[_ Old Earth _] The "real" motive for supporting evolution.

[John]

In the last few decades, numerous scientists have publicly admitted that their real reason for accepting and promoting the theory of evolution is that, although the scientific evidence for macro evolution is non-existent, the only logical alternative was special creation by God.
Since that biblical alternative was absolutely unacceptable to their atheistic convictions, thousands of scientists chose to ignore the evidence they encountered in their own field that proved that chance and mutations could never explain the marvelous design and biological complexity that life displays
Prof L.T More, with the university of Cincinnati , spoke of the "faith" in evolution when he acknowledged the conflict between personal belief and scientific evidence" Our faith in the doctrine of evolution depends upon our reluctance to accept the antagonistic doctrine of special creation" Prof More acknowledged the profound philosophical problem faced by scientists when they confronted the overwhelming problems now facing the ToE,

The reasonable view was to believe in spontaneous generation [evolution] ; [for] the only alternative, is to believe in a single, primary act or super natural creation. there is no third position, For this reason many scientists a century ago chose to regard the belief in spontaneous generation as a "philosophical necessity"

Significantly, British astronomer Pro Fed hoyle acknowledged that enormous problems existed with the ToE. Holye actually admitted that the only reason the ToE is still so wildly accepted in the scientific community, despite the virtual lack of scientific evidence , is due to the need of atheistic people to deny the scientific evidence that God created the universe. Remarkably, prof Holye wrote that the ToE survived despite that lack of evidence becuase the theory is "considered socially desirable and even essential to the peace of mind of the body politic.

 

[Deep Thought]

You should cite the source for all these pieces you are copying/pasting in this forum.

 

[John]

You should cite the source for all these pieces you are copying/pasting in this forum.

I am purposely refraining from posting sources, because i want the debate to but up the topics i put forth, but about who wrote them, some of them were written by me but most are not.

 

[Heidi]

In the last few decades, numerous scientists have publicly admitted that their real reason for accepting and promoting the theory of evolution is that, although the scientific evidence for macro evolution is non-existent, the only logical alternative was special creation by God.
Since that biblical alternative was absolutely unacceptable to their atheistic convictions, thousands of scientists chose to ignore the evidence they encountered in their own field that proved that chance and mutations could never explain the marvelous design and biological complexity that life displays
Prof L.T More, with the university of Cincinnati , spoke of the "faith" in evolution when he acknowledged the conflict between personal belief and scientific evidence" Our faith in the doctrine of evolution depends upon our reluctance to accept the antagonistic doctrine of special creation" Prof More acknowledged the profound philosophical problem faced by scientists when they confronted the overwhelming problems now facing the ToE,

The reasonable view was to believe in spontaneous generation [evolution] ; [for] the only alternative, is to believe in a single, primary act or super natural creation. there is no third position, For this reason many scientists a century ago chose to regard the belief in spontaneous generation as a "philosophical necessity"

Significantly, British astronomer Pro Fed hoyle acknowledged that enormous problems existed with the ToE. Holye actually admitted that the only reason the ToE is still so wildly accepted in the scientific community, despite the virtual lack of scientific evidence , is due to the need of atheistic people to deny the scientific evidence that God created the universe. Remarkably, prof Holye wrote that the ToE survived despite that lack of evidence becuase the theory is "considered socially desirable and even essential to the peace of mind of the body politic.

trying to deny the existence of God was the only reason that Darwin thought of this ridiculous theory in the first place. There's no reason to come up with an alternate explanation of creation than what the bible says unless it's to try to prove that one knows more than God does. But as evolutionists prove, "He who exalts himself will be humbled." ;-)

 

[Dunzo]

Heidi, you're an idiot. Get the hell out.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi, you're an idiot. Get the hell out.

Sorry, but that won't make God's word go away. You'll have to give an account for your contradictions to him even if you won't to us. Sorry. :roll: But better now than later.

 

[Dunzo]

Heidi, you're an idiot. Get the hell out.

Sorry, but that won't make God's word go away. You'll have to give an account for your contradictions to him even if you won't to us. Sorry. :roll:

Please, give me, say, 3 examples of my "incessant contradictions". Strawmen not welcome!

 

[John]

sheesh don't be getting my threads locked :crazyeyes:

 

[freeway]

*Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). *Nietzsche was a remarkable example of a man who fully adopted Darwinist principles. He wrote books declaring that the way to evolve was to have wars and kill the weaker races, in order to produce a "super race" (*T. Walter Wallbank and *Alastair M. Taylor, Civilization Past and Present, Vol. 2, 1949 ed., p. 274). *Darwin, in Origin of the Species, also said that this needed to happen. The writings of both men were read by German militarists and led to World War I. *Hitler valued both Darwin’s and Nietzche’s books. When Hitler killed 6 million Jews, he was only doing what Darwin taught

Nietzsche was a great one he said "God is dead", and if God is dead or if mankind turns their back on God, which in turn would be the same thing. The next century should show a huge increase in wars, murder, thief, famines, and about anything else that is bad.." ibid". So at least he was right on half of the statement. war etc. Since the "dawn of evolution' has gone mainstream mankind has taken war and violence to a whole new level, sure there has always been killing, but not on this scale, now even unborn children are just another causality. thats not even talking about what Hitler believed. So real motive, lets get God out of the picture, then we can live our lives the way we want and answer to no one... the perfect world... so thought!

