[_ Old Earth _] Darwin's Debt to Christianity

[no1nose]

While many words have been written about the differences between evolution and religion far few have been written about the similarities and parallels between the two – that is mainly the parallels between Christianity and Evolution. The point is that there are many parallels and understanding this will uncover the dynamics of the conflict that has been raging for the past 150 years.

When we look at evolution we find that it parallels Christian thought. This is most easily by posing the question, “If evolution is true then who in history would be a prototype for human evolution?â€Â

Surprisingly, Jesus is the most logical choice. No one else in history has had as much influence. If we treat Jesus as an evolutionary prototype we will find that he exactly fits the evolutionary model for a prototype. Jesus was different at birth, and as such was the first member of a new species who proved his survivability by being resurrected. Members of the old species are faced with the choice of transforming and becoming like Jesus or becoming “extinctâ€Â. From an evolutionary view point Jesus is the prototype for mankind's next evolutionary leap. While Jesus did not procreate - his "spiritual genes" are in billions of people making him the most prolific of all humans.

There is a one to one correlation of themes between Christianity and Evolution. It would seem that Darwin took from Christian thought and simply gave things a different name. For example redemption became survival and transformation became mutation. The main differences are the Christianity is concerned with the redemption of the unfit and evolution then focused on the survival of the fittest (that is until it became PC incorrect). The other difference is that in Christianity God is in charge whereas in evolution things happen by chance.

What needs to be brought out is that Darwin’s evolution was not as novel and original as many people believe. He plagiarized 19th century Christianity and this I believe is the true source of the conflict. At the core both Christianity and Evolution are very similar but with differences that lead to strikingly different philosophical values. Evolution seeks to displace and take over the Christian platform and install a new set of moral values.

If evolution is built on a plagiarized Christian foundation then the strength of evolution as a world view must in turn validate Christianity also. The point is we may not have a correct understanding of the Christian message but its ideas and thought forms are so powerful that no one can ignore them and many wish to use them for their own ends.

So what is Darwin’s debt to Christianity? Everything except the idea of survival of the fittest and the denial of God - and these weren’t his ideas either.

 

[John]

1.The Bible states ten times that life reproduces only after its own kind. As we observe the biological world all around us this fact is 100% true Dogs stay dogs, and people stay people. Yet evolution preaches that all life is a blurred continuum.


2.The God of the Bible demands unselfish sacrifice for the good of others. “...whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.†(Matthew 20:27) Would this same God use a method of dead ends, extinctions, and survival of the fittest to make us? I think not.


3.Belief in evolution justified the excesses of the industrial revolution, the Nazi elimination of the Jews, and the rise of Marxism and Communism. It also serves as the primary justification for disbelief in God. Although believers in evolution attempt to distance themselves from taking their theory into a social realm, these historical atrocities are the undeniable result of taking evolution to its logical conclusion. If we are a product of biological forces; why not extend these forces into our dealing with other humans? Animal groups do not lament wiping each other out in order to survive. Why shouldn’t we be the same; if we are just part of an evolutionary process which formed us? Creation is the event which ultimately gives life value because it links every humans value to our Creator who loved us enough to die for us. Evolution is the opposite.
Abundant scientific evidence exists that microbe to man evolution has never taken place. The fossil record shows no credible links between major groups of plants and animals. The chemical structure of DNA contains useful information which could not have developed by natural processes. Also, there is abundant evidence for a worldwide flood which undermines the possibility that evolution could have happened.

Sorry if it does not fit your post entirely, i am just throwing this out there.

 

[Deep Thought]

John, how about posting your *own* comments that actually relate to this thread.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

Belief in evolution justified the excesses of the industrial revolution, the Nazi elimination of the Jews, and the rise of Marxism and Communism. It also serves as the primary justification for disbelief in God. Although believers in evolution attempt to distance themselves from taking their theory into a social realm, these historical atrocities are the undeniable result of taking evolution to its logical conclusion.

Best read your history books again there John. You missing a few things.

1. Technological advances and the thriving capitalistic system spurred the industrial revolution. ToE had nothing to do with it

2. The use of Nazi=ToE is ignorance. You’ve been shown the error of your thinking there many times yet you cling to it.

3. Marxism and Communism = ToE? Um ok. I'm a show me person. Show me.

4. Sorry, but atheism outdates ToE. If evolution makes you disbelieve any god, I doubt you had much faith to begin with.

I swear I have read this on some website, or heard it in a clipping of Hovind somewhere. Might you cite this?

If we are a product of biological forces; why not extend these forces into our dealing with other humans? Animal groups do not lament wiping each other out in order to survive. Why shouldn’t we be the same; if we are just part of an evolutionary process which formed us?

Since Christians go to heaven, wouldn't killing any Christian be doing them a favor since they get to go straight to paradise? Wouldn't that be an act of love if you did it without causing pain?

