Your religion appears to be closer to Gaia worship of the Earth rather than Christianity. While seemingly unwilling to attribute Creation to the divine act of God, you have no problem attributing direct creative acts to "Mother Nature". You write elsewhere (yeah, I like to know a little about the person I am addressing): "She should be irate with Mother Nature for making us this way. For making men big and strong ... for making women smaller ... so that nature can compel them into caring for (children). Nature does not care what we do with our lives..."
Really? You attribute creative acts to "Mother Nature" as if "she" possessed intelligence and has "designed" men and women, etc. Sounds very much like the "Intelligent design" that you ridicule. So Intelligent Design makes perfect sense after all - so long as it is not Biblical?
You would do well to, as the old fishermen used to say, "fish or cut bait." Either stop being ashamed of, and denying, the central understanding of God as Creator, or quit pretending you are Christian.
You quote Bible verses on your "about" page, apparently in an authoritative sense, yet you deny a fundamental understanding of God that is taught very clearly throughout the Scriptures. Jesus spoke of those who "choke on a gnat but swallow a camel..."
Your Ph.D. is obviously not in cell biology, because if it were, you would be aware that our understanding of cell morphology has exploded in recent years, and we now realize the almost infinite complexity of the cell - and how much more there is yet to learn. (No, I did not read this on any - what you sneeringly call "con artist" - Creationist site). Full disclosure: I also have an earned Ph.D. - in theology.
I am not interested, and have no time for, pointless argumentation. I have spoken my peace, and you will forgive me if I do not respond further. I wish you the best - but we can only expect God's blessings if we stand for His truth:
We read in Genesis: "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them."
Our Lord states: "Havent you read, he replied, that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female,?"
Note that Jesus affirms God as Creator. Jesus also warned: "Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."
I dont care if you believe in your view of Biblical Literalism and YEC; in a 6,000 year old Earth; that all dinosaurs were once vegetarians and peacefully co-existed with humans and were present on the Ark; that starlight was created by God so that it became visible to us under some sort of trick of time and so as to bend the known laws of physics to allow for the fact that such light is coming from a very long distance, 13 billion light years away; that there is no such thing as plate tectonics, that all the continents were in their present position since the creation of the Earth; that the Grand Canyon proves YEC; that radiometric dating is a lie (and if you live anywhere near a nuclear facility, you better hope that it isnt); and other such complete and utter nonsense that Ken Ham and other creationists claim and push on their websites.
I dont care if that is what you believe, what you want to preach from your pulpit, what you choose to teach your children in your Sunday schools, in your church run parochial schools, home schools or at home. Be my guest. And FWIW, I fully support and defend your right to believe whatever you want. You can also believe that vaccinations cause autism, that all disease is the result of sin and the cure is to just pray harder, that organic foods are better for you, that GMO foods are harmful, in homeopathy, in demonic possession as the cause of mental illness ..and on and on and on. I am not saying that you believe in all these things BTW but Ive seen enough over the years to know that people who dont believe in an old earth, those who believe in young Earth Creationism, also buy into a lot of other unscientific nonsense.
And I wont get into all the reasons why creationist claims are bad scientifically - there is already much to prove that it is. My problem is that these arguments always boil down to the Christian Biblical interpretations of the YECers, their particular and rather small but very vocal subset of Evangelical Christianity and that they hold the position that if you dont believe what we believe, then you are a bad Christian a false or lapsed Christian, a Gia Worshipper or a closet Atheist. Those are religious arguments, not scientific arguments.
Teaching creationism in public schools will allow some teachers who are YECs to not only teach bad science but then also call into question the religious beliefs of their students and their families and evangelize their faith over the faith of others. And yes, I absolutely get that teaching actual science to students threatens the beliefs of the YECs and that public schools also teach a lot of PC crap now days, but that doesnt make that any more right than what the YECers are pushing. But teaching Biblical literal creationism in the science classroom is teaching religion, and a small subset of religion at that and it has nothing to do with science. I am all for teaching religion in schools in say comparative religion classes, in letting students and teachers with similar POV to have their clubs and discussion groups outside of the classroom if they choose but teaching YEC in the classroom is the same IMO as outwardly teaching Hinduism, Mormonism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islamism, Wiccanism, Catholicism, Zoroastrianism in the science classroom. If the Judeo-Christian creation story should get equal time in the name of fairness in the science classroom then shouldnt the creation stories of Norse religion also be given equal time?
You question exDemMoms credentials as a working scientist, someone working daily in the field of cell biology, you even question her Ph.D. while proudly proclaiming your Ph.D. in theology. If you can question hers, then why shouldnt I be able to question your credentials?
I am not interested, and have no time for, pointless argumentation. I have spoken my peace, and you will forgive me if I do not respond further.
That sums it up pretty well: I am not interested.
I am a Christian, and I am familiar with the various creeds. As a rule, I do not discuss religion in public places.
Your religion appears to be closer to Gaia worship of the Earth rather than Christianity. While seemingly unwilling to attribute Creation to the divine act of God, you have no problem attributing direct creative acts to "Mother Nature". You write elsewhere (yeah, I like to know a little about the person I am addressing): "She should be irate with Mother Nature for making us this way. For making men big and strong ... for making women smaller ... so that nature can compel them into caring for (children). Nature does not care what we do with our lives..."
Really? You attribute creative acts to "Mother Nature" as if "she" possessed intelligence and has "designed" men and women, etc. Sounds very much like the "Intelligent design" that you ridicule. So Intelligent Design makes perfect sense after all - so long as it is not Biblical?
I have nothing but contempt for those who elevate the earth--an inanimate object--to the level of a deity and worship it. Nature has been personified for as long as humans have recorded history (and probably before then, although we cannot know that); using the personified term to refer to the physical forces that shaped human evolution to make us what we are is hardly a religious statement. Especially in the context of that particular thread, where I was commenting about some young man-hating "feminist" who was blaming all of her personal problems on men, when her real issue is with the biological characteristics of our species.
Your Ph.D. is obviously not in cell biology, because if it were, you would be aware that our understanding of cell morphology has exploded in recent years, and we now realize the almost infinite complexity of the cell - and how much more there is yet to learn. (No, I did not read this on any - what you sneeringly call "con artist" - Creationist site). Full disclosure: I also have an earned Ph.D. - in theology.
You would be wrong about my PhD. As a biochemist, I am very aware of how cells function--how they make biomolecules, how they make energy, how they grow and eat and crawl around, etc., etc. It is a lot of knowledge, all packed away in my head. I have grown millions, if not billions, of cells for research. And, interestingly, I talk about those cells as if they were aware, sentient beings--much in the same way that I referred to "Mother Nature"--even though I am very aware that those cells have absolutely no awareness and only respond to chemical signals. My personification of inanimate objects stems from the human desire to personify everything--to see human faces wherever we look.
If I will be honest, I see creationism as being little different than Gaia worship. Like Gaia worship (or Paganism), Creationism elevates the physical world to divine status.