hardcore, I just hope that you and others championing evolution understand that too. I studied with Jehovah’s Witnesses for 15 years. I know when someone is testifying for their religion, or non-religion. And it is a tendency for evolutionists to insult Creation myths, and saying that evolution is the only truth, etc. Insulting other theories is a method of advancing one’s cause, in this case, for atheism. You may not notice it because you believe in it so much. However, I can immediately tell.
Here is another quote from Testy:
“Belief in creationism goes hand in hand with other beliefs in the supernatural, a very poor substitute for science when dealing with the real world.”
Yes, Christians believe in the supernatural, and that they cintribute to the real world. With insults such as theses, of course they will be turned off from the theories of evolution.
The sentences should have read: “Yes, Christians believe in the supernatural, and that they contribute to the real world. With insults such as these, of course they will be turned off from those advocating evolution.”
No. There is a tendency for us to point out that creation myths are not science. If that is considered an “insult,” that isn’t our problem.
You have just summarized the creationist method. Attack and insult evolution, and then act as if creationism must be the only alternative.
Bullshit. You’ve been here long enough to know there are an awful lot of theists around here who accept evolution. Evolution is science and has nothing to do with theism or atheism.
Wow. You don’t know how exciting it is to find someone else in a place like this whose opinions so closely match mine on this subject.
I am so tempted, when creationists who run to doctors for treatment of disease (both infectuous and other, but most particularly things that involve highly sophisticated treatments) to tell them that in accepting treatments which involve the use of something as old and basic as X-rays and blood transfusions (much less chemotherapy or antibiotics), they are putting their faith in the same science that dictates an old universe and evolution.
Why can’t/won’t they accept that “science” is a METHOD, not a belief system?? I grant you that some good scientists who also happen to be dedicated atheists (in the same way that their opponents are dedicated Xians) let their personal beliefs spill over into how they present science. And that doesn’t help, but you can never tell a “true believer” (of the Hoffstader variety, regardless of what his/her belief system may be) anything, unfortunately.
My Reverand mother (it’s so fun to be able to say that!) used to be a technologist and a teacher. She clearly knows the power of scientific method, and the power of Faith, and when to use each. For every purpose, there is a season…
Maybe, maybe not. Some of us are willing to listen. Yeah, I know: Not what you meant. It’s kinda fun to watch people’s mental gears strip when they realize I’m Born Again. ‘Born Again’ and ‘closed mind’ have become synonymous, and people aren’t prepaired for open-mind religeon (SDMB mostly excluded).
There’s Hoffstader . . . and then there’s Hoffer, but Hoffstader ain’t the one that wrote The True Believer; Hoffstader writes about math.
resp to Tranquilis
It’s the sort that Hoffer (I don’t agree with him about a lot, but he wasn’t all wrong) was talking about, not peeps like thee and me, Tranquilis.
I don’t see why you considered the above an insult.
Christians have a belief in the supernatural. This is self evident, there is no tangible proof of God, nor can there ever be.
Relying on supernatural events or guidance is a poor substitute for logic. This is also self evident, at least to me.
I happen to believe that both of those statements are quite true, and frankly I see very little difference between Christian faith and the belief that quartz crystals will heal you through mysterious energies. If you open the door to one faith where do you draw the line? And on what basis?
Or do you object to my statement that supernatural guidance is a poor substitute for science? I personally prefer the demonstrated results of the scientific method over the (equally demonstrated) of superstition.
I’m a religeous man, my mother is a minister, and I’m Born Again, but you know… The more I learn, the more amazing God becomes. To fail to learn, explore, to seek, is a failure to seek the true Glory of God.
God has created for us this amazing playground, and to refuse to play is insulting and foolish. Go forth and explore: The more you find, the more there is to find, an infinite vista for the mind and soul.
‘Creation Science’ is like standing in the corner and pouting because you wern’t given everything on a platter. Get over yourself, and go out and play. We’re waiting for you to come join the fun…!
END QUOTE
Thank you for that last post, you restore my faith in religion as being a positive influence on the earth.
So tell me, why aren’t there more like you? Why this highly public rush to some lowest-common-denominator of ignorance? It is not only Christians that do it, but the fundamentalists of other religions as well.
You have obviously managed to reconcile your Christian beliefs with the methods of science but many others, possibly even a majority of serious believers, seem unable to do so.
Any sort of dogmatic belief system, whether it be based on religion, politic’s or science, is seriously flawed. I don’t know why, but religion tends to lend itself to dogmatic interpretation more than science. That’s probably why you tend to find more non-thinkers there (Creationists, for example).
