This is a discussion question; it makes no explicit sense, but hopefully someone will have a very profound thought on the topic. Add your vote to the poll.
Creationism and Evolution seem to be opposing sides of an argument. Why is it that evolution has both atheistic and theistic proponents while creationism only has theistic proponents?
The answer is obvious, but why is it not profound and convincing?
A very one sided debacle.
Moderator: Moderators
A very one sided debacle.
Post #1I give license to anyone to claim: Xawn does not believe in God. No one may claim: Xawn believes there is no God. From that starting position, and that starting position alone, will we be capable of meaningful discussion.
-
Cathar1950
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
- Location: Michigan(616)
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #2
I would like to add Deistic evolutionist, Panentheistic evolutionist, and Agnostic evolutionist.
Theistic "evolutionist"
Theistic creationist
Atheistic "evolutionist"
Atheistic creationist
Deistic "evolutionist"
Panentheistic "evolutionist"
Agnostic "evolutionist"
See it is easy.
Theistic "evolutionist"
Theistic creationist
Atheistic "evolutionist"
Atheistic creationist
Deistic "evolutionist"
Panentheistic "evolutionist"
Agnostic "evolutionist"
See it is easy.
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #3
Atheistic creationist ??
An oxymoron. What could possibly be the atheistic creationist's creator?
An oxymoron. What could possibly be the atheistic creationist's creator?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
Post #4
Well, that's the obvious answer to the question. But if Intelligent Design is being peddled as a secular alternative to evolution, then there must be atheistic creationists. No?McCulloch wrote:Atheistic creationist ??
An oxymoron. What could possibly be the atheistic creationist's creator?
I give license to anyone to claim: Xawn does not believe in God. No one may claim: Xawn believes there is no God. From that starting position, and that starting position alone, will we be capable of meaningful discussion.
-
Cathar1950
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
- Location: Michigan(616)
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #5
Maybe a turtle did it?McCulloch wrote:Atheistic creationist ??
An oxymoron. What could possibly be the atheistic creationist's creator?
Does a creation need a god as the creator?
Some Gnostics felt a lesser god created the universe. Some think the lesser god was YHWH.
Maybe it wasn't a god but just some force.
Got me Mack.
Post #6
Actually, the secular booted ID out with the Dover courts decision.XaWN wrote:Well, that's the obvious answer to the question. But if Intelligent Design is being peddled as a secular alternative to evolution, then there must be atheistic creationists. No?McCulloch wrote:Atheistic creationist ??
An oxymoron. What could possibly be the atheistic creationist's creator?
What we do for ourselves dies with us,
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
Re: A very one sided debacle.
Post #7Creationism lies within the realm of metaphysical, along with core theistic beliefs. (before I get jumped from behind, I am not suggesting that all theistic beliefs lie in Creationism. Only that Creationism has core theistic beliefs).XaWN wrote:This is a discussion question; it makes no explicit sense, but hopefully someone will have a very profound thought on the topic. Add your vote to the poll.
Creationism and Evolution seem to be opposing sides of an argument. Why is it that evolution has both atheistic and theistic proponents while creationism only has theistic proponents?
The answer is obvious, but why is it not profound and convincing?
Evolution has no theistic properties. It has theistic rebuttals, but nowhere in the realm of evolution is there a "Goddidit". At least not within the scientific understanding of evolution. Anything outside of this understanding was effectively dismissed with the Amicus Curiae brief.
What we do for ourselves dies with us,
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
What we do for others and the world remains
and is immortal.
-Albert Pine
Never be bullied into silence.
Never allow yourself to be made a victim.
Accept no one persons definition of your life; define yourself.
-Harvey Fierstein
Post #8
While I recognize these as valid counter-stances. I was trying to go a bit more black and white. If you consider yourself a deistic of pantheistic evolutionist just vote for theistic evolution. If you are an agnostic evolutionist, then get off your fencepost; you've got enough information to at least make a guess.Cathar1950 wrote:I would like to add Deistic evolutionist, Panentheistic evolutionist, and Agnostic evolutionist.
Theistic "evolutionist"
Theistic creationist
Atheistic "evolutionist"
Atheistic creationist
Deistic "evolutionist"
Panentheistic "evolutionist"
Agnostic "evolutionist"
See it is easy.
I give license to anyone to claim: Xawn does not believe in God. No one may claim: Xawn believes there is no God. From that starting position, and that starting position alone, will we be capable of meaningful discussion.
Post #9
Incidentally, I think it's excellent that we have a 50/50 split for theism and atheism here.
I give license to anyone to claim: Xawn does not believe in God. No one may claim: Xawn believes there is no God. From that starting position, and that starting position alone, will we be capable of meaningful discussion.
-
Cathar1950
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
- Location: Michigan(616)
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #10
I would rather not guess but speculate.XaWN wrote:While I recognize these as valid counter-stances. I was trying to go a bit more black and white. If you consider yourself a deistic of pantheistic evolutionist just vote for theistic evolution. If you are an agnostic evolutionist, then get off your fencepost; you've got enough information to at least make a guess.Cathar1950 wrote:I would like to add Deistic evolutionist, Panentheistic evolutionist, and Agnostic evolutionist.
Theistic "evolutionist"
Theistic creationist
Atheistic "evolutionist"
Atheistic creationist
Deistic "evolutionist"
Panentheistic "evolutionist"
Agnostic "evolutionist"
See it is easy.
The fence is fine with me but I voted deistic evolution jus tin case God is nothing more then a human construct or a way of talking about what we don't understand.
Maybe it is nothing more then Language, meaning and culture and the power it has for doing human things or the awe I feel about life and a way of expressing a sense of interrelationship and connectiveness. I am reading Friedman's "The disapearence of God" and it fits the feeling I get about growing up and maturing where we are now responsible as best we can.
