121–123 of 123 posts
I very much doubt there were any UK schools teaching it anyway, hence this news is not really news this side of the pond. (Context for those in the US)
There are ACE schools in the UK teaching creationism as science: http://www.christian-education.org/christian-education/curri... http://www.christian-education.org/schools/choosing-a-school...
Scientists tend to exclude God, and creationists tend to exclude science. It would benefit all of us for each side to recognize that they can live in harmony. Science can provide insight into how God's creation works, but it can never exclude God. If religious interpretation of scripture flies in the face of provable, observable science, then perhaps our interpretation of that scripture is wrong. I'm tired of this ri…
It is ironic that the very same creationists tend to exclude Gods from other religions. Why do they firmly exclude the Mayan God, or the Hindu Gods? Why are their scriptures true but not the others? If there are contradictions in the scriptures of the various religions in the world, then perhaps the creationists "interpretation of that scripture is wrong". The following quote comes to mind: “I contend we are both ath…
There was a time, in Britain, when almost everyone believed the Genesis account to be true. Then, naturalistic 'scientists' started to pronounce differently. Inevitably, the church bowed to the 'authority' of these scientists, and many ministers departed from their faith. Scientists have since revised their opinions numerous times (and have rejected many of their own earlier notions) but unfortunately some branches of the established church have failed to notice this, or to keep abreast of the ever-changing scientific theories, so they remain completely compromised, and firmly stuck in their 1800's position (which was when Darwin & Co put the cat among their theological pigeons).
Ironically, most geologists have moved on from the fanciful ideas prevalent in Darwin's day, and now hold to a modern theory called Neo-Catastrophism - which essentially means that a world-wide catastrophic flood of 'biblical' proportions was responsible for laying down the massive rock and fossil layers seen all around the world today (analogous to Noah's flood!) which, of course, is what the creationists - who interpret God's Word literally - have been telling everyone all along!
The established church [mainly the Anglicans and Catholics] would have been much better sticking to their biblical guns 200 years ago, because it seems they already had it right. Today, the church is hopelessly divided on the matter of big bang, evolution, morality, etc, and only the creationists are left carrying the torch for God (which is probably why they are so despised, especially among atheists). Of course the established church has only got itself to blame for allowing its misplaced faith in the emerging scientific 'revolution' to take precedence over faith in God, thereby dynamiting its own foundations. I hope this helps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, a Humanist, that explains a lot. Woodlice first appear in the fossil record 50 million years ago, and remain unchanged to this day, i.e STASIS, not evolution (as in every other case in the fossil record). If you have a picture of a woodlouse changing into anything else then please post it here. Or did you mean a trilobite by any chance? If so, I would expect a PhD geology student to know the difference between a…
> If you have a picture of a woodlouse changing into anything else then please post it here. With that statement (and others) it is quite clear you have no idea what you're writing about. Please take your misinformation campaign elsewhere.