Does anyone even listen to creationists these days?

[Greyblades]

You know, I never really understood why christians are creationists.

I mean creationism is from the old testament and the entire premise of chrsitianity kinda relies on the idea that the old testament is imperfect, otherwise what's the point of the new one.
So why is this part of the imperfect old testement being considered perfect truth when faced with irreputable evidence of it being false?

Outside the US I think Creationism mostly exists in the minds of its opponents, I get pretty sick of the whole "do you believe in evolution?" question when people find I out I believe in God and want him to send me back in time to save the Roman Empire so we can all have jetpacks and have colonies on Saturn's moons.

Mostly in our minds? Perhaps, most of the time I dont really care what people believe when they keep it to themselves and dont harm anyone.

Things get a bit different when they start meddling in kid's education.

Or get on US science councils.

[Gilrandir]

Outside the US I think Creationism mostly exists in the minds of its opponents, I get pretty sick of the whole "do you believe in evolution?" question when people find I out I believe in God and want him to send me back in time to save the Roman Empire so we can all have jetpacks and have colonies on Saturn's moons.

In fact, creationism and evolutionism don't contradict each other. The solution that welds them together is to say that the world was created and then all living beings started evolutioning.

I mean creationism is from the old testament and the entire premise of chrsitianity kinda relies on the idea that the old testament is imperfect, otherwise what's the point of the new one.

The anwser is the same as the one to the question "Why did they need Godfather 2?" Because it is the sequel. In case of movies and books the purpose is to get money, in case of testaments it is to get larger flocks of worshippers.

[Husar]

You know, I never really understood why christians are creationists.

I mean creationism is from the old testament and the entire premise of chrsitianity kinda relies on the idea that the old testament is imperfect, otherwise what's the point of the new one.
So why is this part of the imperfect old testement being considered perfect truth when faced with irreputable evidence of it being false?

I'd call the new testament more a shift in policy as to how you can get to heaven. It does not entirely invalidate the old testament. The prophecies are still relevant as quite a few of them are said to be fulfilled in the new testament, the old testament is seen as a perfectly valid historical document and so on. What changes is that the old testament says you have to sacrifice sheep in order to have your sins forgiven while Jesus says you can only get to heaven if you accept him as your lord and saviour and he will forgive your sins. Therein lies the big change. The old testament is not imperfect, it just contains some outdated rules of behavior that a christian would/should not follow anymore. Take this example where Jesus more or less seems to say that doing some work on a sabbath is okay if you're hungry for example:
http://www.biblestudytools.com/comme...e-sabbath.html

The jewish rules said the quiet on sabbath has to be obeyed but Jesus says the quiet was made so that people can rest, to benefit the people, not to force people to do nothing. He does not invalidate the old law, he just gives an interpretation of the spirit of the law that changes the way in which the old law should be applied. There's a change, some invalidation, some reinterpretation but not a complete invalidation, even some validation of prophecies as I said, Jesus is supposed to be the messiah who was prophesied in the old testament after all (jews would disagree of course).

[Gilrandir]

The old testament is not imperfect, it just contains some outdated rules of behavior that a christian would/should not follow anymore.

I would say that the new testament contains tenets that badly need updating now.

[Fragony]

I would say that the new testament contains tenets that badly need updating now.

I can think of a book that needs that a whole lot more

[Papewaio]

I can think of a book that needs that a whole lot more

George R. R. Martin will finish the book after the TV episodes are complete.


...what we are talking about popular works of fiction aren't we...

[Husar]

I would say that the new testament contains tenets that badly need updating now.

But wouldn't it be god's decision when to update his rules and when not? Certain rules seem to be unchangeable, such as certain sins which prevent you from going to heaven and so on. What has changed is mostly how you can reach forgiveness for your sins.

If there is a god who is all powerful (which is the whole point of christianity and judaism) then it would be useless for a human to demand change as the all-powerful god could just throw you into hell and there'd be nothing you very limited powerless human could do about it.
And that's why such demands are ultimately silly and useless. They only make sense from a perspective that the god doesn't exist anyway and the rules are therefore man-made. But why would a believer put any stock in the demands coming from such a perspective? Why listen to the demands of someone who is a sinner, corrupted by the devil and pretty much nothing compared to the all-powerful god who you serve and who will always have your best interests in mind?

The indirect atheist assumption that deep down all the believers are actually atheists and need to go with atheist social pressures somehow seems pretty naive to me. Quite a few christians believe that the atheists and others will want to persecute and kill them in the end times anyway and any signs of that just mean they are closer to meeting their lord, which is their ultimate goal.

