Quote:
Originally posted by ernie@Apr 7 2005, 11:05 AM
Quote:
|
I'm not in school anymore but I guarantee you not a single one of my professors was a literal creationist. Not one of them. Some pretty hardcore religious types in the bunch too.
|
I guarantee that you would be wrong in that. I spent 9 years getting my bachelor and doctorate in a natural science. I have had biology, chemistry, physics, math, accounting and sociology profs who believe the Genesis story and the bible as being literal. A couple of them are at the top of their fields. I even know one evolutionary prof that believes it if you can believe that! These aren't stupid people. I also know several several adults who believe the same thing. I know most churches teach it as literal.
Quote:
|
It may be arrogant and small minded to ridicule HIS personal BELIEF, but it's not nearly as arrogant and small minded as HAVING that BELIEF.
|
Wow you just don't seem to get it. There is nothing wrong or stupid with having that belief. The simple fact of the matter is that the methods used for such things as the age of the earth etc. are based on their own assumptions. Those assumptions though fitting the data of today may in fact be completely and utterly incorrect a few years from now. Really it's a question of do you put the faith in the religious interpretation or do you put your faith in the underlying assumptions that make the sciencintific process possible. To you and me it seems a simple matter and makes more "sense" to believe the latter over the former. Other people believe the opposite and "right" or "wrong" you'll never be able to convince them one way or the other because in the end what everyone believes is based on some leap of faith be it the existence and miracles of God or belief in the assummptions that came up those numbers. Neither belief should be cause for ridicule.
|
Possibly, maybe even probably, but not one of them ever said it. I spent just 4 years getting an English degree and in English classes the bible comes up every single day and it was never, ever taken literally. Not a lot to talk about if the book you are reading means exactly what it says. Not once, in English or any other class (Arky, Anthro, lots of history, psych...) did a prof come out and say it. Maybe behind closed doors they bought it, but in their professional life...
As for churches teaching it literally, I'll have to take your word on that. The Catholics and Episcopalians don't, I know that. An internet search also tells me that Lutherans, Unitarians, the United Church, Methodists... don't.
And again, I guess you got me. They probably shouldn't be up for ridicule. This did start with Stockwell Day though, and he's definitely up for ridicule. His belief in this one thing does taint everything else. It has to. He believes in an entirely different reality than I do.
At the end of the day though... believing the "science" from a book written 2000 years before the invention of the microscope and scoffing at, for example, Einstein, MIT, biology, geology and all the things we've learned since that book was written, it seems to me to be just a little, I don't know, delusional?