Posted by: Rob Lester | August 9, 2010

Atheists are the intolerant ones

BBC news ran a story on 9/20/08 about a controversy erupting in Britain over some comments about creation.  Michael Reiss, Royal Society director of education, stated that simply telling students who believe in creation that they are wrong shuts down communication and teaching.  He said a better approach was that, “Teachers need to be able to explain to them…why creationism has no scientific basis.”  He further stated that, “discussing creationism as a worldview…is not the same as lending it any scientific credibility.”  This is aimed at discrediting creationism, not promoting it.  Mr. Reiss is not a creationist.  Yet, because Mr. Reiss is also a minister in the Church of England, atheists immediately attacked his credibility and motives.  Some claimed he was unqualified to hold his position as director of education simply because of his religious views.  The fact that Reiss denies creationism is apparently lost in the uproar.  One even said that his being a clergyman was “very worrisome.”  A member of the Royal Society, Harry Kroto, said, “I warned the president of the Royal Society that he was a dangerous appointment…I did not realize just how dangerous it would turn out to be.”  They act as if this is a dire matter of national security.  They live in terror of a deadly outbreak of radioactive Christianity.  Answers in Genesis commented on this story, “By attacking one of their own for even suggesting that creationism be dealt with in some other way than outright dismissal, they have reminded us that evolutionary theory won’t tolerate competition.”  Reiss finally resigned amid all the controversy.  The BBC story appeared under the inaccurate headline “Creationism biologist quits job.”  Other British papers printed inflammatory and misleading headlines as well.   The Times headline read, “Leading scientist urges teaching of creationism in schools.”  The Daily Mail read, “Children should be taught about creationism inschool, top scientist says.”  This is why it’s so hard for us to rationally discuss the fundamental differences between creationism and Darwinism without emotion turning it into a shouting match.  The Bible says, “Come let us reason together.”  Even if our opponents do not, we must still “speak the truth in love.” God’s truth will prevail.




  1. The Darwinists exaggerate and lie about their opponents just as they exaggerate and lie about their supposed “evidence” for evolution. If they repeat the same lies often enough and people will start believing what they say. But you are right, God’s truth will prevail!

    • Well, Until a proper explanation for the rock strata being so old, provably, and the the existence of fossil remains that are clearly related and looked progressively more and more Human, despite the being whose remains are in question , evolution is looking pretty good… Now, I’m not being hostile. I am simply disagreeing with you and am willing to listen to your burden of proof. However, I feel like my belief in secular science is being attacked when creationists attempt to make it illegal to teach evolution…. and creationism is a hypothesis, not a theory, there is a difference with theory trumping hypothesis and law trumping theory. The Bible actually does not say how old the earth is and Creationists typically assume that by adding up all the ages of Adam’s genealogy yields approximately 6,000 years as the age of existence… That isn’t reliable as there is an unspecified amount of time in the creation myth between creation and the fall of man, conveniently left unaccounted for. It is usually assumed Adam and Eve didn’t last a single day. Furthermore, whose time are we looking at? Man’s literal 24/7 time or God’s unknown timekeeping methods?

      Further, rock strata proves the Earth is billions of years old… when we watch other solar systems being born, it does not happen in 7 literal 24 hour days… so why is earth special? On that note, what makes anyone think if there be a God that he didn’t create more life than what’s here? It’s quite arrogant to think all this exists for us, don’t you think?

      Again, i am not intending to be hostile. I am not intending to be rude. I am simply wanting my beliefs left alone the same as you want yours left alone… Stop trying to compete with us for political and educational dominance, since that is perceived as a persecuting attack and thus why some atheist grow angry with creationists and go off on you… which in turn makes you feel attacked and persecuted. If you wish to indoctrinate your children with what the secular state and a growing population of American believe are bedtime stories and myths sprinkled with a little historical facts here and there, then do not put them in the public educational system.

      That is Freedom of religion…. the freedom to abstain form anything that the state does not prohibit that your faith finds objectionable as opposed to the feelings of others. Live and let live, you know? 🙂

      • Ayeka Kel,
        I am grateful you are not hostile in your response, but you are beginning with some bold assumptions and oerstatements. Again, rock strata do not “prove” anything. They are there. They exist. Evolutionists believe they were laid down over billions of years. creationists believe they were laid down in a year-long catastrophic global flood. These are two competing theories. Let the evidence be debated. creationists use real, measurable, repeatable, testable science to point out the errors in Darwinist evolution. Then, we notice that the logical conclusion of the evidence aligns perfectly with the Bible. No one is attacking “secular science” nor is anyone trying to “make teaching evolution illegal.” All that creationists want is a fair hearing. Isn’t that what true science is about? We simply want teachers to have the OPTION to discuss the problems with evolution. I hope you will admit that there are problems which demand answers. But the powers that be refuse to admit the emperor has no clothes and ruthlessly intimidate and shout down anyone who dares to point out this fact. Healthy, inclusive, reasoned debate is the answer but few want to engage in it. Thanks for reading the blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: