Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Listen guy, unless you tone it down a bit, you may find yourself having a conversation with yourself. I see so many people come here with a slash and burn approach and the next thing I know the board is shut down and no one is talking about anything, because they are tired of the insults.
This presumes we wish to have a "discussion" with someone who consistently misrepresents the truth. Several times I have posted the quotes from Darwin to show that he had no intention of denying creation, only creationism. You never respond.
I for one do not wish to continue a "discussion" with someone who consistently misrepresents the truth. I have much better things to do with my time. The only reasons I reply to you, John, are:
1. To correct your blatant misrepresentations of the truth for the other people who read this forum and
2. To alert Christians to the severe danger you pose to Christianity.
As to having topics to discuss, we could have some fun times discussing the details of evolutionary theory and other theories ikn science. So if you want to pick up your marbles and go home, John, please do so. I for one won't miss you.
[b]Today at 03:37 PM lucaspa said this in Post #11
This presumes we wish to have a "discussion" with someone who consistently misrepresents the truth.
You have shown me no evidence that you even know the truth. So you have no way of knowing if I misrepresent it or not. The only thing you have shown me is a disregard for truth and a disregard for the God who created you. But in the end, you will go before God and you will give an account. Do you think that He is going to be well pleased with you on that day?
I for one do not wish to continue a "discussion" with someone who consistently misrepresents the truth.
Well, your having a discusson with me, so that must mean that I represent the truth.
I have much better things to do with my time.
Yeah? What? You have a hamster to feed or something?
You have shown me no evidence that you even know the truth. So you have no way of knowing if I misrepresent it or not.
Considering what is being discussed is Darwin's work and his views on the creator, lucaspa has shown a far better understanding than you, John.
However, you do have option of reading The Origin of Species online (for free). Maybe this will help you understand Darwin's work better, so silly tiffs like this can be avoided in the future.
Today at 03:31 PM lucaspa said this in Post #10
"To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual." pg. 449.
Now, where is denial of "creation" here? Please, John, point it out for us. Or drop the false witness claim against Darwin and evolution.
Lets get this into context.
"Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual."
First of all, this is no different than the twisted lies that the serpent gave Eve in the garden of Eden. "Authors of the highest eminence" means God has spoken, now lets see what the serpent has to say: "To my mind it accords better" The serpent seems to think that he knows "better" than God. Like the serpent is suppose to be a better expert witness than God is.
What does he say next: "with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator". "Impressed" What does that mean? Psalm 2:3 "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." Darwin is saying, why should we allow this creator to press His law upon us, we can be free!
Only his freedom is not freedom at all, it is bondage, and in the end the result is death.
Then Darwin goes on, after doing all he can to discredit the creator, he then attempts to give the reader something in place of what God has given to us.
What was the lie that the serpent gave to Eve in the Garden of Eden? What did the serpent say she could have? "your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods"
Darwins lie is the same lie that the serpent gave to Eve in the Garden of Eden. Almost 6000 years later and it is still the same lie. So your falling for the same lie that Eve fell for almost 6000 years ago. It worked on her then and now it working on you now.
Were Eve's eyes opened? No just the opposite. Remember the serpent turned out to be a liar and not trustworthy.
What does he say next: "with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator". "Impressed" What does that mean? Psalm 2:3 "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." Darwin is saying, why should we allow this creator to press His law upon us, we can be free!
He seems to be saying, quite clearly, that the Creator is responsible for the physical laws of the universe. Why you seem to take that to mean something else is a mystery.
Today at 08:36 PM Pete Harcoff said this in Post #15
He seems to be saying, quite clearly, that the Creator is responsible for the physical laws of the universe. Why you seem to take that to mean something else is a mystery.
The serpent takes the truth and twists it into a lie. If you do not know the truth, then it is easier for him to get you to accept a lie as if it were true.
There are so many problems with this paragraph from a theology viewpoint that it is unreal. Darwin had some good theology courses, but he managed to twist it into a lie. Of course he could not pass it off to theologians, they know better. But somehow he got the Biologists to buy into it.
The serpent takes the truth and twists it into a lie. If you do not know the truth, then it is easier for him to get you to accept a lie as if it were true.
There are so many problems with this paragraph from a theology viewpoint that it is unreal. Darwin had some good theology courses, but he managed to twist it into a lie. Of course he could not pass it off to theologians, they know better. But somehow he got the Biologists to buy into it.
The only problem with that paragraph is that it doesn't jive with your theological viewpoint. However, not everyone shares the same view (and please don't cry "Satan's deceiving you!"; that can just as easily apply to you).
I have studied theology intensly for a long time now.
So? There are plenty of theologians who have studied theology intensely for a long time and have arrived at different conclusions than you. Including accepting evolutionary theory as the mechanism by which God has created life on this planet.
What makes your view so special? How do I know you haven't been deceived by Satan?
Today at 09:44 PM Pete Harcoff said this in Post #19
So? There are plenty of theologians who have studied theology intensely for a long time and have arrived at different conclusions than you.
Who are they, let me see their work.
What makes your view so special? How do I know you haven't been deceived by Satan? [/b]
Do you mean me personal, or the entire Ernest Angley organization? The preaching is only one third, the miracles are a third, and the music is a third. If you don't like the preaching, then maybe you will like the music.
Linear Mode