See where that If A = B and Some B = C then all C's = A fallacy can lead to?

Creation is the event which ultimately gives life value because it links every humans value to our Creator who loved us enough to die for us. Evolution is the opposite.
Abundant scientific evidence exists that microbe to man evolution has never taken place.

I am a show me guy, so show me the money on the bolded.

[quote:89858]The fossil record shows no credible links between major groups of plants and animals.

Think tree of life not straight line. Study ToE a bit and you'll see your error there.

The chemical structure of DNA contains useful information which could not have developed by natural processes. Also, there is abundant evidence for a worldwide flood which undermines the possibility that evolution could have happened.

[/quote:89858]

Show me, Show me, Show me.

 

[no1nose]

The Theory of Evolution not a true representation of nature.

Hard physical evidence demonstrates that reality is nonlinear (c squared, r squared etc) and discontinuous (quantum). However the human mind is not capable of rational nonlinear and discontinuous thought. Instead we think sequentially and in a linear straight line (A is followed by B which is followed by C etc). The Theory of Evolution portrays a linear and sequential natural world and is most likely in just another limited human construct and not a accurate representation of the ultimate reality of nature.

 

[BobRyan]

Darwin admits it caused him to drop Christianity in favor of the myths and storytelling he created in his own imagined darwinian evolutionism.

In Expelled the Movie both Dawkins and Provine admit to the same influence from atheist darwinian evolutionism.

In europe where atheist darwinianism is almost completely "believed" by the general public the result is that they have entered a "post Christian era" by all accounts. Even those few people in Europe that DO still attend the mainline churches are often asking the question of their pastors/priests "are you SURE god exists?".

The evidence is "IN" the atheist doctrinal spin of darwinian evolutionism has been fully exposed by their OWN virulent attacks on fellow EVOLUTIONISTS if those evolutionists support the academic freedom to follow the data where it leads -- rather than pandering to atheist dogma regarding their BELIEF that "there is NO god".

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The Theory of Evolution not a true representation of nature.

Hard physical evidence demonstrates that reality is nonlinear (c squared, r squared etc) and discontinuous (quantum). However the human mind is not capable of rational nonlinear and discontinuous thought. Instead we think sequentially and in a linear straight line (A is followed by B which is followed by C etc). The Theory of Evolution portrays a linear and sequential natural world and is most likely in just another limited human construct and not a accurate representation of the ultimate reality of nature.

Indeed and that is certainly the nicest construct we could put to it.

But when you factor in the confirmed frauds and hoaxes used to prop up darwinianism as though it were science fact AND when you factor in the political pogroms they have called for against scientists that dare to exercise the "academic freedom to follow the data where it leads" -- then you begin to appreciate the distinctive religionist aspect to the movement.

Here are examples of a few of them -- perpetrated in many cases for almost half a century -

..as already been pointed out -- the blind faith of atheist religionists promoting darwinism is in fact corrupting science with junk-science hoaxes and frauds in the form of rank fabrication.

data fabrication (fraud) in the case of Nebraska man.
Data fabrication (fraud) in the case of Simpsons 1951 horse series
Data fabrication (fraud) in the case of Neanderthal man age-dates.
Data fabrication (fraud) in the cause of Haeckles "Phylogeny recapitulates ontogeny"
Data fabrication (fraud) the case of Piltdown man used to prop up the myths of Darwinism for 4 decades

At some point people need to "Wake up to the EVIDENCE" that atheist darwinism is PROVEN to be JUNK SCIENCE.

Bob

 

[no1nose]

I have found that Evolutionists suppress and filter out unwelcome evidence and then make an issue of “good†science vis “bad†science. Bad science is anything that contradicts evolution.

 

[jwu]

I have found that Evolutionists suppress and filter out unwelcome evidence and then make an issue of “good†science vis “bad†science. Bad science is anything that contradicts evolution.

Like what?

Do you realize that the scientist who overturns the ToE would become rich and famous? There is no reason why anyone would hold back on such evidence.

 

[no1nose]

Are you assuming that all scientists are in it for fame and money? And the none of them can disprove evolution?

 

[jmm9683]

Are you assuming that all scientists are in it for fame and money? And the none of them can disprove evolution?

Are you assuming that there is a big conspiracy? Because that's what it sounds like.

 

[John]

Not everyone is honest.

 

[no1nose]

Put your guns away guys. Just pointing out that Darwin was not that clever and certianly not very original.

 

[Barbarian]

Hard physical evidence demonstrates that reality is nonlinear (c squared, r squared etc) and discontinuous (quantum). However the human mind is not capable of rational nonlinear and discontinuous thought. Instead we think sequentially and in a linear straight line (A is followed by B which is followed by C etc). The Theory of Evolution portrays a linear and sequential natural world and is most likely in just another limited human construct and not a accurate representation of the ultimate reality of nature.

