Evolution Theory Existed Long Before Darwin

[Ragdoll]

▪INTRODUCTION

Atheists are led to believe that evolution theory is a modern discovery of science. What atheists are not told is that their gurus have been borrowing from ancient pagan philosophers and then taking the credit for the ancient philosophy they have plagiarized into their modern books. In this article we will explore a classic work by a 2nd century theologian named Theophilus of Antioch. Here you will see modern evolution theory addressed in the 2nd century!

Who First Said "We are made of Stardust?"

"The cosmos is within us. We are made of Star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself" (Carl Sagan, 20th century, 1973).

Evolutionists claim that Sagan's statement is original and this "we are made of star-stuff (i.e., stardust) has been attributed to Sagan more than anyone else.

However,

“We are stardust
Billion year old carbon”
(Joni Mitchell, song "Woodstock," 1970).

Joni Mitchell was a career marijuana user who's constant use of the drug inspired her entire worldview. So did Sagan borrow his expression from a stoner who shared her delusional pipe dreams? Maybe in part. However, the belief that we evolved and are uncreated goes back to ancient times.

2nd century church father Theophilus of Antioch speaks extensively about how some pagan Greeks believed in evolution theory and atheism. Here we read about the supposed evolution of life from stardust:

"On the fourth day the luminaries came into existence. Since God has foreknowledge, he understood the nonsense of the foolish philosophers who were going to say that the things produced on earth come from the stars, so that they might set God aside [1 Thess. 4:8]" (Oxford Early Christian Texts, "Theophilus of Antioch: Ad Autolycum" translated by Robert M.Grant, p.51).

So way back in the 2nd century A.D. we see how one of the early church fathers was speaking to his friend Autolycum (Autolycus) about a belief held by ancient Greek philosophers. One of the beliefs they held is that our existence is uncreated and how we were produced by the stars.

How many of you learned that in school? Do they ever teach the origin of evolutionist philosophy in the public schools? We are all told from our youth that all these beliefs held by evolutionists are new discoveries. We are never told that evolution as a theory came from various pagan philosophies including Greek mythology. These secular educators are holding back much information from their students. They get their students to accept things like Greek mythology and then tell them its all modern discoveries of science, when in fact its all ancient mythology.

Theophilus Continues to Address Well Know Doctrines of Evolution Theory

Evolution theory is an ancient religion because of the Divine implications attached to these Greek philosophers who taught atheism. Theophilus begs the question:

"How did the Muses know these things when they originated later than the world? How could they describe them to Hesiod when their father had not yet been born?" (p.29).

Just as evolution theory teaches us how life evolved from the oceans, here also we see how in Greek mythology life originated from the ocean:

"Ocean, origin of the gods, and mother Tethys,
Whence come all rivers and the whole sea.

But when he says this he does not establish the fact of God. For who does not understand that Ocean is water? And if water, then not God. If God is the creator of the universe, as he is, he must be the creator of water and the seas as well" (pp.27, 29).

Theophilus goes on to question the chronology of the matter and how such knowledge could be known apart from God? You'll also notice the big bang theory in the subject matter:

"He says this, but he still does not explain by whom they were made. If originally there was chaos, and certain uncreated matter already subsisted, who was it who reshaped, remodelled, and transformed it? Did matter itself reshape and arrange itself? Zeus came into existence much later, not only after matter but even after the world and great numbers of men, and so did his father Kronos. Was there not instead some sovereign principle that made matter—I mean God, the one who set it in order?" (p.31).

Theophilus points out atheism taught by certain Greek philosophers,

"Some of the Stoics absolutely deny the existence of God or assert that if God exists he takes thought for no one but himself. Such views certainly exhibit the folly of Epicurus and Chrysippus alike. Others say that everything happens spontaneously, that the universe is uncreated and that nature is eternal; in general they venture to declare that there is no divine providence but that God is only the individual's conscience" (p.27).

Make no mistake, Theophilus is speaking about what we call "evolution theory" today.

"Moreover, they made inconsistent and evil statements about the origin of the world. In the first place, some of them declare that the world was uncreated, as we have already explained; and those who said that it was uncreated and that nature is eternal disagree with those who held that it came into existence. They made these statements by conjecture and by human thought, not in accordance with the truth" (p.35).

