does anyone believe creationists when...

the real ramon

they say they believe all the stuff they come out with, or do some people suspect as I do that a fair amount of them are into it for the power, the money, and the control it gives them over people?

therannu

Hi Ramon,
I'd say a lot of creationists are, as you put it, 'in it' because they believe what they have been conditioned to believe. They're susceptible to what their parents and church leaders have told them, and for some people it's easier to believe what they've been told than to actually sit down and think about things rationally.

As you can see, I don't have a lot of respect for creationists, but I really don't think they're in it for power and money. Surely anyone who only cared about power and money would sell their souls in a second rather than insisting on the opposite, ie over-spirituality?!

Beruthiel

to quote the wonderful bill hicks

You ever noticed how people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved? You ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet. "I believe God created me in one day" Yeah, looks liked He rushed it.

Zombrex

the real ramon wrote:

they say they believe all the stuff they come out with, or do some people suspect as I do that a fair amount of them are into it for the power, the money, and the control it gives them over people?

I think a lot of Creationists believe what they do because they use it as some kind of "proof" that what they believe is actually correct.

One thing that is mentioned quite a bit on the Christianity forum is the belief that if the Bible is wrong then there is no reason to believe in Jesus or God. Therefore any science that calls into question the correctness of a literal reading of the Bible must itself be wrong.

So Creationists invent this pseudo-science "Creationism Science" to try and fit the literal translation of the Bible (which they need to be correct to justify their own faith) around what science teaches us about the natural world.

growler

If I had known there was both power and money to be had I might not have been so quick to debunk the crackpots.

Then again I think most of the creationists truly believe in the creation myths and are in it for the good of their souls (and everyone elses they can get their paws on).

Pocari Sweat

If getting the populous US masses to be drawn into the literal teachings of the bible from an early age, with adam and eve, a shocking mighty don't mess with what god says ideology and use easter, christmas and other religious stuff to drum into the minds of the flock, that you just play along with the whole thing and don't rock the boat and if some preacher tells ye creationist stuff, then say hallejulia, don't go questioning stuff or ye can feck off if ye want christening, married or sent off nicely in a box.

And then add this with the corporate culture of america, where big bosses want obedient, no fuss employess who do their jobs and take their limited vacation time and be happy with their pay.

Maybe church attendance under the guidance of evangelical nutcases of preachers gives corporate america and the government a feel of how many idiots there are out there in America to take their cr*p and believe the worst kind of lies that Bush comes out with.

Mind wash people in America and you can say stuff like :

All arabs are terrorists, and are not just bad but evil, yes don't mess with our god.

Guantanamo bay is needed and is a fair way to sort out the evil ones.

Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction, even if there was just one old rusty one that had to be carried places if it was to be harmful (and we were given a few more years to find it).

We can have weapons of mass destruction because we are god's people and the world police, so god bless america and for every megaton of nuke every other country has let us have a thousand times more.

And stuff like that. It all starts with santa.

Asiaprod

Pocari Sweat wrote:

If getting the populous US masses to be drawn into the literal teachings of the bible from an early age, with adam and eve, a shocking mighty ......... don't go questioning stuff or ye can feck off if ye want christening, married or sent off nicely in a box.

Pocari, while I appreciate your passion for the subject, to be honest, I would rather you rant a little less. This forum is not about condemning other belief systems, its about debating them to try to understand what they do stand for. Nor is it about the American attitude. IMO these rants could paint a completely wrong picture of Atheists/Agnostics which would be very unfortunate. Please tone it down a little. Thanks.

Scofflaw

I would say that a lot of Creationists enjoy the sense of being in a special place in the Universe - sorts out a lot of existential dread. Being told that you're just one member of the monkey family doesn't sit very well with a lot of people.

It's worth bearing in mind that a major difference between Catholicism and the Protestant sects is their attitude to the Bible. Protestantism as a movement was strongly focused on the relationship between man and God, and they placed the Bible where Catholics have the Church. Every Protestant is encouraged to read the Bible, know the Bible, whereas the Catholic is supposed to listen to the Church.

Now, if you have an enquiring mind, and a strong faith in the literal truth of the Bible, it's not particularly strange that you might begin to find conflicts between science and the Book. For a Catholic, this isn't a big issue, because the Church is there, same as it's been for the past couple of millenia - the body of information about God represented by the Bible is not as important as that represented by the Church - indeed, the early Church almost certainly had a hand in the selection of the "canonical" Gospels.

