How Does Creationism Prohibit Scientific Progress?

1. 66

   Asa2141posted 9 years ago

   How Does Creationism Prohibit Scientific Progress?
   
   "Atheists" are always claiming that Creationism or Creationists prohibit scientific progress, yet fail to give any concrete examples or reasons. Your thoughts?

   replyreport
2. 59

   Link10103posted 9 years ago

   Hmm? I have an incredibly basic knowledge of Creationism and I can give you a concrete example of it impeding scientific progress.
   
   It is human nature to know "why", whether it be as (sorta) simple as why the sky is blue or something complex as to why the universe was created.
   Creationism claims that god created everything does it not? That is a pretty simple explanation for things, but it fails to hold up when delved deeper into. Why did god create everything? Typical answer to that is either for reasons unknown to us or because he loves us. An answer that doesnt actually answer anything, pretty convenient is it not? Creationism is a claim that everything was created by a divine deity, but there is absolutely nothing that backs that up outside of a singular source that was written thousands of years ago. To simply accept something as fact when there is nothing that points to it being fact goes against human's inquisitive nature.
   
   Evolution goes a much farther way of explaining the world than creationism does, but even that has holes in it. At least evolution can be proven to an extent and any scientist worth his salt would willingly admit that it does not explain everything for certain, whereas creationism attempts to.
   
   If everyone were to just accept that "god made everything" and call it a day, we probably wouldnt be as advanced of a civilization that we are now. Why bother trying to understand the world and the things around us when we "know" god made everything and that everything happens for a reason? There wouldnt be, so progress comes to a halt and we remain the same, never advancing our knowledge of the world, the universe, and mankind in general.
   
   Was that specific enough? Again, I have limited knowledge of Creationism and even Evolution as well, so one can't really say my answer is biased, yet I was still able to piece that together. And on the slight chance that you or anyone else jumps the gun and assume negative biased things, no I am not an atheist.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Daveadamposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      God & mother nature created the world together, & this is the trial run or our one chance to learn, & hopefully grow into something worth giving eternal life to. :-)

      replyreport
   2. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, by studying science you are looking into the design of a Deity. What a motivation!
      
      If we are all just a bunch of chemical accidents that gives us very little incentive to advance anything. Just eat drink and be merry!

      replyreport
   3. 59

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      And even if that is the case, why is that a bad thing Asa? You live your life, be happy, and die. Simple.

      replyreport
3. 78

   junksellerposted 9 years ago

   Where did any atheist ever claim that?
   
   By itself it does nothing. The only time or way it would inhibit scientific progress is if it is put in a science classroom and students' time is wasted on learning it, when that time could be spent on actual science.

   replyreport
4. 0

   fit2dayposted 9 years ago

   One reason creationism isn't taught in schools, is because it gives glory to God. Evolution esteems man as being supreme, hence why the most respected and credible scientists are usually evolutionists. Atheism has proven throughout history to make progress, but heartless, massive killings is the wrong kind of progress.
   What is a creationist? Think about it, if you put a bunch of kids together, who had been orphaned from birth together, you would expect them to know they had parents. But, what if some of them concluded that their parents never existed and they just appeared their or maybe appeared from a puddle of water. Would the kids who believed they had parents be called parentists?
   
   In the term of 'changes overtime', yes, my wedding ring has evolved to a piece of metal with much less time, but I'd be crazy to say those changes are how it came to be. I don't know who made this ring, but someone did.
   As for scientific progress, please I'm stating the following as fact, not to be in anyway insensitive to reality. Mankind has managed to build weapons of mass destruction, alter the DNA of seeds in such a way that make peanuts as much a concern as cocaine. There's constant talk of curing disease, but instead more people are infected as a result of these scientific progressions.
   
   I'm a parentists and a creationist, but I'm a grateful believer in Jesus Christ. It's not enough to believe that God created everything and to go a step further it's not enough for people to simply go to church and say they believe in Jesus Christ. I'm a grateful believer because Christ loved me and gave Himself for me. When God's grace came to me and I stopped running from Him, stopped trying to hold on to the fact that I'd gone to church all my life and everyone else thought I was a Christian, that's when I received Christ as my personal Savior and the burden of my sin was lifted.
   So ultimately any progression apart from Christ is a progression to more and more evil as evident in the fact that we have to think about the fact that our children face the same danger going to school each day as our law enforcement does going to work each day.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Fit... Care to provide a source that explains these heartless, mass killings you speak of that were apparently done in the name of atheism?

