Can creationists make good scientists?

Originally posted by twhitehead
As I said, the fascists also built their arguments on Christian teachings. In fact, I would argue that their belief in a 'master race' is remarkably similar to the Jews belief that they are the 'chosen people'.
As for the two ideas in question, they are the truth, and I don't think it is reasonable to suppress the truth for fear that some fascists will f ...[text shortened]... ther thread and I think it fits rather well here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

"remarkably similar to jews thinking they are the chosen people" doesn't lead to "fascists built their arguments on Christian teachings"

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"remarkably similar to jews thinking they are the chosen people" doesn't lead to "fascists built their arguments on Christian teachings"

I didn't say it did. It is of course more complicated than that.
However, Christian teaching does include the very racist belief that people can be favoured by God purely through genetics. One of the arguments used to justify persecuting Jews in Europe and elsewhere is the claim that the Jews rejected Jesus and are now despised by God as a result and that God now needs a new 'Chosen people'. I admit that I may not be phrasing it well, nor covering the wide range of reasons why people persecuted Jews, but the Christian religion and its teachings played a large part and was used quite heavily.

Queue 'not my Christianity' argument....

Originally posted by twhitehead
I didn't say it did. It is of course more complicated than that.
However, Christian teaching does include the very racist belief that people can be favoured by God purely through genetics. One of the arguments used to justify persecuting Jews in Europe and elsewhere is the claim that the Jews rejected Jesus and are now despised by God as a result and tha ...[text shortened]... played a large part and was used quite heavily.

Queue 'not my Christianity' argument....

Christian teaching does include the very racist belief that people can be favoured by God purely through genetics.
wrong. judaism claims that. jesus claims we are all god's children and none are favored.

reasons why people persecuted Jews
asholes wanting jewish assets, wanting to blame someone of the plagues and poverty persecuted the jews. and for a whole bunch of other reasons. none of which are christian.

christianity is quite clear. love your neighbor, love your enemy. the problem with christianity is that jesus forgot to make that clearer. jesus forgot to give in full detail how the creation of the universe really happened. jesus forgot to make it clear that the crap people believed then to be important may not be important in two thousand years. that the world is changing and, aside from love and compassion, we should change with it.
jesus had a lot on his mind




you know all of these. you can do better.









this has kind of turned into a spirituality thread.
let me reiterate the point i made in the beginning: creationists cannot make good scientists, just as pedophiles do not make good babysitters.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
wrong. judaism claims that. jesus claims we are all god's children and none are favored.

Wrong. Christian teaching does not withdraw the claim from the Bible. A few Christians may claim that the rule was changed, but you are the first I have ever met to try and deny it.

asholes wanting jewish assets, wanting to blame someone of the plagues and poverty persecuted the jews. and for a whole bunch of other reasons. none of which are christian.
You are listing reasons. I was talking about using teachings for justification.

christianity is quite clear. love your neighbor, love your enemy.
Jesus was quite clear, some of the time. Christianity, is not. Christianity is a mess of conflicting claims and conflicting teachings and followers in conflict.

the problem with christianity is that jesus forgot to make that clearer.
Actually its one of the few clear statements he made. Most of the time he sort of mumbled into his beard and said something along the lines of "Well I know its the law, and God sanctions it and all, but if your a really nice person, then you shouldn't really be that mean".

Originally posted by twhitehead
Wrong. Christian teaching does not withdraw the claim from the Bible. A few Christians may claim that the rule was changed, but you are the first I have ever met to try and deny it.

[b]asholes wanting jewish assets, wanting to blame someone of the plagues and poverty persecuted the jews. and for a whole bunch of other reasons. none of which are christ ...[text shortened]... ctions it and all, but if your a really nice person, then you shouldn't really be that mean".

even rjhinds and robbie mention time and time again how jesus dismissed most of the old testament. they still conveniently consider the flood or the 6 day creation as established fact, but even the most zealot christian zealots don't take everything in the bible as 100% true. the less insane realize that. the insane ones (like rjhinds) consider jesus saying that part of the bible is not to be taken seriously still mean that the bible is to be taken 100% seriously.

i wanna see an egotistical american fundamentalist thinking that jews are still the chosen people and not other americans of the same denomination.

i don't understand how you can say the belief that jews are the chosen people of god is a christian belief then mention how christians persecuted a bunch of jews. it is completely contradictory.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i don't understand how you can say the belief that jews are the chosen people of god is a christian belief then mention how christians persecuted a bunch of jews. it is completely contradictory.

