Evangelical Christians

[Cacti 191]

42 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

"Believing in evolution" is a misnomer that I wish would go away. No one "believes" in evolution. Evolution is simply a provable fact of nature that has been observed countless times. Creationists like to label it as a "belief" to prop up idiotic anti-science arguments when it is nothing of the sort.

 

Maybe I should have been more specific. Instead of saying ‘believing in evolution’ I should have said “believing that a single-cell organism evolved into current-day humans”. There can be no definite proof that such a process occurred; nevertheless it’s commonly accepted that, in fact, it did occur. And without proof, it’s a belief—one that I share, btw.

My point, though, still stands (reworded for your benefit): beliefs based on a preponderance of evidence (even circumstantial and indirect evidence) are rational, contrary to what RayDog said.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I went to Texas Church of Christ churches for my first 30 years and Baptist for my last 11.  And when I was c of c that was 3 times a week — Wednesday night and two times on Sunday.   I’ve never heard anyone preach against evolution.  But apparently some congregations must.  Because every liberal non church goer I know — and me being a lawyer that’s a lot — automatically assumes I am some young earth creationist because I believe in God.  

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I went to Texas Church of Christ churches for my first 30 years and Baptist for my last 11.  And when I was c of c that was 3 times a week — Wednesday night and two times on Sunday.   I’ve never heard anyone preach against evolution.  But apparently some congregations must.  Because every liberal non church goer I know — and me being a lawyer that’s a lot — automatically assumes I am some young earth creationist because I believe in God.  

It’s a myth purported by non believers to make us look like morons. It’s a successful tactic because the myth is pervasive. 

[Brian Fantana 6866]

27 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I went to Texas Church of Christ churches for my first 30 years and Baptist for my last 11.  And when I was c of c that was 3 times a week — Wednesday night and two times on Sunday.   I’ve never heard anyone preach against evolution.  But apparently some congregations must.  Because every liberal non church goer I know — and me being a lawyer that’s a lot — automatically assumes I am some young earth creationist because I believe in God.  

I don't assume that at all and I agree that believers are often treated this way.

[safe sex 12010]

Yeah the Texas BOE crippling the teaching of science, including evolution, all throughout the state is something cooked up by "liberals." Not to mention the myriad other states doing the same. All just a story from the libs.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Yeah the Texas BOE crippling the teaching of science, including evolution, all throughout the state is something cooked up by "liberals." Not to mention the myriad other states doing the same. All just a story from the libs.

Do they have any success or is it the whims of a few vocal crackpots?  

[Brisketexan 106899]

Do they have any success or is it the whims of a few vocal crackpots?  

Dude...it’s a plank of the Texas GOP platform.

[Mole 4339]

13 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

the whims of a few vocal crackpots

Motto worthy IMO.

I have at times been part of pretty conservative churches where I'd guess a fair number are young earth creationists. I say "guess" because it never came up, not in conversation nor from the pulpit. Unless you're trying to sell tickets to a theme park, it doesn't really make much of a difference. If the church is doing the work of the church, serving one another and serving the community, I'm not really interested in their understanding of the Big Bang. I'd prefer science classes to teach science though.

There's no doubt that some try to hang their entire theological house of cards on a young earth or opposition to Darwin, but the vocal ones often seem like they have something to sell. If you're reading Genesis and your first thought is to guess the age of the universe, you might be missing the point.

[troph 25227]

I went to Texas Church of Christ churches for my first 30 years and Baptist for my last 11.  And when I was c of c that was 3 times a week — Wednesday night and two times on Sunday.   I’ve never heard anyone preach against evolution.  But apparently some congregations must.  Because every liberal non church goer I know — and me being a lawyer that’s a lot — automatically assumes I am some young earth creationist because I believe in God.  

Went to more than one church that had special bible studies on young earth creationism. Science to disprove carbon dating and evolution and position statements that evolution is a liberal conspiracy to attack the sovereignty of God and shit like that. These were southern baptist churches of suburban Austin.

