Products of Creation Science

Quick bio: Devout conservative Christian, life-science teacher, political liberal

I often find it difficult to be an old fashioned practicing Christian that knows so dang much about evolution. My solution (albeit a total cop-out) is to just trust that God is the creator, and while the process of evolution seems to be at odds with a literal interpretation of the events chronicled in the book of Genesis, I have faith that in next world everything will make sense. And that goes for all the other crazy stuff in the world that doesn't seem to make sense.

Knowing what I know I can't help but believe that evolution has shaped the biosphere and continues to influence life on earth. But I also understand that entropy is a governing principle of thermodynamics and organized life forms capable of conscious thought seems (to me at least) to be the exact opposite of that. Is it all chance and physics? Was the first living cell a random event? Can some ingenious mathematical equation predict every choice an organism will make throughout its life? How bout the choices I make?

Science has been wrong in the past. Before Darwin there was an assortment of crazy theories that made sense to people back then. Atomic theory went through multiple erroneous incarnations before we got to the contemporary model, which I hope is finally correct. And even now there is uncertainty about how much farther we can break down sub-atomic particles.

Blah blah blah. I don't think Christians should use, or try to use, science to explain ALL the events in the Bible. Stick with the stuff for which there is little or no debate. If you believe and have faith, then you should be comfortable with the idea of a Creator that is supernatural. The same science that landed men on the moon, created television, nuclear reactors, etc. also came up with evolution. And while some may disagree, we can't help but go along with it.

Additional Spam:
...and on a totally separate note...

Please don't judge all Christians by the ones you see and read about in the media. Most practicing Christians I know, most of them here, and most of the ones everyone else knows personally tend to be quiet humble people.

The Christians that make the news are almost always of the loud, obtrusive, and delusional variety. Oftentimes very un-Christian like in nature.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Arainach

See, I tried that. But then I ran into a little problem. Because all those quiet nice Christians? They still vote for the morons you see in the media and as such get stupid laws passed and generally make my life hell. So that didn't work out so hot.

See? That's exactly what I'm talking about. Sure, there is strong (and embarrassingly loud) support for the religious right...but that group is part of an extreme. To lump the MILLIONS of Christians who do NOT vote along those lines together in the same group is a completely irresponsible stereotype.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Jochie

God made the land animals, including dinosaurs, "after their kind"? After whose kind?

I believe the sign is quoting Genesis.

And my apologies if I seem to be inflicting my views on anyone. I just want to defend my beliefs and encourage people not to judge a Christian (or any other group for that matter) by their cover.

And for the record, I tend to vote for policy that benefits everyone, not just the zealous. One of the essential doctrines of Christianity is that you are not supposed to force your faith on anyone. And as many have already pointed out, there are quite of few Christians who, for whatever reason, don't adhere to that premise. If the seed doesn't bear fruit, then you're supposed to move on. Which is what a lot do, but it's hardly as memorable as that crazy guy screaming at you to repent.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by LeHah

Seriously though? if you need to defend your beliefs, theres something wrong with them.

So the people who defend their belief in the theory of evolution, are wrong? Huh?

But perhaps we don't "believe" scientific facts, I mean, they're facts. No belief required. So how about moral beliefs, like equal rights for women, minorities, etc. Are people who defend those types of beliefs wrong?

Or maybe people just feel like speaking up when certain people get the wrong idea.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I will defend science. I will defend morals. And I will defend my faith. What I'm trying to say is, contrary to what has been stated by another, that just because someone has to defend a belief doesn't automatically discredit that belief.

If you want to qualify LeHah's comment and change it to "...if you need to defend your RELIGIOUS beliefs, there's something wrong with them...", that would lead to another back-and-forth. But that would be an argument against ALL religions, albeit not a particularly good one.

And yes, I must admit that there is a difference between morals and faith. In the example I used the difference is clear. But for many issues (for me at least) the dividing line becomes gray. Charity, civil obedience, abortion, socialism, etc.: It's really difficult for me to separate myself from my faith when dealing with these types of moral issues. At times they seem to be the same thing.

Originally Posted by LeHah

how else would everyone here have the stereotype of the ignorant pseudo-facist Christian follower.

Um, I can't really take anything you say seriously in this thread anymore. I don't think you are going to get a lot of "intelligent, well-spoken, happy-go-lucky people " to jump on the "morals suck" and "stereotypes are good" bandwagon.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

What I don't understand, and what you have yet to clearly answer is why God wouldn't just let the natural laws he had just developed create the Earth, instead of just blinking it all into existence.

I have no problem with the idea that God created the laws of physics and let creation takes it's course. I do have the unproven hunch that He may have helped push things along. I personally like to think that my existence is due to more than just the pure chance happening of certain molecules combining billions of years ago.

Myself and many of my practicing Christian brethren look at evolution and wonder how something so carefully analyzed and tested can possibly be false. The facts and methods simply make sense to me. But even though it contradicts a strict literal interpretation of the bible, it in no way damages my belief in God as the creator.