      replyreport
   2. 72

      lone77starposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "Creationism" isn't the only method of giving glory to God. And it's a scientifically poor way to do it. Glory based on a lie is not the best way to do it. And you can't find Truth unless you have the humility of a good scientist. Short supply

      replyreport
   3. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Link-Hitler and Robespierre were atheists. Tens of millions slaughtered between them. Lonestar-all I see is more broad, unproved accusations by an atheist. But Hitler said if you tell a lie over and over people will eventually accept it...

      replyreport
   4. 59

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I disagree with most of what lone says, but he is the farthest thing from an atheist.
      As for Hitler and Rob where did they ever say they killed in the name of atheism? Hitler drank water and so do you, does that mean you are just as evil as he was?

      replyreport
   5. 60

      James R Cullinposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity ... in fact our movement is Christian."
      -Adolf Hitler, 27 October 1928

      replyreport
   6. 0

      fit2dayposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      James R Cullin, Hitler was about as Christian as Satan. Do you think the devil deceives people by telling the truth. You don't believe the truth God says of Himself, yet you believe Hitler?

      replyreport
   7. 59

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Fit, Hitler was baptized. His numerous Bible related speaches aside,  he was a Christian on paper. A lot easier to believe Hitler, since he was an actual person and all

      replyreport
   8. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      To gain public credit, Hitler proclaimed all the time he was Christian, but in his private diaries, he reviled Christians and Christianity. Moreover, his actions prove what he really believed. Read the book "Bonhoeffer".

      replyreport
   9. 59

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      And what did he really believe in, Asa? Because atheism is not something you believe in and are capable of killing in the name of.

      replyreport
   10. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       His idea of a Master Race was rooted in atheism. If you believe we are all created in the image of God, we are all equal. But if we are all a bunch of chemical accidents then the idea of weeding out the "weaker kind" makes perfect sense.

       replyreport
   11. 59

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Atheism is not a cause, so again that makes no sense. And if we are all created in gods image and are equal...why are gay people still not able to marry in most states?

       replyreport
   12. 79

       jlparkposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Asa - show me where Atheists state they want a Master Race?  The only people aside from Hitler who have anything like that are the KKK - and errr...they're Christian. But I wouldn't judge all Christians on them...why do it if Hitler may hv bn an athe

       replyreport
   13. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Atheism is a belief (or non-belief). The Master Race was a cause that sprang from that belief (or the results of the non-belief). Killing out the weaker species makes sense. We see it in nature.

       replyreport
   14. 78

       junksellerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Even if we were to agree that the Master Race arose from atheism (which is asinine) there are millions of atheists who find the notion abhorrent. If you choose to cling to the one over the vast many, that is your own willful idiocy.

       replyreport
   15. 59

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       The hypocrisy is so astounding I am at a loss for words.

       replyreport
   16. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Atheists may not agree with Hitler, but that wasn't the point. Ideas like the Master Race sprang from atheism. Morality just becomes what everyone agrees on under atheism. So if millions of Nazis agree killing Jews is good, then it is moral.

       replyreport
   17. 59

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       And sex trafficking, discrimination of homosexuals, and slavery abuse sprang from the bible...
       Is there a reason you seem to be trying to crucify atheism while ignoring the very obvious negatives of christianity/other religions, Asa?

       replyreport
   18. 78

       junksellerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Maybe in an alternate universe. In this universe, those millions of Nazis you mention weren't atheists. Germany was predominantly Christian in 1939 (95%), as was most of the Nazi Party. The Romanian Iron Guard was heavily religious, etc.

       replyreport
   19. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       The point is that you CAN and people HAVE killed in the name of atheism, which you said was impossible. As the leaders of the French Revolution said to justify their kiling of clergymen "We are throwing off the shackles of religion to embrace Reason"

       replyreport
   20. 78

       junksellerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No one said it was impossible. It just isn't anywhere near the norm as you are trying to make it out to be. Not even close. Since you seem completely unwilling to be honest about it, there isn't much else to say.

       replyreport
   21. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Link said you are not capable of killing in the name of atheism. Try reading the previous comments before YOU comment. I guess staying on point is not "being honest".

       replyreport
   22. 78

       junksellerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No, Link said you can't believe in atheism, hence can truly do nothing in its name. You only said that people kill in the name of atheism, which might be true, it doesn't mean they actually are. No one said what YOU said was impossible. Get it?

       replyreport
   23. 59

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Even if people have killed "in the name of atheism" (is there anyway for you to prove this?), to say I killed such and such for atheism still makes no sense. There is no cause to kill for, you cannot claim it was for a cause that doesnt exist.

