The Creationist Museum

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1340152308' post='2446489']
I don't believe those generalities can be applied to all who could be labeled "creationist" because they believe that some intelligent being was the cause of the creation of the universe. Be they christians or whatever.[/quote]
I've given some definition to what I mean by creationism in this context and it isn't based simply on believing that God created the universe. If that were so, then theistic evolution would be included as creationism (and there is a sense in which that is so). Maybe I'll call it antiscience creationism. By my definition there could be atheistic antiscience creationism. I've seen books that would fit this description that I can hardly believe exist. Although, given the existence of scientology and raelianism perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1340144273' post='2446453']
Waste of hate.
[/quote]
This phrase deserves meme status. Funny pics with a "Waste of hate" or "Don't waste the hate" caption. Just a random thought. Hmm...

[Papist]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340206026' post='2446708']
I've given some definition to what I mean by creationism in this context and it isn't based simply on believing that God created the universe. If that were so, then theistic evolution would be included as creationism (and there is a sense in which that is so). Maybe I'll call it antiscience creationism. By my definition there could be atheistic antiscience creationism. I've seen books that would fit this description that I can hardly believe exist. Although, given the existence of scientology and raelianism perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
[/quote]

I always thought that the Creationist, the ones represented by this museum, [s]think[/s]believe that all life just appeared, via God of course. And that since there is hard evidence of dinosaurs, then dinosaurs existed within the time range of the Bible, e.g. T-Rex roaming around in the Garden of Eden. That they are not open to the thought that perhaps between Day 1 and Day 2 in Genesis could be millions or billions of years. Or that perhaps when God created man(Adam) that is also took millions or billions of years. I mean, millions or billions of years to God is like a blink of an eye to us.

I think this thinking does God an injustice. Through science, man can observe the power and glory of God. For example, look into where Earth is placed in its solar system. It is placed in a perfect spot for us to view the universe. Just a smidgen either way and our view of the universe would be blocked.

On the other end, Darwinian evolution rules out God all together, right? If so, can't give God more of an injustice than that. I'm not stating you are arguing for Darwinian evolution. I just believe Darwinian evolution is more dangerous than Creationism.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1340209132' post='2446724']On the other end, Darwinian evolution rules out God all together, right? If so, can't give God more of an injustice than that. I'm not stating you are arguing for Darwinian evolution. I just believe Darwinian evolution is more dangerous than Creationism.[/quote]
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by Darwinian evolution, but I don't think that evolutionary biology rules out God any more than do natural explanations of physical phenomena in general. I think the reason some Christians object to the science is that it contradicts their specific theology. For example, if it is a dogma that the Earth is several thousand years old then one is going to have a problem with the many fields of science that contradict this idea. The history of life that modern biology reveals is not incompatible with a theistic universe or with the idea of divine providence. In your view, how is it that evolution rules out God altogether?

[Papist]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340209738' post='2446725']
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by Darwinian evolution, but I don't think that evolutionary biology rules out God any more than do natural explanations of physical phenomena in general. I think the reason some Christians object to the science is that it contradicts their specific theology. For example, if it is a dogma that the Earth is several thousand years old then one is going to have a problem with the many fields of science that contradict this idea. The history of life that modern biology reveals is not incompatible with a theistic universe or with the idea of divine providence. In your view, how is it that evolution rules out God altogether?
[/quote]

[left]Evolution does not rules out God altogether, I believe. I am referring to the form of evolution that [left][font="Helvetica, Arial, Verdana, sans-serif"][color="#333333"]believes that life was not the result of divine intervention(i.e. God), but the work of blind naturalistic processes. Is that not [/color][/font][/left]Darwinian evolution? I thought that was the whole synopsis of Darwin's theory.[/left]

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340205806' post='2446705']
Without generalizing, I have to say that some individual creationist propagandists do in fact make my skin crawl. They're up there with various other charlatans and con artists. But yeah, the average YEC on the street is likely just ignorant and misguided. Sad story.
[/quote]

