The Real Message of Creationism

The Real Message of Creationism

There are 538 comments on the TIME.com story from Nov 22, 2010, titled The Real Message of Creationism. In it, TIME.com reports that:

When the Kansas Board of Education voted recently to eliminate evolution from the state science curriculum, the sophisticates had quite a yuk.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TIME.com.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#437 Aug 19, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you keep claiming Creationists are ruled by fears?
If anyone is less fearful of the outcome in 'this' world, it's creationists.
You got it backwards.
Well, lets say different fears then if it keeps you happy.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#438 Aug 19, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess the scientists are truly afraid of the Obama Chicago Machine after all, even more than the Koch Brothers.
I know both sides will ping pong the science for their political purposes. That's no big surprise.
Some types of small changes in adaptation are possible in a kind of creature, but not from a kind of creature to another kind of creature. You guys have carried it to unbelievable, impossible areas that have not been proven. We ask for evidence and your answer is "MYA, slow process, and we're working on it".
This evolution over reach in areas without evidence, seems like a blatant attempt to try and discredit the Bible and God.
"the scientists"? How truly laughable.

Are the scientists in Europe, China, India, Japan, Africa, and Australia ll afraid of your little "Chicago Club"? Was there a Chicago Club 20, 50, and 150 years ago?

Your paranoid conspiracy theorising is endless, as your last defence against science, evidence, and reason.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#439 Aug 19, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you keep claiming Creationists are ruled by fears?
If anyone is less fearful of the outcome in 'this' world, it's creationists.
You got it backwards.
Not really. The ones who do not believe in God or heaven and hell have nothing to fear when they die. Now the believers have the fear of sinning and not being forgiven and going to hell when they die. You have to believe in something that could turn out bad in the end to have a fear of it.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#440 Aug 20, 2013
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm, the Evolution Theory is all about no God, No ID. Just a random chain of events. And y'all make fun of me. I'm blessed to be not as smart as you.
Certainly not as knowledgeable. That's the fault of no one else but yourself.

So you spew horseshit and, when challenged, you run away. Got it.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#441 Aug 20, 2013
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure can. How did something. So complex just appear?
I'm not sure if you are referring to the Big Bang or abiogenesis but, in any event, neither are part of the theory of evolution. I would be a good idea if your going to 'pick apart' a theory, you know what it is. So how about you stick to the subject.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#442 Aug 20, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Yours is up your butt.
Beat me to it!

:-)

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#443 Aug 20, 2013
replaytime wrote:
Evolution and Abiogenesis go hand in hand. Evolution supports Abiogenesis and evolution would not be with out abiogenesis according to most.
They are related. No one disputes that. But you seem confused about what the theory encompasses. All fields of study are limited in scope. ToE is limited to the study and explanation of the diversity of life. How life began is outside of it's scope. That belongs to abiogenesis.
replaytime wrote:
So if you say abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution...
I've already addressed that.
replaytime wrote:
...where does the evolution science believe life came from?
Evolution has no beliefs. It's a theory not a human being. If you want an answer for the current hypotheses, look up abiogenesis.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#444 Aug 20, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really. The ones who do not believe in God or heaven and hell have nothing to fear when they die. Now the believers have the fear of sinning and not being forgiven and going to hell when they die. You have to believe in something that could turn out bad in the end to have a fear of it.
Well said.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#445 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess the scientists are truly afraid of the Obama Chicago Machine after all, even more than the Koch Brothers.
I know both sides will ping pong the science for their political purposes. That's no big surprise.
Some types of small changes in adaptation are possible in a kind of creature, but not from a kind of creature to another kind of creature. You guys have carried it to unbelievable, impossible areas that have not been proven. We ask for evidence and your answer is "MYA, slow process, and we're working on it".
This evolution over reach in areas without evidence, seems like a blatant attempt to try and discredit the Bible and God.
Define "kind."

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#446 Aug 20, 2013
Katydid wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA is not complex. C'mon, this is not a hard concept to understand. In today's world of personalized medicine and personalized genome mapping everyone is learning and teaching themselves about the basic concepts. DNA came from RNA.
Go to the DNA Learning Center that we use to explain concepts:
http://www.dnalc.org/
Scroll down to the bottom, see the link that says "DNA from the Beginning"? Click on it. Follow along and learn the basics. Once you have learned the basics, go back to the Learning Center home page. In the search box type "How did DNA evolve?" If you have trouble reading about it, then click on any of the auditory clips and listen to the different scientists explain it to you. Ray Gesteland's clips are good. He is a Distinguished Professor of Human Genetics. His research is on RNA, specifically secondary structures in RNA that can provide additional coding information.
If you want to debate biological concepts, then make an effort to teach yourself a little about the subject matter.
Beers is a moronic troll with no interest in anything other than proudly displaying his ignorance.