Sure, there's money to be gained on the preaching circuit, but look at the early careers of those who make the big bucks, and it looks much like the acting profession (not intended disrespectfully) - many are called, and few make the big bucks.

It is more likely that the money in preaching tends to corrupt preachers than that all preaching is a cynical exercise to gain money. Most of them, I suspect, are genuinely motivated. Consider some of the Creationists on these boards - they are preaching, and I doubt they are getting paid. Do you doubt their sincerity?


cordially,
Scofflaw

Asiaprod

Scofflaw wrote:

It is more likely that the money in preaching tends to corrupt preachers than that all preaching is a cynical exercise to gain money. Most of them, I suspect, are genuinely motivated. Consider some of the Creationists on these boards - they are preaching, and I doubt they are getting paid. Do you doubt their sincerity?

Nicely pointed out. I would agree with this. There will always be the odd one that is in it for the money, fame or personal gain, but in general, they are genuinely motivated.

jtsuited

there are creationists on boards?
Must frequent that christianity forum more often (and try not to get angry!!)

Tar.Aldarion

Look at the creationism thread in Christianity and try not to bang your head off the table. I read the whole thing..I mean wow...

Scofflaw

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Look at the creationism thread in Christianity and try not to bang your head off the table. I read the whole thing..I mean wow...

You actually read the whole thing? How do you feel? Are you alright? Were you hurt?

I may not question the sincerity of the creationist posters, but their sanity, and other faculties, well, yes, there would be some "question marks" there, in some cases.


cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Scofflaw wrote:

You actually read the whole thing? How do you feel? Are you alright? Were you hurt?

I may not question the sincerity of the creationist posters, but their sanity, and other faculties, well, yes, there would be some "question marks" there, in some cases.


cordially,
Scofflaw

I for one am getting a little alarmed at wolfsbane's idea of morals...

Stephen

I got about 3 pages (out of 90) into that thread before I wanted to break stuff.

Also why does a Certain Poster ALWAYS post LIKE THIS?!! It does my head in.

Dades

I enjoyed that thread for a while, and then it became apparent that we were banging heads against a brick wall. The same arguments were being thrown out, and points refuting these ignored or sidestepped.

I think when the thread finally finishes in seven and a half million years the last post will simply say:

42

Scofflaw

Well, it's a dirty job, but I feel we can hardly let them just post up Creationist claims without comment. Possibly those of us who are scientists take it to heart a bit too much!


cordially,
Scofflaw

Asiaprod

Scofflaw wrote:

Well, it's a dirty job, but I feel we can hardly let them just post up Creationist claims without comment.

I sure am glad you took up the cause, it has all moved well beyond my capabiliities. I can only spell about 10% of the words, and thats using a spell checker. Realy Wish that the person in question would also stop all the Bold Type too. Gives me a headach reading it.

Asiaprod

bluewolf wrote:

I for one am getting a little alarmed at wolfsbane's idea of morals...

I don't think you are alone there

Scofflaw

Latest: Atheists alarmed by Christian's morals!

"Well, it's the doctrine of Grace, innit? I mean, he could just, like, kill us all in our beds, right, and then he just goes off and gets this Grace, and it's alright with his God! I mean, even if he goes to prison, they'll let him out if he gets "born again", won't they?", said area atheist Scofflaw today. "It's like he hasn't got any morals of his own - he just does whatever this God bloke tells him."


cordially,
Scofflaw

growler

I've been following the creation thread over there on and off for some time now (but get lost at the micro biology level), its a truly fascinating debate and one I'd imagine that would have your average clergyman baffled ( recalling Fr Dougal un-converting the Bishop). beyond belief.

I remember some time back posting here about a New Scientist article about the origins of belief and the physcological reasons why "belief" was so important to society, and it helped me appreciate the good it can offer some people.... but I find the levels to which a creationist advocate will go to defend their point of view incredible. The sources they draw upon create a fantastically complex tale, that such eloquent and obviously intelligent people can see no further than a literal intrepretation of the bible is mind boggling. I guess I had kind of accepted that belief in judo-Christian/ Islamic religious tradition was ok for the "sheep", I know this is condescending , but I am genuinely surprised to find those who seem to be of above average intellect arguing the indefensible (scientifically) with such conviction.