[DixonHur 11959]

42 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude...it’s a plank of the Texas GOP platform.

Like he said...crackpots

[Cacti 191]

1 hour ago, trauma babe said:

Yeah the Texas BOE crippling the teaching of science, including evolution, all throughout the state is something cooked up by "liberals." Not to mention the myriad other states doing the same. All just a story from the libs.

 

Specifically, how is the BOE “crippling the teaching of science"? You seem to be saying that science, in general, is under attack as it relates to Texas education. Maybe you’re right, but some examples would be helpful.

Whatever nefarious intent is attributed to the Board, it doesn’t seem to be hindering Texas students.  Nationally, Texas ranks in the 2^nd quartile in 4^th and 8^th grade science performance and proficiency. In fact, they rank slightly above the national average in all four categories and rank substantially higher than California, who is I assume is not crippling their students.  

State Indicators 2018

[Guest]

1 hour ago, troph said:

Went to more than one church that had special bible studies on young earth creationism. Science to disprove carbon dating and evolution and position statements that evolution is a liberal conspiracy to attack the sovereignty of God and shit like that. These were southern baptist churches of suburban Austin.

I’ve probably attended 10 churches in my life and have been member of 5. Never once have I ever heard it addressed and all of my friends went with me or to a similar church. Literally nobody held this belief. Everyone accepted evolution. It’s not a “plank” of the Texas GOP. 

[Blotto 24021]

2 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Yeah, this. I know literally nobody that doesn’t believe in evolution. I don’t know why creation and evolution cannot coexist. 

Having said that I drove by that crazy church in Glen Rose near the dinosaur park, so I know these people exist. 

That's some straight-up bullshit

http://news.gallup.com/poll/27847/majority-republicans-doubt-theory-evolution.aspx

41% believe that creationism is true, and that evolution is false.

I bet the list of mainstream politicians that won't agree publicly that humans evolved from monkeys is more than a handful. And you damn sure know the reason they won't admit that is because their constituency would revolt against them. 

As you are an admitted evangelical, I find it damn hard to believe that you don't know a single person that doesn't believe in the theory of evolution and the underlying supposition that humans must have evolved from something. Ask your Minister if we evolved from monkeys and report back.
 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Blotto

[Gil Bang 26240]

I’ve probably attended 10 churches in my life and have been member of 5. Never once have I ever heard it addressed and all of my friends went with me or to a similar church. Literally nobody held this belief. Everyone accepted evolution. It’s not a “plank” of the Texas GOP. 

Prove it. Show the Texas GOP platform and make Brisket eat his words

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Blotto said:

That's some straight-up bullshit

http://news.gallup.com/poll/27847/majority-republicans-doubt-theory-evolution.aspx

41% believe that creationism is true, and that evolution is false.

I bet the list of mainstream politicians that won't agree publicly that humans evolved from monkeys is more than a handful. And you damn sure know the reason they won't admit that is because their constituency would revolt against them. 

As you are an admitted evangelical, I find it damn hard to believe that you don't know a single person that doesn't believe in the theory of evolution and the underlying supposition that humans must have evolved from something. Ask your Minister if we evolved from monkeys and report back.
 

I know of not one single person, and I know a lot of people. Of course I don’t interact with anyone that’s not a college graduate, and know these people who think humans have a 6,000 year existence are out there. 

My minister or any leader has never addressed the topic and suspect if they were pressed, they’d have a reasonable response: evolution is valid, modern humans are some 300,000 years old, dinosaurs died out tens of millions of years ago, and none of these disprove creation. And by the way, none of that matters to why you ought to be here. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Gil Bang said:

Prove it. Show the Texas GOP platform and make Brisket eat his words

Nope; he can pull the platform, where it doesn’t say a word about creationism, and instead refer to the Patrick and Dewhurst debate where they were pandering. 

[Gil Bang 26240]

Nope; he can pull the platform, where it doesn’t say a word about creationism, and instead refer to the Patrick and Dewhurst debate where they were pandering. 

What about paragraph 122?

[simplicity 9]

14 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yep. I mock the left of 2018.  It’s gone hard left and is dominated by socialists and by identity politics. I think most are children.  Someone with Bill Clinton’s 90s platform wouldn’t have a seat at the table in 2018

Both sides mock. 

Lol at calling the democrats socialists.

[Blotto 24021]

21 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

I know of not one single person, and I know a lot of people. Of course I don’t interact with anyone that’s not a college graduate, and know these people who think humans have a 6,000 year existence are out there. 

My minister or any leader has never addressed the topic and suspect if they were pressed, they’d have a reasonable response: evolution is valid, modern humans are some 300,000 years old, dinosaurs died out tens of millions of years ago, and none of these disprove creation. And by the way, none of that matters to why you ought to be here. 

Color me shocked. Lighting that candle seems like a revenue-negative proposition. That being said, I would wager money AT LEAST 41% of your congregation would endorse creationism over evolution. 

[workswithseed 2204]

4 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Yeah, this. I know literally nobody that doesn’t believe in evolution. I don’t know why creation and evolution cannot coexist. 

Having said that I drove by that crazy church in Glen Rose near the dinosaur park, so I know these people exist. 

I miss going to that park. The church always seemed just out of place.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

What about paragraph 122?

Paragraph 122 is exactly what I was talking about. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Blotto said:

Color me shocked. Lighting that candle seems like a revenue-negative proposition. That being said, I would wager money AT LEAST 41% of your congregation would endorse creationism over evolution. 

I’d bet you $1 million that its much, much lower than 41%. 

[F250 29201]

6 hours ago, Blotto said:

Color me shocked. Lighting that candle seems like a revenue-negative proposition. That being said, I would wager money AT LEAST 41% of your congregation would endorse creationism over evolution. 

I believe he is a member of a UMC church. The UMC as a denomination officially supports the scientific theory and opposes any attempt to address creationism or ID in public schools. The UMC also opposes the advocacy of YEC/ID within the UMC organization. Methodists are not known for holding fundamentalist positions like creationism.

 

[CooterBrown 18288]

You think Reagan was left of Romney or McCain? 
Okie dokie. 

Only one of those three was a former union boss and co-signed a letter to congress urging the banning of assault rifles.

[CooterBrown 18288]

I went to Texas Church of Christ churches for my first 30 years and Baptist for my last 11.  And when I was c of c that was 3 times a week — Wednesday night and two times on Sunday.   I’ve never heard anyone preach against evolution.  But apparently some congregations must.  Because every liberal non church goer I know — and me being a lawyer that’s a lot — automatically assumes I am some young earth creationist because I believe in God.  

Growing up baptist, my experience was the same. But something changed. For example, I know Hyde Park Baptist preaches against evolution. The CofC my roommate from college goes to in weatherford does also. Hell, he’s an oncologist, a creationist, and a holocaust denier. It’s like a trifecta that’s probably not matched by anyone in the world.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

I believe he is a member of a UMC church. The UMC as a denomination officially supports the scientific theory and opposes any attempt to address creationism or ID in public schools. The UMC also opposes the advocacy of YEC/ID within the UMC organization. Methodists are not known for holding fundamentalist positions like creationism.

 

HPUMC. Friends go to PCPC, HPPC, PCB or Watermark. None espouse YEC. The thought that anywhere close to 41% of my church believes in that nonsense is laughable. 

[relapse98 634]

14 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Reagan was a philandering piece of shit.

He was also anti 2nd Amendment.

[wildcat09 29579]

8 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

I’ve probably attended 10 churches in my life and have been member of 5. Never once have I ever heard it addressed and all of my friends went with me or to a similar church. Literally nobody held this belief. Everyone accepted evolution. It’s not a “plank” of the Texas GOP. 

