Creationism

Discussion in 'Debate Corner' started by Patsy Stone, May 27, 2010.

  1. Patsy Stone Мать Россия

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    133
    Anyone who believes the literal truth of creationism is a ****** who does not deserve the brain they were born with.

    Discuss, using evidence (i.e. the real world around us, i.e. reality, i.e. truth).
     
  2. Advent 【DRAGON BALLSY】

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Gender:
    Overcooked poptart
    523
    I think calling creationists ******s is a bit much, but I agree, the sheer magnitude of the evidence against the literal teachings of most holy books is kinda tough to deny. I denied it for years of my life blindly, but eventually I just realized how blatant it was.
     
  3. JedininjaZC Hollow Bastion Committee

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    in a galaxy far far away...
    58
    535
    I must agree with Advent on this. Most of them aren't as much ******s as they are hard-headed.

    I moved away from my church four years ago. It took me 1.5 years to get over my homophobia, 2 years to accept evolution, and 2.5 to become an atheist. Everyday I wish that I wasn't a homophobe back then. I think of every day of how I demoralized homosexuals, and I always try to block it out. No matter how much good I try to do for LGBTs the scars remain. Religion is such a disgusting thing. Encouraging dilusions, prejudice, and ignorance of the truth.

     
  4. Gobolo Traverse Town Homebody

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Location:
    The sky
    62
    175
    Hello people who are anti-creationists.
    I want to know what you think of people who believe in creationism and accept evolution? The whole creator using science as a tool to create angle?
     
  5. Advent 【DRAGON BALLSY】

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Gender:
    Overcooked poptart
    523
    The various proposed "Creators" have some holy books that advocate faulty science, condemn homosexuals, women and minorities, and say that slavery is a-okay. I have a tough time following most of these "Creators," not only due to moral reasons, but logically as well. God said he created man on the spot in his image, when in reality we have more than enough evidence to prove that humans and apes share a common evolutionary ancestor.
     
  6. Guardian Soul hella sad & hella rad

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    794
    I guess I'm on the side that defends religion in this debate.

    Morals have obviously changed since ancient times when people didn't know how the world around them works(as well as we do today at least), being different was looked down upon(and still is to a lesser extent today), and slavery was part of the status quo. So when a person with the morals of today looks back on the past, it's obvious that they'll be disgusted since so much has changed. Now I know that the Bible condemns homosexual acts and not homosexuals in general but where does it say anything about condemning women and minorities? I may be forgetting something but can you please give me to a Bible verse or something?

    I personally believe(and a lot of other Christians as well) that sin has alienated us from God. It has damaged or completely severed the relationship of humanity to God. The severing of our relationship with him has caused us to be different and not in the image of God anymore.
     
  7. Always Dance Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    220
    This is why I hate people like you, and this is why Christians complain about being oppressed. I do in fact believe in the literal truth of creationism, and I am not a ******. That's not my own opinion, it's gathered from observations. I'm fifteen years old, a high school graduate, and a college student majoring in computer science and maintaining a 4.0 GPA. I am not a ******, and the fact that you're content to call me one despite my accomplishments achieved through hard work, just because I believe in God and creationism, infuriates me.
    Seriously, there is no hard evidence that can directly disprove or prove creation or evolution for that matter. The evidence of both theories are highly circumstantial.
     
  8. Patsy Stone Мать Россия

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    133
    Emm, how about the fact that EVERYONE discipline of science states unequivocally that the earth is much much older than 6000 years old? The mountain of evidence for evolution and the fact that there has not been a single shred of evidence against it (and that's not for lack of trying)? Evolution and speciation has even been observed in nature for goodness sake!

    GAH! What makes me mad is when people will blindly believe something so clearly wrong.

    Also, by literal Creationism I mean the whole earth being created in 7 days and the Earth being 6000 years old.
     
  9. Always Dance Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    220
    The science that finds this is flawed, as it relies on Carbon 14 amounts, which can be varied easily due to weather conditions. It has been proven that if the flood in Genesis actually happened, it would screw up the accuracy of Carbon 14 dating significantly. Many scientist refuse to go by Carbon 14 dating because it is just plain not accurate. There is a lot of evidence of this. The reason it is so embraced is because evolution would need a lot of time to happen, so evolutionists obviously embrace the concept of a billions-of-years old Earth despite what amount of evidence there is for it.
    This...is just false. Again, the evidence for evolution is very circumstantial, it has even been described by Richard Dawkins as such. It has not been proven, and never will be.
    There are a very large amount of scientists who do no accept evolution, and yes, there is evidence against it, and against the idea of a billions-of-years old Earth, but it is again pretty circumstantial. The "speciation" which you are referring to is probably about the micro-evolution of viruses and bacteria, right? The problem with this is that they are still considered the same species, as the changes are very minimal.
     
  10. Rho Twilight Town Denizen

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    15
    293
    ****** is a bit much, but it is definitely very illogical.