For whatever reason this point of view seems to irritate, confound, or anger certain people. Having my cake and eating it too. Mmmmmm, cake. Anyhoo, I don't think anyone can truly understand God. Like science, we can learn a lot but there will always be a lot more we don't know.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Bradylama

What I find a problem with people who view the universe as a creationist machine and are not also Deists is that an artificial universe with its own natural laws sort of defeats the point of divine interference, unless God is a big jerk who likes to fuck with us.

People such as myself simply don't view a God created universe as 'artificial', regardless of how creation is explained. And while I don't view God as being a jerk, I do prefer an authority with the power and desire to intervene in the natural course of things to one that just works for six days and then sits back and spectates from afar all the way till the end of time.

And I suppose the ultimate way to 'f***' with someone would be to damn them to hell. So in a way I'm not totally disagreeing with you. But who says He can't help us too? ... Well, I guess a lot of us would say that I suppose. Oh well. :P

FELIPE NO

Interesting. I wonder if this will actually sway anyone's opinion, but interesting nevertheless. Though the arguments on both sides seem flawed to me it's still good food for thought.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Believers do not consider the events of the bible to be myths. There is some evidence in the historical records of a massive flood that seems to coincide with events of Noah's arc. But it's not much more than a little peace of mind to a believer, and I assume not terribly convincing to everyone else.

I doubt very much that Judaism is going anywhere since the practitioners of that faith have been documented for at least 3000 years. Christians and Moslems, who also believe in the God of Jacob and Abraham, probably aren't going anywhere either. The importance of the bible is not about historical or scientific accuracy. Those who believe understand that the bible is the word of God to tell us how to get to heaven.

I understand that a lot of what's in the bible is hard to swallow. It's even hard for many devout Christians to accept all of it. Was Jonah really living inside a fish's stomach for three days? That can be a tough sell, I know. What is more important to me though is what I can learn from the choices Jonah made and God's response to those choices.

The Christian faith differs from Romans, Native Americans, and the like because Christianity isn't a culture nor is it confined to a geographic area. And the myths associated with certain culture, like the Romans, are oftentimes not believed by its people. China, Scandinavia, Central America, Africa...these areas today all have rich mythologies tied to their cultures that are clearly not embraced as truth by most of their inhabitants.

Going back to this thread...many Christians get offended when people question their literal interpretation of the book of Genesis. And then other people get offended right back. These issues don't really affect my faith because I'm more focused on the getting-into-heaven thing. To me that takes precedence over whether or not the Old Testament is 100% factual.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Grail

Um...not to burst your bubble, but in all actuallity Christianity started out like that. It was confined to one area

As you point out, Christianity wasn't confined very long. Probably not even for a year. That hardly fits the definition of confined considering that Christianity is almost 2000 years old.

Originally Posted by Grail

What if instead of Europeons landing on American soil, the native americans would have been the first to become more sophisticated, and went to spread their beliefs among the many other lands? Safe to say if that happened, you might be looking at your corn right now and praying to it.

It's not safe to say that. A person doesn't automatically grow up to become their environment. I wasn't raised as a Christian. I went to public school. Growing up in Los Angeles certainly didn't persuade me to believe in Jesus. Sure, there are a number of people undoubtably who may be 'forced' to adopt a religious view by simple fact of where and to whom they were born. But that's a far cry from being a 'safe' bet. The Romans didn't inflict their mythology onto the Jews, the Egyptians, or even Christians. There are unfortunate times in history where some so called Christians spat in the face of Jesus and tried to convert people by force. But the people who committed those grievous sins were not following the teachings of Jesus.

The United States was founded by Christian deists. You see it in the constitution, our currency, the pledge of allegiance, the justice system, etc. Is it safe to say that every American grows up to be a devout Christian? Not really.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Wow! About the 'confinement' thing. I guess I'm approaching it the wrong way. If someone asks me to describe the spreading of Christianity throughout history I just wouldn't think to use the word 'confined'. I'm the one who brought it up so I apologize for inadequately explaining what I meant by it. I didn't really look at it in small chunks, and when I did I was thinking about Israel, then Asia Minor, Roman provinces, and then Rome which, to me at least, seems like pretty good progress for that time frame.

Originally Posted by Sassafrass

So you're essentially trying to kiss your god's ass to get into his post-death rave? You don't really care about his really awesome book, but more how you're going to get past the bouncer and through the pearly gates?

Gee, that's one way to look at it. I certainly wouldn't word it that way. "Kissing ass" implies that I do something even though I don't want to...but that isn't the case with true Christians. And I do care about the bible a great deal because it offers a lot of insight into what is important to God. I don't want to "get past the 'bouncer". I want the bouncer to look at me, my past, and the motives behind all the choices I've made. And hopefully he'll deem me worthy and let me in.