BTW... Good to 'see' you again!
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#447 Aug 20, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, lets say different fears then if it keeps you happy.
We don't fear any of this bologna the leaders on earth do. In fact, we EXPECT it. It was told to us that it would all happen and much has happened and the rest is happening right before our eyes.

If we point it out to you, it's only in an attempt to show you that you shouldn't put YOUR faith in mere men, no matter WHAT their leadership positions.(don't put your faith in science alone)

Men will ALWAYS fail you, always. Men's hearts are deceitful above all else, selfish, and every single person on earth breaks everyone of the 10 commandments.

You should put no earthly man on a pedestal and trust in him more than any other man.

They will always fail you, disappoint you, disillusion you and be self centered.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#448 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
Men will ALWAYS fail you, always. Men's hearts are deceitful above all else, selfish, and every single person on earth breaks everyone of the 10 commandments.
Okay, time for you to think.

Setting aside the fact that MOST people will never commit murder...

If _EVERY_ man is deceitful and selfish, then that includes the people who wrote the Bible, who created the Church, who preach and run your religion.

How would a deceitful and selfish person design a religion so as to take advantage of worshipers?

Would they set up a bunch of rules and claim that an invisible wizard made them?

Would they ask for money from you?

Would they promise you a reward that they themselves don't have to deliver? Perhaps a reward you'll get _after you die_.

Would they make extraordinary claims about magical powers but never actually demonstrate them?

If I asked you to invent a fake religion designed to control people and trick them into giving up power and money - would you design something any different than Christianity?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#449 Aug 20, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
If _EVERY_ man is deceitful and selfish, then that includes the people who wrote the Bible, who created the Church, who preach and run your religion.
OOPS! He better have that foot looked at.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#450 Aug 20, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, time for you to think.
1. Setting aside the fact that MOST people will never commit murder...
2. If _EVERY_ man is deceitful and selfish, then that includes the people who wrote the Bible, who created the Church, who preach and run your religion.
3. How would a deceitful and selfish person design a religion so as to take advantage of worshipers?
Would they set up a bunch of rules and claim that an invisible wizard made them?
4. Would they ask for money from you?
Would they promise you a reward that they themselves don't have to deliver? Perhaps a reward you'll get _after you die_.
5. Would they make extraordinary claims about magical powers but never actually demonstrate them?
6. If I asked you to invent a fake religion designed to control people and trick them into giving up power and money - would you design something any different than Christianity?
1. Anger and unforgiveness against someone is the same as murder in God's eyes.
Matthew 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

2. Yes, everyone sins, everyday, even God's people. We just asked for His forgiveness in exchange for our faith.

3. No one man designed a religion, God left us the instruction booklet.

4. People don't want the money, God asks for it as a show a faith. Then it is used for the good of the community. I've proven to myself, that when you give faithfully 10% of your income, everything you want and need plus 10,000 times more is poured into your life, not necessarily financial wealth, but all needs are definitely met, so you don't miss you measley 10%.

Ask anyone who tithes faithfully, they'll all tell you the same.

5. Men don't demonstrate God's powers to each other, God is the only one who demonstrates His powers to whom He chooses.

6. Satan's already got that taken care of.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#451 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
4. People don't want the money, God asks for it as a show a faith. Then it is used for the good of the community.
Or to build monster multimillion dollar mega-churches.

http://jasonmizephotography.com/wp-content/up...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#452 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
...it's only in an attempt to show you that you shouldn't put YOUR faith in mere men, no matter WHAT their leadership positions.(don't put your faith in science alone)
That is precisely why science does not rely on "faith in men".

Whether you are Darwin or Einstein or The Great Waldorfius Salad, your ideas will be subject to scrutiny, criticism, and competition.

The final arbiter in science, the decider, is physical evidence, not the opinions of men. Year after year we see disputes between scientists settled by resort to physical EVIDENCE.

And not just any evidence. For a scientific hypothesis to be taken seriously, it must be falsifiable. This means, it has to be structured in such a way that we can identify evidence that will show it is false, IF it is false. Visible, repeatable, testable physical evidence.