Like I was, most of them are just lemmings, following what those in their churches teach not wanting look like they are questioning what they recognize as the authority. Even when I was a YEC though it did not make sense to me. Something in you knows that something is off even though you can't successfully debate their apologists because you don't know enough.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1340210945' post='2446732']
[left]Evolution does not rules out God altogether, I believe. I am referring to the form of evolution that[/left]
[left][font=Helvetica, Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][color=#333333]believes that life was not the result of divine intervention(i.e. God), but the work of blind naturalistic processes. Is that not [/color][/font][/left]
Darwinian evolution? I thought that was the whole synopsis of Darwin's theory.[/quote]
I should say that while I'm no historian of science, I'm pretty sure that Darwin did not claim or believe that evolution by natural selection takes God out of the picture. At the time he wrote [i]On The Origin of Species[/i] he was a theist and believed that God was the author of evolution and of the order in the universe, et cetera. I've heard it said that he lost his faith later in life primarily because of the horror of watching his beloved daughter suffer and die.
I also feel the need to mention that many biologists are theists, and as if often pointed out, the founder of the science of genetics was a Catholic priest.

Sorry if this is excessive; I just feel the need to explain myself a little bit.

To me, referring to Darwinian evolution sounds kind of like talking about Newtonian physics. Darwin explored evidence available at the time (mid-19th century) and made a powerful case for common ancestry and descent with modification. Secondarily, he hypothesized that evolution by natural selection is the primary mechanism by which the prior can be understood and explained. On these basic points he was correct; however, it is important to realize that Darwin was completely ignorant of most of the material that would be covered in an undergraduate evolutionary biology course/textbook today.
Neo-Darwinism is a term sometimes applied to early-mid 20th century synthesis of evolution by natural selection and genetics (as it was understood at the time) including the early field of population genetics. In my amateur understanding, the legacy of the modern synthesis is still very significant, but there have been many important discoveries, caveats, refinements, and footnotes since the 1940s.
The discourse of modern evolutionary biology is far removed from the concerns of creationist literature and popular misconceptions about evolution. In terms of complexity and mathematical rigor the literature looks a lot more like that of quantum physics than like the writings of Charles Darwin.
But okay, I suppose there is a colloquial use of the term Darwinism (in my experience 'Darwinism' is often a creationist epithet that implies not only the theory of evolution, but atheism, immorality, the left, and so on.), or neo-Darwinism that often refers to a basic/general idea of evolution. Like, the idea that heritable variation exists and that differential survival and reproduction are facts of nature? There are mechanisms that operate on gene flow that can account for many of the changes we observe in gene pools. The audacity of science! ;-)

You referred to "the form of evolution that believes that life was not the result of divine intervention (i.e. God), but the work of blind naturalistic processes." This sounds like a philosophy to me. I would contend that such conclusions do not follow from biology. How life started is not a question that is addressed by evolutionary theory. The meaning of life, whether or not God's providence is expressed in the history of life, and other such questions are matters of religion and philosophy.
When it comes to the relationship between the scientific community and the Church I much prefer the approach of the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences to that of US fundamentalism. The Vatican hosted a pretty amesome conference on evolution back in 2009.

Anyway, I'm rambling...

P.S. Biological organisms can reproduce. A dog can give rise to a new dog without miraculous intervention. Does this challenge theism? Why not? Is it the natural processes that bother you about evolution or the unguided "randomness" of it all? I assume the latter, and will therefore yet again assert that this is a metaphysical/religious claim. My previous posts about randomness apply to this. Can you answer those? What I mean is, the natural processes behind evolution are known scientifically; the idea of purpose and providential guidance in any facet of life - whether its biological history, geological history, cosmic history, or day-to-day happenings - is not a part of the data of science. In one sense the stochastic (non-deterministic) nature of evolution provides an entry point for such belief.