This is like that old story about the lady who was befuddled when Nixon won because she didn't know anybody who voted for Nixon. Per a recent poll, 57% of evangelical protestants believe man has always existed in its present form. It's not like they're some small and insignificant minority.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

This is like that old story about the lady who was befuddled when Nixon won because she didn't know anybody who voted for Nixon. Per a recent poll, 57% of evangelical protestants believe man has always existed in its present form. It's not like they're some small and insignificant minority.

Don’t believe it. And I don’t want to associate with people like that. 

[gsoda3 3362]

i'm a YEC.  i believe the universe was literally created as the Bible said and as Jesus affirmed.  i believe just as God created adam in his mature adult form, the universe/earth was also created in its mature form.  looking at it from a scientific perspective the earth and universe will look hundreds of millions and billions of years old.  for me it comes down to whose authority i'm choosing to believe.  

[wildcat09 29579]

Just now, gsoda3 said:

i'm a YEC.  i believe the universe was literally created as the Bible said and as Jesus affirmed.  i believe just as God created adam in his mature adult form, the universe/earth was also created in its mature form.  looking at it from a scientific perspective the earth and universe will look hundreds of millions and billions of years old.  for me it comes down to whose authority i'm choosing to believe.  

So what's the consensus/majority/plurality view of YECs to explain things like the fossil record?  

[Brisketexan 106899]

29 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Don’t believe it. And I don’t want to associate with people like that. 

Doesn't matter whether you believe it, the numbers are generally accurate.  Shit, my FIL believes that shit.

And good on you for not wanting to associate with people like that.  But you'd be surprised by some of the people who hold that belief, and you never knew it.

[Jack Burton 35]

10 hours ago, Cacti said:

 

Specifically, how is the BOE “crippling the teaching of science"? You seem to be saying that science, in general, is under attack as it relates to Texas education. Maybe you’re right, but some examples would be helpful.

Whatever nefarious intent is attributed to the Board, it doesn’t seem to be hindering Texas students.  Nationally, Texas ranks in the 2^nd quartile in 4^th and 8^th grade science performance and proficiency. In fact, they rank slightly above the national average in all four categories and rank substantially higher than California, who is I assume is not crippling their students.  

State Indicators 2018

Texas Tribune has stories dedicated to SBOE if you want to read and make your own conclusions. Not a challenge, just a resource

https://www.texastribune.org/organizations/state-board-of-education/

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Doesn't matter whether you believe it, the numbers are generally accurate.  Shit, my FIL believes that shit.

And good on you for not wanting to associate with people like that.  But you'd be surprised by some of the people who hold that belief, and you never knew it.

So is it 41% or 57%?  Is that range what you mean by generally accurate?

[relapse98 634]

5 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

So is it 41% or 57%?  Is that range what you mean by generally accurate?

You do realize those were different polls that asked different questions and provided percentages of how 2 different groups responded, right?

Edited May 14, 2018 by relapse98

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

You do realize those were different polls that asked different questions and provided percentages of how 2 different groups responded, right?

No I hadn’t realized that. I’m merely reading the posts and not the links. The descriptions in the posts seemed very similar. To think that 57% of evangelicals do not believe in our evolution is ludicrous. It’s a flawed poll. 

[Brisketexan 106899]

8 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

So is it 41% or 57%?  Is that range what you mean by generally accurate?

41% of AMERICANS.  And over the last 20 years, I've seen polling showing that number generally ranging in the high 30s to low 40s, so that's what I mean by generally accurate.

And yes, it blows me away that 41% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.  Among my peers, it's probably only about 5%, and most of those people haven't shared their belief with me, and I'd be surprised when they tell me they're creationists.  But they're out there, and there are a metric crap-ton more than you think.

It also blows me away that it's entirely unnecessary, theologically.  The last 150 years or so have created a bizarre world of biblical "truth," which has been twisted to require a literalism of allegory that is totally unnecessary and inexplicably dismissive of the origin and context of the stories (and yes, the creation myth is a story) that make up the Jewish holy tradition.  I mean, think about this simple contrast -- Genesis is a HEBREW book of the bible, yet very few jews believe in creationism at the expense of the Theory of Evolution.  There's a whole tangent there, interesting to discuss, but not necessary for this thread.