But we couldn't be a product of stardust without the philosophy of deep time. Here we see Theophilus address the issue of deep time:

"For some declare that the world was not created and went off into endless time" (p.121).

And last we can see atheism as an already established religion among some of the Greek philosophers:

"If they spoke of the gods, they later taught atheism; if about the creation of the world, they said everything came about spontaneously" (p.103).

Spontaneous generation is the backbone of biological evolution. This belief also goes back to ancient Greece.

"And Pythagoras, who went through such great labours over the gods and made his way up and down, finally defines their nature and says everything was produced spontaneously [ibid., 589, 9-10: Epicurus]; the gods do not take thought of men [ibid., 572, 6: Epicurus]. Furthermore, Clitomachus the Academic philosopher introduced many arguments for atheism" (p.107).

Even today we have noticed how evolutionists contradict their own beliefs. When one's philosophy involves the make-it-all-up-as-you-go system of reasoning then no amount of truth or honesty can ever come from it.
Keep in mind that Theophilus of Antioch was a 2nd century church father who lived some 1800 years before Charles Darwin, and 2000 years before Carl Sagan. Evolution theory is part of paganism and can be traced as far back as Babylon. However there were Greek and Roman philosophers who tweaked those beliefs to how we understand evolution theory today. But it was all made up by humans seeking fame as philosophers in Greece. We can also find evolution theory in Hinduism. Atheists just transformed Hanuman into Hominid. Its all a lie...ancient pagan mythology. Its religion and it makes divine claims about the origin of everything that nobody was there to witness. Therefore the claims made come from Greek prophets who are nothing more than false prophets. These false prophets have led western society to ruin, with violent mobs in the streets who destroy entire cities and murder in the name of their Darwinian prophets. Jesus tells us not to follow these false prophets so that we will not be deceived.

If you are interested in finding of copy of this book then you might have to pay a little extra for it because its an out of print book. I paid more than the usual price for a book like this because of it being out of print. Keep in mind that this is the Oxford translation which is a little more accurate and detailed than the other less expensive translation of this same document out there. I have both of the translation and both of them are good reads. The Oxford translation is just a better overall translation which is why I paid extra to get a hold of it.

 

[Ragdoll]

4th Century St.Augustine Exposes Ape-To-Man Hoax.

When people think of Charles Darwin they think that he was a scientist who discovered something. Evolutionists say Darwin was on to something. The book "Descent of Man" was Darwin's assessment of how humans evolved from ape primates, placing humans into the same pedigree of apes. How many times have you had an atheist say to you "You are an ape"? I lost count on how many times atheists have said this to me. But was Darwin on to something?

Today people think Darwin was some great scientist who proved man evolved from apes. But this careless thinking avoids the reality that what came down to us from Darwinian assumptions had been an ancient mystical belief long before St.Augustine's time. Here, St. Augustine is speaking about the origin and diversity of humans and some myths which have come about since ancient times.

City of God: Book XVI, chapter 8, p.663 (Penguin Classics translation),

"Some years ago, but certainly in my time, a man was born in the East with a double set of upper parts, but a single set of the lower limbs. That is, he had two heads, two chests, and four arms, but only one belly and two feet, as if he were one man. And he lived long enough for the news of his case to attract many sightseers.
In fact, it would be impossible to list all the human infants very unlike those who, without any doubt, were their parents. Now it cannot be denied that these derive ultimately from that one man; and therefore the same is true of all those races which are reported to have deviated as it were, by their divergences in bodily structure, from the normal course of nature followed by the majority, or practically the whole of mankind. If these races are included in the definition of 'human', that is, if they are rational and mortal animals, it must be admitted that they trace their lineage from that same one man, the first father of all mankind. This assumes, of course, the truth of the stories about the divergent features of those races, and their great differences from one another and from us. The definition is important; for if we did not know monkeys, long tailed apes and chimpanzees are not men but animals, those natural historians who plume themselves on their collection of curiosities might pass them off on us as races of men, and get away with such nonsense."

City of God, Marcus Dods translation:

"Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was born in the East, double his upper, but single his lower half--having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like a ordinary man ; and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As, therefore, no one will deny that these are all descended from from that one man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged in bodily appearance from the usual course which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from one another and from us to be true ; but possibly they are not ; for if we were not aware that apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men, and flaunt with impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries."

