It can't be, and the example you give is but one of very many.
I think the denial by Creationists often has a motive beyond questions of either theology or science, especially when part of a concerted (though pointless and absurd) drive to bar others from learning about Evolution.
I have to say that in my personal experience, evolution appears to be denied on the basis that it conflicts with one's religious views and not because one genuinely thinks the science is flawed or the evidence absent.
@Pikachu I think you are right, certainly for very many such believers.
I wonder if this is fear of [i]real[/i] uncertainty, questioning and review, inherent in science; versus a comforting [i]sense[/i] of certainty given by refusing to question one narrow religious idea.
I don't know what an unregenerate mind is (feel free to explain) but if you think that religion has not been used as a means of control then you have not taken any history classes. Eg> Ever heard of Interdict? It meant that no religious observances could be practiced: marriage, funerals, baptism. It was used by the church to exercise control over rulers that refused to bow to their authority. A notable example being King John (brother of Richard the Lionheart).
@Pikachu Unregenerate = not regenerate; not renewed in heart and mind or reborn in spirit; unrepentant, Ok there is a huge difference in religion and being born again. A true Christian would not exert their authority in any such way, that is why true Christianity came to America to escape the tyranny of the religious church of England that was persecuting them.
[quote] A true Christian would not exert their authority in any such way[/quote]
Not even going to get into how that's a perfect example of a no true scotsman logical fallacy.
I can understand if you don't think a *ahem* true christian would use religion for control but as long as you recognize that leveraging religion as a means of control is a historical fact of christianity, i'm content.
P.S. would love to get back to talking about dinosaur/bird evolution if you want to respond to those posts.
@Pikachu [quote]I have to say that in my personal experience, evolution appears to be denied on the basis that it conflicts with one's religious views and not because one genuinely thinks the science is flawed or the evidence absent.[/quote]
When I guess the motive of otherpeople you have gotten upset with me. Here is an example of that behavior. 🙂I am not upset, you can guess motive all you want but don't be upset when I say what I think is the motive of atheists. Its a free country right? As long as it is not mocking and hateful which I have a problem with....
Well now I'm going to find some info on birds to try to prove some of the evolutionists wrong. Because if God said He created Birds on the fifth day he did.
@Carazaa You can be a Christian and still accept the Theory of Evolution!
Indeed, there are probably far more modern Christians who believe in evolution than in Biblical literalism, if only because:
a) they know the Bible was written not by God but by people inspired by and expressing their [i]belief[/i] in that particular god; and
b) many may well feel as I do, that if God did create everything then the more we learn about it the greater and more majestic we see that creativity to be - and that means accepting gigantic time- and spatial- scales, forces and processes the unknown, Ancient Hebrew scribe who wrote Genesis genuinely could not have imagined.
@Carazaa Science does not pretend to know all the answers, but you can't distrust or dismiss the entire field for it not yet knowing all there is to know about one topic.
If your were that sceptical about science generally you would not be here using the Internet for a start!
