Why are Creationists so afraid of Evolution?

[Amaris]

There was nothing about the tree itself. It was a test of man's reliance on God. God just asked one thing of man and man disobeyed it. After eating of the fruit the only knowledge that man gained was the experience of evil, the experience of disobeying. Nothing else. If man had not eaten then there would be no evil, no consequences.

I've read that two of the reasons God allowed man to be tempted was to give man the choice to accept or reject Him and also He know what would happen and used it to show His infinite love. Even after we rejected Him God offered Himself to take the punishment so that man could be reconciled to God.

If everything around you is good, how do you choose between good and good?

 

[Pavonis]

Wait- so G-d lied about what the fruit of the tree would do?

 

[Gov Kodos]

Twain described the God of the Bible as Jekyll and Hyde. That sums up the business, really.

 

[Amaris]

Twain described the God of the Bible as Jekyll and Hyde. That sums up the business, really.

It really does.

See, with the way Genesis is set up, it is clear that God not only created evil, but put his children in front of it and offered them a choice they didn't understand.

"Eat of this and ye shall die."

Well, that's all fine and well, until you realize that there is no point of reference for death.

So God placed a dangerous weapon in the middle of the room, where his children played, and then he went off to hide, waiting to see what would happen. When the children picked up the weapon, not really knowing what it was, God became angry at them for doing something that he gave them the innate drive to do: to discover and learn.

If a regular parent did that today, we'd call them unfit, and howl for their children to be taken away from such a negligent authority. When it comes to God, though, we call it "love," "grace," "mercy," and that "we deserve to die."

It's Stockholm Syndrome on a metaphysical level.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Eve knew nothing about death, she had never seen it so how ws she suppose to understand the threat that if she ate from the tree than she woud die? Not only that but all her descendants are forever punished for her 'sin'.

If you ask me the being that sinned in the Tree scenario was God himself.

 

[Amaris]

Eve knew nothing about death, she had never seen it so how ws she suppose to understand the threat that if she ate from the tree than she woud die? Not only that but all her descendants are forever punished for her 'sin'.

If you ask me the being that sinned in the Tree scenario was God himself.

Agreed. All creation was not only "good," but VERY "good." There was no way "do not" should have played any part in any of it, unless not all of creation was good. If so, then God made a mistake, but instead of owning up to that mistake, he punished infants who didn't know any better, and couldn't possibly comprehend anything on the level which God is supposed to operate, and "thousands" of years later, mankind is still being punished for it. If anything, God is petty, jealous, cruel, prideful, vain, hateful, deceitful, and duplicitous.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

he knewKnow, outcome either way, presumably. If he didn't want things to happen the way they did, he should have put the tree where it was safe.

I think that's the point that alwayts ignored about Genesis. There are things that God never had any power over. The trees and free will.

Genesis is a tale about a tyrant trying to keep his people uneducated. God LIES about the fruits of the tree of knowledge from good and evil: he tells them they would DIE if they ate from it. The snake comes around and tells Adam and Eve that this is a lie. And thy eat the fruit, and suddenly they become truly self aware, they became knowledgable. The fruit gave them free will. And they decided to stop running around naked. And when God saw them running around with clothing, he got UPSET. And punished them by exiling them. Why? Because he was afraid there were now also going to eat from the tree of life. Then they would have been JUST LIKE HIM.
He couldn't change anything about the trees, and he couldn't control free will. And that's where he got afraid and started to punish them.

If you read Genesis, it really is NOT about an all-loving, all-understanding God. He is described as a powerful, but still limited creature. That has been my interpretation ever since I read that passage for the first time.

There was nothing about the tree itself. It was a test of man's reliance on God. God just asked one thing of man and man disobeyed it. After eating of the fruit the only knowledge that man gained was the experience of evil, the experience of disobeying. Nothing else. If man had not eaten then there would be no evil, no consequences.

I've read that two of the reasons God allowed man to be tempted was to give man the choice to accept or reject Him and also He know what would happen and used it to show His infinite love. Even after we rejected Him God offered Himself to take the punishment so that man could be reconciled to God.

