Just found this on someone else’s website (I’m fairly sure I’m the original author)
Quotes from British humour writers are *always *considered on-topic.
I’d just like to point out that the creationist movement is not limited to the US, it just enjoys preponderance there. Before the evolutionary synthesis, I suppose there was a disparate collection of theories tying scripture to the corporeal world, including Ussher’s chronology. Creationism as a movement can probably fairly be said to have emanated from the religious opposition to Darwinism, perhaps with Wilberforce or something.
I’m not sure whether it survived in that form or was exported and returned, but there are currently faith schools in Britain that teach young earth creationism fairly uncritically (including a Muslim one which Professor Dawkins went to visit). They’re taught strawman caricatures of evolution in order that they have a “fair and balanced” position to refute, including one student asking why monkeys were still around if we evolved from monkeys, IIRC.
Who, me?
I find it sad that so many people seem to feel that “belief in a loving God” is somehow tied to “belief in this one creation story.” Every culture has origin myths, all of which are useful teaching tools, none of which need to be factual to be illustrative.
Belief in a loving God has nothing to do with understanding scientific theories. The Big Bang, abiogenesis and evolution could all be true without negating the possibility of a loving God existing.
That’s an…interesting…patois you’re using to simulate uneducated “neanderthals”. Very interesting indeed.
Now explain to me who, or what created the place for God to exist,if God is a being there would first have to be a place where he could exist. If he wasn’t in existence then he wouldn’t exist!
Did the Devil make you say that? 
Or is it the other way around?
Idiocy is on the rise because of your bad schooling system.
So you don’t know the right answer, but you know which one you want to be wrong.
If that were the case, then we would be watching a slow-motion replay of distant events - exactly the same as if you film something using a movie camera with film travelling at 3 feet per second, then play it back on a projector at 1.5 feet per second.
Has anyone ever noticed how lakes are fine tuned for swimming? It’s crazy - it’s like whoever made lakes knew that we’d want to swim in there.
Not too long ago people believed the earth was the center of the universe, and the world was flat.Belief is not fact, once a belief is proven it is no longer a belief but fact. So far in over 6,000 years there is no proof of, or not of, a God. Until there is proof it is just belief and belief can come from desire, all is from some human. Everything ever written, taught, said, or thought is from a human, that is a proven fact!
Since a Good loving God would not create such a monster and let it harm his children, Satan is some one’s imaginary boogie man!
I agree. It’s also strange to me that these people must accept that their god uses natural processes to achieve so many other goals, but for some reason speciation is just not acceptable.
They must know that lightning and thunder isn’t their god chucking bolts of electricity at whatever, but beneficial mutations and reproductive advantages is just too wild to accept.
Fish have sex in them.
This has been said but others, but I hope the OP returns to explain why we can’t have a loving God and a 15 billion year old universe.
Because that would be cruel to the scientists who’ve painstakingly calculated the universe’s age to be 13.7*10[sup]9[/sup] years?
A loving God would not let a monster devour his children,and since Satan is invented by some human I can say no. But it would prove God is not a loving being who cares for his children.
Forgive my rounding error. The point is that most Christians around the world don’t have a crisis of faith when confronting cosmology or evolution.
But what EVIDENCE do you have for that claim? Something written in a book? Books can make mistakes. They can be mistranslated or misinterpreted. They can contain metaphors that later readers can read as facts.
You’ve got powerful evidence that the universe is much older than the Bible says it. You can look right up and SEE it with your own two eyes. You can buy a telescope and study it twelve ways to Sunday.
So what are you going to believe? The truth that’s staring you right in the face, or something someone else wrote down in a book 3000 years ago?
That’s an excellent first step! That’s a hypothesis. Now the next step is to say “If this hypothesis were true, what other observations would be consistent with it? What other experiments can I do to look for evidence?” If light really traveled hundreds or thousands of times faster in the past we should be able to use observations from hundreds of different galaxies to nail down the exact speed and when it suddenly slowed down. Wow, that would be an amazing thing to discover! It would shake the very foundations of science.
I strongly encourage you to follow up on this hypothesis.