Creationism: Is it New? Are creationists by default dishonest& ignorant in basic science?

[Revoltingest]

To me:

Honesty = Truth = Accuracy = Reality
Dishonest = Falsehood = Error = Inaccuracy = Not Reality
Lie = Falsehood = Incorrect Information
Truth = What is in Accord with Reality and Apparent and hopefully pretty Undeniable
Liars = Anyone spreading falsehood and inaccuracies or things not in accord with Reality

If I took those descriptions to heart, I'd be calling Democrats,
Republicans, socialists, & all religious people dishonest & liars.
And yet, many of them are sincere, with no intent to deceive.

 

[thomas t]

charlatans, frauds, deceivers.

No I'm not.

really a bunch of criminals

No, I'm not.

To say that "Jesus will save you, Jesus is God" is such a dangerous statement and lie and destructive thing, far more dangerous

It's not, I think.

they are also deceivers, liars,

No, I'm not.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

I'm not. I'm no liar.

In the view of other people, even if they don't admit it, a person who says things confidently as the truth, which others do not think are the truth and do not think can be true, is someone who is telling lies or spreading falsehood, and someone who is spreading falsehood or telling lies, even if they don't think those are lies (like a schizophrenic for example), is considered a Liar, a Lying Person, someone who Lies, someone telling Lies, A Liar, Dishonest, Untruthful, Not in Accord with the Truth, someone spreading falsehood, one who is deceiving (even not intentionally).

So it is like how some people say "I was taken under the Earth by a bunch of lizard people, there are lizard people under the Earth, they took me and they showed me radio devices that can mind control others, and they wanted me to join them, but I said no, so they transported me back to my bed". Now, most people would think these are not true things being talked about, that this person is basically telling lies, and that they may have even experienced such, but that such is not true, it is not real, it is not in accord with reality, it is false, falsehood, lies, there are no lizard people, etc.

More than that, Christians say things which they don't know, they say that the events of the Gospels are true, but they never saw these things themselves, and they say that it is true that to say Jesus is God and the Son of God will save them from their sins, and they say other things, which they don't know to be true or verified at all really, but they say it is the truth, and they insist upon it, while others do not consider this to be the truth at all, and thus they consider them (even if they don't admit to it) liars telling lies, spreading falsehood, misleading people, leading people to harm and error by their statements which are untruths that can never be true, and that to say things are so which you can't possibly know for certain are so, makes one a dishonest speaker, one who is untrustworthy, a person who says things that they don't know are true "are true" without knowing or being able to clearly demonstrate it as so, and so they are dishonest.

Christians, in the opinion of others, thus live a lie, they wake up lying, they go to sleep lying, their whole worldview is made up of lies, they are completely false in the view of others. Likewise, Christians believe everyone else is deceived by the "God of this World", because they think those who say God can not ever be incarnate as a man, Jesus, are the real liars.

So each thinks the other is a dishonest liar telling lies.

 

[thomas t]

someone who is telling lies or spreading falsehood, and someone who is spreading falsehood or telling lies, even if they don't think those are lies (like a schizophrenic for example), is considered a Liar, a Lying Person, someone who Lies, someone telling Lies, A Liar, Dishonest, Untruthful, Not in Accord with the Truth, someone spreading falsehood, one who is deceiving (even not intentionally).

this doesn't have anything to do with me. I don't tell lies and so on.
I believe God created the earth in a way it is written in the Bible that's all.

So it is like how some people say "I was taken under the Earth by a bunch of lizard people, there are lizard people under the Earth, they took me and they showed me radio devices that can mind control others, and they wanted me to join them, but I said no, so they transported me back to my bed"

I don't think it's a valid comparison.

and thus they consider them (even if they don't admit to it) liars telling lies, spreading falsehood, misleading people, leading people to harm and error by their statements

I don't, I don't say all Muslims are liars, for instance.

So each thinks the other is a dishonest liar telling lies.

I don't.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

No I'm not.

No, I'm not.

It's not, I think.
No, I'm not.

