Creationism in Christianity

Tellox

Just a quick question here which was spurred from some pub talk - I recently got stopped walking through town by once of those born again christian teens. Her largest argument was that Darwin according to her, was full of ****. You know, the "I aint comin from no monkey, fool" argument. Now, I know a decent amount of (non-practising) Christians, and they would all show a strong believe in evolution rather than creationism. As you're bothered enough to check the Christianity forum on boards, I can assume you've at least got a strong opinion on the subject - who here believes in evolution?

My opinion on the matter. (I would also recommend this link to any Portal/Coulton fans)

Also, might I add that it is a massive shame that the teen was a born again, as she was ****ing hot.

Biro

I'm waiting for someone to vote for the 4th option!!!

thebouldwhacker

Hi,
Should the poll not ask about inteligent design vs natural selection as many christian faiths now claim evolution as gods plan.

AtomicHorror

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Hi,
Should the poll not ask about inteligent design vs natural selection as many christian faiths now claim evolution as gods plan.

ID is not the same thing as theistic evolution. It's a pseudoscientific repackaging of conventional creationism. An attempt to sneak the core concepts of creationism past the US education system's religion detector alarm. It spectacularly failed to do so.

The Mad Hatter

I was going to vote for option four as a joke, but then I realised J C will probably use it as a statistic in the megathread.

That's a three please, Carol.

sink

Option 4 makes perfect sense so I voted for it.

The Mad Hatter

sink wrote: »

Option 4 makes perfect sense so I voted for it.

fsm ftw?

SonOfPerdition

c'mon #4

this is a race . .yeah?

Galvasean

According to the poll non-believers outnumber Christians by 3:1 on this forum.

Biro

Galvasean wrote: »

According to the poll non-believers outnumber Christians by 3:1 on this forum.

Yep... athiests are fairly bored people!!

thebouldwhacker

AtomicHorror wrote: »

ID is not the same thing as theistic evolution. It's a pseudoscientific repackaging of conventional creationism. An attempt to sneak the core concepts of creationism past the US education system's religion detector alarm. It spectacularly failed to do so.

I agree to an extent but ID can and often does refer to the notion that god made the big bang (and so the story begun etc) where as creatioism more often reflects the 7 day creation story with adam & eve and all that bs.

Anyway why I was asking was because the term/notion of evolution is being used by so many groups I just think the the term natural selection is definate. ie evolution requires clarification, NS clear cut.

So by asking ID vs NS you find out who thinks there was/was not a god involved. After all this thread was begun because the op was wondering about ppl who believe in evolution + god. So are they saying evolution is a force driven by god or that evolution is separate to their god???

Hence ID vs NS= god vs no god involvment.

Also I have to disagree with you saying that 'It spectacularly failed to do so'... i think they were quite successful, but why mention the US in isolation???? Its most def alive and strong here in Ireland and Europe...

Fanny Cradock

Galvasean wrote: »

According to the poll non-believers outnumber Christians by 3:1 on this forum.

No surprise. I believe that Jackass did a poll on AH and Christians (or was it religious people in general) were quite outnumbered by their non-believing counterparts. It doesn't actually mean a great deal.

But it looks like we are a minority on Boards!

OPPRESSION!

AtomicHorror

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I agree to an extent but ID can and often does refer to the notion that god made the big bang (and so the story begun etc) where as creatioism more often reflects the 7 day creation story with adam & eve and all that bs.

Anyway why I was asking was because the term/notion of evolution is being used by so many groups I just think the the term natural selection is definate. ie evolution requires clarification, NS clear cut.

So by asking ID vs NS you find out who thinks there was/was not a god involved. After all this thread was begun because the op was wondering about ppl who believe in evolution + god. So are they saying evolution is a force driven by god or that evolution is separate to their god???

Hence ID vs NS= god vs no god involvment.