I know, the catholic church is quite different, but where I come from, most of them are hardly considered true believers anyway.

[Gilrandir]

But wouldn't it be god's decision when to update his rules and when not?

If there is a god who is all powerful (which is the whole point of christianity and judaism) then it would be useless for a human to demand change as the all-powerful god could just throw you into hell and there'd be nothing you very limited powerless human could do about it.

There is not a line in the new testament written by God, Jesus Christ or even his family. I think you know (in case you don't you can dig deeper) that there had been around a dozen gospels (including Judas') before some hundred years after Christ's death 4 of them were chosen as the best ones (sincerely, I don't know the criteria appiled for the choice) to form the bulk and basis of the new testament. Evidently, this choice was made by humans. Consequently, if the book is in fact a collection of hearsay and was subject to human editing, why not edit it again (and say God ruled it through some revealtion or other)?

[Husar]

There is not a line in the new testament written by God, Jesus Christ or even his family. I think you know (in case you don't you can dig deeper) that there had been around a dozen gospels (including Judas') before some hundred years after Christ's death 4 of them were chosen as the best ones (sincerely, I don't know the criteria appiled for the choice) to form the bulk and basis of the new testament. Evidently, this choice was made by humans. Consequently, if the book is in fact a collection of hearsay and was subject to human editing, why not edit it again (and say God ruled it through some revealtion or other)?

Well, if you believe that the book is the literal truth and the word of God, then it was divinely inspired, both the writing and the selection of what to include in it, although I have never heard how modern christians exactly justify the selection.
Your last suggestion only works for Christians if someone actually did get a divine inspiration to do so because otherwise they would be a false prophet who is intentionally misleading people in service of the devil. Not exactly something you should suggest to a believer.
The bible also says that one should be wary of such false prophets and check the things people preach against the teachings of the bible, so getting such a change accepted in the more literal/fundamentalist christian circles would be quite hard.
To me it sounds like a pretty strange idea though and not like something an atheist could just do and get a lot of people to actually believe in it. Unless you want to dedicate your life to your new christianity and become its guru or something like that. But even then most would probably think you're a devil-worshipping sect of apostates or so. The modern world has already brought about all these kinds of "spirituality" where god becomes more abstract and where the judeo-christian ideas are mixed with east asian religious/philosophical ideas and so on but to fundamentalist believers that's just the so-called "new age" scheme the devil came up with to distract more people from the right path.

Overall it seems as though capitalism and consumerism or the false god mammon as the bible may call it are also really good at drawing people away from devoting their lives to serving god. Although with turbo-capitalism and the whole burnout thing, some people are apparently looking back to when things were more relaxed and life wasn't about being able to afford the next golden Apple calf Watch by next year.

[Gilrandir]

Well, if you believe that the book is the literal truth and the word of God, then it was divinely inspired, both the writing and the selection of what to include in it, although I have never heard how modern christians exactly justify the selection.

If they justify it somehow (which I don't know either), they could extend this justification to at least some modern attempts at updating. Unfortunatley (or fortunately, who knows), religions are all about tradition, keeping, preserving and not swerving from. Any attempts to do the opposite are considered heresy and treated correspondingly.

Your last suggestion only works for Christians if someone actually did get a divine inspiration to do so because otherwise they would be a false prophet who is intentionally misleading people in service of the devil. Not exactly something you should suggest to a believer.
The bible also says that one should be wary of such false prophets and check the things people preach against the teachings of the bible, so getting such a change accepted in the more literal/fundamentalist christian circles would be quite hard.

Like I said, copyright enforcement: listen only to me, and if you listen to others you are a recreant. But it has one more dimension to it: all prophets are extinct and anyone in the future who will pretend to be one is not. As if times around 0 AD abounded in prophets and they have become increasingly scarce since then and eventually modern era is barren and arid.

[Rhyfelwyr]

You know, I never really understood why christians are creationists.

I mean creationism is from the old testament and the entire premise of chrsitianity kinda relies on the idea that the old testament is imperfect, otherwise what's the point of the new one.
So why is this part of the imperfect old testement being considered perfect truth when faced with irreputable evidence of it being false?

The Old Testament is just as infallible as the New. The reason we have the two testaments is that the Old prophesied of Christ, while the New revealed him. Christians do not believe that the Old Testament is somehow faulty, we* believe it to be divinely inspired and free from error.

* naturally, I don't speak for all Christians, just what I see as the historic and correct Christian position