Tar.Aldarion

Scofflaw wrote:

You actually read the whole thing? How do you feel? Are you alright? Were you hurt?

My mind was hurt, try sitting down and reading it all at once, with all those links. My head.
Um, some interesting morals and views of science going on...

Tar.Aldarion

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

My mind was hurt, try sitting down and reading it all at once, with all those links. My head.
Um, some interesting morals and views of science going on...

I'm not exactly the best at arguing morals =/ I'm probably mucking it up entirely

Son Goku

I keep on getting the urge to post particularly after Captain Capslock appeared again, but I think I'd only drive myself mad.
It's not so much that I wanted to challenge their argument, but I was more curious about the fact that they never saw that their arguements of God making things "look old" or "look anything" could have also been applied to any Creation myth.

Asiaprod

Son Goku wrote:

I keep on getting the urge to post particularly after Captain Capslock appeared again, but I think I'd only drive myself mad.

Haha, I like that, could we edit it to The "Bold" Captain Capslock.
I could never understrand why, even if God made it all, why would he want to make the earth look old. What would that serve? I am almost tempted to say that they took the idea from Terry Pratchett's "Strata" We all read Terry's work, right! Well just in case, it the book where "The Company" employ Stratos machine to build new worlds to order. And planet designer liked to leave litttle unofficial personal touches for future generations, like a fossilized Plesiosaur holding a crumpled placard which read 'End Nuclear Testing Now', a Tyrannosaurus wearing a wristwatch, or a Neanderthal skull with gold fillings.

robindch

Hmm... Strata... now why did that never show up in the creationism thread?

Anyhow, back to the OP:

> they say they believe all the stuff they come out with

On the whole, I'd say that yes they do believe most of the rubbish they come out with. But then again religion is all about believing six impossible things before every breakfast and making yourself happy that you do. It's weird -- you ask some believer some question that you think will make them sit back and say, "hmm, that's interesting; never realized that". But that's not what happens. Instead, they'll sit there, grin a bit, then say it's a "sacred mystery" or something and think, apparently sincerely, that *that* is an answer. That's of course in addition to all of the back-flipping antics of the Captain Capslock (ha!) and the other hooting baboons.

But the interesting thing is the greater culture of ignorance which creationism is only a part of. Pocari mentioned it above and it's worth bearing in mind that if you can convince people that the world is 6,000 years old and that your god is going to turn up sometime in the next 20 years (see the eye-poppingly stupid http://www.rr-bb.com/, for example), then it's a cinch to get an illiterate gobsh1te into the White House who'll shower you with "Faith-based initiaitive" money :cool:

Asiaprod

robindch wrote:

see the eye-poppingly stupid http://www.rr-bb.com/

:eek: Thats not stupidity, thats scary stuff. Those people are suicidal.

growler

robindch wrote:

(see the eye-poppingly stupid http://www.rr-bb.com/, for example), then it's a cinch to get an illiterate gobsh1te into the White House who'll shower you with "Faith-based initiaitive" money :cool:

that site is excellent, the Da Vinci Code really seems to have got their knickers in a twist. I also learnt that Prince Charles could be the anti-christ, which makes perfect sense of course, who would suspect him !! :eek:

Scofflaw

I particularly like the idea that arguing against God's word can only be done in the Apologetics Forum. Did I miss something there, or were other people unable to see that useful forum?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zombrex

Scofflaw wrote:

I particularly like the idea that arguing against God's word can only be done in the Apologetics Forum. Did I miss something there, or were other people unable to see that useful forum?

cordially,
Scofflaw

I liked the bit that says

"News covering health, weather, natural disasters, declining morality and corrupt spirituality."

Today at 6, declining morality and corrupt spirituality is destroying the world, but first Indepth Today finds out which is better springy clothes pegs or the other kind. All this and more coming up after these messages

HealingBlight

Creationism:
- Is good book selling material.
- Is simple. (i.e. God Did It)
- Is easier to understand than evolution.
- Is supported by charismatic rightious holymen, not dull scientists and their gobbledygook.
- Doesn’t question the bibles description of things.
- Supports the bible or whatever flavour of religious text.
- Doesn't link us to primates.
- Doesn't make man 'just an animal'.
- Doesn't actually -explain- anything, leaving everything to the god of the gaps.


