Are you a creationist?

[Wootah]

Hi all,

The thing about creation is that we do it every moment.

- I look at a lump of matter and make it into my wife every day of my marriage.

- Apparently, there is a bunch of atoms that I recognise every day how to get back to and I call it my home.

The day you are not a creationist, you likely have lost your mind.

Are you a creationist? Thoughts?

[Tcg]

Reported and cleared so technically you have a valid post. I will only add that your post was offensive to me personally as I felt dismissed and I think the thread is worthwhile and I was interested in a reasoned and logical argument or rebuttal.

Moderator Comment

Please recall the following rule: 17. Do not comment on any rule infractions made by others. Ignore any rule violations made by others and only respond by reporting it to the moderators.

If you suspect someone has broken a rule the proper procedure is to report it not to complain about it publicly as you have done here.

Please review the Rules.




______________


Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Wootah]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #10]

I think your post and the other one just shows the divide. I'm not being rude in the slightest. I am making threads/posts reading responses thinking on them and then trying to simplify concepts to explain them.

We are all creationists. I was known as a kid who loved making wierd sandwiches. A peanut butter sandwich is very much undervalued. We do amazing things and treat them as mundane too quickly.

I do think one of the unintended consequences of biblical creationism has been the rejection of creation in general. But then why blame the biblical creationists. That would be like blaming someone else for punching myself in the head.

[Difflugia]

This is the problem with atheism for atheists. Words end up meaning nothing. Watch for it Diagoras and stop choosing that path that dissolves words to nothing.

I don't think this is an atheist problem.

The trick is to spot when someone is acting duplicitously when they suggest one meaning, but in fact have a different meaning in mind.

See, this is exactly right and is a hallmark of Christian apologetics.

"You think faith is bad? Well, you atheists have faith in careful data collection and robust statistical methods, so you're no better than Christians."

"You think religion is bad? Well, your religion is science, so you're no better than theists."

What's the atheist equivalent?

[Diagoras]

We are all creationists.

1) A creator
2) The Creator
3) A Creationist

Of these three, I understand the first to apply to anyone who makes or creates something - I would probably first think of a sculptor or painter, but could happily have the description applied to me for things like meals, internet posts and so on.

The second, given its capitalisation, suggests to me a title sometimes given to various gods, including the one Christians believe in. That’s a belief I don’t share, but I can grasp the concept that ‘The Creator’ means ‘God’ in some contexts.

The third is a specific term for a small group of Christians that take the Bible literally, and believe in stories like the Garden of Eden, pillars of salt, and all the rest of it. Further subdivided into Young Earth- and Old Earth- versions, but sharing the idea that because the Bible says something, then it must be true. Based on this definition of the word, I am definitely NOT a ‘creationist’.

So, having agreed with your claim that we are all ‘creators’, I’m wondering what comes next? Do we wait for someone to claim that they don’t create anything (and immediately disprove that by the act of creating a post)?

[Wootah]

[Replying to Diagoras in post #14]

No I think we are just baselining reality.

[Diagoras]

That’s a curious phrase…

Someone said upthread (Post #7) that I had to watch out for words that could ‘dissolve into nothing’, so I think I’ll hang back and wait for the picture to become a little clearer.

I mean, I understand ‘baselining’ from a project management perspective, but when combined with ‘reality’, it becomes rather too vague to be helpful.

[Wootah]

I get the cringe of biblical creationism and the Bible does and doesn't necessarily require it.

In the beginning was the word and then God shapes the universe is a fundamental statement that speaks to our fundamental reality. We speak and create what we speak. That's resonating for me deeply.

Biblical creationism is just a follow the science issue. There is evidence both ways and we should be neutral. But creationism seems even more important if biblical creation isn't true and/or if the universe always existed.

Because it really leaves us as creators or in nihilism. We choose. Maybe atheists should be fighting for creationism.

[Diagoras]

I get the cringe of biblical creationism and the Bible does and doesn't necessarily require it.

