Religious People - Where do you stand on the creationist/evolutionist scale?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:47:55 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Religion & Philosophy (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  Religious People - Where do you stand on the creationist/evolutionist scale?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Just pick the answer you are closest to
#1
Young Earth Creationist - The world was created by a/some god(s), sometime in the last 10,000 years, in a short amount of time. Evolution is heresy.
#2
Old Earth Creationist - Scientists are roughly correct about the age of the earth, but evolution did not happen. A/some god(s) created each species at certain times in history from dust or similar.
#3
Progressive Creationist - Scientists are roughly correct about the age of the earth, and species did develop from previous species, but no actual evolution is present. A/some god(s) created new species out of parts of previous species without natural sele
#4
Theistic Evolutionist - Scientists are roughly correct about the age of the earth, and natural selection did happen to a point. However, A/some god(s) guided the process throughout with a clear end goal in mind and did some of the "evolution" on
#5
Darwinian Evolutionist - The theory of evolution is fully correct and valid. This does not prohibit a god from existing according to my beliefs.
#6
Do not believe in any gods
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: Religious People - Where do you stand on the creationist/evolutionist scale?  (Read 3925 times)
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 07, 2016, 05:25:41 PM »
« edited: October 07, 2016, 05:27:22 PM by Dwarven Dragon »

Third option ending was supposed to read: "without natural selection ever being present"
Fourth option ending was supposed to read: "on his/her/their own without the help of natural selection.


This is intended to be a poll, not an evolution megathread, but if it turns into that, so be it.

As I've stated many times before, I'm a (christian) theistic evolutionist. The creation story wouldn't have been written if god didn't play a role, but the scientific evidence for an old earth and some level of natural selection is definitely there and very hard to deny in my view. I believe this is consistent with the bible, even if I don't have a perfect answer to every question YECers/OECers ask.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2016, 07:01:26 AM »

Option 4 or 5. 4 is possible, but given the vast scale of the universe in both space and time, it seems unnecessary for intervention to happen on the evolutionary scale.
Logged
DavidB.
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,612
Israel


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: 4.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2016, 12:02:25 PM »

Option 4 or 5. 4 is possible, but given the vast scale of the universe in both space and time, it seems unnecessary for intervention to happen on the evolutionary scale.
This.
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2016, 01:58:45 PM »

I am an ''Old Earth, Young Humanity'' creationist.
Logged
Green Line
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,577
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2016, 03:50:02 PM »

3 or 4.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2016, 05:52:19 PM »

4.5ish, in that I have the strong suspicion--but no real theological argument, yet--that this is in some way a false dichotomy.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,962
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2016, 06:12:17 PM »

4.5ish, in that I have the strong suspicion--but no real theological argument, yet--that this is in some way a false dichotomy.

I actually agree with this entirely. 4 and 5 can both be true - they would just reflect different levels of truth.

Obviously, the level of truth to which 4 refers bears no relevance to a science class.
Logged
Illiniwek
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,865
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2016, 06:30:06 PM »

4 of course.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2016, 07:18:45 PM »

Theistic evolutionist.  I could get into all the details, but it would probably take several posts, so I will summarize with that.
Logged
Enduro
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,073


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2016, 12:20:12 PM »

Young Earth, but I do recognize that they're some evidence in favor of the other choices.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2016, 01:45:58 PM »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.
Logged
JA
Jacobin American
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,956
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 14, 2016, 11:00:03 PM »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.

... What? There are enormous, even vast amounts of scientific proof to completely discredit any notion of a young earth. Have you never taken a course in Anthropology or Biology?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,962
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2016, 01:40:53 AM »

The closest one to my views is Progressive Creationism. I believe in natural selection and that God created all general animals as they are now, but God created things like one canine, one feline, and through natural selection guided them to where they are now. I believe humanity was created as is.

That is one of the stupidest applications of moderate hero logic I've ever seen. Right on par with the XKCD cartoon on 9/11.
Logged
Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook
The Obamanation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2016, 04:22:09 PM »

The closest one to my views is Progressive Creationism. I believe in natural selection and that God created all general animals as they are now, but God created things like one canine, one feline, and through natural selection guided them to where they are now. I believe humanity was created as is.

That is one of the stupidest applications of moderate hero logic I've ever seen. Right on par with the XKCD cartoon on 9/11.

Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,962
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2016, 04:39:07 PM »

Yeah, that's the one I was referring to.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2016, 05:32:25 PM »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.

