Why are people afraid of creationism?

[Neuropteron]

Definition of creationism:

"creationism, the belief that the universe and the various forms of life were created by God out of nothing (ex nihilo)."
QUOTE]

Hi,

The definition that creationism offer might might be possible since God is almighty, but the bible offers a more reasonable explanation for how the universe was created.

One of God's main attribute is energy. We know that energy can be converted into matter.
It stands to reason that instead of stating that "God created the universe out of nothing" -a theory that contradicts physical laws-, we could reasonably hypothesize along a biblical line that God used his "energy/power" to create the material universe.
(Rev 1:20)
It is illogical beliefs such as the one proposed by creationism that lead rational thinking people to reject belief in a creator.

 

[Clara Tea]

Why are people afraid of creationism?

Creationists want to teach creationism in school. This violates the separation of church and state. Creationists argue that teaching evolution is a religion, and that, too, violates the separation of church and state. Evolutionists believe that it is science, not religion.

In the dark ages, scientists were tortured to death and forced to recant or forced to agree with the church. Books were burned, and many were considered sinful or frivolous. Reverend Savonarolla's Bonfire of the Vanities burned books. This kept the world ignorant for hundreds of years.

Science, which just almost cured COVID, works. Notice that the Vatican restricted travel, not trusting that God would keep them safe. They had more faith in common sense measures than in God.

Creationists took over politics and voted in Republicans (Reagan and Bush Sr.....Iran Contra scandal). Reagan (as governor of California) ordered the National Guard to beat Berkeley students over the heads with billy clubs if they protested the war in Vietnam. (Bush Jr....wars and torture camp, environmental damage and greed--lower taxes for the rich). This is partly the reason that people fear creationists today. It is not because they object to the kindnesses of Christianity, it is because they don't feel that Christians follow Christ. "Thou shalt not kill" yet there is war.

 

[Clara Tea]

I guess we've had different experiences then. Most creationists I've interacted with insist that their position is science-based, rather than religion-based. Just look at the Jehovah's Witnesses here; every one of them swears up and down that it's all about the science for them and they get rather upset if you suggest that just maybe, their religion is a factor.

I've always had the view that if a creationist tells me their position is based in their religious beliefs, then my response is to basically not debate them and tell them I'm fine with them believing whatever they want. As long as they're not bashing science or trying to affect science education, I generally don't care what someone believes.

Most theists here are not scientists, and their arguments (presumably based on science) don't seem valid to real scientists.

However, there are some very famous scientists who, nonetheless, remain theists.

Many theists are awestruck by the complexity of life. Thus, you might see a lot of doctors who insist that there must be a God intelligently designing life.

My mom's cardiologist said that in his 50 years of practice he has seen a lot of out of body experiences of people whose hearts stopped. He says that they recounted in full detail, conversations in other rooms of the hospital that they could not possibly have heard as they claim that their spirit roamed the halls. Highly educated, not brought up religious, yet, with no other way to explain events, he turned to religion.

 

[sealchan]

Definition of creationism:

"creationism, the belief that the universe and the various forms of life were created by God out of nothing (ex nihilo)."
creationism | Definitions, History, & Facts

[kind of dubious that the article goes on to say, "It is a response primarily to modern evolutionary theory," since the idea of creationism was definitely there before the evolution theory.]

So we're not talking about biblical view to creationism alone.

I, as a Muslim, believe in science (in the sense that I acknowledge what has been achieved and found by it and that it is useful to study) and I don't deny much of the evolutionary theory, nor do I confirm it. I don't think it's important. The main thing about it that Muslims object to is the creation of man and that he supposedly evolved from the ancestors of monkeys. So there's plenty of room for science.

But there doesn't seem to be room for creationism anywhere according to some atheists and even some hypocritical believers.

What is the harm in it being said that God created everything? The children are going to hear it anyway.

In my opinion it is nothing but one of the many tactics used to attempt to annihilate religion, belief, and righteousness.

Creationism often hangs out with literalism and there is plenty to be afraid of when literalists carry political power. Divorced as they tend to be from a propercredpect for science.

 

[danieldemol]

One of God's main attribute is energy. We know that energy can be converted into matter.
It stands to reason that instead of stating that "God created the universe out of nothing" -a theory that contradicts physical laws-, we could reasonably hypothesize along a biblical line that God used his "energy/power" to create the material universe.

Energy and power are different.
Power is the amount of energy transferred or converted per unit of time.