It is a dangerous statement if its not true, to make people lazy and complacent regarding their afterlife state, to say that saying that Jesus is the Son of God who Died for Your Sins will save you, if that is not true, then it is dangerous, because people will be made to think that is all or that is enough or that is good for them, and then they may find out that it was not so, and this may be one of the major errors that led to their miscalculation and destruction or failure.

Its absolutely dangerous, to say "jump, there will be a bridge that you will be fine walking over" and they jump, and there is no bridge, and they jump fall and are destroyed. This is why these kinds of things should not be trusted, they can't be trusted, it is unsafe to trust them or depend upon them, they can not be taken as the truth or in accord with reality in any verifiable way clearly, they can not thus be depended on, they are equal to any other statement made out of the blue like that and are equally as trustworthy as the lizard people under the Earth with the radio equipment, and believing in any of these things can lead people to make miscalculations in their life and conduct or beliefs and thoughts which may cost them dearly.

 

[firedragon]

Perhaps we can have a reasonable discussion. I was going to point out that the term "creationism" arose in the English language by those that believed the creation myths of Genesis. They themselves separated themselves from other Christians, and at that time most scientists in the western world were still Christians, by coming up with that term. Just because one believes in a creator is not enough to be a "creationist". The people that first refuted a literal interpretation of Genesis tended to be Christians themselves. Calling anyone that believes in a God a "creationist" dilutes the term to such an extent that if becomes worthless. Once again it arose because Christians themselves demonstrated a literal interpretation of Genesis to be wrong. And not just in evolution, but the Flood of Noah as well. In fact the Flood was refuted before the theory of evolution came along.

Creationism has nothing to do with the flood. The flood is a much later matter of theology. The flood is part of the creationists narrative, but that has nothing to do with creationism as a whole.

Creationism stems from a person believing that a divine intervention created. Refuting the flood has nothing to do with refuting creationism, and refuting creationism has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is not to refute creationism or anything else. The topic is elucidated in the OP.

The topic is not to discuss "the English term and its eruption". Its creationism as a whole and how misunderstood it is by those who paint it with that broad brush with many subjective interpretations and anecdotal understandings. Also, there was a guy called James Ussher who wrote on creationism extensively way back in the 17th century. Along with many others even prior to him. I dont agree with him, but that's not the point. Creationism is not that new.

Any subject should be studied at least a little bit. I dont know the whole history of creationism but it is easily deductible that even in the Atanatu theology it existed.

The broad brush of saying "creationism is the war against evolution" in other words is empirically wrong.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

this doesn't have anything to do with me. I don't tell lies and so on.
I believe God created the earth in a way it is written in the Bible that's all.

I don't think it's a valid comparison.

I don't, I don't say all Muslims are liars, for instance.

I don't.

If it is the truth that God is a Trinity, and Muslims say that God is not The Trinitarian concept of God, then the Muslims are the ones spreading the lies and untruth, even if you don't say it, they would still be the liars who are spreading lies.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

this doesn't have anything to do with me. I don't tell lies and so on.
I believe God created the earth in a way it is written in the Bible that's all.

I don't think it's a valid comparison.

I don't, I don't say all Muslims are liars, for instance.

I don't.

If you say "The Bible is the truth" and it is not actually the truth, then you would be telling a lie when you say "The Bible is the truth", but if you say "I believe what the Bible says, even the parts I can't confirm are true" then that is not at all a lie, that is a truth about your belief in the Bible and that you believe what it is saying is true. If what it is saying is not true, then it is the Bible that is lying, but not you that are lying when you speak about yourself and that you believe the Bible is true.

 

[firedragon]

A creationist cannot be honest and informed when it comes to evolution.

1. What about a creationist who propagates evolution? Is he still being dishonest?
2. How about a creationist who has misunderstood evolution. Mistaken. "Uneducated" from your point of view. Is he still "dishonest"?

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

If I took those descriptions to heart, I'd be calling Democrats,
Republicans, socialists, & all religious people dishonest & liars.
And yet, many of them are sincere, with no intent to deceive.