When Augustine says "born in the east" he is referring to the Hindu countries of India and Pakistan where Hinduism thrived in the 4th century. These ape-man stories all deal with human mutations...or birth defects, that is. Though in time men like Charles Darwin would be the natural historian who would entertain a false theory which placed man in the same pedigree as the monkeys and apes. The ape to man myth definitely has very strong Hindu roots. Hanuman is a great devotee of Lord Rama -- the Hindu monkey god Lord Hanuman.

The ape-to-man philosophy was well in place long before the first so-called hominids were discovered. The fossils were deliberately interpreted to fit the monkey man myth.

We can see how atheists have long admired Hinduism and its religious beliefs:

“The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology."
-Carl Sagan

Carl Sagan never had a kind word to say about Judaism or Christianity.

Funny, evolutionists never say anything good about the religion that founded and established modern science. But they love Hinduism, Buddhism and, today, many atheists say great things about Islam as well as the Church of Satan! Interestingly, Sagan's praise for Hindu cosmology was proven wrong.

"Physics tend to be dictated by fad and fashion. There are the gurus who dictate the direction in which new ideas grow. " -Michael Duff

There are gurus directing the direction in which evolution theory will go. Some may argue that Duff used the term guru figuratively. Though he could have also chosen a word that better aligns with atheism too.

Pictured below are Hindu images of Hanuman the monkey god and the legend of the vanara.

 

[BeyondET]

What's the properties of dirt and where did it come from. Figure that out and that's where man came from. Who knows what took place at each second to minute to hours of day. Had nostrils before the breath and grunt like an ape lol , them stem cells quite a amazing library of history.

 

[Ragdoll]

What's the properties of dirt and where did it come from. Figure that out and that's where man came from. Who knows what to place at each second to minute to hours of day. Had nostrils before the breath and grut like an ape lol , them stem cells quite a amazing library of history.

God created the dirt when He created the earth's core on the 1st Day of creation. God created man on the 6th day of creation and Personally breathed into man the breath of life which gave us life. Modern science came from the Bible so I'll stick to the Biblical view since that led to modern science

 

[BeyondET]

God created the dirt when He created the earth's core on the 1st Day of creation. God created man on the 6th day of creation and Personally breathed into man the breath of life which gave us life. Modern science came from the Bible so I'll stick to the Biblical view since that led to modern science

Huh haven't seen that verse, dirt and the core on the first day?.

Seems your idea isn't much better than evolution

 

[Ragdoll]

Huh haven't seen that verse, dirt and the core on the first day?.

Seems your idea isn't much better than evolution

St.Augustine came so close to solving it. He was so close the truth was biting him in the nose. But since he lacked knowledge of the inside of the earth he was unable to truly understand it. I'll give him due credit for how he imagined the earth and the planet Saturn having gears turning about in the inside of a planet. I began to realize that there might be a correlation between St.Augustine's analysis and how the early Jews and Christians knew that the first globe earth verse in the Bible is found in Day 1 of creation. This greatly bothered me for a year or more. Long story short, I had a deep relevation hit me and it was so deep within me I had to struggle just to keep the thought. I fought hard against losing the thought. I grabbed hold firmly to that thought until I knew what that thought was about. It was a thought beyond my own intelligence. So here is the basic premise for interpreting Genesis 1:3 as the core. If you read Genesis chapter one this way the entire chapter is satisfactorily solved.

If you interpet the light as God creating the earth's core for the purpose of giving the earth life as well as shape, then you will be able to understand the rest of Genesis so much easier. God created the earth in very well thought out stages. The earth must have a core in order to be considered a living planet. The process of creation cannot proceed until the earth is alive. Mars does not have vegetation on it because the planet is dead and cannot produce life. God knew that He wanted to protect the earth from the harmful radiation from the sun. So God made the core first which would produce a magnetic field to protect the earth. The sun and stars were created on the 4th Day until God knew the earth was ready for sustain the radiation from the sun. This is both good exegesis and good science.
I think that God may have used some form of Sonoluminescence during the creation of the earth's core. The earth was merely a blob of water prior to God commanding the light. So God spoke and His word had some effect like Sonoluminescence is trigger by sound. God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. The only way to understand this in the limited knowledge of science we have is Sonoluminescence. From this core we have a reaction that creates soil and from soil comes nutrients. God knew what He was doing and He waste no time doing it. This has nothing to do with evolution theory. It follows the proper exegesis of Scripture and how the ancients also read Scripture. All I did was take the next step based on modern knowledge of the earth.