The point is - back to the OP - we have a unique theocratic culture here that celebrates and fights for scientific ignorance, and would co-opt government to do so.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

41% of AMERICANS.  And over the last 20 years, I've seen polling showing that number generally ranging in the high 30s to low 40s, so that's what I mean by generally accurate.

And yes, it blows me away that 41% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.  Among my peers, it's probably only about 5%, and most of those people haven't shared their belief with me, and I'd be surprised when they tell me they're creationists.  But they're out there, and there are a metric crap-ton more than you think.

It also blows me away that it's entirely unnecessary, theologically.  The last 150 years or so have created a bizarre world of biblical "truth," which has been twisted to require a literalism of allegory that is totally unnecessary and inexplicably dismissive of the origin and context of the stories (and yes, the creation myth is a story) that make up the Jewish holy tradition.  I mean, think about this simple contrast -- Genesis is a HEBREW book of the bible, yet very few jews believe in creationism at the expense of the Theory of Evolution.  There's a whole tangent there, interesting to discuss, but not necessary for this thread.

The point is - back to the OP - we have a unique theocratic culture here that celebrates and fights for scientific ignorance, and would co-opt government to do so.

Yeah, it's bullshit and gives us a bad name. 

[relapse98 634]

9 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

No I hadn’t realized that. I’m merely reading the posts and not the links. The descriptions in the posts seemed very similar. To think that 57% of evangelicals do not believe in our evolution is ludicrous. It’s a flawed poll. 

I'd argue that you aren't actually an evangelical, you just for some reason identify as one so I'm not sure your experience is a valid one to judge the poll data with. You yourself stated in post #159 on this thread that you basically aren't an evangelical. But for some reason you have identified to be one and have carried on arguing like you are one.  Its not really a discussion I care to have, just something I noted.

Edit: To clarify - the world 'Evangelize' means 'convert or seek to convert (someone) to Christianity.' I argue that if one isn't 'converting or seeking to convert people to Christianity, you aren't an evangelical. Its kinda the big word part of being an Evangelical.

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by relapse98

[Jiggy-Z 3509]

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

41% of AMERICANS.  And over the last 20 years, I've seen polling showing that number generally ranging in the high 30s to low 40s, so that's what I mean by generally accurate.

And yes, it blows me away that 41% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.  Among my peers, it's probably only about 5%, and most of those people haven't shared their belief with me, and I'd be surprised when they tell me they're creationists.  But they're out there, and there are a metric crap-ton more than you think.

It also blows me away that it's entirely unnecessary, theologically.  The last 150 years or so have created a bizarre world of biblical "truth," which has been twisted to require a literalism of allegory that is totally unnecessary and inexplicably dismissive of the origin and context of the stories (and yes, the creation myth is a story) that make up the Jewish holy tradition.  I mean, think about this simple contrast -- Genesis is a HEBREW book of the bible, yet very few jews believe in creationism at the expense of the Theory of Evolution.  There's a whole tangent there, interesting to discuss, but not necessary for this thread.

The point is - back to the OP - we have a unique theocratic culture here that celebrates and fights for scientific ignorance, and would co-opt government to do so.

I thought it was 41% of evangelicals, not of all Americans.

My ex wife was/is a Wisconsin synod Lutheran  and they follow a strict literal interpretation of the bible and I was told in to uncertain terms by her pastor years ago that they believed the universe/earth as we know it was created in 6 normal days.  Not sure if the rank and file fall in with that or if the church keeps it on the qt, but that was their stance 29 years ago.

That synod was pretty small as far a Lutherans go with numbers around 250K nationwide-30 years ago.  Heaviest presence in Wis., Minn., and the Dakotas. 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

I'd argue that you aren't actually an evangelical, you just for some reason identify as one so I'm not sure your experience is a valid one to judge the poll data with. You yourself stated in post #159 on this thread that you basically aren't an evangelical. But for some reason you have identified to be one and have carried on arguing like you are one.  Its not really a discussion I care to have, just something I noted.

