Creation Thread

[Farbin Kaiber]

I was only talking about the Christian version of Creationism, as that is the only one involved in the teach/dont teach in public schools debate.

Obviously there are far older religions. Christianity took most of it's context from Judaism. The story of Noah and the Ark were borrowed from an ancient Babylonian tale, which was in turn borrowed from the ancient Sumarians before them. And on it goes......plagiarism at it's best :)

But who said that the teaching should only show the "Christian" angle? Why not a world based platform that uses a broad array of religious/historical/factual science basis of study material thru a gradual system via the public system that "acclimatizes" children to others the world over in a way simultaneously teaches a new, higher level of acceptance of others, effectively squashing out the concepts of prejudiced social actions. Start with small stories and facts that build to the reading
and understanding of portions of larger texts as Jr./HS classes continue.

It's not teaching "plagiarism" as you called it, it is teaching a history. Those "tales" were handed down for a reason, do you think they would have survived and propagated thru the ages if they were meaningless? The oral tradition-to-written references was only to carry those things before their paper abilities became an option.

There is a lot of other historical items that don't get taught... I would have also liked to hear about the Japanese Holocaust when learning of the events in Germany. Or how VW was involved with the German support of WWII, etc., but the education system is, has been and will be flawed/skewed (in every socially controlled education medium)to prevent many facts, and events form being taught. That's a whole different debate though.

[bwanac]

I don't have a problem with Creationism being taught in schools, as long as it's teached in a religion class. Creationism is a theory invented by christians and based in the christian faith. Hence it is a religious entity. And seeing as how there is zero evidence (outside the bible) that creationsim is real, I don't see it's place in science/biology courses. Everything taught in those courses can be tested, researched and observed. Creationism, by definition, cannot be any of those things; it's just a different animal altogether and I think it belongs in a religion class, not a science class.

Evolution is not a replacement for Divine Creation. You do not need to pick one or the other, you can pick both, or neither. They are exclusive with "nonoverlapping magisteria". Evolution does not attempt to define or explain creation, it only deals with how organisms change due to genetic mutations, environmental pressures, etc.. Evolution is not the Big Bang, the Big Bang is Physics. People confuse what the science of Evolution is really about, and what it is trying to explain to the point where they view it as a religion for scientists. It is not.

Creationism should not be taught in a science class, because it is not science. Science tries to explain things in the natural world through methods of experimentation and reasoning. Creationism is faith, and it deals with the supernatural. Science could never experiment on the existence of a god, and that is why "Creation Science" is a false term. It is not science at all.

Agreed.

Evolution/big bang are scientific theories that can be backed up with fairly certain facts and studies.

Religious creationism is derived from oral/written traditions. All of these traditions started with someone, at some time, who needed these explanations for some reason. As long as the origin is throuoghly explained I see no problem with teaching/exploring these ideas.

Knowing all of these things, and why people think differently, can only broaden people's knowledge. Eventually they can come to their own conclusion.

[peerless]

Isn't that what we've all been saying?

Anyways, here's something a bit more entertaining:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

Thank You!

I could not have put it into words any better.

And neither could a book of fairy tales based on a the instant 'poof' creation of 2 souls called Adam and Eve.

[TwoJ's]

Isn't that what we've all been saying?

Anyways, here's something a bit more entertaining:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

[CorvallisBMW]

Quoted, for a great explanation.

Agreed, very good post!

[devonjordan]

Evolution is not a replacement for Divine Creation. You do not need to pick one or the other, you can pick both, or neither. They are exclusive with "nonoverlapping magisteria". Evolution does not attempt to define or explain creation, it only deals with how organisms change due to genetic mutations, environmental pressures, etc.. Evolution is not the Big Bang, the Big Bang is Physics. People confuse what the science of Evolution is really about, and what it is trying to explain to the point where they view it as a religion for scientists. It is not.

Creationism should not be taught in a science class, because it is not science. Science tries to explain things in the natural world through methods of experimentation and reasoning. Creationism is faith, and it deals with the supernatural. Science could never experiment on the existence of a god, and that is why "Creation Science" is a false term. It is not science at all.

Quoted, for a great explanation.

[z31maniac]

Otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic and fantasy when evidence and logic prove otherwise. I dont understand it, but I also dont fault them for it. As long as it helps people, Im all for it, as long as A) they dont push it on me and B) A mutual respect is maintained.


Mariano

Also agreed.

[trashcop 80s 80s]

Evolution is not a replacement for Divine Creation. You do not need to pick one or the other, you can pick both, or neither. They are exclusive with "nonoverlapping magisteria". Evolution does not attempt to define or explain creation, it only deals with how organisms change due to genetic mutations, environmental pressures, etc.. Evolution is not the Big Bang, the Big Bang is Physics. People confuse what the science of Evolution is really about, and what it is trying to explain to the point where they view it as a religion for scientists. It is not.

Creationism should not be taught in a science class, because it is not science. Science tries to explain things in the natural world through methods of experimentation and reasoning. Creationism is faith, and it deals with the supernatural. Science could never experiment on the existence of a god, and that is why "Creation Science" is a false term. It is not science at all.

[CorvallisBMW]

So all those other older eastern religions stole the idea from Jesus lovers? What about the Torah, the qur'an and other assorted religious texts? Bhagavad Gita?

I was only talking about the Christian version of Creationism, as that is the only one involved in the teach/dont teach in public schools debate.

Obviously there are far older religions. Christianity took most of it's context from Judaism. The story of Noah and the Ark were borrowed from an ancient Babylonian tale, which was in turn borrowed from the ancient Sumarians before them. And on it goes......plagiarism at it's best :)

[eric (^__^)]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwo8qxUit00

some humorous commentary on the relationship between parents and schools

[devonjordan]

otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic and fantasy when evidence and logic prove otherwise. I dont understand it, but i also dont fault them for it. As long as it helps people, im all for it, as long as a) they dont push it on me and b) a mutual respect is maintained.


Mariano

+1

[eric (^__^)]

There is absolutely no practical reason to teach children intelligent design or the big bang theory in school, much less that there is a God. That's what going to church or not going to church is for.

[CleanAzzE30z]

Otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic and fantasy when evidence and logic prove otherwise. I dont understand it, but I also dont fault them for it. As long as it helps people, Im all for it, as long as A) they dont push it on me and B) A mutual respect is maintained.


Mariano

[z31maniac]

It's like sports. If you could just go out & swing like Tiger Woods, there would be no real reward in it. Everything is based on where you came from & where you are supposed to head. If you could just jump to the front of the pack, the FedEx Cup would have roughly the same number of winners as people alive who could hold a golf club.

I can't believe/justify/rationalize fate.

I am responsible for my own actions and steer the course of my life.

Not some predetermined plan.

[Farbin Kaiber]

I don't have a problem with Creationism being taught in schools, as long as it's teached in a religion class. Creationism is a theory invented by christians and based in the christian faith. Hence it is a religious entity. And seeing as how there is zero evidence (outside the bible) that creationsim is real, I don't see it's place in science/biology courses. Everything taught in those courses can be tested, researched and observed. Creationism, by definition, cannot be any of those things; it's just a different animal altogether and I think it belongs in a religion class, not a science class.

So all those other older eastern religions stole the idea from Jesus lovers? What about the Torah, the qur'an and other assorted religious texts? Bhagavad Gita?