Light from sound. Light from the word of God.

 

[BeyondET]

St.Augustine came so close to solving it. He was so close the truth was biting him in the nose. But since he lacked knowledge of the inside of the earth he was unable to truly understand it. I'll give him due credit for how he imagined the earth and the planet Saturn having gears turning about in the inside of a planet. I began to realize that there might be a correlation between St.Augustine's analysis and how the early Jews and Christians knew that the first globe earth verse in the Bible is found in Day 1 of creation. This greatly bothered me for a year or more. Long story short, I had a deep relevation hit me and it was so deep within me I had to struggle just to keep the thought. I fought hard against losing the thought. I grabbed hold firmly to that thought until I knew what that thought was about. It was a thought beyond my own intelligence. So here is the basic premise for interpreting Genesis 1:3 as the core. If you read Genesis chapter one this way the entire chapter is satisfactorily solved.
View attachment 342476


If you interpet the light as God creating the earth's core for the purpose of giving the earth life as well as shape, then you will be able to understand the rest of Genesis so much easier. God created the earth in very well thought out stages. The earth must have a core in order to be considered a living planet. The process of creation cannot proceed until the earth is alive. Mars does not have vegetation on it because the planet is dead and cannot produce life. God knew that He wanted to protect the earth from the harmful radiation from the sun. So God made the core first which would produce a magnetic field to protect the earth. The sun and stars were created on the 4th Day until God knew the earth was ready for sustain the radiation from the sun. This is both good exegesis and good science.
I think that God may have used some form of Sonoluminescence during the creation of the earth's core. The earth was merely a blob of water prior to God commanding the light. So God spoke and His word had some effect like Sonoluminescence is trigger by sound. God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. The only way to understand this in the limited knowledge of science we have is Sonoluminescence. From this core we have a reaction that creates soil and from soil comes nutrients. God knew what He was doing and He waste no time doing it. This has nothing to do with evolution theory. It follows the proper exegesis of Scripture and how the ancients also read Scripture. All I did was take the next step based on modern knowledge of the earth.

Light from sound. Light from the word of God.

Venus, Earth and Mars are the only planets with an atmosphere because of their core. Mercury has the largest core around 80% of its mass is the core. Even the moon has a core.

 

[Ragdoll]

Venus, Earth and Mars are the only planets with an atmosphere because of their core. Mercury has the largest core around 80% of its mass is the core. Even the moon has a core.

Mars does not have hardly any atmosphere. The core on Mars is considered dead and near total death. There a very very weak magnetic field on Mars. Because of that, most of the atmosphere of the planet was blown into space.

 

[BeyondET]

Mars does not have hardly any atmosphere. The core on Mars is considered dead and near total death. There a very very weak magnetic field on Mars. Because of that, most of the atmosphere of the planet was blown into space.

Mars isn't dead

Mars Is Alive!

Until now, Mars has generally been considered a geologically dead planet. An international team of scientists now reports that seismic signals indicate vulcanism still plays an active role in shaping the Martian surface. Ever since the NASA InSight Mission deployed the SEIS seismometer on the sur

scitechdaily.com

 

[Ragdoll]

Mars isn't dead

Mars Is Alive!

Until now, Mars has generally been considered a geologically dead planet. An international team of scientists now reports that seismic signals indicate vulcanism still plays an active role in shaping the Martian surface. Ever since the NASA InSight Mission deployed the SEIS seismometer on the sur

scitechdaily.com

You just keep telling yourself that. Maybe you can Volunteer to live there. But you will have no luck growning vegetation there. The core is dead and that makes Mars a dead planet. What little life there is to that core is not enough to grow vegetation there. I feel sorry for those future people who travel to Mars after listening to all the hype about how great Mars is only to find out the planet cannot sustain life. And don't even get me started about terraforming.

 

[BeyondET]

You just keep telling yourself that. Maybe you can Volunteer to live there. But you will have no luck growning vegetation there. The core is dead and that makes Mars a dead planet. What little life there is to that core is not enough to grow vegetation there. I feel sorry for those future people who travel to Mars after listening to all the hype about how great Mars is only to find out the planet cannot sustain life. And don't even get me started about terraforming.

