Young earthers vs Old earthers the conspiracy keeps growing.

The creationist movement is almost exclusively the Protestant American Fundamentalist movement that seeks to impose on the general public, by “Political” means, a religion that revolves around the creation stories of the bible.

These fundamentalist creationist are divided into the “young earthers” and the “old earthers”.

Young Earthers believe that the genesis accounts are an infallible account of the history of the earth and the universe, disregarding any scientific facts and calling them irrelevant amid of the power of the God of the bible.

Old Earthers believes that in a more sophisticated way that the universe is actually very old, they believe in modern geology and accept evolution only when the human evolution is not the topic, they still agree with the “Young Earthers” that humans are special and only has been in earth in the last 6000 years.

The role of “young Earthers” is to become the nemesis of modern scientific research and to bring into question anything that is discovered. Their job is to recrute Scientist into their ranks to support their creation believes. The American Scientific Affiliation is one of the fundamentalist soft core groups.

www.asa3.org...

If you think is all about creationism is not, is about politics and religion money and lucrative research.

The institution research every year collect donations to finance their expeditions to find, from Noah’s Ark to other religious still missing artifacts from the Bible, their job is not really to find anything but to keep the promise that something is to be found.

www.icr.org...

What is the job of the creationist? And young and old earthers?

Very simple they are not looking to accomplish anything really, or to do any real science, their job is maintain their claim that “Evolution theory is collapsing” and that the evidence that these groups provide are great.

They are aiming to the educational system to push enough weigh and doubt to make Biological research to abandon evolution and to take creationism as the proven fact.

This is why the public school system is targeted, to make sure that children will not get enough desire to pursue studies on evolution.

Because evolution can not be disproven as a theory there comes the creationist to make sure that at least is questionable.

I think its also intersting to note that many Old Earth creationists will tell you that they are 'fundamentally' christian, and yet their ideas are condemmed as damnable heresey worthy of hellfire by many Young Earth Creationists (YECists). Its also noteworthy that lots of Old Earth Creationists, and even some Young Earth Creationists, will accept that evolution happens, just that there was an initial 'creation' of the different 'types' of organisms, and this is compleletely different than "Intelligent Design", wherein its recognized that not only have other kinds of organisms evolved, but that man evolved from ape!

Ok....wow, this is way off in so many ways. Don't usually get involved in the "i've got it all figured out, so let me show you why your a moron" threads. But what the heck i'm here kids are napping why not.

Not sure if it's blind hatred or simple ignorance of the debate. Can almost 'see' you guys foaming at the mouth, yelling at your screens as you type. Look if evolution (every bit of it) is true then the debate with only strengthen and deepen our understanding of it ... so relax

marg6043


Almost exclusively a Protestant American Fundamentalist movement? Really, care to back that rubbish up with some facts? And Creationism has nothing to do with "imposing the general public, by “Political” means, a religion that revolves around the creation stories of the bible." Some Creationists certainly are attempting this and your problem is with those people and not creationism as a whole. You label us all the same way an atheist labels all Christians as Dobson or Frist. I am a Creationist, in that i believe God is the creator, and i do NOT fit any of your so-called criteria. Anyone who believes God is the creator is a Creationist technically. I like to look for evidence of His creation in science, not change science to fit my beliefs. Sure some due this, BUT it has nothing to due with Creationism. The world is full of ***holes, but i guess i don't need to tell you that.



Where do you get this view? so every Creationist is not doing any real science and is only trying to "de-bunk" evolution? You really have gone over the deep end here IMO. If you have a problem with a particular belief, sect, theory or scientist(s) then state it and debate that. Your world view is as prejudicial and myopic as any fundamentalist in any religion IMO anyway.

Nygdan


Chapter and verse please, where can i find that i'm doomed to "hellfire" because i believe that the Earth is old? I'm not worried about the judgement of some random anonymous YECists, i've read my Bible guess i missed that part. Enlighten me o' wise one.



again some not all, and if you want i can show you some evolutionists who don't believe we evolved from apes. Can i lump you guys in with them?