Let's see if I got this love of god concep right.
In his infinite love, god decided to throw two children out of his house forever for a mistake they could not avoid, a bit later drowns their descendants and every other living being in a hissy fit over a vague description of them being wicked except for an incestous family who somehow qualify for his standard of good behavior (what happened to original sin here?).
Then continues to torture the one guy who is truly devoted to him over a petty bet, incites wars, endorses slavery, pilagging and rape, and lots of other gruesome stuff including a few genocides.
Some day he decides, he wants to save humanity from his eternal punishment. But instead of, you know, NOT punish them, giving them a psmile with the words "bygones be bygones, no hard feelings,eh, buddy?", he cnes down to earth, let's them hit him with a pillow and pretends to fall over dead. Aftet getting back up as good as new he says "ok, guys, I still have to punish you forever, but if you become my devoted bitch I'll let the apple thing slide and you can come to my party zone later where you can lick my feet every day forever instead.


Does that sum up god's love or did I forget something important?

 

[Gov Kodos]

I think that's the point that alwayts ignored about Genesis. There are things that God never had any power over. The trees and free will.

Genesis is a tale about a tyrant trying to keep his people uneducated. God LIES about the fruits of the tree of knowledge from good and evil: he tells them they would DIE if they ate from it. The snake comes around and tells Adam and Eve that this is a lie. And thy eat the fruit, and suddenly they become truly self aware, they became knowledgable. The fruit gave them free will. And they decided to stop running around naked. And when God saw them running around with clothing, he got UPSET. And punished them by exiling them. Why? Because he was afraid there were now also going to eat from the tree of life. Then they would have been JUST LIKE HIM.
He couldn't change anything about the trees, and he couldn't control free will. And that's where he got afraid and started to punish them.

If you read Genesis, it really is NOT about an all-loving, all-understanding God. He is described as a powerful, but still limited creature. That has been my interpretation ever since I read that passage for the first time.

There was nothing about the tree itself. It was a test of man's reliance on God. God just asked one thing of man and man disobeyed it. After eating of the fruit the only knowledge that man gained was the experience of evil, the experience of disobeying. Nothing else. If man had not eaten then there would be no evil, no consequences.

I've read that two of the reasons God allowed man to be tempted was to give man the choice to accept or reject Him and also He know what would happen and used it to show His infinite love. Even after we rejected Him God offered Himself to take the punishment so that man could be reconciled to God.

Let's see if I got this love of god concep right.
In his infinite love, god decided to throw two children out of his house forever for a mistake they could not avoid, a bit later drowns their descendants and every other living being in a hissy fit over a vague description of them being wicked except for an incestous family who somehow qualify for his standard of good behavior (what happened to original sin here?).
Then continues to torture the one guy who is truly devoted to him over a petty bet, incites wars, endorses slavery, pilagging and rape, and lots of other gruesome stuff including a few genocides.
Some day he decides, he wants to save humanity from his eternal punishment. But instead of, you know, NOT punish them, giving them a psmile with the words "bygones be bygones, no hard feelings,eh, buddy?", he cnes down to earth, let's them hit him with a pillow and pretends to fall over dead. Aftet getting back up as good as new he says "ok, guys, I still have to punish you forever, but if you become my devoted bitch I'll let the apple thing slide and you can come to my party zone later where you can lick my feet every day forever instead.


Does that sum up god's love or did I forget something important?

 

[Avon]

Lots and lots of hate in this thread.

And from what I've seen, not from the believers.

i hate ignorance. i hate a book that condones slavery and genocide. i hate the idea of worshipping a vindictive , jealous murderer. i hate superstition being promoted as science. i hate conmen using people's faith to make money. i hate people stating religious opinion as factual evidence. i hate the smilie.

theres a lot to hate.

 

[Lt. Uhura-Brown]

Was the decision to eat from the tree really an informed decision?

Did they really have the capacity to make an informed choice when they ate from the tree?

It's like scolding a child for eating the bottle of pills you left on the table within easy reach of them, after you went out and left them unsupervised.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Inevitably, people will mess with things they're told not to mess with. This is one of the greatest things about being human. We're as curious as cats.

Or maybe the final version is where we go when we die? I think you might've just come up with a concept of heaven that makes sense in the 21st century!

Hmm. Not bad. Maybe god has been working on an import filter to migrate us all into the Alpha-verse. Hopefully I'll have fewer problems with my teeth there.

The way I see it, God greenlighted and bankrolled the project, hired the talent, got the ball rolling and went on to the next gig. He doesn't visit the set and he doesn't take personal phone calls. God is Executive Producer of the Universe.