I call them all dishonest and liars, I know they are well intended on all sides, but many of them speak lies or untruths or inaccuracies which they even may believe and have the best intentions with, but if they tell lies, then I think that by definition anyone telling lies is a liar, so its more than likely we are all liars who have told lies one way or another at some point.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

More like about 140 years ago, but close enough.

creationism | Origin and meaning of creationism by Online Etymology Dictionary


Creationism is against evolution by definition, not by default.


I wouldn't say such people exist. Who are you talking about?


Nope. Most are sincere. Mistaken <> dishonest.


Yes.
Being an expert in one narrow discipline of science doesn't make a person an expert in anything outside that narrow discipline.

Having a PhD in theoretical physics doesn't necessarily mean that you know anything about evolutionary biology.

The pickle person often has good things to say.

 

[firedragon]

In the view of other people, even if they don't admit it, a person who says things confidently as the truth, which others do not think are the truth and do not think can be true, is someone who is telling lies or spreading falsehood, and someone who is spreading falsehood or telling lies, even if they don't think those are lies (like a schizophrenic for example), is considered a Liar, a Lying Person, someone who Lies, someone telling Lies, A Liar, Dishonest, Untruthful, Not in Accord with the Truth, someone spreading falsehood, one who is deceiving (even not intentionally).

So it is like how some people say "I was taken under the Earth by a bunch of lizard people, there are lizard people under the Earth, they took me and they showed me radio devices that can mind control others, and they wanted me to join them, but I said no, so they transported me back to my bed". Now, most people would think these are not true things being talked about, that this person is basically telling lies, and that they may have even experienced such, but that such is not true, it is not real, it is not in accord with reality, it is false, falsehood, lies, there are no lizard people, etc.

More than that, Christians say things which they don't know, they say that the events of the Gospels are true, but they never saw these things themselves, and they say that it is true that to say Jesus is God and the Son of God will save them from their sins, and they say other things, which they don't know to be true or verified at all really, but they say it is the truth, and they insist upon it, while others do not consider this to be the truth at all, and thus they consider them (even if they don't admit to it) liars telling lies, spreading falsehood, misleading people, leading people to harm and error by their statements which are untruths that can never be true, and that to say things are so which you can't possibly know for certain are so, makes one a dishonest speaker, one who is untrustworthy, a person who says things that they don't know are true "are true" without knowing or being able to clearly demonstrate it as so, and so they are dishonest.

Christians, in the opinion of others, thus live a lie, they wake up lying, they go to sleep lying, their whole worldview is made up of lies, they are completely false in the view of others. Likewise, Christians believe everyone else is deceived by the "God of this World", because they think those who say God can not ever be incarnate as a man, Jesus, are the real liars.

So each thinks the other is a dishonest liar telling lies.

Brother. With all due respect, you did not understand that calling all christians liars or/and dishonest simply because they are believing in a particular doctrine of divinity is absolutely a prejudiced statement.

There are many Christians who honestly believe, they are not lying. In your theological point of view they maybe wrong, so everyone wrong according to your theology are not dishonest. Some maybe dishonest, but generalising it to the whole 2.3 billion people in the world in itself is bigotry.

Hope you understand.

 

[thomas t]

If it is the truth that God is a Trinity, and Muslims say that God is not The Trinitarian concept of God, then the Muslims are the ones spreading the lies and untruth, even if you don't say it, they would still be the liars who are spreading lies.

here we diagree. I say I suppose the Christians got it right in this respect. They may be wrong at other instances.
That's all.

I don't think it's dangerous to call Jesus the savior. I think he saved me. Nothing dangerous about it, at all. I don't make people lazy or complacent. I suggest the Gospel, that's all. I don't say "don't do anything!". To the contrary.

Its absolutely dangerous, to say "jump, there will be a bridge that you will be fine walking over" and they jump, and there is no bridge, and they jump fall and are destroyed.

this doesn't have anything to do with the Bible, though, in my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

I call them all dishonest and liars, I know they are well intended on all sides, but many of them speak lies or untruths or inaccuracies which they even may believe and have the best intentions with, but if they tell lies, then I think that by definition anyone telling lies is a liar, so its more than likely we are all liars who have told lies one way or another at some point.