Also I have to disagree with you saying that 'It spectacularly failed to do so'... i think they were quite successful, but why mention the US in isolation???? Its most def alive and strong here in Ireland and Europe...

Are we talking about Discovery Institute ID here? Irreducible complexity and whatnot? That's repackaged Creationism and got labelled "not science" for the purposes of use in the education system in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case in 2005. During the case, the main witness for the ID movement (Michael Behe) was forced to admit that by the definition of "science" they were attempting to use, astrology would also be classed as science. It was a trainwreck for the Discovery Institute, barring their ideas from being taught in US schools and effectively restricting the ID movement to publishing propaganda for general public consumption.

Theistic evolution, as I understand it, doesn't much resemble ID in that it is firstly not organised and secondly only really suggests occasional intervention in evolution with most of the process being dominated by the usual mechanisms of unattended variation and selection. There's also talk of infusion with souls and whatnot that's really not relevant to evolution anyway.

thebouldwhacker

Tellox wrote: »

Now, I know a decent amount of (non-practising) Christians, and they would all show a strong believe in evolution rather than creationism. .

TBH this was what I was refering to in my op.

The amount of people who have religion but those beliefs do not extend to creation.

I find it odd that one can believe in the existance of god (practising or non) and yet have trouble believing that it was involved in 'creation'

What do these people think their god is then? some kind of moral administrator?

I dont get it...

that is what led to my simple question should the poll not ask about inteligent design vs natural selection as many christian faiths now claim evolution as gods plan.

Thus finding out who believes that there is or isnt input by a god into 'life & co'

Fanny Cradock

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

that is what led to my simple question should the poll not ask about inteligent design vs natural selection as many christian faiths now claim evolution as gods plan.

Yes, ID should have been covered.

TBH, it really doesn't matter what you find odd. It's more a case of what people believe, and in this regard, bar the missing ID option, the poll covered most of the available options. (I say 'most of' in case I'm missing something obscure)

thebouldwhacker

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

TBH, it really doesn't matter what you find odd. It's more a case of what people believe,

I couldnt agree with you more, my notion of odd is meaningless to others (at least it should be) I was only expressing & explaining the reason why I was posting, I find polls like this interesting, because I find peoples ad hoc attitudes to god odd.

Fanny Cradock

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I couldnt agree with you more, my notion of odd is meaningless to others (at least it should be) I was only expressing & explaining the reason why I was posting, I find polls like this interesting, because I find peoples ad hoc attitudes to god odd.

Maybe you should consider the possibility that not all Christians take an ad hoc approach to God. Instead, for better or worse, they have a very defined image of God and how he interacts with creation (without boxing him in or claiming to know it all).

Galvasean

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

No surprise. I believe that Jackass did a poll on AH and Christians (or was it religious people in general) were quite outnumbered by their non-believing counterparts. It doesn't actually mean a great deal.

But it looks like we are a minority on Boards!

OPPRESSION!

I a recent poll on After Hours showed the majority of posters were non-believers.
(Correct me if Im wrong) Jackass also did a recent one about their opinions on Christianity and most were very much against it. Although I cant help but wonder how many were these new fangled 'cool' atheists rather than actual ones.
Seems to be stylish in AH to be atheist these days.

Oops, gone off topic

Fanny Cradock

Galvasean wrote: »

I a recent poll on After Hours showed the majority of posters were non-believers.
(Correct me if Im wrong) Jackass also did a recent one about their opinions on Christianity and most were very much against it. Although I cant help but wonder how many were these new fangled 'cool' atheists rather than actual ones.
Seems to be stylish in AH to be atheist these days.

Oops, gone off topic

Yeah, I would be surprised if all the non-believers had put as much thought in the matter of God as some of the A&A regulars. We digress...

PDN

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

TBH this was what I was refering to in my op.

The amount of people who have religion but those beliefs do not extend to creation.

I find it odd that one can believe in the existance of god (practising or non) and yet have trouble believing that it was involved in 'creation'

What do these people think their god is then? some kind of moral administrator?