Edit: To clarify - the world 'Evangelize' means 'convert or seek to convert (someone) to Christianity.' I argue that if one isn't 'converting or seeking to convert people to Christianity, you aren't an evangelical. Its kinda the big word part of being an Evangelical.

 

Yeah I’m aware. Let me ask you this: what % of so-called evangelicals do you think evangelize/seek to convert?

[Brisketexan 106899]

13 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

I'd argue that you aren't actually an evangelical, you just for some reason identify as one so I'm not sure your experience is a valid one to judge the poll data with. You yourself stated in post #159 on this thread that you basically aren't an evangelical. But for some reason you have identified to be one and have carried on arguing like you are one.  Its not really a discussion I care to have, just something I noted.

Edit: To clarify - the world 'Evangelize' means 'convert or seek to convert (someone) to Christianity.' I argue that if one isn't 'converting or seeking to convert people to Christianity, you aren't an evangelical. Its kinda the big word part of being an Evangelical.

 

Well, the problem is that the word "evangelical" has become so co-opted that the overlapping meanings create much confusion.

There's "Evangelical Christians," which are a particular cultural and political group that we're discussing here.  That label came about both by self-labeling and external characterization (hard to tell which came first), but it's the label that applies today.

Then there's evangelical Christians, who are simply Christians who evangelize...which, really, is effectively ALL Christians.  If we live outwardly as commanded, loving one another, we are sending a clear and powerful message:

Quote

A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so also you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another.

Indeed, it is the foundational and most powerful way to evangelize -- live as an example.

The irony is, by THAT measure, many "Evangelical Christians" -- who many of us have experienced as some of the plain meanest people we have ever known -- are the OPPOSITE of evangelical Christians.

This has happened with other terms over the years as well.  See liberalism.  The Economist has long been a champion of liberalism, which historically has only slight overlap with what American "LIberals" have stood for.  Instead, classical liberalism most closely links with what we've long associated with American Conservatism: protection of individual freedoms, pro-markets and free trade, etc.*  

* The recent bizarro-world developments of the GOP suddenly becoming anti-free trade etc. notwithstanding.

[WhatTheBuck 28930]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, the problem is that the word "evangelical" has become so co-opted that the overlapping meanings create much confusion.

There's "Evangelical Christians," which are a particular cultural and political group that we're discussing here.  That label came about both by self-labeling and external characterization (hard to tell which came first), but it's the label that applies today.

Then there's evangelical Christians, who are simply Christians who evangelize...which, really, is effectively ALL Christians.  If we live outwardly as commanded, loving one another, we are sending a clear and powerful message:

Indeed, it is the foundational and most powerful way to evangelize -- live as an example.

The irony is, by THAT measure, many "Evangelical Christians" -- who many of us have experienced as some of the plain meanest people we have ever known -- are the OPPOSITE of evangelical Christians.

This has happened with other terms over the years as well.  See liberalism.  The Economist has long been a champion of liberalism, which historically has only slight overlap with what American "LIberals" have stood for.  Instead, classical liberalism most closely links with what we've long associated with American Conservatism: protection of individual freedoms, pro-markets and free trade, etc.*  

* The recent bizarro-world developments of the GOP suddenly becoming anti-free trade etc. notwithstanding.

I would call Christians who evangelize "evangelists," not evangelicals. There's a difference. I'm sure there's no consensus on what either is nor how they differ from one another. But hey, that's religion for you. 

[Mole 4339]

I'd define evangelicals by certain theological positions, although obviously there are now certain political implications.

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

And good on you for not wanting to associate with people like that.  But you'd be surprised by some of the people who hold that belief, and you never knew it.

 

Maybe I'm unclear on who "people like that" are. Outside of the ones advocating for ID in the classroom, which is a small subset of "people like that," what does it matter? Do you hold a similar disdain for people who refuse to use the Oxford comma?

