Then nobody has standing to declare it fact either.
Yet we know that science has confirmed some of what is written in Holy Scripture.
We see vague parallels that can be interpreted as such. But then we see that in many religions. In fact, drawing these parallels and getting you to see the connection is a tactic of cold-reader hucksters. The point is that if you want to see them, you will.
Which kind?
Take what I described and you apply the appropriate ones from your list. The point is that they exist.
I know of no Christian who does not hold as a fundamental tenet of belief that God is the creator of the Universe.
Back to the beginning, that's what my professor thought. He just didn't believe the literal creation.
“no opinion or belief is sent to man from God contrary to natural knowledge.”
"Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof." Ashley Montagu
You left out a word. One that my statement included.
“In fact, drawing these parallels and getting you to see the connection is a tactic of cold-reader hucksters.”
Derrida deconstruction in action.
“Take what I described and you apply the appropriate ones from your list.”
Judeo-Christians. All Creationists. They differ in some particulars. They share a common culture. I think your real objection is that they follow the Judeo-Christian God. Or perhaps that they follow a religion of any sort. Do your own work.
“The point is that they exist.”
The point is that by lumping them together you can indiscriminately smear them all as frenzied zealots (Derrida deconstruction).
“I know of no Christian who does not hold as a fundamental tenet of belief that God is the creator of the Universe. Do you?”
”Back to the beginning, that's what my professor thought. He just didn't believe the literal creation.
Oh, I see. Your professor held as a fundamental tenet of belief that the Judeo-Christian God is the creator of the Universe, but not literally so. He found it “incredible” that the Creator was capable of “setting up all these intricate, interrelated laws of physics to make things happen as they did.” But, not literally. It wasn’t really real. Just a mythical construct. That’s no creation, and no Creator, at all. Those clunks you’ve been hearing from time to time are the hints I’ve been dropping that your rationale is nothing more than a bundle of contradictions.
You quote Ashley Montagu rather carelessly using the word ‘proof.’ This forum has, for years, been hammered by “scientists” and “friends” of Science, insisting that ‘proof’ is not a word to be used in connection with science. ‘Proof’ can properly be used in mathematics, in logic, in religion, in philosophy, in forensics, even in ordinary conversation, but not in science. Now, we are to take Mr. Montagu seriously? He is clever perhaps (surely, he is clever), in his wordsmithing, but his point is to make an unfavorable comparison using the misapplication of a word (more Derrida deconstruction).
#120
“And whenever someone tries to pass religion off as science, for me a red flag goes up. We all have our hangups.”
Surely, you refer not to Moi? Your other antagonists and their “hang-ups,” perhaps? What I object to is misanthropic attempts to dismiss Holy Scripture as nothing more than myth.
“. . . the myth that science is a cabal of atheists intent on destroying religion.”
Red herring. The myth is that a cabal of Atheists and Agnostics are not using Science in an attempt to destroy the Judeo-Christian tradition of Western Civilization.
“I don't often agree with the likes of Dawkins who have for themselves essentially turned atheism into a quasi-religion.”
Quasi-religion? Atheism is a religion. No more subject to the rules of Science than any other religion. But Dawkins and his ilk try to pass off Science as “proof” that there is no God (The God Delusion).
“Show me. Persecution complex is common in religions”
Just a ways back you announced that at times you’ve defended Catholics and Jews (“I'm not Catholic or Jewish, but at times I find myself defending them”). From what? Why defend a paranoiac suffering a persecution complex? Now, according to you, there’s nothing to defend. It’s all in their feverish minds. I referenced this forum as providing examples of attacks on the Judeo-Christian tradition. But you’re in such a state of denial that I imagine you can not admit to even so obvious examples as those.