... What? There are enormous, even vast amounts of scientific proof to completely discredit any notion of a young earth. Have you never taken a course in Anthropology or Biology?

     The funny part is that he is evidently married to a geologist.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2016, 09:45:20 PM »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.

... What? There are enormous, even vast amounts of scientific proof to completely discredit any notion of a young earth. Have you never taken a course in Anthropology or Biology?

     The funny part is that he is evidently married to a geologist.

But true. She is old  🌏. Astronomy tends to favor young earth however.
Logged
RFayette
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,952
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 21, 2016, 11:25:09 AM »
« Edited: October 21, 2016, 11:27:14 AM by Cruz 2020 »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.

... What? There are enormous, even vast amounts of scientific proof to completely discredit any notion of a young earth. Have you never taken a course in Anthropology or Biology?

     The funny part is that he is evidently married to a geologist.

But true. She is old  🌏. Astronomy tends to favor young earth however.

Huh?  Even young-Earth creationist astronomers like Jason Lisle acknowledge that the distant starlight problem poses a significant difficulty for a young universe model.  

Anyway, for me, I'm definitely a fan of the gap theory (often called the gap principle) - as there is too much scientific evidence contradicting a young Earth, and the exegesis makes sense with it.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2016, 01:33:41 PM »

For me the answer is 6.

I don't see any huge difference between 4 and 5, though.
Logged
Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook
The Obamanation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2016, 02:04:53 PM »

Young Earth. Though am open to the day-age view.

6-12 thousand years at the most.

... What? There are enormous, even vast amounts of scientific proof to completely discredit any notion of a young earth. Have you never taken a course in Anthropology or Biology?

     The funny part is that he is evidently married to a geologist.

But true. She is old  🌏. Astronomy tends to favor young earth however.

Huh?  Even young-Earth creationist astronomers like Jason Lisle acknowledge that the distant starlight problem poses a significant difficulty for a young universe model.  

Anyway, for me, I'm definitely a fan of the gap theory (often called the gap principle) - as there is too much scientific evidence contradicting a young Earth, and the exegesis makes sense with it.

Is that the one where God creates, destroys, and re-creates everything, and fossils are from the first creation?
Logged
Greatest I am
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 819
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 21, 2016, 02:43:06 PM »

Third option ending was supposed to read: "without natural selection ever being present"
Fourth option ending was supposed to read: "on his/her/their own without the help of natural selection.


This is intended to be a poll, not an evolution megathread, but if it turns into that, so be it.

As I've stated many times before, I'm a (christian) theistic evolutionist. The creation story wouldn't have been written if god didn't play a role, but the scientific evidence for an old earth and some level of natural selection is definitely there and very hard to deny in my view. I believe this is consistent with the bible, even if I don't have a perfect answer to every question YECers/OECers ask.

You forget that all religions have some kind of creation myth so why would you pick a fairly recent Christian myth over the older myths and traditions?

Logged
Greatest I am
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 819
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 21, 2016, 02:51:14 PM »


You seem to promote Jesus'/Yahweh's substitutionary atonement as moral and just.

How so when your own scriptures speak of our being responsible for our own salvation?

Most Christians will not argue for it. Perhaps because every decent court on earth would reject such a notion as they believe that justice should seek to punish the guilty and not the innocent.

I basically think the way this Bishop does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKNup9gEBdg&feature=em-subs_digest-vrecs

Are you up for a civil argument here or in a new O.P. as to not highjack this one?

If so, please refute this following statement here or begin a new thread.

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

Regards
DL


Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2016, 02:51:56 PM »

For me the answer is 6.

I don't see any huge difference between 4 and 5, though.

The basic difference is 4) involves some sort of "intelligent being" controlling the process of evolution (at least some of the time), while 5) is saying there were no supernatural aspects to evolution or natural selection, but that this doesn't mean there is no god.
Logged
Greatest I am
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 819
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2016, 02:59:11 PM »

Young Earth, but I do recognize that they're some evidence in favor of the other choices.

Do you see your bible as evidence given that it begins with a talking serpent and a God who cannot seem to get creation right?

By that I mean that he screwed up heaven with Satan, he screwed up Eden by having to murder A & E by neglect and locking away what would have kept t5hem alive, the tree of life, and finally God could not control his own sons of God and had to genocide almost the whole earth to reboot the system.

Not a great record for a God. Right?

Regards
DL
Logged
Greatest I am
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 819
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2016, 03:08:39 PM »

A bit of comic relief followed by how creation really happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPQj5ITva9k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmD9ZWDUsNY

Regards
DL
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 14 queries.