I just gave info on the latest that seismic activity has been detected on planet Mars. You definitely are telling yourself it's dead when it's not.

I haven't anybody say it's a great place to live

 

[Ragdoll]

I just gave info on the latest that seismic activity has been detected on planet Mars. You definitely are telling yourself it's dead when it's not.

I haven't anybody say it's a great place to live

I guess I'm just not one to trust much of what I hear about Mars. But if indeed they have for certain been able to truly prove there is volcanic activity on Mars then that does mean that the planet is not dead. We'll have to see what comes from these claims.

 

[BeyondET]

I guess I'm just not one to trust much of what I hear about Mars. But if indeed they have for certain been able to truly prove there is volcanic activity on Mars then that does mean that the planet is not dead. We'll have to see what comes from these claims.

The surface of Mars is dead, I would agree with that. Alot of its atmosphere has been stripped but it still has one which means the core is active.

 

[Ragdoll]

The surface of Mars is dead, I would agree with that. Alot of its atmosphere has been stripped but it still has one which means the core is active.

Like I said before we'll see how all this new information pans out.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

▪INTRODUCTION

Atheists are led to believe that evolution theory is a modern discovery of science. What atheists are not told is that their gurus have been borrowing from ancient pagan philosophers and then taking the credit for the ancient philosophy they have plagiarized into their modern books. In this article we will explore a classic work by a 2nd century theologian named Theophilus of Antioch. Here you will see modern evolution theory addressed in the 2nd century!

Who First Said "We are made of Stardust?"



Evolutionists claim that Sagan's statement is original and this "we are made of star-stuff (i.e., stardust) has been attributed to Sagan more than anyone else.

However,



Joni Mitchell was a career marijuana user who's constant use of the drug inspired her entire worldview. So did Sagan borrow his expression from a stoner who shared her delusional pipe dreams? Maybe in part. However, the belief that we evolved and are uncreated goes back to ancient times.

2nd century church father Theophilus of Antioch speaks extensively about how some pagan Greeks believed in evolution theory and atheism. Here we read about the supposed evolution of life from stardust:



So way back in the 2nd century A.D. we see how one of the early church fathers was speaking to his friend Autolycum (Autolycus) about a belief held by ancient Greek philosophers. One of the beliefs they held is that our existence is uncreated and how we were produced by the stars.

How many of you learned that in school? Do they ever teach the origin of evolutionist philosophy in the public schools? We are all told from our youth that all these beliefs held by evolutionists are new discoveries. We are never told that evolution as a theory came from various pagan philosophies including Greek mythology. These secular educators are holding back much information from their students. They get their students to accept things like Greek mythology and then tell them its all modern discoveries of science, when in fact its all ancient mythology.

Theophilus Continues to Address Well Know Doctrines of Evolution Theory

Evolution theory is an ancient religion because of the Divine implications attached to these Greek philosophers who taught atheism. Theophilus begs the question:



Just as evolution theory teaches us how life evolved from the oceans, here also we see how in Greek mythology life originated from the ocean:



Theophilus goes on to question the chronology of the matter and how such knowledge could be known apart from God? You'll also notice the big bang theory in the subject matter:



Theophilus points out atheism taught by certain Greek philosophers,

"Some of the Stoics absolutely deny the existence of God or assert that if God exists he takes thought for no one but himself. Such views certainly exhibit the folly of Epicurus and Chrysippus alike. Others say that everything happens spontaneously, that the universe is uncreated and that nature is eternal; in general they venture to declare that there is no divine providence but that God is only the individual's conscience" (p.27).

Make no mistake, Theophilus is speaking about what we call "evolution theory" today.



But we couldn't be a product of stardust without the philosophy of deep time. Here we see Theophilus address the issue of deep time:



And last we can see atheism as an already established religion among some of the Greek philosophers:



Spontaneous generation is the backbone of biological evolution. This belief also goes back to ancient Greece.