    Christianity is pretty ambiguously a fanbase. It's just like Trekkies and such gone way, way, way too far.

    I just really damn hope in 2000 years "Church of Edward Cullen" will not exist.
     
  11. Boy Wonder Dark Phoenix in Training

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Genosha
    2,239
    Actually, my old church had a lesson about this. It told us not to take that part of Genesis too literal.

    As in, who said the days were right after each other? It could be "on the first day, God did this," on the next day, he di that."
    "Next day" as the "next day he did something."
    There could be thousands, millions, or billions of years between each day.
    And by day, there's no proof it means 24 hour period.
    I mean, what could be counted as a day to an all-powerful, infinite being?

    The head of my Anthropology department at my university taught us that God and evolution can go side by side and I've always believed that. It's Creationism and evolution together that forms a problem, but I still think it could work.
    As long as people don't believe that God created humans and it's the end of the story. (I love hearing "God created us in His image" because I always ask, "How do you know what His image is?") I think God created life. And then life began to evolve.
     
  12. Always Dance Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    220
    The word "Day" used in the original manuscripts meant a 24 hour period. I never thought about the whole "periods between each day" thing, though.

    But I do take it literally, and I don't think evolution can exist with creationism or God. The Bible says that God said, and there was. Unless God is a very slow speaker, I'm pretty sure that means a quick creation. The Bible says that God made man from dirt, and made woman from a rib. Evolution is not vaguely implied. I think if evolution happened, the Bible would say something about it, but it doesn't.
     
  13. Luna Lovegood nani panda-kun

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Shirokuma Cafe
    294
    You are correct in the fact that the religious texts of the religions with the biggest followings (such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism) have an amount of immoralities in them. But there are many less popular religions that couldn't care if you have a leg growing out of your ear and you're having an affair with a flower pot behind your same-sex spouse's back. Most commonly, these are the religions without sacred texts, (save Buddhism and maybe Sikhism) such as different pagan or new age religions. These religions share a common similar belief that the Creator used/uses nature and is nature. Why do these religions accept basically everyone? Because everyone is a part of nature.
    Perhaps sacred texts are immoral because sacred texts are not written from the mouth of a god, but by the hand of humans. Perhaps a man raped a woman, and when asked why he replied, "My god said it was okay" (or something along those lines, you get what I mean).


    Creationism, in the form taught by the Church, is entirely illogical. I do believe in evolution, but I also find it illogical to rely on an almost non-existent chance of life on Earth being successful.
     
  14. Advent 【DRAGON BALLSY】

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Gender:
    Overcooked poptart
    523
    So why didn't God say "By the way guys, the Earth revolves around the sun, and killing gays is wrong."? Why did he instead allow them to be 100% incorrect in their science (not just astronomy, but a plethora of other things that could have contributed to mankind's advancement) and why did he destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah? God had the same morals overall as the people of those ancient times. So much for the all loving aspect.

    As for the condemning women and minorities part, I suppose the word "condemn" was a bit harsh, but they were belittled and generally just not treated the same as men, and God allowed this, never once intervening. However, he thought it perfectly fine to intervene at Sodom and Gomorrah.
     
  15. JedininjaZC Hollow Bastion Committee

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    in a galaxy far far away...
    58
    535
    I will not lie to you. I have not had any courses in anthropology, or \ advanced chemeistry, so I would not be able to surfice your thirst for knowlege is the area of radiometric dating.
    I am sure another member here might surfice in giving you info on this; however I have a brief video from Thunderf00t on the matter.


    *Less than 5% of the scientific community believe the idea of the creationist10,000-6000 year old earth.*
    http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/do-scientists-really-reject-god

    Actually Richard Dawkins has written a book called "The Greatest show on Earth. The evidence of evolution."

    The theory of evolution is based of embryology, DNA commparision, Homology, similar charecteristics, food webs, ERVs, a huge amount of fossils, and multiple methods of radio metric dating.

    Their are many scientific theorys per say. Such as the theory of gravity, or the theory of relativity; the antanomical theory, and the Sphere theory.
    http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/theories/inscience.html
     
  16. Misty gimme kiss

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Gender:
    Cisgender Female
    Location:
    alderaan
    6,590
    Patsy, tone down your first post a bit or I'm editing it for you. We're supposed to be having a civilized debate here.

    As for me, I really have never bought into the creationism concept. I personally would call myself a deist (though not in a pessimistic sense). Creationism does have a LARGE amount of evidence stacked against it and evolution makes scientific sense, but that doesn't make it okay to completely deny the concept of creationism. Most Christians I know do not buy into the 100% literal sense of the Bible as, let's face it, much of it is highly illogical. That being said, it's the message that the Bible sends that is important.

