…and this is a bad thing why?
Perhaps I can view this like a journey. You know, the destination means nothing. The journey, everything. So bashing my head against the walls of creationism could somehow benefit me. I doubt it.
Never thought of it that way. Great take on the situation.
I just wanted to point out that while ID is bad science, it is excellent theology. It is not taught in public schools because we don’t teach theology in public schools.
yet. We don’t teach theology in public schools - yet.
Further, why is ID good theology. It’s just “god of gaps” dressed up. What happens when, not if, when science is able to explain those precious gaps that ID holds to be the sign of God?
Look at it this way. If your pastor is going to Heaven, do you really want to spend eternity with him?
Actually, one could ask “Aren’t there enough real life evils in the world without creating new ones”?
Wouldn’t the time and energy spent preaching about how “Evolution=Athiesm=Hell” be better spent helping the less fortunate? You know, like Jesus would have done?
ID means “Intelligent Design,” which means that God (or whatever, but we’ll say God) designed evolution to proceed the way it did, and meant for human beings to evolve, and that humans have some purpose on earth. The “gaps” you’re talking about are an attempt to turn this into scientific inquiry. Since it relies on completely untestable presumptions, the only way to force it into a science curriculum is to emphasize “problems” with darwinian theory, and try to assert that ID is needed to answer them.
No stop sign, speed limit?
Nobody gonna slow you down?
Can I come? hell sounds so much more appealing than heaven at this point… 
I should have used smilies there; I guess my intended tone was only in my own head. Please paste them on retroactively.
They say there’s a heaven for those who will wait
Some say it’s better but I say it ain’t
I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints
The sinners are much more fun…
::sigh:: It’s idiot Creationists like him that put all religious thought in question. A person can believe in God and Science. Let God (or religion) answer the questions best suited to religious thought, and let Science show us the reality of the world around us. It’s both beautiful and easy to do. Creationism, any fundementalism for that matter, just takes too much effort.
If that sends me to Hell, of well. Although it’s much more likely that my womanizing, lying, and multiple bondage murders already have my seat assigned. Besides, I’m one of those Xtian types who not believe in Hell, yep yep.
I would be very interested to read whatever you care to post about your meeting.
I have plenty of questions that I would like to ask such a theologian as your pastor. But, I fear that, being an atheist, any and all of my questions would seem to be posed from an offensive position, and not from an inquisitory one. However, as a science teacher who has dealt with people unwilling to believe that evolution need not be at odds with christianity, I am glad to hear that you are asking your pastor to defend his statements (that science must conflict with his religion).
You said last weekend was just experimentation.
And God looked down at the idiots who sneered at evolution and said unto them: “Yo, you still living in caves, eating raw meat and walking around in animal skins?” And she smote them upside the head and it was good.
And your mother was a hamster!
And your father smelled of elderberries!
Me too!
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Sigh. Stories like this keep reminding me of what Saint Augustine had to say, about people speaking in ignorance - the short version is, he thought they should keep quiet and stop emabarrassing everyone else. People like this preacher give all religion a bad name.
You should really put “id” or “intelligent design” in lower case when you make this statement.
Capitalized ID is a very specific philosophical movement, propagated by frightened people relying on bad science and poor philosophy to attack the Theory of Natural Selection. While it is a valid point that a number of theological traditions see a Designer behind creation and evolution (a school of thought often referred to as theistic evolution), the specific phrase “Intelligent Design” has been coopted by the Johnsons, Behes, Dembskis, and creationist school board members to mean very specific denial of the possibility of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.
I think that it sounds like Greenback needs to start looking for a new church.
I, too, would like to hear the summary of the meeting with the pastor.
No, that’s “Theistic Evolution” (I’ve also heard it called by the apparently contradictory name “Evolutionary Creationism”), which is quite compatible with science (insofar as any religious belief is compatible with science in the first place).
The central tenet of ID is that certain aspects of the biological world did not evolve, but were brought into being by a supernatural “Designer”. They deliberately take no position on such topics as the age of the Earth, the occurrence of Noah’s Flood, the existence of a literal Adam, etc - an ID supporter can be anything from a literalist Young Earth Creationist to a Progressive Creationist (one who believes that the Earth is billions of years old and life normally evolves, but that God regularly intervenes to create new species when they’re required), but they still deny (at least) one of the fundamental principles of evolution, that all existing forms of life arose through natural processes from a common ancestor.
I can’t fault the creationists too badly.
Tonight, one turned me…
…from “agnostic leaning toward atheism” to “militant agnostic”.
While there’s certainly no proof of an invisible unicorn in my backyard, there’s no proof to the contrary.
And I give her credit for not taking offense.
P.S. At least one tidbit was funny… I was talking about the 6,000 year old earth thing, and “God” planting the bones…
Dude to my left turns around, and says, “NO! The DEVIL planted the bones!”
Har har