[edit on 30-6-2005 by Rren]

I would have accepted your post as a good challenge but with that line above you just killed my response to you, I do not take well insults, all you had to do was to post your views and that was it "the moron thread" was unnecessary.

Well Nygdan I will have to said that I know many "fundamentalist Christians" that support evolution but only when human evolution is not part of it.

When you take the first seven days of creation, by Bible standards the "old earthers" will agree that perhaps it was not meaning to be "days" per say but "millions of years" and they are comfortable with that.

But alas there comes the "young earthers" and will argue that changing any part of the bible is "unacceptable".

In their views they will refer to geological ages as of not consequences and that in their logic they can not accept the standard system created by scientist as real.

Again bringing the sole purpose to refute scientific research even when it makes it look like an uneducated guess.

Many of the "more hard core fundamentalist creationist" will call "Old earthers" liberals and neo orthodox Christians.

The truth is that if you look at the creation myth is actually the base of the Christian believe of falling from grace and be damned to hell.

If you don't believe in "Adam" then falling from graces is not "real" and "hell" is none existent.

Without hell is not need for a Saviour and the biblical system of salvation will collapse.

Then the core of Christian believe will be in question so evolution is not an option.

In the modern times in which new methods of testing and new technology can prove or disapprove theories, evolution is seen as a weapon that can destroy the Christian faith so we can not have too many geologist getting educated on evolution.

In my views religious believes are already to enbeded into our society to have any real major impact on people's faith but it can get them a littler bit educated to find a real fact or two.

Then it comes the "theistic evolution" Old earthers alias "Christan liberals" are willing to compromised using the phrase "evolution is God's way of creation.

But again the "young earthers"will immediately debate that, in the bases that is not consistent with God nature.

The fact is that if God is a benevolent God that created earth in seven days and men has been in earth for only 6000 years has render creationist blind to the true nature of the God in the bible.

Their theories of creationist made God look cruel and instead of making a world in harmony with the species it actually created a cold blooded system where life feeds on life, the strong survives and the weak face death and in nature you either kill or be killed or eat or be eaten.

So looking at the creation myth of the original sin I guess we will have to admit that God curse of all people and animals for all time, just because two people falling from grace.

Then that makes God also too human to be divine.

Not so sure about some southern prodestants, but up here it is mostly the influx of the Evangelical churches (Edit: Not sure if they are included as prodestants, I always considered em like, mormons, JWs). I also noticed most of the sites pushing for school reform on this issue to be evangelical. I consider them to be our version of the Pre-enlightened age church.

I also have to laugh,

Anyone who believes the earth is only a few thousand years old, needs to take a historical geology class, not that they would believe any of it anyways, I mean it's just science.

[edit on 30-6-2005 by silentlonewolf]

Well the problem is that if you take Genesis accounts of creation you don’t have to dig to much to figure out that it makes the God of the bible also a littler bit misinformed, the bible accounts only talks about the our sun, moon and starts, but it mentions nothing about Galaxies or the Universe.

This brings a very good point that perhaps the writers of the bible per God guidance were not very well educated on astrology and the actual age of the universe or what else the Universe had.

Then when the flood of creation came about to destroy all humans and animals on earth but the chosen ones, it makes God also, looks too human and with a temper.

Occurs “Young earthers will argue that the reason of the flood wipe out sin and at the same time the giant beast that we called dinosaurs, they were living in harmony with humans before the flood and God sense of justice.

Then again “Young earthers” will at least tend to agree that the bible has errors on some chronological data but that is not God’s fault.

Modern creationists follow the works of James Ussher and John Lightfoot, freemasonry.bcy.ca... when relying on the biblical data as the proper way of determining the date of creation, claiming that it took lest that 10 thousand years ago. But then again it still makes the Universe older than the Genesis “young universe”, “Old earthers” at least do not uphold the accuracy of the bible after all, they know that “If God wrote the Bible, as “Young Earthers” claim then God have to be exact as such a powerful divine being and not off by a few thousand years.

