I need to define some terms for the purposes of this thread:
Christian = One who believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ.
Creationist = One who believe that the universe is the product of creation from a higher power.
Biblical/Genesis Creationist = One who believe that the creation story as it is told in the book of Genesis is literally true. Not to be confused with Creationists.
Atheist = One who believe there is no god.
Evolutionist = One who accept the Theory of Evolution.
I had some reservations at first about starting this topic but I was feeling that this needed to be said. (or re-said)
Below are quotes from some of our most vocal self proclaimed Biblical Creationists both active and not. I did a casual survey of the archives after reading some of the things being said in the
Who's Held To Higher Standards at EvC thread because I got really tired of reading this implied connection with atheism, religion, and evolution.
Maestro232 writes:
And the reason I do is because I am fairly convinced that they are enslaved by science in such a way that it has become a god to them; a very, very narrow god. And, I don't think that god will let them think outside its box. It is the nature of enslavement to the natural.
mike the wiz writes:
Even if it doesn't meet the "scientific method" we need to show that that is not necessarily important, because we don't put science on a pedestal and worship it like others do.
mike the wiz writes:
Exactly. All the evidence you look at is atheist. You support atheists. I won't judge you - but blimey Jar - you seem to be heavily in favour of atheism.
mike the wiz writes:
It just seems to me, that you seldom post a defense of theism. You say we blow smoke - like you almost consider yourself an atheist.
mike the wiz writes:
I'm not particularly a fan of this site anymore to be honest Jar. More opinions fly around rather than true objective endeavours, as can be seen with atheists in my objective Hypothesis of consciousness. The Bootcamp is an example of the power hungry Adminites that want to rule over any creationist fish that wanders up the stream, hence this farsicle approach to confining anyone whos opinion wanders from the mainstream atheist/evo train of thought. Thus this site is dead to activity it seems. I like a few people here but they're still heavily opinionated and think they aren't sinners, and that there's no God, which is obviously a wrongful mindset.
mike the wiz writes:
So, I'm not ignorant - I've seen the picture and I still am for God, as evolution supports mindless Godless chance deludants and random silliness. Therefore I cut myself off from this Godless theory which atheist's love as it supports their negative, which is unacceptable as you then convince yourselves you are sinless and don't answer to God. I urge you to all stop this confusion.
d_yankee writes:
Creation is not only obvious...which is why you atheist find yourselves saying things like "creation" and "created" so often without even noticing it. LOL!!! But Creationism and the Bible has, not everchanging assumptions, like evolution does...but obvious scientific and historic explanations to everything that scientists have discovered.
JAD writes:
As usual you completely misunderstand. I am delighted with your "Groupthink." It is the best evidence imaginable for the failure of the atheist, chance worshipping, neoDarwinian foolishness. It is the only reason I bother with any of you. EvC has proven to be very instructive.
WILLOWTREE writes:
Welcome to the atheist indoctrination camp for christians.
JAD writes:
EvC is nothing but a homogeneous collection of atheist Darwinian mystics who, never having had an original idea of their own, find it necessary to inflate their egos with arrogant pontifications and personal degradation of anyone, creationist or theist or dissenter of any other any stripe, who had the ordinary common sense to realize the total failure of the neoDarwinian fairy tale.
WILLOWTREE writes:
The three great atheist liars who could not tolerate the truth about evo dating nonsense.
...
Percy, Ned, and Jar are the most stereotypical God-hating/and/or lip service to God evos one could point to.
WILLOWTREE writes:
All of you atheo-evos are enraged and beside yourself. This is why you shifted the debate to a Forum you knew I would not participate in. You get to comfort yourself with the appearance of continuing while knowing the floor wiping will not continue. Fear of the truth and good old fashion atheist dishonesty has insulated yourselves from my irrefutable evidence.
Servant2thecause writes:
Honestly, neither Biblical creationism nor Darwinian evolutionism can be proven by science ("Science" = knowledge through demonstrated evidence and observation). Therefore, if any evolutionist, atheist, or otherwise anti-creationist has an ounce of honesty and integrity, he would freely admit that BOTH viewpoints have to be taken by faith.
6days writes:
That many people are religious who believe in evolution is certainly true, but I deny that they are mature Christians, if believer*s in Jesus Christ at all. The new-born believer can be swayed by evolution, etc, but a person in whom the Holy Spirit is actually residing will not be able to deny the Bible for long without internal opposition from God
peter borger writes:
The atheistic religion is called evolutionism. As mentioned "There are many good reasons to be an atheist, but the theory of evolution is not one of them.
peter borger writes:
Apparently you didn*t understand the above sentence. It means that since evolutionism can be demonstrated to be false, atheists do not have a religion anymore.
whatever writes:
I feel TOE is just a small part of the religion of secular humanism, to increase their following however they are using the state to place their godless religion over and above the other religions of the world, how is this fair to buddhists that too are a godless based religion.
