So, as I'm sitting here writing a paper on court cases between evolution and Creation, I find myself pondering this topic. There are some reasons I could come up with, but they don't seem to explain the pure contention that some advocates of Creation have for evolution. We have records of design proponents purposely misguiding and lying under oath just to try to get their way in the court room. Why go so far? Why is evolution so threatening?

Note: I don't really want to get in the whole evolution vs. design debate itself. Let's just discuss the core motivations behind the debates.

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde

I think it is because evolution can call on facts and evidence, but when it comes to creation you have no facts but only your belief/faith .

Since creation is based on belief and faith i think that they see evolution as evil because it can put doubt into peoples minds, the worst thing for people with a belief and faith is doubt in what there following.

but hay that is just what i think

__________________
Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience

Because creation has been presented as fact by most churches for hundreds of years. If any church doctrine is proved wrong, it will lead to other doctrines with flaws to be questioned.

__________________


"What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist..."- The last words of General John Sedgewick, killed by a sniper in the American civil war

I don't see much this being too much of an issue. I mean, people still believe that God put fossils in the ground to "test our faith." They will find an explanation for how it all works together or why it was stated in the way it was.

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde

There's two types of religious stances that I've witnessed when it comes to evolution vs creation;

1.) The person recognizes and accepts the scientific truths of evolution. They form their spiritual beliefs around the scientific facts, "evolution = design, God works in mysterious ways", usually even stating that something as complex as evolution couldn't exist by happenstance. This does, however, cause them to reject parts of the bible, so it might lead them to question what merit religion has in its entirety. But, more often than not, it seems like these people see evolution as evidence of God's workings.

2.) The person rejects evolution because the bible is obviously 100% truefax, and anything that says otherwise is the devil. These are usually the extremists who also feel the need to speak out against anything that goes against the bible; The "loud minority". These would be the people who think fossils are a test of faith by God/The Devil, or who cling to the idea that carbon dating is an imperfect science which should have factual leeway of hundreds of thousands of years.

Christianity does not necessarily mean you're a creationist, and plenty of scientists have been religious on some level. Try again.

__________________

Nobody claimed anything different.

If you're going to look for a reason to be defensive, there are plenty of other areas on the web that are completely dedicated to Christian bashing. Go post there.

Topic title > Christianity.
Topic content > Creationism.

__________________

Religion does not necessarily mean you're a creationist, but plenty of Christians have been creationists on some level. Try again.

Because that's what OP was arguing. Try again.

__________________

This issue is only threatening to those who presume to know everything of their (frankly unknowable) god, and only then to individuals who perceive others to be presuming to know everything about existence.

I'm certain there's also some cultural issues involved, of which I can say I've been happily ignorant. Apparently this rather fervent creation/evolution debate is largely endemic to the United States (at least in the context of Western Society), and I was largely unaware of its length and breadth until prompted by a recent episode of QI no less. Thus I would assume that this is a subjective cultural issue that possibly stems from something other than this idea that there is no reconciliation between religion and science. I, personally, can simply hand-wave the whole mess as nothing but simple politicking for want of something more productive to worry about. I have little doubt that the entire issue has probably been blown so hideously out of proportion on both sides that people are probably engaging in some cultural turf war that at the end of the day is ultimately meaningless and ineffectual, as it would be nothing other than a contest of belief, and thus unable to be brought to terms. Such is the demon of social politics.

Or, if you want a more concise response: Does it really matter?

__________________

Imagine a perfect beach
Without a mermaid
Imagine a perfect hideaway
Without a time
Imagine a perfect Eden
Without a friend, without a serpent
"Feeling lonely and content at the same time,
I believe, is a rare kind of happiness"

Ok i am gona say this once, i don't mind people swearing so long as its not directed at other members also.

DO NOT INSULT OTHER PEOPLE

so please stay on topic and Debate

__________________
Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience

Perhaps we should all just stop paying attention to the problem. It might just 'go away'. ;D!?

__________________




and this is me testing fun stuff.

I think you have it backwards. Christianity doesn't mean you're a creationist.

But I am assuming that creationists are a subset of Christianity. I mean, I guess there's other creation stories from other religions. But I'm not talking about those guys. And I don't think it's assumed that I'm talking about them either.

Many creationists will argue vehemently against theological evolutionists and claim that evolution in and of itself is toxic to the religion. That's why both Christianity and creation were used.