“Old earthers” admit that is gaps in the book of Genesis but only a few of then will agree that the gaps are for not 10 thousand years but perhaps millions of years.

Then I most ask if God was the force and the voice of Moses when dictating the genealogical lists to Moses, why its gaps in the book of genesis at all? It should be perfect. Right?

At the end even for the most strong hard core “young earthers” the fact that earth was not created in seven days and that man is older than 6000 will not even make a dent in their pursue of disproving evolution and scientific research, because they are not here to bargain.

Rren if you know some Creationists and YEC Creationists in particular are basically theoterrorists, why attack the people pointing that out and not the theoterrorists?

We all seem to know only Islam can deal with radical Islam. Why do "mainstream" Christians have such clean hands and easily offended sensibilities over their nuts trying to take over the world?

They sure as hell aren't my people or my responsibility.

[edit on 30-6-2005 by RANT]

I am sleepy and don't want to jump in knee-deep into this thread, but I did want to point out a Biblical passage or two that suggest that anyone who does not heed the word of the lord will face negative consequences. We're getting sand all over ourselves here in a playground of subjectivity, but that seems to be the name of the Bible's game: YECs, by definition, believe that OECs aren't interpreting "the word" as it is intended, and are therefore subject to this:



I dunno... Tons more... Sleepy...

Zip

[edit on 7/1/2005 by Zipdot]

Rren- your in a conversation of the blind leading the blind and even with sight they still will not believe. Let the misinformed inform others of their information gathered from misinformation.

Creationism isn't only an american issue, but in the US its more in the front. So american is accurate. As far as protestant, the RCC doesn't have any problem with science, including evolution, so protestant is pretty accuraet too. As far as a movement, yes, its clearly a movement, not all the groups are alligned with one another, but in general they work under the 'Big Tent' of creationism and have a good deal of organization to them and are working torwards a goal, so movement is accurate.

As far as fundamentalist, I'd say that thats more open. Certainly Creationism enjoys wide acceptance amoung 'fundamentalists' or 'conservative christians', but there is a large population of relatively mainstream people that tend to beleive in creationism, of course the general public has rather muddled thoughts (as 'the general public') on this sort of thing. So it being a 'fundamentalist' thing is pretty accurate, but certainyl there's room for debate.


Yes it does. The creationist movement seeks, at a minimum, to have creationism taught in school, thats imposing their religion on the public thru political means.


The people who are part of the creationist movement would disagree with that.


Do not insult other members like that.Why would you be upset with marg making a rather accurate description of the creationist movement, which you are not a part of apparently?


Correct. Obviously she's not talking about the creationist 'laity' that doesn' t get involved in the debate one way or antoher, but rather the peopel claiming to perform 'creation science', there simply is no such thing.


I think that part of the issue here is that you have your own particular understanding of the situation, and you are thinking of creationism in much wider terms than marg or most of us would consider it. For the most part, when someone is talking about a 'creationist', they're not simply talking about someone who beleives in an all powerful god that created the universe. They're talking about a much more specfic group, represented by AIG or the ICR and people like Kent Hovind, and even 'Intelligent Design'.




Nowhere. Its not in the bible. And yet, the more extreme fundamentalists will sometimes claim just that.


Good for you, neither am I.


Almost certainly, they're probably infact creationists of a various sort. There's near universal acceptance amoung the scientific community, especially those actually invovled in this particular research, that man evolved from apes. I wouldn't say its immpossible that there are scientists out there who have scientific (albeit perhaps incorrect) reasons to conclude that man evolved from something else, but its extremely unlikely that there is. Rather, there are probably some people who are creationists who make these statements.

.
If creationists of all varieties would simply admit the the scientific method means collecting data and analyzing it with a completely open mind, they would see how having a pre-conceived notion about what the data is going-to/is-supposed to tell them makes creationism superstition/mythology and not science.