       replyreport
   24. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Of course they don't exclaim "I'll kill you in the name of atheism!" But their justification for killing is rooted in their belief system of atheism. The entire deChristianization campaign of the Frnch Revluton was justified by "reason over religion"

       replyreport
   25. 59

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Again, feel free to prove your second sentence at any time with sources. You can have reason and be religious at the same time. Following religion and being blind to most logic is what is dangerous and probably what prompted reason over religion.

       replyreport
   26. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Read chapter 7 in the book "Demonic" for the French Revolution, and read "Bonhoeffer" regarding Hitler and the Master Race movement.

       replyreport
5. 84

   M. T. Dremerposted 9 years ago

   Science is all about asking questions. Why is the sky blue, why does the wind blow, why does that dog look so much different than that other dog? Finding the answers to those questions is scientific progress. So, it makes sense that, in order to encourage further progress, you must encourage children to ask questions about the world around them.
   
   Creationism is the opposite of that. It is a finite answer to a seemingly infinite question. It teaches people to be content with not knowing and proves to be a dead end for scientific thinking. If we assume that god, or a creator, is any part of the equation (without sufficient evidence) then we're fudging the data: pushing it in one direction without letting the results speak for themselves. The two cannot go hand in hand because they teach opposing ways of thinking. One that always asks questions and seeks new answers, and another that argues there is only one answer.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, if you believe the world was created by God, you have a HUGE incentive to advance science (such as medicine) in order to help people.
      If we all came from chemical accidents, why bother advancing anything? Just eat, drink and be merry!

      replyreport
   2. 84

      M. T. Dremerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Why advance medicine if those who die go to eternal happiness in heaven? There would be no reason postpone death. In an atheistic universe, survival is our incentive. We've only got this one life, so lets make it a good (and long) one.

      replyreport
6. 72

   lone77starposted 9 years ago

   It doesn't. Scientists get along just fine without even considering "creationism."
   
   God created physical reality. Science does an excellent job studying physical reality. Things get a little bent with self-concern (ego).
   
   Creationism is self-concern on steroids. Ego is the source of all evil, and thus Creationism is feeding the evil of the world. Talk about upside-down and inside out. Is this something the Anti-Christ would do?
   
   You can tell because Creationism spends too much of its time protecting its "sacred" worldview rather than merely spreading the Love that Christ talked about.
   
   Creationism has science all wrong! Take creationist Walt Brown's book, for instance. It's chock full of erroneous arguments against traditional science. Brown cites the "eye" as one of the organs that prove evolution is invalid. He says that the eye is perfect and that there are no half-done eyes. What about a snail? It can't see shapes or discern colors. All it can do is to tell how bright the sun is. It's eyes are less than half-developed.
   
   Mr. Brown also states that there is no proof of life in the universe other than that on Earth. He points to the failure to find life on the Moon and on Mars. Oops! Mr. Brown is revealing his ignorance, here. The Moon? Does he know that the Moon doesn't have an atmosphere? Does he know that life requires air and water to exist? Duh! But not only that, he misses the huge fact that we have not touched upon any other star system than our own and there are at least several sextillion potential suns out there.
   
   Creationism makes a mockery out of logical debate.
   
   Not only that, Creationism makes a mockery out of biblical study. Truth resides in the Bible, but not in the literal word. Just read 2 Corinthians 3:6, where it warns against taking the letter, for it leads to death. Only the spirit of scripture leads to life everlasting.
   
   Scientists are in the nasty habit of ignoring things that don't make sense to them. This is not a good thing, but in the case of creationism, it works out pretty well. Creationism has nothing of value to offer anyone, especially the believer.
   
   God is love, and that does not fit the description of creationism.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      But you are discrediting the Biblical account by rejecting Creationism.
      
      Just because one Creationist made a fool of himself does not mean the Creator is stupid.

      replyreport
7. 70

   Old-Empresarioposted 9 years ago

   It's always been this way going back to when it was considered blasphemous to say that the earth revolved around the sun instead of vice versa. It seems to take about a hundred years before Christians finally back down from a stance in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. Seriously, the entire academic community, Western Europe and even the mainstream corporate networks and media outlets have accepted the scientific explanations and evidence for how the universe was created (or at least how the earth was created). The Christians have produced no scientific evidence that has not been created by man. The radical Christian response to this losing battle?--pull all of their kids out of school and teach them that the Flintstones is historically accurate. If one refuses to accept scientific evidence without producing a scientific argument, then we are losing scientific progress. We go back to before the days of the Enlightenment and back to the Dark Ages of superstition. Maybe Heaven is real. I don't know. But we do know how old the earth is and how it was created. I 'm embarrassed that it's still being argued in the 21st Century.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I don't fully understand this comment. If you are looking for answer google AIG for how science fits into the Bible. The Website and their magazine is great!

      replyreport