Pure prune product, this one is. There are many, many linear processes in nature. However, evolutionary theory describes both linear and non-linear processes. If you doubt this, explain why evolutionary theory describes the nth generation sorting of alleles by a non-linear equation.

The Bible describes a linear and sequential world. Are you telling me that the Bible isn't an accurate representation of the ultimate reality of nature?

This is the wrong place to trot out buzzwords to make it look like you're saying something profound.

 

[no1nose]

If you doubt this, explain why evolutionary theory describes the nth generation sorting of alleles by a non-linear equation.

These kind of equations do not depend on the TOE as such. They are based on obervations and do not flow from the TOE. The TOE is a world view and a product of the human mind and as such has a very limited grasp on the reality that is "out there". To think that it is some sort ultimate representation is fantasy - like all other previous world views it too will someday be outdated and laughable.

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
If you doubt this, explain why evolutionary theory describes the nth generation sorting of alleles by a non-linear equation.

These kind of equations do not depend on the TOE as such.

Be honest with yourself, at least. You don't have a clue about what I'm talking about, do you? In fact, this is an application of evolutionary theory, and depends on the basic four Darwinian principles.
It is used to identify when selective pressures in evolution are present.

They are based on obervations and do not flow from the TOE. The TOE is a world view and a product of the human mind and as such has a very limited grasp on the reality that is "out there".

You've been misled about that, too. Turns out this area of evolutionary theory, known as population genetics, is a very useful science. Scientists use it, because it works.

You're in way over your head, and tossing out big words you don't understand won't help you.

 

[no1nose]

The point is that these equations do not depend on the theory of Evolution. This is the real issue.

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
If you doubt this, explain why evolutionary theory describes the nth generation sorting of alleles by a non-linear equation.

These kind of equations do not depend on the TOE as such.

They lied to you about that, too...

We consider a population of diploid organisms with two alleles A1 and A2 in a certain locus. The population size n is supposed to be finite, but sufficiently large, so that the gene frequencies can be described by continuous values. We also suppose that the population size n is constant.

Let's introduce the function j = j (X,t|P,0) , which characterizes the probability density of the frequency X of the gene A1 at the time moment t under condition that the initial frequency (at t = 0) of this gene is equal to P. Under the assumption that the changes of the gene frequencies at one generation are small, the populations dynamics can be described approximately by the following partial differential equations [1,3,4]:
¶j/¶t = - ¶ (Md X j )/¶X + (1/2) ¶ 2(Vd X j )/¶X2 , (6)
¶j/¶t = Md P ¶j/¶P + (1/2)Vd P ¶ 2j/¶P2 , (7)

where Md X , Md P and Vd X , Vd P are the mean values and the variances of the changes of the frequencies X, P during one generation; time unit is equal to one generation. Eq. (6) is the forward Kolmogorov differential equation (in physics it is called the Fokker-Planck equation); Eq. (7) is the backward Kolmogorov differential equation.

The first terms in the right sides of Eqs. (6), (7) describe a systematic selection pressure, which is due to the fitness difference of the genes A1 and A2. The second terms characterize the random drift of the frequencies, which is due to the fluctuations in the finite size population.

Using Eq. (6), one can determine the time evolution of the gene frequency distribution, Eq. (7) provides the means to estimate the probabilities of gene fixation.

Assuming that 1) the fitnesses of gene A1 and A2 are equal to 1 and 1-s, respectively and 2) the gene contributions to the fitnesses of the gene pairs A1 A1, A1 A2, and A2 A2 are additive, one can obtain, that the values Md X , Md P and Vd X , Vd P are determined by the following expressions [1,3,4]:
Md X = sX(1-X) , Md P = sP(1-P) , Vd X = X(1-X)/2n , Vd P = P(1-P)/2n . (8)

If the evolution is purely neutral (s = 0), Eq. (6) takes the form:
¶j/¶t = (1/4n) ¶ 2[X(1-X)j]/¶X2 .
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/mathmpg.html

Notice that this model uses all four of the primary points of Darwin's theory; his theory is essential to the model. Oh, BTW, the model works very well with real populations.

I think you'd best go learn a little about the theory and it's mathematical consequences, if you want to talk about it. If you really want to learn, I can show you a very simple model that assumes no selective pressure, that accurately predicts the change in allele frequency (which is what evoution is) for the next generation. Want to see how?

 

[no1nose]

I'm impressed but still you need to show how this depends on the Theory of Evoution. The thing is this type of technical waffle may be true regardless of one's world view.

 

[Barbarian]

Darwin's four basic claims:

1. More are born than can live
2. Every organism varies somewhat from its parents
3. Some variations affect the likelihood of living long enough to reproduce.
4. The useful variations therefore increase in the population.

The model

requires variation in organisms of the population
requires fitness pressure (more are born than can live, and some are better adapted)
shows how this affects the allele frequency of the next generation (no. 4)

The process requires Darwin's theory to work.

Want to test a simpler model to see for yourself?