You misunderstood what I said. I said Christianity, through the Bible, teaches that the Jews were the chosen people.
And you are the first Christian I have ever heard deny this.
However, as you say, this is becoming more of a spirituality thread, even though the thread title suggested that thats where it really should be. So I'll start a thread in spirituality and we can see whether there are any other Christians that believe as you do. There could well be more than I know about, and I would find that interesting.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Wrong. Christian teaching does not withdraw the claim from the Bible. A few Christians may claim that the rule was changed, but you are the first I have ever met to try and deny it.

asholes wanting jewish assets, wanting to blame someone of the plagues and poverty persecuted the jews. and for a whole bunch of other reasons. none of which are christ ctions it and all, but if your a really nice person, then you shouldn't really be that mean".

I don't quite know how you have got onto zionism, Jews believe they are 'gods own people' as they were the only ones believing in that god at the time , so they were!

twhitehead, I notice you and humy keep pushing the nazi were christian idea. may i ask I notice your from South Africa. To what extend was apartheid motivated / supported by the church in south africa. Would you call that 'christian' was it sold as such?

Regarding that Dawkin vs brandon flowers video. that is another example to me of dawkins getting an E- in philosophy, he would fail that subject if he took it. The book of morman is not meant to stand up to his type of scrutiny, its a philosophical text, the cynical might call it fiction, but compare it to scientology, rastafarianism and it holds up quite well frankly. Richard dawkins 'philosophy' is Eugenics in sheeps clothing. Most people who study evolution know it is a very dangerous / un pc subject out of the science book, it should never be sold as philosophy, but dawkins does. I have a short book on heidegger - that is advanced 'godless' philosophy, much better then dawkins. But heidegger was a nazi, a very clever one. I actualy like the book a lot, but am weary of the ideas, and if dawkins can't see he is selling a cheaper version of that I think he is the fool in that video. (That said he does spark discussion so good luck to him)

Originally posted by e4chris
twhitehead, I notice you and humy keep pushing the nazi were christian idea.

I am not 'pushing' it. As far as I know it is a historical fact.

may i ask I notice your from South Africa. To what extend was apartheid motivated / supported by the church in south africa. Would you call that 'christian' was it sold as such?
I moved to South Africa after the end of Apartheid. However, to my knowledge, a significant proportion of the people who promoted Apartheid were Christian and did use the Bible as justification for their actions.

Regarding that Dawkin vs brandon flowers video. that is another example to me of dawkins getting an E- in philosophy, he would fail that subject if he took it. The book of morman is not meant to stand up to his type of scrutiny, its a philosophical text, the cynical might call it fiction, but compare it to scientology, rastafarianism and it holds up quite well frankly.
Do you at least accept that Dawkins was not particularly rude in that video, and that his opponent, should have expected some criticism considering that he went on a tv debate show against a known atheist?
So what type of scrutiny did Dawkins use that was so wrong? And if the Book of Mormon failed to stand up to it, as you readily admit, then what is wrong with Dawkins pointing this out?

Richard dawkins 'philosophy' is Eugenics in sheeps clothing. Most people who study evolution know it is a very dangerous / un pc subject out of the science book, it should never be sold as philosophy, but dawkins does.
I have never heard Dawkins try to sell Evolution as philosophy. When did you hear him do so?

I have a short book on heidegger - that is advanced 'godless' philosophy, much better then dawkins. But heidegger was a nazi, a very clever one. I actualy like the book a lot, but am weary of the ideas, and if dawkins can't see he is selling a cheaper version of that I think he is the fool in that video. (That said he does spark discussion so good luck to him)
I think you are just a theist who can't help seeing the devil in anyone who doesn't share your views. I don't think you really listened to what Dawkins had to say at all.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not 'pushing' it. As far as I know it is a historical fact.