If energy always existed why does one need a God to convert it at all since it appears to convert naturally?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Again, my own personal impression is that most internet ant creationists/athaists (including you) are anticreationists/athaeists because they *feel * that Smart people are atheist/anticreationists.

I can only inform you that you are wrong.

I honestly and sincerely don’t think that you looked at the evidence objectively from both sides and decided “anti-creation” over creationism as a result of an honest and objective inquiry.

I can again only inform you that you are wrong.

that my own personal opinion and my own personal guess...............from past conversations its obvious that you dont understand the theist arguments and that you are not making an honest effort in trying to understand them

I understand the arguments very well.
The problem is that you don't mind using logical fallacies and don't particularly care when you are shown to be incorrect.

I can't even count the amount of times that people corrected your strawmen and fallacious nonsense, only to see you repeat the same exposed nonsense a couple posts / days later.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I guess we've had different experiences then. Most creationists I've interacted with insist that their position is science-based, rather than religion-based. Just look at the Jehovah's Witnesses here; every one of them swears up and down that it's all about the science for them and they get rather upset if you suggest that just maybe, their religion is a factor.

I've always had the view that if a creationist tells me their position is based in their religious beliefs, then my response is to basically not debate them and tell them I'm fine with them believing whatever they want. As long as they're not bashing science or trying to affect science education, I generally don't care what someone believes.

Indeed. Personally, I haven't ever met a creationist (including on this site) who simply states his / her beliefs are 100% bible based, while acknowledging that the science of biology draws a different picture.

No. Every single one of them will argue against the science of evolution, claiming that it is not proper science and thereby thus implying (or literally stating) that their opposition to evolution is science-based.

At best, I've seen creationists state both. That they 1. follow the bible and 2. argue against evolution from a supposed scientific point of view.


I also notice that the extreme vast majority of creationists who argue against evolution, don't know the first thing about it.

The most common hint for that, is that they'll say that "we never see species changing kinds" in the sense of dogs evolving into cats or alike. Or they'll say silly things like "finches are still birds!!!!" as if that is an argument against evolution.

They'll imply that if they would see finches evolve into non-birds, then that's when they will consider evolution to be accurate. Ironically, if we would see such a thing, evolution theory would actually be disproven.

This is the level of ignorance of your average creationist....
The evidence they demand to see in support of evolution, is actually evidence that would disprove it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Highly educated, not brought up religious, yet, with no other way to explain events, he turned to religion.

So really, a classic textbook case of argument from ignorance.

 

[Shakeel]

Creationists want to teach creationism in school.

I'm not sure I do. I haven't really thought about it. This isn't about me wanting it to be taught in school since if it was it would be biblical and I don't want that. This is rather about the principle behind opposing it.

This violates the separation of church and state

There should be no seperation between the church and the state of a country if it was to be genuinely Christian. This is just another example of hypocrisy.

One is either a Christian or is not a Christian.

Creationists argue that teaching evolution is a religion

Who are these people?

Notice that the Vatican restricted travel, not trusting that God would keep them safe.

Do they look to the left and right before crossing the road too?!

 

[Shakeel]

@Neuropteron
How do you know energy is God's attribute? You are proposing God didn't create from nothing, but from something. If God needs something to create from then He is needy. Who created the energy? Or do you suggest God created from a portion of Himself?

 

[Shakeel]

because we understand that anyone who refuses to accept the reality of one thing, can just as easily refuse to accept the reality of anything they don't like.

That implies religious people are less intelligent or are more inclined to illogical thinking. But there is no proof for that in your psychological studies, is there?

Which came first, the chicken or he egg? Genesis 1 is chicken first view, Genesis 2 is egg first view. Presenting both views back to back suggests to me the author didn't know which view was correct, only that God was responsible for creation however it happened. Science certainly can't answer the question as to which came first, but that is the point of the text I think.

You would have to ask those aquinted with the evolution theory at which point did the chickens become true chickens.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There should be no seperation between the church and the state of a country if it was to be genuinely Christian.

Secular democracies aren't "genuinely christian". Instead, they are "genuinely secular".

Who are these people?

Creationists. There are plenty of them on this very forum.

 

[Shakeel]

Actually, science has answered this question. Since chickens evolved from egg-laying animals, the egg must have preceded the bird.

The bird must have resembled what was in the egg. Or did a dinosaur lay the first chicken?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Who created the energy?

Loaded question.
1. it assumes energy required being created
2. it assumes it required a "who" to do it

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That implies religious people are less intelligent or are more inclined to illogical thinking

Well, religious people are more inclined to illogical thinking.
As for intelligence, that is not the case.

