This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Young Earth Creationism is Sinful

#1darkmaian23Posted 2/23/2013 2:14:41 PM
Yesterday I tried to have a discussion with a Christian friend of mine about how there are efforts underway to undermine science education in some states by allowing for teachings like the Earth being only 6,000 years old to be given equal weight against actual scientific observations and objectively known information. He became visibly uncomfortable and stated that scientists are always changing their minds and don't really know anything.

Well, is God the Lord of everything or isn't he? Science is the biggest blessing next to life itself that has ever been bestowed upon mankind. With it, our knowledge of creation and our extreme fortune to be alive increases. With it, medicine that saves us from pain and disease are crafted. With it, water is cleansed and made drinkable. With it, we may grow more crops and feed more people. With it, new instruments of creative expression and pleasing recreation are born. With it, we may begin reaching even for the stars themselves (which is our birthright, if God really made everything for us as many think).

To reject science is to reject a true miracle from God. People claim that science contradicts the Bible and is therefore dangerous and sinful. Christians speak constantly about growing in a relationship with God. If what we now know about the origin of life or the time it took is different from what is in the Book of Genesis, so what? Were humans in the Bronze Age 2000 years ago prepared to understand such things? If an individuals relationship with God is free to change and grow with time, why is that same freedom not afforded to mankind as a whole?

Hardcore Christians are aghast when someone swears and filter out many things from their lives in an effort to be more pure. To speak out against God is considered by most Christians to be awful. This is, I think especially true of those who would like to sneak God into biology classes or deny the age of the Earth with bad science.

To restrict God to a being that created the Earth 6,000 years ago is a terrible crime. Doing so makes God out to be much smaller than he is and his creation much less grand than it is. We now know--through science--that the universe is bigger and more wonderful than any YEC could ever imagine, and trying to restrict science education and keep people ignorant harms our ability to use other wonderful gifts of science to our advantage.

Thus, I conclude that being a YEC is sinful and is something all Christians should strive to stamp out in an effort to grow the faith and teach the good news to all. Is it not so?
#2OrangeWizardPosted 2/23/2013 2:16:22 PM(edited)
From: darkmaian23 | #001
To reject science


I don't think anyone is doing that, not even YECs
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
#3darkmaian23(Topic Creator)Posted 2/23/2013 2:20:12 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
From: darkmaian23 | #001
To reject science


I don't think anyone is doing that, not even YECs


They bend our objective knowledge and the means of finding it to make them out to be something they're not in an effort to keep the concept of God in line with their small, backward thinking. The "science" of YEC is not science by any reasonable definition and is supported by frauds with fake degrees and credentials. They reject science (and God's commandment not to lie) and substitute in its place their own version which is false.
#4OrangeWizardPosted 2/23/2013 2:32:18 PM
From: darkmaian23 | #003
They bend our objective knowledge


Can we really say we have objective knowledge? Everything is filtered and interpreted by our brains, which aren't perfect and don't always give an accurate representation of what is objective. See: Hallucinations.

and the means of finding it to make them out to be something they're not in an effort to keep the concept of God in line with their small, backward thinking


That sentence is loaded with bias.

The "science" of YEC is not science by any reasonable definition and is supported by frauds with fake degrees and credentials.


This name-calling just makes me less inclined to listen to you.

For someone who speaks about objectivity, you're quite emotionally motivated here.
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
#5LastManStandingPosted 2/23/2013 2:41:45 PM
There are lots of tests of faith on Earth, you pass stronger faith. You fail, your faith gets shaken, doubt creeps in.
Don't try to over analyze things that won't help you into heaven, but can make you lose your faith.
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#6LastManStandingPosted 2/23/2013 3:18:55 PM
When you over analyze you allow for over temptations by the Devil. He will hit you in a way to try to create doubt. Once that seed is planted it will grow into something that will suffocate you if allowed.
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#7AynRandySavagePosted 2/23/2013 3:19:30 PM
The arguments YEC's put forth can't be justified scientifically, that's pretty much an objective fact.
#8OrangeWizardPosted 2/23/2013 3:30:59 PM
Insofar as "scientifically" is a subjective construct, yes.
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
#9EastsideslingerPosted 2/23/2013 4:06:18 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
Insofar as "scientifically" is a subjective construct, yes.


I re read your post several times and I'd like to know if I'm correct or not in this assessment. From what I've gathered, are you trying to imply that, because our minds are imperfect in their ability to perceive the world around us that faith in and of itself is some how more sound then scientific observation?
---
"That's Mushy Snugglebites' badonkadonk. She's my main squeeze. Lady's got a gut fulla' dynamite and a booty like POOOW!" - Tiny Tina
#10OrangeWizardPosted 2/23/2013 4:09:12 PM
From: Eastsideslinger | #007
I re read your post several times and I'd like to know if I'm correct or not in this assessment. From what I've gathered, are you trying to imply that, because our minds are imperfect in their ability to perceive the world around us that faith in and of itself is some how more sound then scientific observation?


When did I ever say the word "Faith"? No you aren't correct in your assessment at all.
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.