Does and doesn’t? Can you explain?

In the beginning was the word and then God shapes the universe” is a fundamental statement that speaks to our fundamental reality.

‘Fundamental’ meaning ‘core principle’, ‘necessary’ or ‘important part’? Or something else? ‘Speaks to’ also sounds impressive, but doesn’t enhance any claim being made.

We speak and create what we speak.

Flying Spaghetti Monsters, then?

That's resonating for me deeply.

Each to his own, I suppose.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

(From ‘The Demon-Haunted World’)

Biblical creationism is just a follow the science issue. There is evidence both ways and we should be neutral.

No we shouldn’t. Do you mix a paste of mud with the blood of two birds to cure cancer, or do you visit your family doctor? The methods of science are demonstrably superior at getting at truths about the natural world.

But creationism seems even more important if biblical creation isn't true and/or if the universe always existed.

The ‘creation story’ in the Bible doesn’t fit with observation. Likewise a universe that always existed. Therefore, creationism (i.e. the belief in the Bible as literal truth) seems much less important.

Because it really leaves us as creators or in nihilism.

By my understanding of ‘creator’, this means we’re safe from nihilism.

Maybe atheists should be fighting for creationism.

Hate to have to ask again: what, precisely, do you mean by ‘creationism’ here?

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #10]

I think your post and the other one just shows the divide. I'm not being rude in the slightest. I am making threads/posts reading responses thinking on them and then trying to simplify concepts to explain them.

We are all creationists. I was known as a kid who loved making wierd sandwiches. A peanut butter sandwich is very much undervalued. We do amazing things and treat them as mundane too quickly.

I do think one of the unintended consequences of biblical creationism has been the rejection of creation in general. But then why blame the biblical creationists. That would be like blaming someone else for punching myself in the head.

This is playing with words and is all wrong. There are few Axioms 'Meanings before labels', the Humpty Fallacy (words mean what I want them to mean') and equivocation. If you want to call anyone who makes, designs or even envisages everything a 'creationist' that's your decision, but those people are creators, not creationists. 'Creators' (with a mention of what they create) would be ok, but Creationists is just a clumsy ploy to wangle the label 'Creationist' into acceptability. It has a very specific meaning - one who believes that a god created everything divided into to main theses - a god made it all and Genesis is right. To try to sell us the other word - trick is clumsy and almost disrespectful to us in thinking that we'd fall for it. Give it up, this is getting you nothing.

[Miles]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #10]

I think your post and the other one just shows the divide. I'm not being rude in the slightest. I am making threads/posts reading responses thinking on them and then trying to simplify concepts to explain them.

We are all creationists. I was known as a kid who loved making wierd sandwiches. A peanut butter sandwich is very much undervalued. We do amazing things and treat them as mundane too quickly.

I do think one of the unintended consequences of biblical creationism has been the rejection of creation in general. But then why blame the biblical creationists. That would be like blaming someone else for punching myself in the head.

This is playing with words and is all wrong. There are few Axioms 'Meanings before labels', the Humpty Fallacy (words mean what I want them to mean') and equivocation. If you want to call anyone who makes, designs or even envisages everything a 'creationist' that's your decision, but those people are creators, not creationists. 'Creators' (with a mention of what they create) would be ok, but Creationists is just a clumsy ploy to wangle the label 'Creationist' into acceptability. It has a very specific meaning - one who believes that a god created everything divided into to main theses - a god made it all and Genesis is right. To try to sell us the other word - trick is clumsy and almost disrespectful to us in thinking that we'd fall for it. Give it up, this is getting you nothing.

And who here doesn't believe Wootah knew the difference, but simply wants to play?

In any case, for those who may be unconvinced that the word "creationist" does have a specific meaning:

creationist
noun: creationist; plural noun: creationists
a person who believes that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account.
"a renewed campaign by religious creationists"

adjective: adjective: creationist
relating to the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation.
"a creationist account of the universe"
source: Oxford Languages Dictionary

.