I am more than happy to address the issue you had with my wording of the topic, and I apologize for my vagueness. But could you please actually contribute to this instead of acting like a big troll?

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde

I feel if you logically think about 'creationism,' its overly absurd. Hard to believe people see no fault in it.

I read that people who are big on religion have brain issues later on down the road. Here's an article that I (admittedly) just read that supported what I thought I'd heard somewhere else.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... t-of-brain

Stress from striving to meet the standards of your religion or just living in areas where your religion is a minority (muslims in america?) releases hormones that results in 'hippocampal atrophy'. :3

Found it to be an interesting article. >.> The Hippocampus controls memory (mostly encoding for longterm), emotions, and spatial cognition.

I'd figure this isn't entirely off topic, because if you consider the possible effects of atrophy on the hippocampus.. short-term memory or only distant memories, stifled fear response, etc.. it'd make sense people would start fearing anything beyond their faith.

__________________




and this is me testing fun stuff.

Christianity's hate of science isn't limited to evolution. In the Dark Ages, the church was responsible for much of the oppression of science that occurred. I think Kiaba and Goten are right; faith is what people substitute for a lack of knowledge, and science provides knowledge to fill those gaps and expel faith. People used the have faith that lepers were suffering punishment from God, while science has now proved that leprosy is just another disease caused by microbes. It basically comes down to the fact that God's existence has no proof, and science has all the proof int he world.
As for evolution, specifically, Christianity can't seem to accept that it does not belong in education. Even now, the NAR and other extremist Cristian groups speak of re-achieving "dominion" over education. The field in which the theory of evolution resides is of a rare type, one in which there is basically one sole theory with a small number of permutations. Among the scientific community, the theory of evolution is unchallenged, and evolution very directly contradicts the Bible. Christianity is trying to open up a new front where they hope to gain some ground, but scientific fact has stalled them again and again. Basically, Christianity hates the fact that kids are being taught scientific, empirical facts that unequivocally show major parts of the book of Genesis to be in major error.

__________________
Tahu 1000 - Former Member

I think evolution is threatening to Christianity because, as Kiaba put it, evolution is devised by scientific fact. It breaks those who believe in creationism because creationism is based solely on belief that God created the earth. However, there are some creationists who like to try to blend both evolution and creation together, to try to make sense of it all. It is also true that not all Christians are necessarily creationists. I think Goten put it quite well too!

__________________

I would think it's mainly threatening to fundamentalists, that is, the people who fit under 2) of Goten's post.

__________________
Guild Wars 2

~ Kudzu, Dreamer, Frostfang, Eternity, Flameseeker Prophecies ~
~ Nevermore, H.O.P.E, Moot, Incinerator, Meteorlogicus, Howler ~
~ WvW Rank 964, sPvP Rank 75, 25,437 AP ~

I just want to say a quick few things that I might get some flak for. First, though it might be more of nit-picking than anything, the statements in this discussion so far, or at least by some, seem to invoke the infallibility of science. The difference, to most extent, between science and religion is that science postulates theories and tests them empirically, whereas religion can be tested, but in less empirical ways. While this is true, science doesn't have all the facts in the world, there are still many unknowns, and perhaps that is where some have to choose between a belief that more scientific development will illuminate it, or that religion can. Either way its a belief. Also, I don't think that evolution is completely contradictory to the Biblical account. Although it requires a bit of different interpretation, I can see the stages of creation as correlating with the stages of the Earth's development. This would, further than intelligent design, infer that God not only created the basic principles of the universe, but also steered it to its current state. Anyway, I know this doesn't discuss the proposed topic, just something I thought I should say.

I have to agree and disagree with this.

I find nothing wrong with the theory of theological evolution; even if I don't believe in it myself. In fact, it was pretty popular about a century ago among scientists and Fundamentalists alike. The problem is that Christianity felt threatened by its "lack of morals" and lashed out at evolution in the anti-evolution crusades of the 1920's. Which is sorta the point of the topic: Not which is "right" but why Christianity feels "threatened."

But I really have to disagree with your assertion that either way is "faith." I have to question my faith in the "theory" of evolution no more than I have to question my faith in the "theory" gravity. Theories have different meanings in science.

I "apologize" for my overuse of "quotes" in this "post."

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde