Wednesday, November 14, 2012

CREATION MYTH?



Why is it that when liberals attack people of faith, they always throw out the argument that Christians believe in creation which allegedly sets the world at about six thousand years old. Therefore, Christians must be idiots since they do not believe in  things that science can prove, like dinosaurs, for example.



I don’t know how I would classify myself when it comes to faith.

I was raised Catholic, and still think of myself as one even though I do not practice the faith as prescribed.
I was educated in a Catholic school system through ninth grade, and was taught things like dinosaurs and the big bang theory alongside the book of Genesis.

By nuns who hit me with rulers and dust brooms (mostly for behavior that warranted such attacks).

Is it possible that the schools in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia were rebels, or uniquely enlightened?

Maybe so.

When I went through grades 10-12 in the public school system I was able to sleep through most of the advanced placement classes and get A’s and B’s, so the Catholic system was doing something right.

Or maybe the public school systems were doing something wrong.
This was before the Federal  Department of Education was signed into law in 1979, so maybe the performance inequities would be fixed by this massive tax dollar drain (budget of $71 billion in 2011).
Or not.

Since the ED was founded, combined math and verbal scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) fell from an average of 1,039 to 1,028.  
Not a huge drop, but considering the trillions thrown at public schools over those three decades, we certainly di not get a return on investment!
But I digress. I will attack the publisc school situation in a future post.

So back to creation versus evolution.
I asked if it were possible that the Catholic schools I went to were particularly enlightened.
The other possibility would be that the liberal atheists are not as intelligent as they see themselves, and are simply spouting bile with naught to back it up.
 

Hmm….could that be possible?
(by the way liberal readers, "naught" is a synonym for "nothing")
Christians ARE presented with both views of the advent of mankind on this rock, and the liberal myth that Christians believe it is less than 10,000 years old is just that-a myth.

Many religious denominations accept that biological evolution has produced the diversity of living things over billions of years of Earth's history and have issued statements observing that evolution and the tenets of their faiths are compatible.

 

Many scientists have written eloquently about their awe and wonder at the history of the universe and of life on this planet, explaining that they see no conflict between their faith in God and the evidence for evolution.
Religious denominations that do not accept the occurrence of evolution tend to be those that believe in strictly literal interpretations of religious texts.

So it is the fringes of religion that believe the earth is not very old.
Kind of like it's the fringe liberals who think that mocking people with different beliefs than their own demonstrates their open-mindedness.

 


7 comments:

  1. When I was in school they never mentioned any Darwinian theory. Then they had that damn Scopes trial. Okay, so I exaggerated. But actually there was little emphasis on evolutionary theory as I recall. It was all mentioned in passing, but it never dissuaded me from believing the Biblical account.

    Lee
    Wrote By Rote

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lee-

    But you did learn about dinosaurs, right? And I think if they were traipsing through the Garden of Eden the Bible might have mentioned them.

    I need to clairfy, though-when I say there is room for both Biblical and Scientific theories, I am not opining on evolution, but specifically mean the age of the planet.

    Why couldn't God have started everything with the big bang?

    For that matter, he could have pulled off evolution, but Stephen T. has forgotten more about that book than I will ever know and he's told me about passages that rule out evolution-but I think he at least concedes that the earth was not necessarily created in a week.

    I don't think the construction unions would have allowed that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. DOCTOR DISCMAN ~

    >> . . . by the way liberal readers, "naught" is a synonym for "nothing"

    HA! :-)

    >> . . . the liberal myth that Christians believe it is less than 10,000 years old is just that - a myth.

    Uh, not necessarily so. There are probably far more Christians who believe that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old than you realize. I would agree that the majority of Christians side with an Earth that is billions of years old, but a significant number of them do not.

    >> . . . Many religious denominations accept that biological evolution has produced the diversity of living things over billions of years of Earth's history and have issued statements observing that evolution and the tenets of their faiths are compatible.

    Religious denominations, maybe. But “Christian denominations”? Not a lot. No one (with a brain) disputes the concept of micro-evolution, but macro-evolution is not only disputed by many, but it has no real hard science to support it. In short, IT is a myth. Or as I once wrote in a book review:

    Darwinism still hasn't developed a leg to stand on.

    >> . . . So it is the fringes of religion that believe the earth is not very old. Kind of like it's the fringe liberals who think that mocking people with different beliefs than their own demonstrates their open-mindedness.

    Actually, I’m afraid I have to kind of disagree with both of those statements. There are too many Christians who believe in the “Young Earth” concept to label them “fringe”. True, they’re not in the majority, but they’re also more than “fringe”.

    Nor do I think it is “fringe liberals” who mock people with different beliefs than their own. Mocking dissenters is, and for a long time has been, pretty much the Standard Operating Procedure of liberals.