So whenever an idea is proposed, its got to be built in with a way to check it, and even if the scientist who proposed the idea does not check it, others can and do. And they will throw any idea that does not stack up into the bin, according to this standard.

Is it perfect? No.
Can an idea continue, for a while, even when the evidence fails to support it? Yes, for a short while.

Science developed in part to overcome those failings of people just as you described. In the long run, it overcomes deceit, and error, and especially come of the cognitive biases that humans are prone to.

That is the whole point!

I can offer you some examples where there were huge (intellectual) fights over differences of opinion, all of which in the end were settled by the accumulation of more EVIDENCE.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#453 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Anger and unforgiveness against someone is the same as murder in God's eyes.
Then the 10 commandments are meaningless.
3. No one man designed a religion, God left us the instruction booklet.
Hindu, Buddhism, Judaism, Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Mormon, Scientology, Krishna -- "NO ONE MAN DESIGNED A RELIGION".

These are all religions.

Therefore Christianity is false.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#454 Aug 20, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is precisely why science does not rely on "faith in men".
Whether you are Darwin or Einstein or The Great Waldorfius Salad, your ideas will be subject to scrutiny, criticism, and competition.
The final arbiter in science, the decider, is physical evidence, not the opinions of men. Year after year we see disputes between scientists settled by resort to physical EVIDENCE.
And not just any evidence. For a scientific hypothesis to be taken seriously, it must be falsifiable. This means, it has to be structured in such a way that we can identify evidence that will show it is false, IF it is false. Visible, repeatable, testable physical evidence.
So whenever an idea is proposed, its got to be built in with a way to check it, and even if the scientist who proposed the idea does not check it, others can and do. And they will throw any idea that does not stack up into the bin, according to this standard.
Is it perfect? No.
Can an idea continue, for a while, even when the evidence fails to support it? Yes, for a short while.
Science developed in part to overcome those failings of people just as you described. In the long run, it overcomes deceit, and error, and especially come of the cognitive biases that humans are prone to.
That is the whole point!
I can offer you some examples where there were huge (intellectual) fights over differences of opinion, all of which in the end were settled by the accumulation of more EVIDENCE.
I guess my point is that all scientist are mere men and there is no infallible book of instructions from any scientists, like there is from God. If you do or don't agree with a scientist results, you have no where else to go for instruction but to other mere men.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#455 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess my point is that all scientist are mere men and there is no infallible book of instructions from any scientists, like there is from God.
This argument is based on your claim that the Bible is infallible.

However, that's simply a false statement.

The Bible contains a number of errors. A host of contradictions (both within itself and across different versions).

Rabbits, for example, are not a kind of cow.
Bats are not a kind of bird.
There is no such thing a gopher wood. That is a typo.

All of which would be FINE if what you were saying was:
"The Bible is a book of philosophical teachings which I feel are a good way to orient my life."

But you aren't.

You are saying that the Bible is _LITERALLY_ the infallible word of God.

And since THAT is your argument, ANY error. No matter how tiny. No matter how explainable. ANY ERROR disproves the existence of God.

You need to get a better argument because yours is doomed to failure.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#456 Aug 20, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess my point is that all scientist are mere men and there is no infallible book of instructions from any scientists, like there is from God. If you do or don't agree with a scientist results, you have no where else to go for instruction but to other mere men.
Yes and no.

There is no book of infallible instructions from God. Even you lot who think there is, cannot agree on which book or even what your particular book is saying. No, I do not care to hear your arguments as to why the Quran or the Bhagavad Gita or the Book of Mormon is wrong, but your book is the right one. Haven't you learned yet? None of them are.

There is only one choice. You have to use your mind and your heart to decide what is right. No instructions can drop from the sky and no other man can be entrusted fully to decide for you, what is right and wrong.

That is why we have a parliament and discussion and debate and elections and must make new rules as we go along. That's why no system is ever perfect.

You wish it were simpler and unambiguous. But it is not.

If there is a God, he wants us to figure it out for ourselves. And if there is not, we have to figure it out anyway because we want to live a rewarding life.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 min Nohweh 18,607
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 28 min Chimney1 43,337
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 36 min It aint necessari... 205,226
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 17 hr ChristineM 917
Questions about first life 20 hr Upright Scientist 18
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 20 hr Dogen 151,492
Carbon and isotopic dating are a lie Sat One way or another 16
More from around the web