Replies

As both bettyboop and .30carbine have variously said, the question of whether someone is a creationist isn’t really answered by knowing how they fill in the blank on the religion line. Not everyone who claims to be a Christian really is and not every Christian who reflexively claims to be a creationist because they think that’s what they’re supposed to do but really doesn’t believe in the creation account should actually be called a creationist.
In any case, I still think this is a bit of squabbling over the proper application of a label at the expense of the larger questions...

Indeed, some Muslims, like some Christians subscribe to different (literal vs figurative) interpretations of thier respective scriptures. But it is still a matter of theology.

It's not an argument over what the definition of what "is" is, but rather exactly what the primary principles in the debate (evolution and creation) are. What would you consider the possibility of having a rational debate on the issue of one side or the other can arbitrarily re-define them at will?

“...Indeed, some Muslims, like some Christians subscribe to different (literal vs figurative) interpretations of thier respective scriptures. But it is still a matter of theology. ...”

Yes, your first sentence is fundamentally a true statement...but your second sentence takes things in a direction I’m not sure I agree with. I think I get what you’re saying, but being relatively new to this very long thread in the name of caution I’d like to ask that you clarify what you mean by “it is still a matter of theology”? What is “it”?

It's not an argument over what the definition of what "is" is, but rather exactly what the primary principles in the debate (evolution and creation) are.

Agreed.

lifebygrace, you contributed greatly at post 280: thanks.

Stultis, there is no need to use such abrasive language. If you wanna be done, leave. If you can refute what she said with logic, why not do so? Why hurl invectives at betty boop? Why not work out our terms peaceably, as tacticalogic is doing: "What would you consider the possibility of having a rational debate on the issue of one side or the other can arbitrarily re-define them at will?"

betty boop and tacticalogic were defining terms by standard rules of argument I thought. Though it was exciting reading over their shoulders as they did so, it was more like an organized boxing match than a street fight. (: