cure-real
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 84

Thread: Anti-Intellectualism/Ignorance in Christianity!

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by decrumpit View Post
    The issue here is saying one thing is true (i.e. young earth) and then having it scientifically disproved. When those atheist evangelists (Dawkins, Harris, etc.) use this to their advantage, it makes Christians look dishonest and idiotic.
    I'll jump on board with this. I heard a brief exchange on NPR a week ago in which someone mentioned that about 40% of Americans are young earth creationists which just absolutely floors me. When representatives of that 40% try to support their views with evidence there's nothing there but pseudoscience which reflects badly on Christianity as a whole. If anything, I think anti-intellectualism trends within Christianity are caused by the discomforting places that intellectually engaging the evidence necessarily takes us as far as our traditional ideas about the history of our universe. As I've said before, the universe doesn't seem to really care about our notions of how it ought to be, nor does it shed a tear for our shredded existential comfort zones concerning biblical interpretation. It is what it is, and our denial will not change that.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Itinerant Lurker View Post
    I'll jump on board with this. I heard a brief exchange on NPR a week ago in which someone mentioned that about 40% of Americans are young earth creationists which just absolutely floors me. When representatives of that 40% try to support their views with evidence there's nothing there but pseudoscience which reflects badly on Christianity as a whole. If anything, I think anti-intellectualism trends within Christianity are caused by the discomforting places that intellectually engaging the evidence necessarily takes us as far as our traditional ideas about the history of our universe. As I've said before, the universe doesn't seem to really care about our notions of how it ought to be, nor does it shed a tear for our shredded existential comfort zones concerning biblical interpretation. It is what it is, and our denial will not change that.
    To paraphrase, from your quote: I think anti intellectualism trends within Darwinian orthodoxy are caused by the discomforting places that intellectually engaging the evidence necessarily takes them as far as their status quo ideas about the history of the universe.

    Guess what? Some people find "discomforting" the idea of an Almighty One Who "interferes" in their lives, and Who plans to hold them accountable for their behavior.

    I agree with this: "The universe doesn't care about our notions. It is what is and our denial will not change that."

    However, I believe that YHWH, Who, unlike the universe actually can care about something and cares about everything, wants us to come into all truth.

    Yahshua believed in Adam & Eve and the Noahic flood. I do too. I am one of those young earth creationist, like the formerly atheistic scientist in one of the videos mentioned above who tells what evolutuionists leave out.

    I believe that Yahshua knew the Truth, IS the Truth, left us with the Truth and that science backs Him up - which only makes sense, since after all, He created all.
    Please pray for "the least of these" in the Persecuted Church Prayer Forum at top.

    Acts 21 Now they have been informed about you that you continually teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn back from and forsake Moses...Therefore do just what we tell you. With us are 4 men who have taken a vow upon themselves. Take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses [for a temple offering],...Thus everybody will know that there is no truth in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself walk in observance of the Law of Moses.


  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,211
    As badly as I want to respond (I'm literally holding myself back), I feel we're both derailing this thread even further.

    I'll say this - Ken's wrong because he's never taken the adequate time to look at Behe's test, not where the test has been applied. The test itself shows that the design hypothesis is testable and falsifiable.
    I agree, no need to make this thread digress. But this is fascinating. I'm going to order a copy of Darwin's Black Box and give it a read for myself!

    Ken's own belief that God has been involved in creation contradicts his method - believes it's a matter of theology to believe in God and a matter of science to ignore Him. That's compartmentalization, which is a precursor to anti-intellectualism.

    Also, Mike has always taught that we come from a single cell - so him admitting we evolved from apes doesn't surprise me (as I believed this was always his belief).
    Miller's theology struck me as weak, and I think that his standpoint (which IS naturalistic, he dodges the question of abiogenesis) does border on compartmentalization.

    As a side note, Plantinga doesn't frame evolution as implausible. He frames naturalism as implausible (naturalism is what ID works against; ID doesn't work against evolution). Just something to keep in mind.
    Tonight, I dig out my Plantinga articles again!

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by L'Ange View Post
    Guess what? Some people find "discomforting" the idea of an Almighty One Who "interferes" in their lives, and Who plans to hold them accountable for their behavior.
    True, this is one of the reasons for the initial resistance of many scientists against the big bang theory, because it has definite and in my opinion undeniable implications of a supernatural source for the universe. However, at the end of the day evidence is the trump card - the finite universe crowd had it while the infinite universe people did not. The universe itself, meanwhile, pretty much said "tough cookies" to the pleas of the infinite model and kept right on expanding.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,806
    I personally agree with the scientists who feel that the Big Bang is not well suported by scientific facts, and will turn into a little whimper when the next theory arrives for origins of the universe. But as someone said above, I don't want to derail this thread from its original topic.
    Please pray for "the least of these" in the Persecuted Church Prayer Forum at top.

    Acts 21 Now they have been informed about you that you continually teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn back from and forsake Moses...Therefore do just what we tell you. With us are 4 men who have taken a vow upon themselves. Take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses [for a temple offering],...Thus everybody will know that there is no truth in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself walk in observance of the Law of Moses.


  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by L'Ange View Post
    I personally agree with the scientists who feel that the Big Bang is not well suported by scientific facts, and will turn into a little whimper when the next theory arrives for origins of the universe. But as someone said above, I don't want to derail this thread from its original topic.

    Eh...

    Those scientists are attempting to argue for an eternal universe, which is antithetical to Christian metaphysics. The Big Bang is actually congruent with Christian metaphysics, that is, the universe has a finite beginning point where everything came into existence ex nihilo.

    Like I said, even 6 day creationists can believe in the Big Bang (and should as it's scientific evidence for God's creation). All it teaches is that the universe is expanding and decaying, nullifying a belief in an eternal universe. Furthermore, due to the second law of thermodynamics, if the universe were eternal then all energy should have moved toward a state of equilibrium. However, this has yet to happen, further indicating that the universe has a finite beginning.

    The Big Bang is beautiful because is mathematical and scientific proof that the Universe (ultimately) needed an immaterial and nontemporal cause, i.e. God.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,451
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnswer99 View Post
    I wasn't sure which forum to post this into, but I think this topic directly affects apologetics and evangelism (especially!)

    I've always been interested in why there are strong currents of anti-intellectual thought among Christians. I think you guys know what I'm talking about too. Some believers seem to favor "blissful ignorance" and to view intellectualism as some form of heresy. For example, many Christians do not even know basic information about Evolution or anything related to science. My mom is a Sunday School teacher, and many of her kids (aged 10-13) can't even read - as in nearly illiterate. I just saw a video where some man was talking to a group of people about evolution in schools and some woman actually yelled "burn the books!"

    Traditionally, Christian monks, Christian theologians, and Jewish scholars were generally the most educated people in the entire world, and the non-believers were the uneducated ones. Now, however, it seems to have flip-flopped. Fewer and fewer Christians seem to be attending top 20 universities or are pursuing degrees in the biological sciences. When I was an agnostic, I thought that Christians lacked logic or any form of basic education - and the evidence seemed to back that up. After all, why should I believe an Intelligent Design advocate if he does not even understand the fundamentals of the Theory of Evolution.


    This basically re-affirms others' belief that Christians are uneducated yokels who believe in fairy tales.

    This is not to stand on some pedestal and say that 'the educated' are better than those with a 5th grade education. It does not require a college degree to explore things which DIRECTLY effect our understanding of the Bible or the world.

    If Christians don't even understand the theory of evolution or other scientific ideas, how are they to address them when non-believers ask? This affects evangelism and bringing others into God's flock
    Wow. Brother, I think you should consider that you may have a different ministry than someone else. Do you think Christians in Africa or South America need to learn the theory of evolution also or just the American Christians?
    God chooses to use whomever submits to being used, regardless of IQ or GPA.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,806
    Quote Originally Posted by apothanein kerdos View Post
    Eh...

    Those scientists are attempting to argue for an eternal universe, which is antithetical to Christian metaphysics. The Big Bang is actually congruent with Christian metaphysics, that is, the universe has a finite beginning point where everything came into existence ex nihilo.

    Like I said, even 6 day creationists can believe in the Big Bang (and should as it's scientific evidence for God's creation). All it teaches is that the universe is expanding and decaying, nullifying a belief in an eternal universe. Furthermore, due to the second law of thermodynamics, if the universe were eternal then all energy should have moved toward a state of equilibrium. However, this has yet to happen, further indicating that the universe has a finite beginning.

    The Big Bang is beautiful because is mathematical and scientific proof that the Universe (ultimately) needed an immaterial and nontemporal cause, i.e. God.
    I can see how people would think that the Big Bang is proof for a Creator, unless they ascribe to an everything came from nothing at that time point of view.

    Presumably there is more than one method that the Creator could have used to create time, space, matter, energy and the Cosmos. But did He use the Big Bang?

    I am just quoting, hopefully more or less correctly, what I have heard from scientists who disagree with the Big Bang. They say that if it were true, as the universe expanded outward, any force binding and holding planets and stars and galaxies together would be absent. Things do not look as if they are all part of some vast, ever outwardly expanding explosion.

    As some scientists put it, our telescopes show that things look "lumpy" in the heavens, instead.

    There are clusters of galaxies here, and some others over there, etc. etc.
    There are quite a few other reasons why dissenting scientists dio not believe in the Big Bang but I do not have time to go into them right now.

    I don't feel any personal stake one way or another in the Big Bang theory.
    I just felt, when I heard the arguments against it, that they made good sense.

    Below is the video that talks about problems with the Big Bang. Lots of quotes from evolutionists are given showing their own qunadries regarding the Big Bang model. I am certainly not a cosmologist or an astronomer. If you think there are some problems with what this particular scientist is saying, it might be interesting to know your thoughts. I'm always open to hearing different points of view as I like to be as accurate as possible
    in my perceptions of reality! I know YHWH (and assume you do also!) and know He is the Creator of all that is, seen and unseen. I never feel threatened by new information as the more I have delved to see where any people disagree with Genesis, the more I have always found that makes me believe it more fully.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haadES6pDZw

    Edit: Should have said, I am not saying there is no outward expansion at all of the universe during this present time. I'm just learning about things like red shift and the doppler effect, and those do seem to indicate there is some outward expansion of the universe right now. However opponents of the Big Bang are saying that they see scientific evidence against the belief that all time, space, matter and energy originated out of one central explosion called the Big Bang. Really I need to study all these things over more in depth, and probably will do so this Sabbath, so that I can more clearly articulate what I am trying to say.
    Please pray for "the least of these" in the Persecuted Church Prayer Forum at top.