 

[freeway]

"[Hitler] stressed and singled out the idea of biological evolution as the most forceful weapon against traditional religion and he repeatedly condemned Christianity for its opposition to the teaching of evolution . . For Hitler, evolution was the hallmark of modern science and culture, and he defended its veracity as tenaciously as Haeckel."â€â€*Daniel Gasman, Scientific Origins of Modern Socialism: Social Darwinism in Ernst Haeckel and the German Monist League (1971), p. 188.

*Hitler said this:

"I regard Christianity as the most fatal, seductive lie that has ever existed."â€â€*Adolf Hitler, quoted in Larry Azar, Twentieth Century in Crisis (1990), p. 155.

"This doctrine of racial supremacy Hitler took at face value . . He accepted evolution much as we today accept Einsteinian relativity."â€â€*Larry Azar, Twentieth Century in Crisis (1990), p. 180.

"Sixty-three million people would be slaughtered in order to obey the evolutionary doctrine that perishing is a law of nature."â€â€*Op. cit., p. 181.

This was the thinking of a man who's god was evolution. This is what happens when you remove God from or out of society, no one to answer too, hell the sky is the limit!!

 

[Dunzo]

Hitler eh? That old hat? Ok then.
1. Hitler was a Catholic. He met the Pope.
2. Hitler was a "Social Darwinist", which literally has nothing to do with evolution bar the name.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

*Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). *Nietzsche was a remarkable example of a man who fully adopted Darwinist principles. He wrote books declaring that the way to evolve was to have wars and kill the weaker races, in order to produce a "super race" (*T. Walter Wallbank and *Alastair M. Taylor, Civilization Past and Present, Vol. 2, 1949 ed., p. 274). *Darwin, in Origin of the Species, also said that this needed to happen. The writings of both men were read by German militarists and led to World War I. *Hitler valued both Darwin’s and Nietzche’s books. When Hitler killed 6 million Jews, he was only doing what Darwin taught

Nietzsche was a great one he said "God is dead", and if God is dead or if mankind turns their back on God, which in turn would be the same thing. The next century should show a huge increase in wars, murder, thief, famines, and about anything else that is bad.." ibid". So at least he was right on half of the statement. war etc. Since the "dawn of evolution' has gone mainstream mankind has taken war and violence to a whole new level, sure there has always been killing, but not on this scale, now even unborn children are just another causality. thats not even talking about what Hitler believed. So real motive, lets get God out of the picture, then we can live our lives the way we want and answer to no one... the perfect world... so thought!

You are saying that because of evolution men are killing more?

Religion has been on of the biggest motivators of war. Dont even mention Hitler, you will get batted down on that one if you try the "hitler was pushing forth Dawrinism" crud I hear some say.

Go read a book and learn history please.

Look at the countries involved in wars right now. Palestine, America, African countries, Iraq, Israel etc.

Do you see the common denominator of evolution there? No. These are mostly ethnic and religious wars.

 

[freeway]

You are saying that because of evolution men are killing more?

not me only, but just about anyone that does not believe in the "fact laden :o " evolution.

Religion has been on of the biggest motivators of war. Dont even mention Hitler, you will get batted down on that one if you try the "hitler was pushing forth Dawrinism" crud I hear some say.

yes religion has, but not Christianity and lets not forget about the millions and millions that have been killed because of evolution "atheist's view" evolution breeds atheistism.

Go read a book and learn history please.

nice come back, and yes I have read my history book, let me ask you a question professor, before the crusades, which was a war to get back the promise land that was stolen by the Muslims. When the Muslims came form out of the desert to take Jerusalem what was the word, "battle cry' they used to rally their forces?

Look at the countries involved in wars right now. Palestine, America, African countries, Iraq, Israel etc.

And point?

Do you see the common denominator of evolution there? No. These are mostly ethnic and religious wars.

Here comes the shocker, yes I do see a common denominator,
1. Palestine= Muslim =non Christian= do not believe in Jesus= follows world view
2.America= fighting terrorist on their land and not here, only other backer of another free nation Israel. oh America has chosen to turn it back on God also..
3.African countries= see 1.
4.= again see one.
5. Israel= now come on you mean to tell me that if other countries threatens to blow you off the face of the earth, or to daily bombard you, you won't defend yourself, Jimmy Carter has a bus ticket for you to join his crusade if you believe that..
now don't get me wrong I hate war and killing just as most as you probably do, but as a Christian we supposed to just roll over and play dead...
One last thing, Israel, is still waiting for the messiah that we christain's worship,= non Christian country...

 

[VaultZero4Me]

You are saying that because of evolution men are killing more?

not me only, but just about anyone that does not believe in the "fact laden :o " evolution.

