Yes, there are unfortunately not many creationists who apply scientific research to their beliefs, nor are there many scientists who research holy books other then to attempt to disprove them. But there are some, and hopefully more will catch on and learn to work together for the common good.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Creationism is an insult to God.
- Thread starter tumbleweed41
- Start date
Skwim
Veteran Member
So, just which scientists research holy books in an attempt to disprove them? I certainly haven't heard of any.
Perhaps I should clarify. There have been scientists who have tried to prove that God does not exist.
Getting involved with creationism is pretty much a career suicide option for a serious researcher so I doubt it.
Yes, those who attempt to research creationism do tend to be crucified.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Really! I've heard and read of scholars who have shot down so-called proofs of the existence of a god, but none that have ever tried to prove he doesn't exist, principally because it's impossible to prove a negative, so it would be a fruitless endeavor at best and at the least a foolish one. So, I'm interested in whom you're talking about.
I do not know any by name, nor do I care to know. But you say there are scholars who have shot down so called proof of God's existence. I believe you and that is proof enough for me!
Thanks Skwim!
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Why would a biologist research a 'holy book" to learn about biology? Or an astrophysicist research a 'holy book' to learn about astrophysics?
Anthropologists, sociologists, and others in the social sciences do at times research 'holy book' to learn more about those that wrote them and to help understand religion as it relates to their specific field. But the natural sciences have nothing to do with any reveled revelations.
Why do you think that is?
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Really, it hasn't hurt Behe, Dembski or the rest... They are more popular and wealthy thanks to it.
wa:do
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Indeed! Aren't these so called "Creation Scientists" making much more per year than say, your average Biologist?
outhouse
Atheistically
there modern day crooks taking advantage of the uneducated flock and contribute not one positive thing to society.
Unlike science who has made our society as advanced as it is
Skwim
Veteran Member
No doubt they do. And of course, the appellation "creation scientist" does mean to imply any stature as a true scientist.
Of the two, Michael Behe and William A. Dembski, only Behe could be considered a scientist, he serves as professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, although I don't know if he does any actual work in the field.
See HERE
Dembski is not a scientist, but a Research Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for Cultural Engagement [School of Theology] at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary at Fort Worth, Texas,
See HERE
ellenjanuary
Well-Known Member
dumbski is a freaking idolater. 
mathematics seems to be my official religion; people who abuse mathematics for an agenda of reductionism... get me wanting to light a torch, grab a pitchfork; storm someone's castle...
but while those whose will it is to lie produce nothing to the benefit of society; the lie, like poetry, like fiction, like sensationalized account - is truly the purpose of the human to the mind of the eternal.
mathematics seems to be my official religion; people who abuse mathematics for an agenda of reductionism... get me wanting to light a torch, grab a pitchfork; storm someone's castle...
but while those whose will it is to lie produce nothing to the benefit of society; the lie, like poetry, like fiction, like sensationalized account - is truly the purpose of the human to the mind of the eternal.
Amill
Apikoros
Then why do so many evolutionists have no trouble doing just that?
That's like saying stars don't produce light. duh?
Mr. Machina
New Member
Am I correct in presuming that everything before Abraham's life is being argued against ITT?
Last edited:
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Mr. Machina
New Member
What does ITT stand for?
Edit: Oh, and welcome to RF
Thank you. ITT stands for in this thread. I made an edit to my previous post as well. It seems that this debate over what happened before God spoke to Abraham has been raging for quite a while now.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Not necessarily. The point of the OP is to show that the primitive understanding of the world as exhibited in the OT, when taken as literal events, is an insult to just about any concept of God.
Mr. Machina
New Member
You should change your thread's title to "I Don't Believe Anything In The OT" then. If you (and a lot of the other posters here from what I've witnessed) approach The Bible with a non-aggressive view born out of an open mind instead of the intention to find everything possible to lessen it's veracity, you might be able to discern between allegorical and literal texts. Try not to let your bitterness over the actions of the people of my faith cloud your judgment. A lot to ask, no doubt. Like when God "tears open the sky" in the story of Noah, I don't think a titanic Zeus-like figure tore open the Earth's stratosphere and then poured water over all the lands. I absolutely believe in the big bang, dinosaurs and evolution. I believe God is a masterful architect and the supreme scientist, having created all the laws of nature and physics. You would probably scream "pre-determination" in retaliation to this, but here me out. Say you construct a system that operates with "randomness" and then let it do as it will within certain parameters (like for the purpose of creating homo sapiens), voila, in a simple leap of logic that seems to acutely escape millions of people, you have a Christian who believes in the laws of physics. In any case, good luck finding 3,000 year old foot prints in the desert or evidence of slavery in a nation that might very well have decided not to mention that particular nuance of their culture in their own hieroglyphs. [EDIT] In any case, the OT wasn't a "Biology 101" text book. It was a moral guideline to life and the recounting of the affairs of God's chosen people, the Hebrews, amongst other things. As far as I know, the only science in it is the part where it states "you shouldn't eat pigs or shellfish" and, rightly so, because those two animals often times are very unhealthy to eat.
Last edited: