• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A Bit of Good News for Science Education

Anarcho-fascist

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
1,069
Reaction score
264
Location
T E X A S !
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The words "creationism think-tank" seem like a big oxymoron.
 
Good, but its sad we even have to say creationism can't be considered science. It would be like including a masters in holocaust denial as a history degree. Its so completely and obviously wrong to anyone with knowledge of the subject that we shouldn't even be having this debate. At best creationism belongs in theology classes, not science ones.
 
Good, but its sad we even have to say creationism can't be considered science. It would be like including a masters in holocaust denial as a history degree. Its so completely and obviously wrong to anyone with knowledge of the subject that we shouldn't even be having this debate. At best creationism belongs in theology classes, not science ones.
I don't really think much of either, but young earth creationism does a disservice to serious theology. It necessitates that God be deceptive, and opens Christianity up to mockery. I'd think that Christians that are sincere about their religion would fight creationism being taught in class as meaningful theology just as hard as scientists have fought it from being taught as real science.

St. Agustine said:
It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.
 
I don't really think much of either, but young earth creationism does a disservice to serious theology. It necessitates that God be deceptive, and opens Christianity up to mockery. I'd think that Christians that are sincere about their religion would fight creationism being taught in class as meaningful theology just as hard as scientists have fought it from being taught as real science.

Question Anarcho, can you be a Christian when your belief requires your God to be a liar? After all, Christians I do believe think that their God is perfect and without flaw. Being a liar hardly fits that model.
 
Question Anarcho, can you be a Christian when your belief requires your God to be a liar? After all, Christians I do believe think that their God is perfect and without flaw. Being a liar hardly fits that model.
I don't think that young earth creationists think that their God is a liar, I think they believe that the bible is always true no matter what, (I think most say there is some metaphor in there, but I don't get how they think Adam and Eve and the flood can't be metaphorical) and they deny evidence that contradicts their interpretation of it. They could claim that the devil is doing the deceiving I guess, but if that's the case God sure didn't do much to stop him.
 
Back
Top Bottom