You are doing the same thing another person does by calling all creationists dishonest. If the whole world calls each other dishonest, this is worldwide prejudice. I cant believe this is not understandable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Creationism has nothing to do with the flood. The flood is a much later matter of theology. The flood is part of the creationists narrative, but that has nothing to do with creationism as a whole.

Creationism stems from a person believing that a divine intervention created. Refuting the flood has nothing to do with refuting creationism, and refuting creationism has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is not to refute creationism or anything else. The topic is elucidated in the OP.

The topic is not to discuss "the English term and its eruption". Its creationism as a whole and how misunderstood it is by those who paint it with that broad brush with many subjective interpretations and anecdotal understandings. Also, there was a guy called James Ussher who wrote on creationism extensively way back in the 17th century. Along with many others even prior to him. I dont agree with him, but that's not the point. Creationism is not that new.

Any subject should be studied at least a little bit. I dont know the whole history of creationism but it is easily deductible that even in the Atanatu theology it existed.

The broad brush of saying "creationism is the war against evolution" in other words is empirically wrong.

If you had read the articles that I posted earlier you would have seen that that is not the case. Early geologists disproved the Flood and that led to "creationism" arising before Darwin.

As to this detour have been a large part of it because of your misdefintion of "creationism". To understand what creationism is a bit of knowledge of English is necessary. If you speak another language I am sure that you are familiar with some terms that foreigners often get wrong because they take a word too literally.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are doing the same thing another person does by calling all creationists dishonest. If the whole world calls each other dishonest, this is worldwide prejudice. I cant believe this is not understandable.

Actually I have not claimed that all of them are dishonest. Once again you are incorrectly negating the phrase "There is no such thing as an honest and informed creationist".

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

here we diagree. I say I suppose the Christians got it right in this respect. They may be wrong at ohter instances.
That's all.

I dont think it's dangerous to call Jesus the savior. I think he saved me. Nothing dangerous about it, at all. I don't make people lazy or complacent. I suggest the Gospel, that's all. I don't say "dont do anything!". To the contrary.

this doesn't have anything to do with the Bible, though, in my opinion.

The danger is if you'll be thrown in hell or punished for saying that Jesus is God or Jesus is the Son of God or Jesus is your savior who will save you from God's Judgment or the false things spoken or believed such as "Jesus is God, God born through Mary" etc etc. Things that are common statements and affirmations in mainstream Christianity. Its totally dangerous by the standards of other religions mostly, because it isn't true at all according to them.

If you don't say that anything is for certain which you can't confirm, but say you just believe in some stuff, then you're only speaking honestly about your own beliefs, that is different from the people who say "Jesus Loves You" or "You will go to Heaven" or anything like that, which may even be true, but can't be verified by them or anyone, and so they may also be lying, and in the opinion of others (probably most others) are indeed making up things and telling lies, and spreading falsehood.

The danger is telling people to put their faith in something that might not be there to do what is claimed, and not even giving a strong reasoning for believing in such or a strategy for it which appears sound or well calculated.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Actually I have not claimed that all of them are dishonest. Once again you are incorrectly negating the phrase "There is no such thing as an honest and informed creationist".

Yeah, I'm the one going all out on this "dishonesty" thing. I may be the only one really going full force on that aspect.

 

[firedragon]

Actually I have not claimed that all of them are dishonest. Once again you are incorrectly negating the phrase "There is no such thing as an honest and informed creationist".

Who said its you mate? I was talking to someone else.

 

[firedragon]

If you had read the articles that I posted earlier you would have seen that that is not the case. Early geologists disproved the Flood and that led to "creationism" arising before Darwin.

Not relevant.

As to this detour have been a large part of it because of your misdefintion of "creationism". To understand what creationism is a bit of knowledge of English is necessary. If you speak another language I am sure that you are familiar with some terms that foreigners often get wrong because they take a word too literally.

Ad hominem.