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

[John]

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)

Wrong, they are just under the same umbrella, if we were the same we would both be catholics/Christians

 

[Heidi]

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)

Wrong, they are just under the same umbrella, if we were the same we would both be catholics/Christians

Correct. ;-)

 

[freeway]

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)

Wrong, they are just under the same umbrella, if we were the same we would both be catholics/Christians

Correct. ;-)

ding ding ding... we have a winner!! lets show them what they won!!! :-D :-D

 

[John]

a cookie ?

 

[BobRyan]

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.

That's pretty much laughable for anyone who saw the movie Expelled and the interview done with the people at German camps.

Atheist Darwinism just does not do well "in the light of day".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

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." ;-)

Actually Darwin -- like Richard Dawkins and like Dr Provine BECAME a comitted atheist over time the more he thought about what his "atheist darwinism" and it's implications.

The Movie EXPELLED has come out and shows intereviews with leading Darwinists -- all admitting to the anti-God anti-Christian heart of atheist darwinism. In the Dawkins delusion section of the Moview - Dawkings explores the depths of his rejection of God as a result of his acceptance of Darwinism.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dunzo]

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." ;-)

Actually Darwin -- like Richard Dawkins and like Dr Provine BECAME a comitted atheist over time the more he thought about what his "atheist darwinism" and it's implications.

The Movie EXPELLED has come out and shows intereviews with leading Darwinists -- all admitting to the anti-God anti-Christian heart of atheist darwinism. In the Dawkins delusion section of the Moview - Dawkings explores the depths of his rejection of God as a result of his acceptance of Darwinism.

in Christ,

Bob

There's no such thing as "Darwinism". Darwin's evolution is terribly outdated. One doesn't also have to be an atheist to be an evolutionist.

Every review I've seen of Expelled so far has been overwhelmingly negative. It's been criticised for quote mining, lying in order to obtain interviews and frequently using the "Appeal to emotion" fallacy, among maaany other things.

 

[John]

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." ;-)

Actually Darwin -- like Richard Dawkins and like Dr Provine BECAME a comitted atheist over time the more he thought about what his "atheist darwinism" and it's implications.

The Movie EXPELLED has come out and shows intereviews with leading Darwinists -- all admitting to the anti-God anti-Christian heart of atheist darwinism. In the Dawkins delusion section of the Moview - Dawkings explores the depths of his rejection of God as a result of his acceptance of Darwinism.

in Christ,

Bob

There's no such thing as "Darwinism". Darwin's evolution is terribly outdated. One doesn't also have to be an atheist to be an evolutionist.

Every review I've seen of Expelled so far has been overwhelmingly negative. It's been criticised for quote mining, lying in order to obtain interviews and frequently using the "Appeal to emotion" fallacy, among maaany other things.

its awesome, its so easy to see that your wrong, so all you can do is beat them movie down becuase of what it did, instead of beating the message.

 

[Deep Thought]

its awesome, its so easy to see that your wrong, so all you can do is beat them movie down becuase of what it did, instead of beating the message.

You can obtain the real truth about the movie at

http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth

 

[John]

I get a real laugh on this, first off evolution is not a science, its a world view. that practically kills off the first section.

"Expelled insults the science of evolution"

please.

 

[Heidi]

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." ;-)

Actually Darwin -- like Richard Dawkins and like Dr Provine BECAME a comitted atheist over time the more he thought about what his "atheist darwinism" and it's implications.

The Movie EXPELLED has come out and shows intereviews with leading Darwinists -- all admitting to the anti-God anti-Christian heart of atheist darwinism. In the Dawkins delusion section of the Moview - Dawkings explores the depths of his rejection of God as a result of his acceptance of Darwinism.

in Christ,

Bob

:o Sorry, but Darwin did not propose his theory from evidence. : This theory came from his imagination and then people went looking for evidence to prove it. So once again, no one who believes in God would look for ways to refute God like Darwin did. :roll:

 

[VaultZero4Me]

Why is it that you two feel that just by stating statements you feel are true, you can make them true?

This conversation has been flawed from the start.

 

[BobRyan]

"Evidence" is just data and it can be used to support competing theories.

Data: Joseph was not Christ's biological father.

Theory of the Jewish leaders: Christ was the illegitimate son of Mary.
Theory of Bible believing Christians: The Virgin birth.

Same data - different conclusions.

Data - our Univerise has already reached a stated of background radiation saturation far sooner than it should have by natural means. This is even more amazing when you consider the W-map results in which it is seen that even near the beginning it was still in a state of mature saturation.

For Christians this is proof: "God spoke and IT WAS" just as Adam and Eve were created "mature".

For atheist darwinists and atheist cosmologists: This is evidence that the 4 forces in nature were in some innexplicible combination within an infinitely dense "dot" that blew up into the fully mature background-radiation saturated product seen in the W-Map study by suspending all the laws of science that we know of today.

Same evidence -- but the atheist perspective of the cosmologists "needs a solution" that does not invovle God.

Darwin writes near the end of his life that as he compared his story telling in the doctrines of evolutionism it lead him to conclude that these were not compatible with the bible and so his choice was to then choose his own story telling over the reliability of God's Word.

The point is that many Christians among Catholic universities and mainline Protestant universities - have embrace the atheist darwinist distinctives just as Darwin did - -thinking that these are compatible with the God of the Bible -- they are not.

Darwinism is distinctively atheist proof of that is seen in the way they attack fellow evolutionists that happen to admit to Intelligent Design.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I get a real laugh on this, first off evolution is not a science, its a world view. that practically kills off the first section.

"Expelled insults the science of evolution"

please.

Actually it is pretty good "junk science." - rich with frauds and hoaxes that were used to promote it at every turn.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Heidi]

I get a real laugh on this, first off evolution is not a science, its a world view. that practically kills off the first section.

"Expelled insults the science of evolution"

please.

Actually it is pretty good "junk science." - rich with frauds and hoaxes that were used to promote it at every turn.

in Christ,

Bob

Yup. It would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic that these people who call themselves scientists have brainwashed our children for decades and fired people who oppose them.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

I get a real laugh on this, first off evolution is not a science, its a world view. that practically kills off the first section.

"Expelled insults the science of evolution"

please.

Actually it is pretty good "junk science." - rich with frauds and hoaxes that were used to promote it at every turn.

in Christ,

Bob

Yup. It would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic that these people who call themselves scientists have brainwashed our children for decades and fired people who oppose them.

Tragedy is denying something just because it doesn't fit your preconceived view of the scriptures.

 

[John]

Tragedy is denying something just because it doesn't fit your preconceived view of the scriptures

.

yup the scripture of evolution

In the beginning there was nothing, then there was everything.

 

[BobRyan]

Atheist darwinists interviewed on "EXPELLED" admit that their doctrines expressed in atheist darwinism LEAD EACH OF THEM from Christianity TO atheism.

Bible believing Christians "SEE IT" as well.

EVEN the National Academy of Sciences director admits in the Movie that the "dirty little secret" is that the atheist darwinist opposition to Christianity COULD NOT HAVE been so successful without the fULL COOPERATION of key elements of the Catholic and mainline Protestant churches in America.

How sad that devotees to atheist darwinism should be found among Christians of any denomination!

Why should christians choose junk science half truths hoaxes and frauds over REAL Science AND the trustworthy standing of God's Word?

According to Romans 1 -- even godless pagans SEE the invisible attributes of God IN THE THINGS HE HAS MADE.

Sadly - there are some Christians today who are so married to atheist darwinist dogma that they deny the very thing that Paul says PAGANs could "see clearly" in Romans 1.

But even if those compromised Christians had no appreciation for scripture at all - you would think that if they had any respect for science at all - they would be rejecting the junk-science methods of atheist darwinism.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[VaultZero4Me]

This is my last post on this thread as it is plain to see that people who have read nothing on the theory are the only ones on the other side for this thread.

Please for your on sake, learn about it before attempting to discredit it.

 

[Jayls5]

*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!

Nietzsche, when read at face value, comes across as very insulting. I really haven't met too many people that really understand his work, not to say I am an expert.

It's not about turning our back on God in some trivialized moral sense. Nietzsche himself had plenty to say about morality, but he is not one who makes serious absolutist claims about individual acts. I believe he really just wanted people to have a more grand perspective of what "morality" was and where it came from. It's a product of society, a complex relationship of many people, a collective of herd mentality. Coming to this realization of how the world is does not mean we should change in light of this knowledge. It was more of a social commentary in this area than anything else. "Pursue your best or your worst desires, and above all perish! In both cases you are probably still in some way a promoter and benefactor of humanity and therefore entitled to your eulogists -- but also to your detractors."

He doesn't mean we should all go around and murder people. He was just telling us to expect a complex social response to a "moral" action. I think the best way to read him is by attempting to shred your preconceived morals and try to look at the perspective he gives. You'll then see that he's not attacking your morals or supporting morals that you don't. I think he just wanted to paint a picture of objective reality and the complex world we are a part of.