I am not saying that evolution has anything to do with theism or atheism. I am just saying that there are some atheists who do think so. I already allowed that the Genesis account didn’t detail to the RNA level how God created Earth. But there are atheists, and unfortuanately some so-called Christians, who claim that the account is entirely false because of the theories of evolution, based on a single switch in order, and won’t hesitate to advocate the ‘falsehood’ of Genesis to those who believe, not literally, but metaphorically, on the Genesis account.
I am not saying they atheists should not be allowed to testify on SDMB. I am just asking to be honest about it, and not be so defensive when it is pointed out that they are.
I am not at all sure that you do. You have yet to address the question of super_head’s alleged proselytizing for atheism, then you follow with the non sequitur about some imaginary friend who promotes atheism by discussing evolution.
I suggest that you should reference an instance of this actually occurring in this thread, rather than boasting of your ability to spot it.
Like Testy, I fail to see what you consider to be an insult. But more importantly, I am curious about the replacement of the word Testy used – science, with the word you chose – evolution.
Why is it that you, and others that believe as you do, single out evolution among the sciences as an inferior concept? I don’t see anyone attempting to discredit other branches of science with quiet the same fervor, yet the method behind all of science is identical. What is it about evolution that causes such an intellectual disconnect?
So what? Some people think the world is flat. What people think and what is factually correct are two different concepts.
Certainly an atheist might make the erroneous leap in logic by saying “evidence says we evolved therefore the Bible is wrong therefore there is no God,” but I would call him on it as quick as I do a Creationist who is so only because of the same leap of illogic in the opposite direction.
Atheists can be ignorant too, and I’ll do my best to stomp it out in them too.
Of course, I have yet to ever hear an atheist say “evolution is why I don’t believe in God.” Have you?
Please point out a single time on this board where a person of ANY spiritual belief (or lack thereof) either advocated bad science and/or used poorly structured logic to enable a certain view-point (or, heck, even parenthetically) which did NOT get corrected, commented on or somehow noted by others here what the problem was.
Maybe no atheists here made the claims that you seem to think they did?
the “GOD ONLY WANTS DUMB PEOPLE IN HEAVEN” was sarcasm. figured it would be obvious. but it applies to people who KNOW what god wants and expect people to WANT to be like them. had some ‘christian’ ask me if i died right at the time he asked if i thought i would go to heaven. i told him i didn’t believe in heaven. he just stood there with his mouth open staring at me. i laughed.
i love this MY GOD, YOUR GOD business. GOD and any persosn CONCEPT OF GOD are two different things. people can only talk about and argue about and fight about their CONCEPT OF GOD. even if someone’s concept is more accurate, they can’t PROVE it. killing someone doesn’t even prove it. although that has been tried many times.
Doing it my way requires a bit of courage, and more than a little bit of effort. I have to be willing to face the fact that I might learn something that will force me to re-examine my Faith. Picking up your religeon and dusting it off every so often is energy-intensive, and can be emotionally trying, and many people just don’t want to do that.
People (as a whole) like simple solutions, and will often go to extrodinary lengths to justify their choice, even if it’s more work than just dealing with the facts at hand.
I’ve found that I can find God in the complex workings of the endocrine system, the interlinked dependancies of the ocean, land, and sky, and in the vast mysteries of space. Rather than weakening my Faith, the more intricate things become, the more I understand, the more in Awe I am. Better understanding leads to deeper appreciation. I like solving puzzles, I love elegant solutions, and God has provided plenty and to spare.
Or, maybe I’m just a pompous ass.
I figured that was how it was meant, but sometimes sarcasm needs to be challenged. You know why.
Yup. My concept of God is all that I can talk about, and I’ve got no proof (save for this wonderful universe in which we live), and you know what, that’s why it’s called Faith.
I was involved in a discussion in my Methodist Sunday School class about how the Bible contains many contradictions, inconsistencies, etc. During the conversation someone asked why, if it was the Word of God, wasn’t it more clear and definitive.
The reply was:
I believe that you have to think about what you believe to really believe it.
Given that I was under the impression we were discussing Creationism, as it is understood by Christianity, then yes - belief in Christian creation would entail belief in a deity. If we were, in fact, discussing some other creation myth which doesn’t involve deities, please let me know.
It has to do with the claim that creationism should be taught alongside evolution. I’ve yet to see any evidence in support of creationism. The connection is that there is no evidence that the Heaven’s Gate cult went to their UFO after their suicides. Thus, as long as we’re teaching one subject without any evidence for it being factual, why stop there?
And that doesn’t help, but you can never tell a “true believer” (of the Hoffstader variety, regardless of what his/her belief system may be) anything, unfortunately.