If you really had faith that creationism was in the scientific evidence, you wouldn't need to argue about it and be vandalizing good competent science.
You could simply do the work and the truth would be revealed.

The truth that science reveals is not necessarily what anyone wants or doesn't it is simply the truth.

Reality is big ugly and brutal.
We live in a delicate balance of gravity & inertia around the Sun and in a biosphere that is very thin and completely exposed to raw space.
If you can't handle that, I can empathize, but don't degrade those diligent hard working people that seek the REAL truth, where ever it may lead them.
It may not be much hope, but it is absolutely all the actual hope we have.
.

The Creationist Movement.

What’s the creationist movement? How did they became to be?

The creationist movement is not new, it may seem to some, due to the fat that it has become an issue in the last years with the controversies against evolution.

But actually has been around for a while.

It became a movement in the 20’s with the “Scope trials” But the roots can be traced early than that.

www.law.umkc.edu...

Most creationist of the time was country folks of some education and heavily dependant on faith. American was just starting to become Urban. The 1925 victory for creationist over evolution may had started the “Creationist Movement”. Evolution disappeared from high-school bilogy text from mid-1920s to late 1950s.

In 1957, the Russians and Sputnik (1957 - Soviet launches the Spunik 1 and 2.) Prompted a curriculum reform.

In 1960 The evolution centered Biology textbook series “Biological Science Curriculum Study” was introduced. pblib.utpb.edu...

Physical sciences was changed for ever. The “creationist movement” started to become very aware of their trials ahead and they were not far away from the truth.

In 1968 the court was viewing the cases of “Epperson vs Arkansas” www.law.umkc.edu...

The supreme court struck down “Anti-Evolution Laws” www.geocities.com... the creationist movement got once again challenged.

The movement now was more organized more educated middle class people and mostly from the south and in Urban areas. These people targeted the new laws in favor of Evolution as a danger to their communities due to Social Change.

Even as a small group of organized “Creationist” their voices was very loud. Now the knew that getting rid of Evolution was not an option they changed strategies and the “Creationist” became a “Religious Concept”

States like Tennessee, California, Texas and others, had laws to define evolution as a “Theory” and to give equal time to other “Theories” like “Genesis Accounts”.

Creationist is a movement and it has been a movement for a while. This link give you a brief history of it.

www.asa3.org...





[edit on 1-7-2005 by marg6043]

Yes it does.
Read Job chapter 38 and read Genesis 1: 14-17. I believe there are other verses in Job but I can't think of them offhand. Psalms has some mentioning of the universe also. One I found is Psalm 8:3.

And God said. “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years. Gen 1:14

And let them be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon earth:and it was so. Gen 1:15

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars. Gen 1:16

And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give upon the earth Gen 1:17

Yes he mention the starts, the moon and the sun, but still no mention of galaxies and other solar system or planets.


What you think of the creationism as a movement? dbrant.

Read Job 38 as a whole it's God talking, then pay attention to verse 31 for the universe. I have to answer the other one after I get back home.

38:31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?

You know now that you mention this, do you know that the Egyptian people was very good at mapping the sky and one of the best accomplishments were the alignment of the pyramid.



This brings more light to the fact that the bible took stories and myth from the Egyptians.



ancientegypt.hypermart.net...

Literal translation:


KJV:


No universe there, just stars.



Zip

What do you think makes up the universe?

There was also a problem with the angels that sinned and had offspring with human women. that seems to be a major part of the reason for the flood, which can be attributed to sin.

If this is an actual organized movement with elected officers I don't know anything about it. If you are just talking about people who believe that there is a God who created the universe, I belong to that group. If someone believes that the universe and it's occupants were created, then that would lead me to believe that they believe the Bible. But if you believe the Bible, then believers in the Bible are not called to make creationism their #1 priority. We are called to tell others about the salvation found in Christ. Creation is part of that story.