    People will believe what they want to. It's nothing new, and getting all worked up about it or calling them '******s' is just downright awful. :/
     
  17. Guardian Soul hella sad & hella rad

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    794
    Does it say anywhere in the Bible that the Earth is the center of the universe? No. Isn't one of the Ten Commandments "Thou shall not kill"? Yes. While the Bible doesn't condone homosexual acts, it doesn't outright say to go out and kill all homosexuals. We as human just fucked up big time.

    I never said that our morals were also God's morals

    Now let me define morality for you

    Our morals can't apply to God since he's above us. What's wrong for us may not be wrong under the eyes of God. I don't know the reason why God decided to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because I'm not God and I'll never be able to understand God but I do believe that God is just so the destruction of the two cities could have been for the better good.

    That still happens today with women although to lesser extent than it was back in the day(for example, a man and a woman could have the same job but the man will have the higher paycheck). God and religion aren't the only culprits for that.
     
  18. Cyanide King's Apprentice

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    50
    412
    There is not much doubt within the scientific community about evolution's validity. Think about this for a second. Evolution has to be one of the most widely hated scientific theories of all time. Nobody wants it to be true. So why has it gained such acceptance? Because of evidence. It has been subjected to rigorous criticism for over a century and has passed it with flying colors.

    The only things that are up in the air regarding evolution are very specific details that require a lot of knowledge about biology to understand what the discussion is even about.

    There are still a few more general issues that probably could be cleared up about the whole thing:

    1. there is a difference between "evolution" and "common descent". Evolution just equates to a change in the gene pools of populations over time (which is an empirically proven fact). Common descent is just basically taking that premise a step further, saying that we all evolved from a common ancestor, but it still has evidence behind it. Even if you could prove common descent wrong, you wouldn't discredit evolution.

    In addition to this, common descent and evolution are both different from abiogenesis and the Big Bang. Evolution explains the current diversity of life and the mechanisms behind it. Nothing more. Obviously abiogenesis and evolution are linked, but even if you could prove one wrong you wouldn't discredit the other.

    2. I should point out that no scientific fact or theory has a 100% acceptance rate. That goes for just about anything really. While the majority is not always right, the fact that there is a subdecimal amount of people (among scientists who are actually specialized in areas relevant to evolution the rate of people who don't believe in evolution is lower than 1%) who do not believe it does not mean that it is not true either. When a number of experts agree on something, you should at the very least take it into consideration.

    3. to say evolution is "just a theory" is technically correct, but in most cases the people who say this don't have any idea on what the word "theory" actually means to science.

    Let me illustrate this for you: Einstein's theory of gravity replaced Newtons. Did apples suddenly start falling upwards because of it? No. Theories definitely change, evolve, and go under a process of correction, and the theory of evolution is no different. But the fact of evolution is true and isn't about to change any time soon.

    If we're not capable of understanding God, we have no true way to understand if his actions are truly for our greater good. You just have to faith in his good intentions, like you're supposed to have faith regarding everything else about him.

    As for the belief in creationism itself...well, it's not an empirically sound belief, but I'd be lying if I didn't understand why people believed it.

    All the same it's important to understand that science's goal is finding the truth, regardless of how ridiculous it might seem. Many scientific discoveries and facts actually go against any form of common sense we might have.

    At the end of the day, nobody said the world had to make sense. It is what it is and no amount of believing otherwise will change that.

    I'm not sure if I fully believe in evolution (well, naturalistic evolution anyway) all the same, for personal reasons; in terms of my actual beliefs I would probably classify more as an agnostic deist or pantheist, I'm not sure. However, in saying things like "it hasn't been proven" or "it's just a theory" or "lots of scientists doubt it", I'm just lying to myself.
     
  19. Advent 【DRAGON BALLSY】

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Gender:
    Overcooked poptart
    523
    God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah largely because they allowed homosexual intercourse. Does the destruction of these two cities automatically get redeemed because he said "Oh, by the way, don't kill people even though I have."? I don't think so. That would make God a hypocrite for one thing, and not all-loving for another.

    I'm sorry, but that's an extremely BS argument. The word "human" isn't that important in the definition. Fact of the matter is, God still has morals, as we see in the Bible, since he is a personified deity who makes decisions. His reasoning for destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, as I said earlier, was largely because of the homosexuality that they were allowing. If this doesn't tell you that God is, to put it extremely bluntly, a homophobe, then I don't know what does.

    I thought God was supposed to be on the highest pillar of justice, morality, love and mercy in the Universe? I guess not. If God were the epitome of wisdom, he would have been able to devise a solution that didn't involve breaking one of his own Commandments, which brings us back to the hypocrisy thing I mentioned earlier.
     
  20. Xeitr The False Image Gummi Ship Junkie

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    your tummy
    7
    341
    actually god destroyed sodam and Gomorrah because of all the sins being committed he never singled out homosexuality ...things such as gambling murder rape (homosexual or otherwise) prostitution and just a lot of hate were also occurring in those two cities