    Or to put it another way: The majority of liberals under the age of 50 are assholes.

    Going back to the “Young Earth” Vs. “Old Earth” viewpoint held by Christians, one will find that both camps have some good arguments.

    For minuscule examples:

    The following comes from one of my favorite pro-Creation books [‘TORNADO IN A JUNKYARD: The Relentless Myth Of Darwinism’ by James Perloff]:

    “Dr. Larry Vardiman’s “technical book, ‘THE AGE OF THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE: A Study Of The Helium Flux Through The Atmosphere’ makes a strong case that helium accumulation limits the Earth’s age to about 10,000 years.” [Page 134]

    However, not too long ago, I posted two blog bits about E.W. Bullinger a man who – although I don’t agree with him on everything – is the first person I’ve ever called a “genuine Biblical scholar”.

    On page 352 of Bullinger’s book ‘HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE: 12 Basic Principles For Understanding God’s Word’, he writes:

    “When Geologists have settled how many years they require between the first and second verses of Genesis, chapter 1, there is ample room for all they want, and a large margin beside. Meanwhile, we may well conclude that all the fossils and remains which are found belonged to ‘the world that then was’ [2 Peter 3:5,6], and thus, at one stroke, remove all friction between Geology and Scripture.”

    So, for sure, there are some very bright Christians on both sides of the ‘How Old Is Earth?’ argument.

    Below is a URL to a video I previously posted on my old ‘STUFFS’ blog. This guy is extremely sharp, even politically so (he knows the Constitution, knows about the New World Order, knows 9/11 was an inside job, etc.) He is as intelligent as he is funny, and he also happens to be a “Young Earth” Christian. I highly recommend people watch his entire presentation:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga33t0NI6Fk

    ~ D-FensDogg
    ‘Loyal American Underground’

    ReplyDelete
  4. STMcC-

    When I was pulling quotes I did not edit as carefully as I should have (and to do so now would make your comment seem odd, so I won't), but I did not mean to push evolution-my intent was to focus of the age of the planet debate.

    Do you really think there are that many Christians who believe the Earth is only a few thousand years old?

    I have no statistics to back me up, but I guess there are dumb people of faith, too.

    Also-last clairification.

    In MY opinion, all of the current liberal ilk are "fringe" liberals, from Bill Maher to Barry O'Kenya, our illustrious alien in Washington.

    To my mind, the word "liberal" has been usurped by these assholes. Liberal means "open-minded," which the current crop of zombies is NOT.

    ReplyDelete
  5. >> . . . Do you really think there are that many Christians who believe the Earth is only a few thousand years old? ... I have no statistics to back me up...

    I don't have any statistics either. So my rough estimate is based solely on anecdotal evidence assembled from what I've gleaned over a couple of decades of attending various Christian church services and from books and videos created by Christian writers, preachers, etc.

    My best "guesstimate" would be that perhaps 15% to 20% of self-proclaimed Christians believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old (and more likely about 6,000 or 7,000).

    That's obviously not a large percentage but, in my opinion, it's too high to call it "fringe".

    >> . . . I guess there are dumb people of faith, too.

    I'm not sure, but I think you may have misunderstood my meaning:

    I myself wouldn't even consider labeling Christians who believe the Earth may be less than 10,000 years old as "dumb". In fact, based on what I've read and heard, if I were literally FORCED to bet every penny I have and every penny I will ever earn on whether or not the Earth is over 10,000 years old, I would bet it on "less".

    Why?: There are some legitimate, "scientific" reasons to believe the Earth MIGHT be less than 10,000 years old. Plus, a very, Very, VERY literal interpretation of Biblical verses would lead a person to conclude that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. And... if I were FORCED to bet all the money I have or will have, one way or the other, I would prefer to lose my money betting on a STRICT, LITERAL interpretation of Scripture, than to lose it "betting AGAINST 'God's Word'."

    In other words, if I MUST lose, let me lose betting ON the seemingly literal meaning of The Holy Bible, than by betting AGAINST it.

    That having been said, I DO NOT actually take a strong stand on the age of the Earth, since I have never been literally FORCED to do so.

    ~ D-FensDogg
    'Loyal American Underground'

    ReplyDelete
  6. McDogg-

    Someday we'll have to converse on the legitimate scientific reasons you refer to-I'd be interested in hearing more, as this is the first I've heard of that.

    Before I forget, have a happy Dwali, tomorrow. Same to Nappy.

    You celebrate Dwali, right? The Kenyan harvest festival? I'm not sure we can call it Thanksgiving any more...

    LC

    ReplyDelete
  7. >> . . . You celebrate Dwali, right?

    You gotta axe?
    Of course I does!

    Q: Are We Not Men?

    ~ D-FensDogg
    'Loyal American Underground'

    ReplyDelete