Edited May 14, 2018 by Mole

[wildcat09 29579]

3 minutes ago, Mole said:

I'd define evangelicals by certain theological positions, although obviously there are now certain political implications.

Maybe I'm unclear on who "people like that" are. Outside of the ones advocating for ID in the classroom, which is a small subset of "people like that," what does it matter? Do you hold a similar disdain for people who refuse to use the Oxford comma?

I certainly do.

[Anastasis 23720]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

I certainly do.

[Guest]

I’ve never heard someone self identify as an evangelical.  Typically folks will say they are Christian and if pressed give the denomination they attend. The term was developed to lump large groups together for political demographic purposes.  People now use it as a pejorative to reference what they believe to be a monolithic group of hateful nationalists whose sole purpose was to get Trump in office.  They often have some crazy uncle or father in law that they can give an anecdotal reference for what all evangelicals must be like.  Similar to how entire races of people must be like the few representatives you know. 

[F250 29201]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

41% of AMERICANS.  And over the last 20 years, I've seen polling showing that number generally ranging in the high 30s to low 40s, so that's what I mean by generally accurate.

And yes, it blows me away that 41% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.  Among my peers, it's probably only about 5%, and most of those people haven't shared their belief with me, and I'd be surprised when they tell me they're creationists.  But they're out there, and there are a metric crap-ton more than you think.

It also blows me away that it's entirely unnecessary, theologically.  The last 150 years or so have created a bizarre world of biblical "truth," which has been twisted to require a literalism of allegory that is totally unnecessary and inexplicably dismissive of the origin and context of the stories (and yes, the creation myth is a story) that make up the Jewish holy tradition.  I mean, think about this simple contrast -- Genesis is a HEBREW book of the bible, yet very few jews believe in creationism at the expense of the Theory of Evolution.  There's a whole tangent there, interesting to discuss, but not necessary for this thread.

The point is - back to the OP - we have a unique theocratic culture here that celebrates and fights for scientific ignorance, and would co-opt government to do so.

I believe a lot of this has to do with the importation of dispensationalism from England and it's infiltration of Evangelicals during the mid-nineteenth century in the U.S. What most people think of today as Evangelicals follow Dispensational theology, a theology that was picked up by some historical Evangelicals around a 150 years ago. With the rise of the Evangelical-Dispensationalists a separation between various Evangelical groups developed in the early twentieth century. At the time, it was a struggle between fundamentalists and Mainline Protestants which gave way to a new group, the modern day Evangelicals, which were just rebranded fundamentalists. They took the name and ran with it.

To understand them, you need to understand the concepts behind Dispensationalism. The Evangelical name was basically a marketing scheme.

[Brisketexan 106899]

23 minutes ago, F250 said:

I believe a lot of this has to do with the importation of dispensationalism from England and it's infiltration of Evangelicals during the mid-nineteenth century in the U.S. What most people think of today as Evangelicals follow Dispensational theology, a theology that was picked up by some historical Evangelicals around a 150 years ago. With the rise of the Evangelical-Dispensationalists a separation between various Evangelical groups developed in the early twentieth century. At the time, it was a struggle between fundamentalists and Mainline Protestants which gave way to a new group, the modern day Evangelicals, which were just rebranded fundamentalists. They took the name and ran with it.

To understand them, you need to understand the concepts behind Dispensationalism. The Evangelical name was basically a marketing scheme.

Without going too far down the detailed history road, this.  Good post.

[YChang 3569]

I’ve never heard someone self identify as an evangelical.  Typically folks will say they are Christian and if pressed give the denomination they attend. The term was developed to lump large groups together for political demographic purposes.  People now use it as a pejorative to reference what they believe to be a monolithic group of hateful nationalists whose sole purpose was to get Trump in office.  They often have some crazy uncle or father in law that they can give an anecdotal reference for what all evangelicals must be like.  Similar to how entire races of people must be like the few representatives you know. 

Man, Christians just can’t get a break in this country!