I wonder who will play me in the inevitable reboot. Probably Zachary Quinto.

 

[Emher]

While the Devil put all the dinosaurs' bones, to fool the arrogant scientists!

I do know people who believe this.

god kills more people in the bible than the devil. hell seems like the safer option.

You see, those people didn't believe in God, so that when God's People™ came to claim what God said was theirs, they had to do a little cleaning out. God was okay with this, since those people were never going to believe in God anyway, so they weren't really people! See how easy that was?

So the devil made dinosaurs then? Awesome, hanging with he devil then.

Also, the latter bit also pretty much means that God = a dude like Hitler, what with the ethnic cleansing and everything.


I love these threads

 

[JarodRussell]

There was nothing about the tree itself. It was a test of man's reliance on God. God just asked one thing of man and man disobeyed it. After eating of the fruit the only knowledge that man gained was the experience of evil, the experience of disobeying. Nothing else. If man had not eaten then there would be no evil, no consequences.

First of all, why would have feel the desire to test this? A good character wouldn't do this.
Second, why does he punish them for making their own choices? Again, a good character would not do this.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

For one thing, they don't want Humans to be "descended from monkeys" (as they like to put it). For another thing, teaching evolution (and science in general) in schools is seen as a threat to their historic use of the school system for indoctrination.

You know, for non-Americans, this is so strange. I went to school in the UK, in Brazil, in Germany and in South Africa, and never once was I even aware of "creationism" before I went to the USA. No-one in Europe, South Africa or Brazil would ever think of contesting evolution (as far as I can tell, of course), because, as Sheldon Cooper puts it, it's not an opinion, it's a fact.

It irks me how "Christians" MUST be bigoted people who believe in this creationism stuff, are against gay rights or a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy - this is the vibe you get on Facebook, anyhow, from virulent atheists. That believers are stupid people who believe in an Old Testament God.

On the other hand, a lot of religious people calling themselves Christians rely too heavily on the Old Testament, when really, that's just sort of a historic chronicle, and not a means of justifying hatred against those who are different from you. The Christian bit of the Bible is actually that one pertaining to Christ. Just saying.

I'm a Catholic, I believe in God, I believe in evolution (because it's a FACT), I support gay rights, emancipation, peace and love and tolerance...you know, that stuff Jesus Christ preached, back in the day. When has Jesus ever said anything about discriminating gay people, prohibiting abortions, forcing your theory of how life came to be down people's throats? He didn't. What he did say was that before finding flaw with the others, do yourself a favour and find yours, first. Leave each other alone. Be nice. Be TOLERANT. Treat others the way you want to be treated, which includes their belief system.

Neither evolution, nor opinions contrary to mine threaten me, my way of life, or anything / anyone else. Claiming that is just plain idiotic. And utterly baffling.

 

[MacLeod]

Don't most religons teach tolerance and understanding?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Don't most religons teach tolerance and understanding?

Yes, of people who practice that religion.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

It's hard to know which way to turn when, one side says it has infallible truth and the other has scientific proof, isn't it?

It's a scary thought, that Moses and his buddies were not able to saddle up that Stegosaurus. I dig their museums though, saving the T-rex by shoving him on Noah's arc, a really nice well-executed theme park for religious radicals

 

[Amaris]

Don't most religons teach tolerance and understanding?

Yes, of people who practice that religion.

I figure a good person will continue to be good, with or without religion, though some religions can confuse that person into thinking something detrimental is actually "good." On the other hand, I think an asshole is going to be an asshole, regardless of what religion he or she follows, because being an asshole is a religion in its own right. I know plenty of atheists, for example, who would make Jesus proud with how they reach out to the poor, the sick, and the lonely. I also know a number of Christians who would make him weep with how they treat the disadvantaged. I have serious respect for Jesus. I have somewhat less respect for those who say they work in his name, and spread nothing but fear, ignorance, and hatefulness.

 

[Oerdin]

Mostly it seems like they're afraid if they admit one thing in their magic book is wrong then their whole house of cards will come falling down.

 

[Amaris]

Mostly it seems like they're afraid if they admit one thing in their magic book is wrong then their whole house of cards will come falling down.

Literalists treat it that way because they proclaim it a perfect book breathed from God's own lips. That's why there will never be anything wrong with the book, only purportedly wrong conclusions made by anyone who disagrees.