P.S. Is not buddaisms more of a philosophy of self, than a belief in a god, yet this sect according to Thomas Jefferson was to be extended separation protection from the state, truely the athiest too are a godless based religion / sect, its called secular humanisms. If the buddists is not to be empowered by the government, then neither should the atheistic religion and their dogma side shoots dogma's be given government sanction powers to preach for more converts using state moneys, using the federal public school system to the gaining of converts, into their godless based belief in respect to origin, etc...
jazzlover_PR writes:
If you dont want to talk about God in schools well thats fine but the problem that i see is that your "well supported and robust scientific theory" is a religion of its own.
Jet writes:
I would not care to believe in such a world of lawlessness where there is no true consequence of action. That is why I must ultimately reject and totally deny any acceptance of such an inhumane concept as the theory of evolution. Perhaps it is the way I was raised, though I seriously doubt that is the reason I feel this way. In fact, despite my upbringing, I have far too much empathy in my being to ever pay homage to such a barbaric concept as the Godless theory of evolution. There is a reason some people refer to this concept as "EVILUTION"!
whatever writes:
TOE should be banned based on the separation freedom violations of the government supporting the atheists religion and their dogma of the origin of life, in respect to the Bill of Right.
Syamsu writes:
My argument that evolutionists have historically suppressed scientific, common, and religious knowledge of creation, and that this suppression facillitates their promotion of atheism / materialism / social darwinism, is as far as I can tell the only credible alternative to saying the creation vs evolution controversy is about religion repudiating anything contrary to it's teachings.
Robert Byers writes:
The reason evolutionists don't want evolution questioned or discussed in schools is because they have a higher agenda of fighting Christianity and its influence in society. They are still in combat with the Protestant origins of the country.
Jasonb writes:
So let me define terms. I define an evolutionist as someone who does not believe in a Creator and accepts the theories of evolution as to the origin of life.
Syamsu writes:
The prejudice to have natural selection as the fundament is sustained because evolution tends to deny creation by God, and the moral sort of language gives Darwinists a substitute pseudoscientific religion. It is sustained by atheism and scientism, rather then scientific merit.
DarkStar writes:
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
...
Definition #3 could be perceived by some to apply to Darwin as the spiritual leader of all those who are adherents of the theory of evolution.
funkman writes:
The Bible teaches that there is no way to get to heaven apart from faith in the salvation work of Christ on the cross. Evolution undermines that. So if the pope believes in evolution, he has undermined the cross of Christ and is not a Christian.
Now I know that some of these are older but unfortunatly the sentiment is being repeated today. For these people there seems to be an automatic equivalence relationship between Evolutionists and Atheists or Evolution and Religion that I feel is a massive barrier to productive discussion in the larger EvC arena. Also, born from this equivalence there is this concept of Science vs Religion as if the two concepts were diametrically opposed.
There are stakes to all of this or else there would be no controversy. The stakes are education and how we choose, as a society, to educate our children. Certainly there are also stakes for those who make this automatic connection between Evolution and Atheism for the salvation of those who they feel are in this combined group. In order to further both rational discussion about education and a possible atmosphere for sharing religion in a positive way I feel we need to identify and destroy these ridiculous equivalencies. I hope that if/when ever this barrier is broken down that people will generally realize that science and religion are discrete things such that when you mix them you only get poor science and worse religion.
You can be both an Atheist and an Evolutionist.
You can be both a Creationist and an Evolutionist.
You can be a Christian, a Creationist, and an Evolutionist.
You can be both a Christian and a Biblical/Genesis Creationist.
All of which are valid positions to take based on faith, reason, authority, or however else you come to decisions in your life about what you believe is true.
I would prefer not to get bogged down on the "is atheism a religion" path because I am beginning to think that you can flounder around with evidence that pretty much anything is a religion. Watching too much reality TV could be a religion based on a lot of the arguments I have seen for what is and what is not a religion.
I want to focus a discussion on why some Biblical Creationists feel the need to make this assumption that Evolution = Atheism, why to some is being a Christian Evolutionist invalid, and what this has anything to do with what is at stake for the EvC debate.
This should probably go in the Misc Topics in EvC.
™ Version 4.2