These are just my observations though.

This is a prediction, but if I were to go to that creationist thread, will I see a lot of bible quotes, old quotes taken out of context, quotes from evolutionists used against evolution, general things disproving evolution, strawmen, watchmaker arguments and various unscientific 'evidences' masquerading as science?

Scofflaw

HealingBlight wrote:

This is a prediction, but if I were to go to that creationist thread, will I see a lot of bible quotes, old quotes taken out of context, quotes from evolutionists used against evolution, general things disproving evolution, strawmen, watchmaker arguments and various unscientific 'evidences' masquerading as science?

Yup. Also CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK will destroy your sense of reality by not only doing all the above, but misunderstanding things so badly that normal people can only look on in shock and awe. He can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or sense. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are deaf.

cordially,
Scofflaw

HealingBlight

Scofflaw wrote:

Yup. Also CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK will destroy your sense of reality by not only doing all the above, but misunderstanding things so badly that normal people can only look on in shock and awe. He can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or sense. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are deaf.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Remember, the bigger the font, the righter you are, ITS CLEARLY FACT.

http://www.freethoughtmedia.com/evolution101.ftm
I wonder how well your average joe-biblehugger can completely debunk each one of those podcasts that explains and provides evidences for evolution.
Even though I havent really gotten into the whole thing yet, it was nice to listen to. I would say that it could turn a creationists brain into mush, but then again, it allready is, at least in this respect.
And I was told: http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html was a useful link.

Talkorigins is a great site, yeah


I'm afraid I too resorted to some caps, I'm losing my patience with this evolution is taking over astrophysics crap...

Dades

HealingBlight wrote:

This is a prediction, but if I were to go to that creationist thread, will I see a lot of bible quotes, old quotes taken out of context, quotes from evolutionists used against evolution, general things disproving evolution, strawmen, watchmaker arguments and various unscientific 'evidences' masquerading as science?

Not to mention that giant leap of logic:

Something intelligent created the world;
Therefore it was obviously OUR GOD because it says so in an old book.

The Atheist

The Atheist wrote:

Not to mention that giant leap of logic:

Something intelligent created the world;
Therefore it was obviously OUR GOD because it says so in an old book.

Heh hence my old sig:
"Who stole the cookies from the cookies jar?
I DON'T KNOW SO IT MUST BE GOD"

growler

bluewolf wrote:

Heh hence my old sig:
"Who stole the cookies from the cookies jar?
I DON'T KNOW SO IT MUST BE GOD"

nonsense I have it on good authority it was the fairies.

HealingBlight

The Atheist wrote:

Not to mention that giant leap of logic:

Something intelligent created the world;
Therefore it was obviously OUR GOD because it says so in an old book.

I always loved the idea that 'the creator' is somehow automatically god, or something really powerful is automatically god, and when you think and think about it, the only thing that really makes a god is the worshiper. That’s how I manage to be a strong atheist without any scientific fact, purely because the unworkability of the definition, its just a friggen title, like king. Kings exist to some people, but I don’t have a king, and I see the other kings as they are, a man with power proportionate to the amount of supporters he has.
Although that was -completely- off topic for a creationist thread.

growler wrote:

nonsense I have it on good authority it was the fairies.

FSM you heathen basterd.

Tar.Aldarion

I am thinking to converting to FSM after that last comment.

HealingBlight

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

I am thinking to converting to FSM after that last comment.

Praise be to the Flying Spaghetti monster! For he has touched another with his noodely appendage!

HealingBlight

HealingBlight wrote:

Praise be to the Flying Spaghetti monster! For he has touched another with his noodely appendage!

Oooh, saucy.

Pocari Sweat

Remember that advert on tv

"I take spaghetti and I noodle cars and boats and planes and trees,
and lots and lots of shapes like these,
I'm the noodle doodle man"

God is like this, he takes simple noodles and makes something wonderful,
so I think you should all be born again christians and stop your heathenism.

Repent ye sinners.

the real ramon

Hi all,

yeah, most of them probably do believe in it all for the best of intentions like 99% of people in any walk of life or sub-culture. Have stayed away from Christianity forum myself because I knew there'd be a few unreasonable nuts there and as an earlier post said you can't reason with people like that.