    Acts 21 Now they have been informed about you that you continually teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn back from and forsake Moses...Therefore do just what we tell you. With us are 4 men who have taken a vow upon themselves. Take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses [for a temple offering],...Thus everybody will know that there is no truth in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself walk in observance of the Law of Moses.


  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Itinerant Lurker View Post

    As I've said before, the universe doesn't seem to really care about our notions of how it ought to be, nor does it shed a tear for our shredded existential comfort zones concerning biblical interpretation. It is what it is, and our denial will not change that.
    But how did the universe come into being? The “intellectualism” promoted by Darwinian science insists that the universe is the result of random cosmic accidents that did not have man in mind. The Darwinian universe is void of meaning “where something (the universe) came from nothing” all by its lonesome which defies logic. Darwinian science demands that there is no Creator-God. Is that the “intellectualism” you advise Christians to embrace?
    "Evolution is unproved and is unprovable. We believe in it because Creation is unthinkable." ~ Sir Arthur Keith

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by losthorizon View Post
    But how did the universe come into being? The “intellectualism” promoted by Darwinian science insists that the universe is the result of random cosmic accidents that did not have man in mind. The Darwinian universe is void of meaning “where something (the universe) came from nothing” all by its lonesome which defies logic. Darwinian science demands that there is no Creator-God. Is that the “intellectualism” you advise Christians to embrace?
    "Evolution is unproved and is unprovable. We believe in it because Creation is unthinkable." ~ Sir Arthur Keith
    Read my post again, I have no idea what you're talking about.

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Itinerant Lurker View Post
    Read my post again, I have no idea what you're talking about.
    Of course you understand my post and you know the meaning of “Darwinian intellectualism” – it is based on atheism and should be rejected by Christians of all stripes and it is rejected by many intellectuals within and without the scientific community - Christian and non-Christian. Your premise that Christians are somehow “anti-intellectual” because they reject aspects of Darwinian science is simply fallacious thinking. If you can’t wrap your head around this concept let me know and we can go into greater detail.

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by losthorizon View Post
    Of course you understand my post and you know the meaning of “Darwinian intellectualism” – it is based on atheism and should be rejected by Christians of all stripes and it is rejected by many intellectuals within and without the scientific community - Christian and non-Christian. Your premise that Christians are somehow “anti-intellectual” because they reject aspects of Darwinian science is simply fallacious thinking. If you can’t wrap your head around this concept let me know and we can go into greater detail.
    I'm thinking that "Darwinian intellectualism" is pretty much a figment of your imagination. Sure, there are atheists who lean on evolution as an alternative for Creationism but this hardly implicates anyone who acknowledges modern scientific findings about the age of the earth or biological evolution as a member of this anti-God semi-imaginary order of yours.

  13. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Itinerant Lurker View Post
    I'm thinking that "Darwinian intellectualism" is pretty much a figment of your imagination.
    Hardly – read the works the darlings of the Darwinian movement - Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins – two good examples of the “Darwinian intelligentsia". Their words speak volumes. What is the difference between your version of Darwinism and what Dawkins preaches?

  14. #44
    I've always believed mature Christians are very intellectual. They have to be. Most mature Christians are on the front fighting against secularism creeping it's way into the church, so simplistic arguments like "the Bible tells me so" just won't wash in these high-brow debates. Facts and analysis must be a part of the equation as well.
    One of the greatest intellectuals in Christian history was C.S. Lewis. If you read his book "Mere Christianity" you'd think he was Spock's brother. Almost all logical thinking and little emotion was used in his salvation from Atheism to Christianity. It's a fascinating read.

  15. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by losthorizon View Post
    What is the difference between your version of Darwinism and what Dawkins preaches?
    Either you aren't very familiar with Dawkins or you aren't very familiar with my posts. . .I really can't think of any other explanation for asking such a question. Dawkins goes to extreme lengths to show that the universe came into existence without the need for a supernatural God, I do not. Dawkins argues against the deity of Christ, I do not. Dawkins believes that life arose through a purely naturalistic and unguided series of chemical reactions, I do not. Dawkins argues that the Christian principles of morality have actually had a negative impact on human society whereas a system of morality based on pragmatism would be superior, I most certainly do not.

    Please actually read Dawkins' work or actually read through one of my posts before asking questions like this again. I am a teacher, but I am not a believer of the old addage that there are no stupid questions.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anti-Intellectualism/Anti-Academia
    By *Hope* in forum Christian Fellowship
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Mar 20th 2009, 02:52 AM
  2. The danger in anti-war and anti-death penalty stances
    By Brother Mark in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: Jul 2nd 2008, 12:42 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •