Christian Theist challenging Creationists

I put this in free for all because this is something a little different, so here it goes:I haven't written on here in a long time because it's been revealed to me through a number of circumstances in the past few months that spirituality isn't something that you can debate for or against scientifically, and yet it's not JUST something you 'feel in your soul', either.This is not a slap in the face toward scientists doing their thing, it's just that you can't disprove something outside the laws of space and time with methods that require repeatability within these laws. Somebody (I think it was Adminasgara) pointed out that asking someone to outright disprove omnipotent existence was like disproving an intangible purple monkey in our cerebral cortex, in other words you can't prove a negative. I agree. ON THE OTHER HAND, I've got a little something to say to Creationists (Not Christian theists, there's a difference)Just as God can't be disproven by these means, you can't prove His existence to people who wish to use these means to help them understand the reality we live in. Apologetics can be fun for both sides if you keep your cool, but that's the problem with it: Creationists are supposed to be trying to 'convert' their opponents, basically. Now, say a Creationist pulls a wildcard fact that just blows away the competing Evolutionist. THAT WONT MAKE ANYBODY SEE THE LIGHT, JUNIOR! What it will in fact do is make them think 'That was a good point, gotta research and beat it'. It'll just make them rally stronger against it, which is exactly what you do when someone gains ground on you in a debate. It's neither side's fault, but conversion in my experience(including my own) has nothing to do with evidence, but of mercy and kindness and all that stuff that people think is nowhere to be found. Kindness can surprise and change people, but cold hard evidence won't.IN SUMMARY (I know I ramble way too much)I challenge any Creationists who honestly believe they can show people the Light through evidence and debate as opposed to the love and charity that is undeniable fading from this world to prove their efforts legit. Keep in mind that just proving the Bible's accuracy would still leave us believing in nothing but a history book. JUST BRING IT

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

I think one of the things that creos really need to remember is that even if evolution is shown to be false it doesn't mean creationism is right.

High five.

I understand your point and I agree wholeheartedly, but I seriously doubt that it is even possible that the core principles of the theory of evolution might one day be disproved. That'd be no more likely than seeing the core principles of the theory of gravity disproved, or the core principles of germ theory disproved. It just ain't gonna happen.Of course, scientific assumptions and hypotheses based on these theories are routinely disproved, but the theories still hold. By all indications these theories will hold forever, or at least so long as the universe exists.The theory of creation has absolutely no evidence to support it, save for ancient scripture which, if it can even be called evidence which I don't think it can, would have to be the flimsiest evidence imaginable. Like Born2Preach seems to say, the only way to understand God is through faith. Attempts to prove the innerancy of scripture will always fail because there's no evidence except for the scripture. I don't know if B2P would go so far as to agree with me here, but I think that the creos should drop the inerrancy thing, accept what science teaches as fact and get back to promoting faith.Saying evolution is impossible because it conflicts with the precise text of a book written thousands of years ago by marginally civilized men is just as absurd as saying that germ theory is impossible because Jesus could heal people just by touching them.Probably the only reason these idiots don't challenge germ theory is because even those of the meanest intelligence can look into a microscope. It's much more difficult to understand the theory of evolution, and therefore simple-minded people can be much more easily duped.

"Probably the only reason these idiots don't challenge germ theory is because even those of the meanest intelligence can look into a microscope. It's much more difficult to understand the theory of evolution, and therefore simple-minded people can be much more easily duped. "Hey, I'm here to debate them and maybe make fun of them, but they're not idiots or simple-minded just because they take their faith and try to prove its merit using the wrong system. I'm not going to say your position regarding them is any more or less authoritive than mine because I don't know you, but... please try to take it easy on them. For some of them, they may be hanging onto the faith they rest their souls upon by a thread. I may not be a Creationist, but I'm still a Christian by more than the textbook definition of the word and I feel for them... even though I might be a smartass to them on this board.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

Born2Preach says:

quote:

---

Hey, I'm here to debate them and maybe make fun of them, but they're not idiots or simple-minded just because they take their faith and try to prove its merit using the wrong system.

---

Sorry if my words sound harsh, but you must understand two things about me: I was born and reared in the Deep South and I'm gay. I've been condemned my more fundies than I could ever possibly count. I don't much care what they think of me and I doubt they care what I think of them.I realize that there is such a thing as an intelligent Christian, but anyone who thinks that an ancient text written by barbarous men is somehow inerrant is an idiot in my opinion. An idiot can be a person of no intelligence or it can be a person of undeveloped intelligence. I think most idiots belong in the latter catagory and therefore there is hope for them. But at least for now they're idiots nonetheless.EDIT: On second thought, I suppose it's unfair of me to use the word 'idiot' and possibly carry this discussion to a place you didn't intend to go. Therefore I will refrain from using that or similar words. I'm sorry if I offended you.[This message has been edited by berberry, 03-13-2004]