I dont get it...

that is what led to my simple question should the poll not ask about inteligent design vs natural selection as many christian faiths now claim evolution as gods plan.

Thus finding out who believes that there is or isnt input by a god into 'life & co'

I think part of the problem is that "creationism" is a bit of an elastic term. People use it to refer to either of the following:
a) Young Earth Creationists who believe that God created everything in 6 days 6000 years ago.
b) Those who believe that God created everything by some means. this obviously includes those who believe in theistic evolution (which, as has already been pointed out, is different from 'Intelligent Design').

Many, probably most, Christians fall into the second category. they are not creationists as the term is most commonly used, but they do indeed see God as Creator and as very much involved in Creation.

thebouldwhacker

PDN wrote: »

Many, probably most, Christians fall into the second category. they are not creationists as the term is most commonly used, but they do indeed see God as Creator and as very much involved in Creation.

yes, they call the process evolution, hence my op... 'in the beginning' evolution was seen as meaning 'no god involved' it now has been diluted...

Thats all I was saying and tbh, i'm kinda sorry I did.

I'm done with this thread I think;)

Fanny Cradock

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

yes, they call the process evolution, hence my op... 'in the beginning' evolution was seen as meaning 'no god involved' it now has been diluted...

Thats all I was saying and tbh, i'm kinda sorry I did.

I'm done with this thread I think;)

I don't follow. Not all denominations - certainly at grass roots - rejected the theory of evolution after Darwin published Origin of Species. I may be misunderstanding you.

Zillah

Tellox wrote: »

My opinion on the matter.

I'd just like to note that this is incredibly awesome.

Seaneh

I'm a Christian and I believe in Evolution.

There's a difference between Macro and Mirco Evolution and it's this difference that I believe in.

The Mad Hatter

Seaneh wrote: »

I'm a Christian and I believe in Evolution.

There's a difference between Macro and Mirco Evolution and it's this difference that I believe in.

Er, no there isn't.

kiffer

Seaneh wrote:

I'm a Christian and I believe in Evolution.

There's a difference between Macro and Mirco Evolution and it's this difference that I believe in.

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Er, no there isn't.

The only "difference" between micro and macro evolution is time...

Fanny Cradock

OK, let's not debate it here, gents.

AtomicHorror

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

yes, they call the process evolution, hence my op... 'in the beginning' evolution was seen as meaning 'no god involved' it now has been diluted...

Actually, it has not. Evolution the theory doesn't cover the origin of life, and it never has done. It's never been particularly difficult for most Christians to accept the theory as-is. The concept that there has been "intervention" in that process after the origin of life is vague enough to not really contradict the theory. Particularly when the intervention cited deals with things like souls.

AtomicHorror

Seaneh wrote: »

I'm a Christian and I believe in Evolution.

There's a difference between Macro and Mirco Evolution and it's this difference that I believe in.

Then you'd want to be ticking the creationism box, because that's their position too.

philologos

Galvasean wrote: »

I a recent poll on After Hours showed the majority of posters were non-believers.
(Correct me if Im wrong) Jackass also did a recent one about their opinions on Christianity and most were very much against it. Although I cant help but wonder how many were these new fangled 'cool' atheists rather than actual ones.
Seems to be stylish in AH to be atheist these days.

Oops, gone off topic

Yes, it was me. I wanted to assess the AH attitude towards the topic. I only posted asking questions and to see the results. I'm actually encouraged by the results and I think that there is hope for Christianity in Ireland yet. Bear in mind that the sample was rather small, I got just short of 200 votes, out of a sample base of around 200,000 people on boards.ie (or accounts, probably many duplicate accounts actually).

As for the figures, I'd say the percentile changes between AH and the Christianity forum. Many of the Christians didn't actually vote in the poll on AH if you read the names of the people who voted (t'is a public poll).