[b]may i ask I notice your from South Africa. To what extend was apartheid motivated / supported by the church in south africa. Would you call that 'christian' was it sold as such?
I moved to South Africa after the end of Apartheid. However, to my knowledge, a significant proportion are your views. I don't think you really listened to what Dawkins had to say at all.[/b]

i am bemused as to why you and humy keep putting my text IN BOLD... and countering it line by line. they are not so well considered to warrant that.

I wouldn't call myself a theist, I am a scientist turned christian and i would not say I'm that devout either, not at all. but you are right i do see the devil in what dawkins says yes, and i saw it in fritz haber when i had to study him too. I was not christian then, not at all, but studying him did make me more sympathetic to a christian view.

Re South Africa, do you think apartheid was at all christain? or was it christianity hijacked?

Re Dawkins, saying evolution disproves religion is offering it up as a philosophy. Using science to criticise the book of morman is about as valid as using it to counter alice in wonderland, its not relevant.

Originally posted by e4chris
i am bemused as to why you and humy keep putting my text IN BOLD... and countering it line by line. they are not so well considered to warrant that.

Its just standard practice on this forum and makes it clear what we are responding to. Its not an indication of how well considered your posts are.

I wouldn't call myself a theist, I am a scientist turned christian and i would not say I'm that devout either, not at all.
You believe a god/gods exist? Then you are a theist.

but you are right i do see the devil in what dawkins says
Not what I said. I don't think you listen to what Dawkins actually says. You see the devil based on the fact that you know he is atheist.

Re South Africa, do you think apartheid was at all christain? or was it christianity hijacked?
I think it was perpetrated by Christians who used Christianity to in part support it.
But no, I don't think Aparthied was 'Christian'. It wasn't a religious denomination but rather a political form of exploitation. I also don't see Nazism as 'Christian', but most Nazis were Christian.

Re Dawkins, saying evolution disproves religion is offering it up as a philosophy.
Can you quote Dawkins saying that evolution disproves religion?
If your religion claimed that the earth was flat, and I used science to show that the earth was spherical, would I be 'offering it up as philosophy'? Or just presenting the facts?

Using science to criticise the book of morman is about as valid as using it to counter alice in wonderland, its not relevant.
It is relevant if you claim that Alice in Wonderland is a true story and that it was written by the brother of Jesus. If I point out that it is not a true story and not written by the brother of Jesus, then why are you so offended? Surely I didn't say anything untrue?

Originally posted by twhitehead

but you are right i do see the devil in what dawkins says
Not what I said. I don't think you listen to what Dawkins actually says. You see the devil based on the fact that you know he is atheist.

I have no problem at all with atheists, i don't consider it evil in anyway.
My problem with dawkins is the UK had to fight 2 world wars against fascism, and I think what he is offering up is fascist philosophy - not science. Like i said it smacks of darwin meets nietsche to me. Heidegger is one step further along that road and he was a paid up nazi.

Originally posted by e4chris
I have no problem at all with atheists, i don't consider it evil in anyway.
My problem with dawkins is the UK had to fight 2 world wars against fascism, and I think what he is offering up is fascist philosophy - not science. Like i said it smacks of darwin meets nietsche to me. Heidegger is one step further along that road and he was a paid up nazi.

Considering fascism was invented after the end of one of those world wars in a country that was allied to Britain during that world war I think your arithmetic is a little off there. What that has to do with Dawkins engaging in unseemly brawls with religious half wits is beyond me.

Originally posted by e4chris
My problem with dawkins is the UK had to fight 2 world wars against fascism, and I think what he is offering up is fascist philosophy - not science. Like i said it smacks of darwin meets nietsche to me. Heidegger is one step further along that road and he was a paid up nazi.

You don't appear to have understood what Dawkins is offering up. I suggest you consider reading some of his books, or watching a full debate on youtube and actually listen to what he says. I certainly have never heard him offer up anything that I would call 'facist philosophy.' But then your ideas of what facism entails seem somewhat non-standard anyway.

Originally posted by e4chris
You might disagree, but i often think when i see 'atheists' talk about morals on this site, saying they don't need christianity to teach them... they sound like they are spouting christian morals anyway, .

Morals are not the property of Christianity.

Nor did Jesus invent any of the morals he taught.
(Give an example if you disagree)