that they meet.

Against God? Even harder as if God exists and does not want to be seen who can see him?

But some decent evidence occasionally is a different story and I have not seen any such evidence. If you feel you have there is a good chance it is something where your simple report to us here is far from compelling (to us). What you saw/experienced may be quite different when it comes to YOUR confidence and belief.

If you have such they for YOU to have faith is not unreasonable, and to demand it over and over is anything but faith.

BUT others demanding I have faith with no evidence and considering faith all the better if there is a COMPLETE lack of evidence seems stupid to me.

Years ago I searched for quotes about faith. Many were idiocy. But I found one I liked, liked a lot:

Faith is not belief without evidence, it is trust without reservation.

Very different things. The second can and should demand evidence to start, but once given the faith is just that , trust without reservation.

 

[BrianJK]

I haven't demanded anything of anyone. I've just tried to answer questions.

 

[bhsmte]

I think I agree with what you are saying here.

Heck I cannot think of any irrefutable proof either for or against the existence of God. Most things I can think of could be done by a society as scientifically advanced as we see in Star Trek, and the few beyond their grasp are quite doable by several entities that they meet.

Against God? Even harder as if God exists and does not want to be seen who can see him?

But some decent evidence occasionally is a different story and I have not seen any such evidence. If you feel you have there is a good chance it is something where your simple report to us here is far from compelling (to us). What you saw/experienced may be quite different when it comes to YOUR confidence and belief.

If you have such they for YOU to have faith is not unreasonable, and to demand it over and over is anything but faith.

BUT others demanding I have faith with no evidence and considering faith all the better if there is a COMPLETE lack of evidence seems stupid to me.

Years ago I searched for quotes about faith. Many were idiocy. But I found one I liked, liked a lot:

Faith is not belief without evidence, it is trust without reservation.

Very different things. The second can and should demand evidence to start, but once given the faith is just that , trust without reservation.

Whether you call it faith or trust, I would argue what one chooses to have "trust" or "faith" in, is very much rooted in individual psychological needs.

 

[Kellyvee]

You're confused? what do you think we are?

All we ever read is creationists complaining about Atheist coming on to a Christian Forum trying to shake the faith of believers, how can we possibly shake the faith of people who are so sure they are right? how is that possible? is the faith of the people here so fragile that they are afraid we might say something that could change their beliefs?

I think you are all afraid that you could lose your faith, even you want to hide yourself away with your family so nothing can come into your world and change what you believe.
I know that it's not easy living in a creationist community and not believing what everyone else tells you they believe, sometimes it's lose your faith and lose your family, that's a pretty big ask of anyone.

Perhaps it's better to lie and live with them than say how you feel and lose them.
I was lucky I moved away to work shortly before I lost my faith completely.

I am not afraid of someone "breaking my faith". I just find it curious that someone spends their time insulting, rather than respectfully discussing, the faith of others.

You can keep calling my faith a lie if it makes you feel good. It just strikes me as more antagonistic than anything else.

Please point out where I insulted you.

If you are not afraid why do you want to lock yourself away?

I call your faith a lie because it is the same faith that lied to me,
if you saw someone about to walk in front of a bus would you yell and try to grab them? or say and do nothing?
the bus has already gone over you but you are still alive.

 

[lasthero]

You take the scientific evidence used to support these theories on faith.

In a manner of speaking, I suppose, though I feel using the word as such cheapens the term. If you get technical enough, everything is faith.

 

[bhsmte]

In a manner of speaking, I suppose, though I feel using the word as such cheapens the term. If you get technical enough, everything is faith.

Sure, I guess you could.

I have a very high level of faith that 2+2=4.
I have a high level of faith that the earth is millions of years old.
I have an extremely low level of faith that the God of the bible exists.

How do I increase my level of faith? With objective evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

Whether you call it faith or trust, I would argue what one chooses to have "trust" or "faith" in, is very much rooted in individual psychological needs.

And I would argue that you're no psychiatrist.

 

[AV1611VET]

How do I increase my level of faith? With objective evidence.

Um ... no.

That's not how faith works in this dispensation.

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

 

[Kellyvee]

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Would we be blessed if we believed in everything we have not seen, bigfoot, yeti, every other God?
I noticed that the Bible praises the not very smart people for not being very smart in lots of places.
Do you think it's wise to trust people you don't know? would you advise your children to do it?

 

[BrianJK]

In a manner of speaking, I suppose, though I feel using the word as such cheapens the term. If you get technical enough, everything is faith.

That is the point. People with faith primarily in scientific evidence seem to look down on those whose primarily faith is elsewhere.

 

[BrianJK]

Sure, I guess you could.

I have a very high level of faith that 2+2=4.
I have a high level of faith that the earth is millions of years old.
I have an extremely low level of faith that the God of the bible exists.

How do I increase my level of faith? With objective evidence.

Why impose your version of faith on others?

 

[AV1611VET]

Would we be blessed if we believed in everything we have not seen, bigfoot, yeti, every other God?

I don't know.

If bigfoot wanted to bless you, I'm sure he could think of a way.

Pose for a clear picture, maybe?

 

[lasthero]

That is the point. People with faith primarily in scientific evidence seem to look down on those whose primarily faith is elsewhere.

The reverse could be said, too. People can be jerks, religious and non.