"Faith" in evolution vs Hebrews 1 apologetics

[ProcInc]

Here's something I am wondering whether or not has escaped the attention of other users.

Faith used to be marked as the ultimate virtue to have, a sign of strength. It appears as though through demonstration throughout the decades Atheism has so successfully shown that it is a vice that now creationists insist on using it to describe acceptance of evolutionary theory.

At the same time you will find creationists around the place who defend the notion of faith by insisting that "faith" means trust based on reason and evidence (I believe this is one of WLC's major arguments) often citing Hebrews 1 (Despite the fact that Hebrews one clearly describes faith as being contrasted to sight).

Similarly, evolution is described by antievolutionists and even firmly religious creationists as a religion. Which seems to suggest the sole possibility that "religion" in the context they are using is intended to mean nothing more or less than "wholly false view" (Whereas technically something is not disqualified from being true on the sole basis it is a religion).

There seems to be a major conflict here. As I managed to point out to a creationist not far back:

I can't help you if you insist on having faith in evolution

I'm curious about something. You happily describe yourself as a creationist so I presume would feel yourself qualified to speak for its position in general. When you say "faith" what does that mean?

Lol you serious? Faith means blindly believing in something without any proof or evidence. Dur.

Okay, I'm glad you put it that way. I've been talking with another creationist who is defending his self-avowed faith by insisting that "faith" means a reasoned conclusion *achieved* by evidence. I was wondering if you would like me to patch you through to him and set him straight on that definition. After all, you don't want creationists running around insisting that they have faith and I don't do you? It seems damaging to your case

Funnily enough the offer wasn't taken up on.

 

[Prolescum]

Here's something I am wondering whether or not has escaped the attention of other users.

It isn't a new revelation, no.

Faith used to be marked as the ultimate virtue to have, a sign of strength. It appears as though through demonstration throughout the decades Atheism has so successfully shown that it is a vice that now creationists insist on using it to describe acceptance of evolutionary theory.

They do it as part of an effort to redefine both atheism and evolution as part of a belief system; to reduce a debate to metaphysics where one of faith has an (arguably) easier position to maintain. It's quite pathetic, really.

At the same time you will find creationists around the place who defend the notion of faith by insisting that "faith" means trust based on reason and evidence (I believe this is one of WLC's major arguments) often citing Hebrews 1 (Despite the fact that Hebrews one clearly describes faith as being contrasted to sight).

Anyone thick enough to think faith involves anything other than trust/belief is not worth conversing with in my view. It's in the fucking dictionary...

Similarly, evolution is described by antievolutionists and even firmly religious creationists as a religion.

Yes, they're not well read as a rule, as we should know by their inability to distinguish the difference between faith and evidence.

Which seems to suggest the sole possibility that "religion" in the context they are using is intended to mean nothing more or less than "wholly false view" (Whereas technically something is not disqualified from being true on the sole basis it is a religion).

The plan is to repeat that evolution and/or atheism is a religion enough times that it will become presumed as one by the general populous. It won't work because it's a fucking idiotic idea, but it does come from Christians so...

There seems to be a major conflict here.

Not really, no. It's just an attempt to distract you and should be dismissed as such.