Okay, now I'm definitely rambling. Peace.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1340152308' post='2446489']
Some peoples words do seem on the virulent outrage side just because some creationists have a museum, big whoop, I don't agree with them but I wouldn't agree that it was a "Horrible piece of garbage" or think of it as "Sick and degrading" nor would I joke about 'terrorizing who was responsible for the museum'.

There is also a underlying sense of snobbery mockery. They are idiotic, they are closed minded, they are just anti-science, they just care about doctrine, God did it, (whatever it is) so that's all that matters. I don't believe those generalities can be applied to all who could be labeled "creationist" because they believe that some intelligent being was the cause of the creation of the universe. Be they christians or whatever.[/quote]
You guys have a point. I'll try to be more respectful and careful about over-generalizing. Thanks dude.

[Laudate_Dominum]

P.S. This site does a good job of explaining the science behind evolution in basic terms.

[url="http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evohome.html"]http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evohome.html[/url]

[sixpence]

OK Peoples!!! Calm yourselves! Darwinian evolution does not rule of God! However, it can be used by atheist scientists as a (lacking) explanation of our existence. This is where the fundamentalist creationists come in and get all freaked out. I think both parties are missing something. Evolution does not explain how life began, or exactly how we ended up with the organisms we did. Atheist scientists would have you believe that this all happened for no apparent reason and its a nice big happy coincident. FCs would have you throw out the entire concept of evolution because it does not agree with a literal Genesis. HOWEVER, it is totally possible to accept evolution as the probable mechanism by which God brought all his creatures into existence. Why, some would ask, would God bother to go through this would long process instead of just snapping us into existence?? Well I don't claim to know, but two things I keep in mind are (1) God is outside of time; therefore, he was not just sitting around twiddling His thumbs. (2) There is something avvesome about the experience of loving crafting something over time (like artwork or even something functional like working on an old car).

Our problem in this thread is that we are probably all really "creationists" but probably not in the way that most people think of them (anti-science, fundamentalist, etc).

Edited June 20, 2012 by sixpence

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1340052576' post='2445987']
In fact, I find the idea that the creation of the universe and all the life on this planet is simply the result of nothing but pure dumb luck and meaningless random physical processes with no intelligence or design to be much stupider than "Creationism" - not to mention far more pervasive and destructive in its impact.[/quote]
Atheists are a minority in this country. In many states it's against the law for atheists to hold public office. The last president of the United States apparently supported creationism. Several of the recent presidential candidates support creationism. Okay, so you don't understand or care about the impact of this problem, fine, but it's pretty pervasive. Are you even aware of the round of "monkey bill" legislation that has been going on just in the past year?

And again, nobody said that it's the biggest problem or the only problem. Yes, there are other cultural problems, but invoking them to minimize some other issue is a cheap move.

And although it's off topic, I have to disagree with you: Atheism is not necessarily "stupider" than creationism. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to doubt the existence of God, the goodness of God, or the existence of providence in the universe, the cosmic significance of human beings and human acts, and so on. Faith is a theological virtue and a supernatural gift that none of us has merited. A theistic or Christian worldview isn't some hugely self-evident thing that only morons and evil people would fail to accept.
On the other hand, creationism often is just plainly ignorant and patently against reason and evidence.

[Papist]

So y'all are saying the atheists hijacked Darwinism for their own gain? I am no Darwin expert by any means, but all that I have read implies the nonexistence of God. That, all that exist is material. Also, I can't rule out perhaps I am reading with the preconceived notion that is Darwin's conjecture.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1340221699' post='2446798']
So y'all are saying the atheists hijacked Darwinism for their own gain? I am no Darwin expert by any means, but all that I have read implies the nonexistence of God. That, all that exist is material. Also, I can't rule out perhaps I am reading with the preconceived notion that is Darwin's conjecture.
[/quote]
I think there are people with an atheistic philosophy who have to some extent recruited evolutionary theory in support of their worldview, but such activities are outside of the science of biology. These are philosophical and theological debates.

Perhaps evolution contradicts the erroneous theological views of some people, but according to the Church evolution and Catholicism are compatible.

Here is a quote from Pope Benedict that I wholeheartedly agree with.

"Currently, I see in Germany, but also in the United States, a somewhat fierce debate raging between so-called “creationism” and evolutionism, presented as though they were mutually exclusive alternatives: those who believe in the Creator would not be able to conceive of evolution, and those who instead support evolution would have to exclude God. This antithesis is absurd because, on the one hand, there are so many scientific proofs in favour of evolution which appears to be a reality we can see and which enriches our knowledge of life and being as such. But on the other, the doctrine of evolution does not answer every query, especially the great philosophical question: where does everything come from? And how did everything start which ultimately led to man? I believe this is of the utmost importance." (From [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2007/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20070724_clero-cadore_en.html"]this speech[/url] found via [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution"]this page[/url].)

I also like this B16 quote from the book [i]Creation and Evolution[/i].

"The theory of evolution does not invalidate the faith, nor does it corroborate it. But it does challenge the faith to understand itself more profoundly and thus to help man to understand himself and to become increasingly what he is: the being who is supposed to say Thou to God in eternity."

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340223600' post='2446811']
I think there are people with an atheistic philosophy who have to some extent recruited evolutionary theory in support of their worldview, but such activities are outside of the science of biology. These are philosophical and theological debates.

Perhaps evolution contradicts the erroneous theological views of some people, but according to the Church evolution and Catholicism are compatible.
[/quote]

Which is the only worldview that makes complete sense. Theology and biology are two different disciplines. Applying evolution or quantum physics to prove that there is no God validates Chesterton's theory that reason unbridled by faith leads to insanity. We see this with declarations that "God is dead" and athiests riding purple dinosaurs as Jesus. Nothing about the hidden mysteries of math or science in the universe will contradict our knowledge of who God is as God has revealed himself to us as the one who created the creation that we study. Christians have nothing to fear in scientific pursuits. When scientists try to become philosophers or theologians is when everything goes wrong. It is outside of their field of competency to draw conclusions in one discipline from the study of another with evidence from a third.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1340200777' post='2446677']
I don't see it as dangerous or sick, simply misguided. It is far easier to lead someone from the YEC to actual science than someone brought up without any religion or stuffed with atheistic leanings.
[/quote]
Before coming to PM I posted on some Mental illness forums. Even though they had a sub forum on spirituality, the mere mention of Christianity sent people including the admin/mods ballistic! Believe me, forced misinformation does the devils work in driving people away from faith.

[quote]Laudate Dominum----Atheists are a minority in this country. In many states it's against the law for atheists to hold public office. The last president of the United States apparently supported creationism. Several of the recent presidential candidates support creationism. Okay, so you don't understand or care about the impact of this problem, fine, but it's pretty pervasive. [/quote]
Atheists may be a minority but a lot of them are that way because of enforced misinformation. Apart from the regular posters there were often blow ins that would come in and vent about how they are being pummelled by religious views and who want to be just left alone. There is strong evidence that false religious teachings when obviously nonsense are being pounded into people that it deters them from faith. Here in Oz where religion isn't all that big it is far easier to convert atheists than those that have been brain washed into false beliefs.
[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1340210945' post='2446732']
[left]Evolution does not rules out God altogether, I believe. [/left]
[/quote]
I think the crux of the matter is that most people as an analogy would look at a computer and think what a marvellous machine! When in truth it is just following a series of dumb processes. The real intelligence is in the design and programming of those processes. Archaeological evidence tells us that throughout the earth's history, there has been successive evolutionary populations and mass extinctions of creatures. This is kind of overwhelming evidence for a process that works every time. The only question for me is, did God tinker with it to get humans? Or since time is inconsequential to him, did he just wait for the inevitable creation of us through his process?
[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340216499' post='2446759']


Anyway, I'm rambling...



Okay, now I'm definitely rambling. Peace.
[/quote]
I disagree!