It's a shame I think that creationism is beginning to become more vocal within Christianity (or maybe it just appears that way to me) because Christianity isn't all that bad at heart, it led for instance to the abolition of slavery.

Maybe it's always been this way, but I suspect some people are afraid of science and its implications and so would rather put their faith in supersition and nonsense which to them makes the world clearer morally and in other ways than the messyness that is living in this world. Marxists are the same IMO.

Probably always been that way, and they'll always remain a minority I would guess. It's moderate Christians who should be more worried than atheists and agnostics methinks

robindch

> Christianity isn't all that bad at heart, it led for instance to the
> abolition of slavery.

Within the British Empire, the main abolitionist was William Wilberforce who was an evangelical christian, though his many supporters don't seem to have been particularly religiously motivated.

Within the USA, some of the earliest anti-slavery abolitionists were Quakers, but these good folks saw themselves as a small minority of christian dissenters, and certainly were not mainstream christians in any sense (and who were frequently damned from the pulpit for being abolitionists). A quick google produces this map:

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/african/images/reynomap.jpg

...where the red bits (the librul, wife-swappin', heathen north) had abolished slavery in marked contrast to the gray bits (god feerin', good ole bible-thumping christian south), which didn't seem to see much of a problem with it. There was a similar north-south split happened in the 50's and 60's with the Civil Rights movement.

In summary, I think saying that christianity led to the abolition of slavery could be seen as a mild overstatement

the real ramon

Perhaps not all Christianity was in favour of abolition, but weren't the majority of people in Europe and North America who were in favour of abolition claiming it was their Christian conscience which led them to be in favour of abolition. After all it was, although increasingly liberal, still very much a 'believing' age when this happened. That at least is the way I've always understood it.

Scofflaw

the real ramon wrote:

Perhaps not all Christianity was in favour of abolition, but weren't the majority of people in Europe and North America who were in favour of abolition claiming it was their Christian conscience which led them to be in favour of abolition. After all it was, although increasingly liberal, still very much a 'believing' age when this happened. That at least is the way I've always understood it.

Hmm. Given that slavery continued uninterrupted in Europe from the Roman Empire, would you not say it took Christianity rather a while (1800 years?) to "abolish slavery"?

cordially,
Scofflaw

HealingBlight

Jesus, who has the oppertunity to set the record straight and speak out harshly aginst the injustice of slavery, doesent. The bible makes no real outcry aginst slavery, but instead holds instructions on how to handle slaves and how hard to punish them.

Those who opposed slavery were good people, there were some who just happened to be christian.

the real ramon

Scofflaw wrote:

Hmm. Given that slavery continued uninterrupted in Europe from the Roman Empire, would you not say it took Christianity rather a while (1800 years?) to "abolish slavery"?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Did take it an awful long time I concur, but less than anywhere else. I don't know what changed in the European mindset, perhaps it was partly the reformation, perhaps it was more down to the increasing liberalism which was in part, though not totally in oppostion to Christianity, it's hard to tell, though you would have to concede despite the length of time it took, people were, for the most part, in the end arguing from a liberal Christian perspective.

I don't think anyone can say Christianity was all bad (some might, but they'd be wrong). In a way it has a similar (but different, obviously) spectrum running from a good bit to the left to far right just like atheists, both are still part of the European tradition, it's just that some people decided, in the great liberal tradition of Europe, to split completely from Christianity, while other liberals decided to stay in the fold. I have a lot of time myself for both the atheistic/agnostic tradition and also the liberal dissenter traditions. I think it's important not to completely dismiss every Christian tradition just because they believe.:)

Scofflaw

the real ramon wrote:

Did take it an awful long time I concur, but less than anywhere else.

I agree with the rest of your points, but would have to take issue with this one. Slavery, in the sense most of us think of it (that is, in the sense that it was abolished), was essentially a European (hence Christian) phenomenon. It therefore couldn't be abolished in a lot of places, because it didn't exist as such.

cordially,
Scofflaw

lostexpectation

the real ramon wrote:

Perhaps not all Christianity was in favour of abolition, but weren't the majority of people in Europe and North America who were in favour of abolition claiming it was their Christian conscience which led them to be in favour of abolition. After all it was, although increasingly liberal, still very much a 'believing' age when this happened. That at least is the way I've always understood it.

maybe morality was confused with christianity back then too.