[quote:49b5e]Religion has been on of the biggest motivators of war. Dont even mention Hitler, you will get batted down on that one if you try the "hitler was pushing forth Dawrinism" crud I hear some say.

yes religion has, but not Christianity and lets not forget about the millions and millions that have been killed because of evolution "atheist's view" evolution breeds atheistism.

Go read a book and learn history please.

nice come back, and yes I have read my history book, let me ask you a question professor, before the crusades, which was a war to get back the promise land that was stolen by the Muslims. When the Muslims came form out of the desert to take Jerusalem what was the word, "battle cry' they used to rally their forces?

Look at the countries involved in wars right now. Palestine, America, African countries, Iraq, Israel etc.

And point?

Do you see the common denominator of evolution there? No. These are mostly ethnic and religious wars.

Here comes the shocker, yes I do see a common denominator,
1. Palestine= Muslim =non Christian= do not believe in Jesus= follows world view
2.America= fighting terrorist on their land and not here, only other backer of another free nation Israel. oh America has chosen to turn it back on God also..
3.African countries= see 1.
4.= again see one.
5. Israel= now come on you mean to tell me that if other countries threatens to blow you off the face of the earth, or to daily bombard you, you won't defend yourself, Jimmy Carter has a bus ticket for you to join his crusade if you believe that..
now don't get me wrong I hate war and killing just as most as you probably do, but as a Christian we supposed to just roll over and play dead...
One last thing, Israel, is still waiting for the messiah that we christain's worship,= non Christian country...[/quote:49b5e]

You really believe this mess or is this tonuge in cheek?

 

[Patashu]

Just because an atheist kills does not conclude the death was in the name of atheism. Stalin and Pol Pot were killers but for the state/communism. (And Hitler was christian. So was the Germany who actually carried out his orders, so don't even start.)

In addition, if atheism is wrong because of atheist mass murderers, so is christianity (crusades, the inquisition, the kkk et all). Yes, I know, tired old point but you can't ignore it.

 

[Heidi]

Just because an atheist kills does not conclude the death was in the name of atheism. Stalin and Pol Pot were killers but for the state/communism. (And Hitler was christian. So was the Germany who actually carried out his orders, so don't even start.)

In addition, if atheism is wrong because of atheist mass murderers, so is christianity (crusades, the inquisition, the kkk et all). Yes, I know, tired old point but you can't ignore it.

Sorry friend, but Hitler was no more a Christian than Charles Manson was. Anyone can claim to be a Christian if his parents went to a Christian church. But one has to agree with and follow the teachings of Christ to be Christian. And Hitler did not do that. In fact he thought he was the messiah. : So you need to be a little more informed before you post. :

 

[Dunzo]

No true Scotsman.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

Just because an atheist kills does not conclude the death was in the name of atheism. Stalin and Pol Pot were killers but for the state/communism. (And Hitler was christian. So was the Germany who actually carried out his orders, so don't even start.)

In addition, if atheism is wrong because of atheist mass murderers, so is christianity (crusades, the inquisition, the kkk et all). Yes, I know, tired old point but you can't ignore it.

Sorry friend, but Hitler was no more a Christian than Charles Manson was. Anyone can claim to be a Christian if his parents went to a Christian church. But one has to agree with and follow the teachings of Christ to be Christian. And Hitler did not do that. In fact he thought he was the messiah. : So you need to be a little more informed before you post. :

Well now that would just be too easy for you wouldn't it ;p

I like how that works out for you. Talk about stacking a deck.

 

[John]

Sorry friend, but Hitler was no more a Christian than Charles Manson was. Anyone can claim to be a Christian if his parents went to a Christian church. But one has to agree with and follow the teachings of Christ to be Christian. And Hitler did not do that. In fact he thought he was the messiah. : So you need to be a little more informed before you post.

its true.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

Sorry friend, but Hitler was no more a Christian than Charles Manson was. Anyone can claim to be a Christian if his parents went to a Christian church. But one has to agree with and follow the teachings of Christ to be Christian. And Hitler did not do that. In fact he thought he was the messiah. : So you need to be a little more informed before you post.

its true.

It's comletely false.

If someone claims the basic tenets of Christianity, they are for labeling purposes a Christian, no matter their actions.

Now, different people within the faith can argue if they are actually saved, but that is besides the point.

Example:

1. I know many baptists in this area who state that all catholics are still sinners and will burn in hell, because they do not follow the true faith (the saints issue, worshipping Mary, etc.)

Now, because they state they are not Christians, are we to remove the label? No. Catholics are considered Christians. (and I am not picking on anyone because I know the reverse is also true as well)

2. A man who is a Christian murders someone in cold blood. He is still labeled a Christian, although you can argue if he still has salvation or not until he asks for forgiveness. That is a different matter.

If we followed Heidi's reasoning to its logical end, there would be no Christians (or very few) as each sect has a reason to claim why the other sect is wrong. We would go from over 2 billion Christians in the world to a much smaller number.