It is however true that the higher one is educated, the least likely one is to be (or remain) religious.
But educated and intelligent, aren't synonyms.

It's perfectly possible to be extremely intelligent, yet uneducated.
Or vice versa.

But there is no proof for that in your psychological studies, is there?

One doesn't require proof / evidence for claims one isn't even making.

You would have to ask those aquinted with the evolution theory at which point did the chickens become true chickens.

At no point. Evolution is a gradual process. There is no "first chicken". In exactly the same way as there is no "first french speaker".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The bird must have resembled what was in the egg. Or did a dinosaur lay the first chicken?

Again, there is no "first" chicken.
Gradual processes don't work like that.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Definition of creationism:

"creationism, the belief that the universe and the various forms of life were created by God out of nothing (ex nihilo)."
creationism | Definitions, History, & Facts

[kind of dubious that the article goes on to say, "It is a response primarily to modern evolutionary theory," since the idea of creationism was definitely there before the evolution theory.]

So we're not talking about biblical view to creationism alone.

I, as a Muslim, believe in science (in the sense that I acknowledge what has been achieved and found by it and that it is useful to study) and I don't deny much of the evolutionary theory, nor do I confirm it. I don't think it's important. The main thing about it that Muslims object to is the creation of man and that he supposedly evolved from the ancestors of monkeys. So there's plenty of room for science.

But there doesn't seem to be room for creationism anywhere according to some atheists and even some hypocritical believers.

What is the harm in it being said that God created everything? The children are going to hear it anyway.

In my opinion it is nothing but one of the many tactics used to attempt to annihilate religion, belief, and righteousness.

You being a Muslim and me being a Christian we do have some common ground that we believe in..

In the Bible it's written in
1 Timothy 6:19-21,
19--"Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen"

What this means is.
Science is good as long as stays within the boundaries of what science is to be.
Once science over steps it's boundaries, then it becomes false science..
Which some in science have erred from the faith that was once delivered unto them..

God ( Allah) is the Supreme being of all things created in heaven and Earth.
It's when science over steps it's boundaries.then it becomes false science.

To further add, this where science over steps it's boundaries, by saying man came from monkeys,
Allah ( God) created man in his own image after his own likeness....
There's nothing impossible with
God ( Allah) for all things are possible with
Allah ( God)....

 

[Mock Turtle]

That implies religious people are less intelligent or are more inclined to illogical thinking. But there is no proof for that in your psychological studies, is there?

Perhaps both, but probably more the latter?

https://phys.org/news/2016-03-conflict-science-religion-lies-brains.html

To believe in a supernatural god or universal spirit, people appear to suppress the brain network used for analytical thinking and engage the empathetic network, the scientists say. When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite. "When there's a question of faith, from the analytic point of view, it may seem absurd," said Tony Jack, who led the research. "But, from what we understand about the brain, the leap of faith to belief in the supernatural amounts to pushing aside the critical/analytical way of thinking to help us achieve greater social and emotional insight." Jack is an associate professor of philosophy at Case Western Reserve and research director of the university's Inamori International Center of Ethics and Excellence, which helped sponsor the research. "A stream of research in cognitive psychology has shown and claims that people who have faith (i.e., are religious or spiritual) are not as smart as others. They actually might claim they are less intelligent.," said Richard Boyatzis, distinguished university professor and professor of organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve, and a member of Jack's team. "Our studies confirmed that statistical relationship, but at the same time showed that people with faith are more prosocial and empathic," he said. In a series of eight experiments, the researchers found the more empathetic the person, the more likely he or she is religious.

 

[Viker]

I'm not afraid of creationism. I'm more afraid of the murder of science and reason.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You being a Muslim and me being a Christian we do have some common ground that we believe in..

In the Bible it's written in
1 Timothy 6:19-21,
19--"Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen"

What this means is.
Science is good as long as stays within the boundaries of what science is to be.
Once science over steps it's boundaries, then it becomes false science..
Which some in science have erred from the faith that was once delivered unto them..

God ( Allah) is the Supreme being of all things created in heaven and Earth.
It's when science over steps it's boundaries.then it becomes false science.

To further add, this where science over steps it's boundaries, by saying man came from monkeys,
Allah ( God) created man in his own image after his own likeness....
There's nothing impossible with
God ( Allah) for all things are possible with
Allah ( God)....

So what do you think are those boundaries and why?