Wall Street Journal publishes anti-Christian propaganda! i

Underseer

Diabloii.Net Member
Steel_Avatar said:
This is not so much anti-Christian as it is anti-ID. And I have no problem with that; ID is a severely flawed theory.
If you mean "theory" in the scientific sense, then it's not even a theory, much less a flawed one. If you meant "theory" in the vernacular, then I agree.
 

Steel_Avatar

Diabloii.Net Member
Well yes. I was using theory in the layman's terms. In scientific terms, it's a conjecture, nothing more. No supporting evidence at all.
 

Plum

Diabloii.Net Member
Underseer said:
Yep.

Creationism is only a major component of Christian sects that teach that the entire Old Testament is literal. Many Christians believe in odd things like "allegory" and "parable."

Creationist Christians nominally outnumber evolutionist Christians in America (Christians: 84% of the American population; creationists: 45% of the American population), but America is the only industrialized Christian nation in which this is true. In all the other industrialized Christian nations, evolutionist Christians outnumber creationist Christians, often by a wide margin. Globally, theist evolutionists outnumber creationists.
I'm of the opinion that one would be hard pressed to suggest that the creation of man can equate to his formation through evolution, whether literal interpretation is used or not. It can be suggested that God allowed for the gradual development of other living things, since they came from the "earth", but a direct act of God is stated to have been involved in Genesis when man came into existence.

If it's theorized that the Old Testament is one massive allegory, then nearly any point that it raises has the potential to be invalidated to an extent. If the OT is interpreted allegorically, then what about the NT that refers to it? Should it be treated as a massive parable as well? It seems to me that downsizing the OT and choosing which portions of the Bible ought to be followed is nothing but selectively interpreting the words. If people want to do so then so be it, but I'm not sure that I see the compatibility of Christianity, which has taught creationism through both the OT and NT, and evolution.
 

Underseer

Diabloii.Net Member
I'm not going to argue theology with you, just pointing out what most Christians believe. You guys can argue amoungst yourselves.
 
This is why the Theory of Evolution is offered as just that, a theory; not an alternative belief to creationism.
My experience, as a scientist myself, is much along the same lines as what maccool said. It seems to be more non-scientists, using scientific data gathered by scientists (and using it wrongly, I might add), who attempt to refute religious beliefs and traditions.
The purpose of science is to gather data and expand our perceptions of the world/universe we live in, and to improve the human condition if possible with the information we gain. Any scientist who deliberately sets out to refute a belief system is missing the point and behaving in an unscientific manner, letting personal feelings get in the way of thought. Most of the scientists I know don't behave that way.
 

CaptJoe213

Diabloii.Net Member
Sergeant said:
Science didn't kill religion. God is the most expert physicist, chemist and biologist in existence. The minds of our greatest would vaporize if they tried to grasp all he knows.

I mean, God didn't create the universe and world out of NOTHING. God, a past master of physics, geology, chemisty and biology simply took materials already there and put his vast knowledge and power to use.

Science does not refute religion and vice versa. Science is one of the things God is very good at. :D
thank you sergeant, that's what I was trying to say, but I wasn't as clear or concise as you. Damn these pain pills lol
 

Plum

Diabloii.Net Member
Underseer said:
I'm not going to argue theology with you, just pointing out what most Christians believe. You guys can argue amoungst yourselves.
I just wanted to point out the hesitation I have concerning a relationship between evolution and Christianity. Was the theory of evolution developed specifically to refute creationism? I'm inclined to doubt it. Do the two ideas contradict each other however? To an extent, I believe they do.
 

maccool

Diabloii.Net Member
Listen to Mixed, he knows of what he speaks. Excellent job, btw, Mixed. I must find you another Periodic Table :drink:

Not the me being correct part - that rarely happens, but the part about the purpose of science. I mean, if we weren't supposed to question everything, why do we? There are at least 2 answers.

MV said:
The purpose of science is to gather data and expand our perceptions of the world/universe we live in, and to improve the human condition if possible with the information we gain.
I hope this discussion remains civil, it's an interesting one.
 

Underseer

Diabloii.Net Member
Plum said:
I just wanted to point out the hesitation I have concerning a relationship between evolution and Christianity. Was the theory of evolution developed specifically to refute creationism? I'm inclined to doubt it. Do the two ideas contradict each other however? To an extent, I believe they do.
If you are a creationist, then of course you find the two ideas incompatible. However Christians who believe otherwise outnumber you. You'll have to argue with them.

Here's an essay from one of them (although I don't believe it covers OT literalism)
 

Plum

Diabloii.Net Member
Underseer said:
If you are a creationist, then of course you find the two ideas incompatible. However Christians who believe otherwise outnumber you. You'll have to argue with them.

Here's an essay from one of them (although I don't believe it covers OT literalism)
I'm not sure what the number of believers has to do with the issue. It doesn't come as a surprise that many like to follow such a line of thought anyways, since selective interpretation of any piece of writing is a tactic used by countless people around the world. Most of us (myself included I presume) seem to be inclined to discriminately analyze for what we hope to find.

Interesting essay, though it didn't quite look into what I hoped it would. I figure that evolution can agree with Christianity to a degree (in essentially all but humanity). Humanity, according to the Bible, seems to be the sole creature that turns away from potential of agreement with the theory of evolution. That's where I see the contradiction. There's a high chance that I'm incorrect though.
 

Underseer

Diabloii.Net Member
Plum said:
I'm not sure what the number of believers has to do with the issue. It doesn't come as a surprise that many like to follow such a line of thought anyways, since selective interpretation of any piece of writing is a tactic used by countless people around the world. Most of us (myself included I presume) seem to be inclined to discriminately analyze for what we hope to find.

Interesting essay, though it didn't quite look into what I hoped it would. I figure that evolution can agree with Christianity to a degree (in essentially all but humanity). Humanity, according to the Bible, seems to be the sole creature that turns away from potential of agreement with the theory of evolution. That's where I see the contradiction. There's a high chance that I'm incorrect though.
I'm a heathen infidel atheist, so my knowledge of the Bible is pretty slight, but from what I've been told the theological hurdle between creationism and evolution comes down to the order of events.

Do read the article. If nothing else it is well and passionately written, and it points out a few dangers that can arise from how you present creationism.
 
Top