A visit to The Creation Museum and the wonders seen there.
Um … yeah, don’t think I’m going to go out of my way to visit.
Creation science does a disservice to both science and religion, by teaching that it’s okay to not use your God-given brain except to perform intellectual backflips and cognitive legerdemain in trying to demonstrate the literal truth of Genesis. It’s a battle that cannot, in the long run, be won, and by tying Christian faith to that anchor, it only puts their religion into further ill repute.
UPDATED: Another fine post on a related subject. No, it’s not just a matter of differing axioms.
79 view(s)
It has always amazed me that some people will gladly embrace the concept of a God powerful enough to wave ‘his’ hand and create the world in one fell swoop, but can’t imagine the infinitely more powerful and wise vision of a god with the length of vision to create the Big Bang, the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, the spark of life and eventually evolution.
Frankly, the statistical improbability of life on Earth is possibly the single greatest evidence for the existance of a guiding intelligence. But until the science is accepted, they can’t accept that evidence. *sigh*
Biblical literalism (which is the axiom behind creation science) is, honestly, a sign of a rigid and thus weak religious faith. That is judgmental of me, but the only answer I can see. Because the inevitable argument is, “Well, if you toss out the literal truth of the Creation story in Genesis [ignoring the inconsistencies even in the first chapter of that book], then how will you know what truths to pick and what truths to reject? It will all become a matter of personal choice and individual morality and the responsibility for discerning and acting upon what seems to be Right and Good.”
Which, to me, is kind of the point. Biblical literalists are afraid of having to figure out God’s will and take responsibility for what they come up with. And they are afraid that others will make different decisions and there won’t be an Infallible Rule Book that can be used to bludgeon those others back into line.
It’s not like the Word of God is hard to understand: Be Good and Do Good.
It’s the execution that’s difficult, especially when one’s instincts are much more selfish.
“Well, if it were that easy, everyone could do it.”
The problem being that what is “good” (to do and to be) is open to discussion and debate and not always easy compromise or tolerance, and it gets all mingled up with what’s *socially* acceptable and permitted and useful.
The easiest and “safest” thing to do at that point is to throw up one’s hands and simply say, “Here are all the detailed rules to live by — do that or get jailed/maimed/killed/punished,” treat the societal impulses to the contrary as (initially hotly debated, later natural and understandable and utterly consistent to the original) exceptions (cf “divorce”).