About the Old Testament not being 100% true. I belong to the group of Christians who have trouble interpreting all events of the Old Testament literally. There are biblical principles that explain why this doesn't invalidate Christianity. It goes hand in hand with why Christians don't have to adhere to the Mosaic law the way that the Jews do. But again, if you're not a believer then you'll hardly be satisfied with that. Still, interpreting a few parts figuratively hardly puts me in the position of discrediting the Old Testament. I think it's great, it is necessary to understand the sacrifice Jesus made, it is an essential source of prophecy...but without the new testament it just wouldn't matter to anyone but the Jewish people.

More to address. Post too long already. Sorry for getting on so many people's nerves.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

There's quite a bit of truth in what you say, although I would still shy away from the "kiss ass" phrasing. I think many Christians feel pressure to attend services. There's so many things that time could be used for; fun, friends, studies, work, yadda yadda. So why do they go? Some fear God (which plays directly into the ass-kiss stance), others may go strictly for the social aspect (which can be a good or bad thing), others have responsibilities to the church, and still others because their family makes them. The best reason to attend I suppose would be to experience the joy of communing with God and learn His way while in the company of fellow believers.

I totally agree that a lot of people go to church not so much because they want to, but because they feel they are supposed to. I see it all the time. I used to be one of them. But I realized that I was offering my time as a sacrifice that was pleasing to God and eventually it brought me joy to do so. Some Christians find that joy right away, others may struggle their whole lives. Additionally, the simple fact of just being there exposed me to teachings I wouldn't discover on my own.

A lot of things about the Christian faith stand in opposition to what is generally accepted in the world. Conflict, such as the one prevalent throughout this thread, occurs when Christians promote their way of thinking. The term "slave to Christ" is certainly not going to sound very appealing to the masses, but it is something that Christians actually strive for. It's corny, it's cheesy, but it's true that there is freedom to be found when you willingly abide by the Christian principles Jesus established. It's a freedom from the stress, anger, depression, and other pains any person must endure. ?! Good golly, it's getting even cheesier. :P *bracing myself to get flamed*

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Sassafrass

But why? That's what you're doing. You're saying "I don't really pay attention to the whole BIBLE thing - I just want to get on God's cool list!" Which, if you ask me, is not very Christian at all. You're afraid of the consequence - you're not actually paying attention to the point. I'm not a religious person, but if I were, I'd be offended.

It is simply way too difficult to get on the 'cool list' without familiarizing yourself with the bible. I wish I didn't have to repeat myself, but interpreting parts of the Old Testament figuratively does NOT mean I don't pay attention to the bible. Please stop trying to make it appear otherwise. Yes, I'm afraid of going to hell. No, I pay very careful attention to the teachings in the bible.

Quote:

What does church have to do with what you believe? It's just a big building where a certain type of believer congregates to worship. Apparently, God hears you better if you're all praying at once in the same place?

Yes. It is clearly written in the bible that God will pay more attention when two or more people pray in one accord. Church is not a building, it's a group of people who worship together so you're correct about the location not being important. However, fellowship is an integral part of Christian development. Good question.

Quote:

I would love it if everyone for their own path to god, and found it without the "help" from a church or organization.

I disagree, but this is based purely on my religious beliefs. I won't attack your ideals.

Quote:

You know why people "fear" god? Because the church wants you to. It keeps you in check. It creates (no offense) people like you who follow the religion not because of the good message it brings, but because you're scared shitless of going to hell.

Yes, I fear God. But that doesn't mean I don't willingly do the good things I do. A young child may fear his parents and be motivated by this, but it doesn't mean that child won't also do things out of love for his parents too. My church wants me to both fear and love God. Without love I am no better than a fallen angel who has only fear. A Christian motivated more by fear and less by love is a Christian who doesn't understand God. When I pull over to help someone in a car accident it isn't because I'm afraid of God, it's because I simply want to help. I happen to credit God with my desire to do so. Of course, without religion, I'd like to think I was a pretty decent person. But now having believed, I'd like to think I'm capable of even more good.

Quote:

You're pretty much admitting that the GOAL is to be a slave to Christ.

Yup. It sounds lame, idiotic, and obtuse; i know. I don't expect most people to accept it or even understand why Christians would think this way. It really only makes sense to the devout.

Quote:

Yes, it's freedom. You know how? Because you willingly reduce yourself to a little robot. You don't have to challenge yourself. You don't have to think about what is actually right and wrong. You don't have to think about morals. You only have to do what the church tells you to do.

I find it impossible to think of myself as a robot because I still feel passion and temptation. I think about right and wrong all the time. Sermons and bible reading aren't going to spell out the solution for every single problem. Life is just too complicated. I have to take what I know and constantly apply it. Sometimes I fail, but I learn and become better for it.

Quote:

They say ignorance is bliss, afterall.

While not as blissful as I'd like, I still think I have a lot of bliss.

I was speaking idiomatically.