Even today we have noticed how evolutionists contradict their own beliefs. When one's philosophy involves the make-it-all-up-as-you-go system of reasoning then no amount of truth or honesty can ever come from it.
Keep in mind that Theophilus of Antioch was a 2nd century church father who lived some 1800 years before Charles Darwin, and 2000 years before Carl Sagan. Evolution theory is part of paganism and can be traced as far back as Babylon. However there were Greek and Roman philosophers who tweaked those beliefs to how we understand evolution theory today. But it was all made up by humans seeking fame as philosophers in Greece. We can also find evolution theory in Hinduism. Atheists just transformed Hanuman into Hominid. Its all a lie...ancient pagan mythology. Its religion and it makes divine claims about the origin of everything that nobody was there to witness. Therefore the claims made come from Greek prophets who are nothing more than false prophets. These false prophets have led western society to ruin, with violent mobs in the streets who destroy entire cities and murder in the name of their Darwinian prophets. Jesus tells us not to follow these false prophets so that we will not be deceived.

If you are interested in finding of copy of this book then you might have to pay a little extra for it because its an out of print book. I paid more than the usual price for a book like this because of it being out of print. Keep in mind that this is the Oxford translation which is a little more accurate and detailed than the other less expensive translation of this same document out there. I have both of the translation and both of them are good reads. The Oxford translation is just a better overall translation which is why I paid extra to get a hold of it.
View attachment 342308

Yes, the idea of "evolution" is ancient. But evolution isn't the bug-a-boo that so many fellow Christians feel it is. It isn't a lie because there's evidence for it, scientific evidence.

Still, being the history buff that I am, I appreciate your citation of the book about Theophilus of Antioch by the late historian, Robert M. Grant. I have a couple of his books and I've enjoyed his work.

 

[Miles]

People are observant. God created us with the ability to observe his creation and to ponder what we see. This was true before the gospel and continues to be true today. I wouldn't put much stock in Greek storytellers or Carl Sagan beyond the fact that they, like us, were creatures made in God's image who saw patterns and tried to make sense of them. There's no rule that says pagans or atheists can't do this or that they're the only ones with this ability. Everybody with the God-given curiosity and drive to do so can.

Yes, the idea of "evolution" is ancient. But evolution isn't the bug-a-boo that so many fellow Christians feel it is. It isn't a lie because there's evidence for it, scientific evidence.

I imagine that the idea has been around in some form for at least as long as people have been domesticating plants and animals. Intentionally changing livestock and crops over successive generations suggest a rudimentary understanding of this. Darwin proposed his own take on evolution with The Origin of the Species, which dethroned Lamarckism, for instance. Ironically, Darwinism now seems to be lacking when it comes to how new species form. It's better at dealing with changes that take place within species. Species have different numbers of chromosomes, sufficiently dissimilar DNA sequences, etc. that can't simply be explained by survival of the fittest. A new theory of evolution will likely take its place, or at the very least evolve from the currently accepted form.

Not to mention the level of complexity found in the DNA in single cell organisms. The likes of which we are said to have evolved from. It seems to me that there's more to DNA than elements and compounds randomly bumping into each other in a primordial soup The existence of a primordial soup doesn't necessarily suggest that the language of DNA is random. Within certain compounds the potential for receiving this language would need to be made. The existence of flora and fauna points to the fact that this was possible.

God spoke and creatures rose from the dust of the Earth, our understanding of time is relative to that of a timeless creator (the Bible says that a day to God is like many days to us), etc. Most of it checks out so far. I'm still curious what God creating Eve from Adam's rib looked like, but it's enough to take us to the Garden when the first truly modern humans were deceived and sin entered our story.

So no, it isn't a lie. It shouldn't be seen as a threat either. The idea of evolution or other creation theories shouldn't be turned into an idol. Doing so diminishes the scope of God's power. God is all powerful and creates as he sees fit, regardless of whether aspects of it are within or beyond our understanding. I sometimes think, however, that describing God as "All powerful" can be misinterpreted. As if to say that he must throw spanner wrenches into his creation on demand to demonstrate how powerful he is. Rather, nothing came in to being, or continues to exist in the present, without relying on God's handiwork. Jesus rose from the dead as he is life (and the way and the truth). Defeating the grip of sin and taking on the role of our advocate in the light of his holiness. I imagine that he enjoys seeing our curiosity. Especially, when we give him credit for all he has done. Jesus as the Logos, the Word of God. However he does it, he produces marvelous things. How much more marvelous is the creator himself!

 

[Harry Larry]

I forget who it was, but I love that one of Darwin's peers at the time basically responded to reading Origin of Species with "this is so simple we must have been idiots not to see it long ago!". Like Newton and gravity, Darwin neither invented nor discovered anything, he just put it into words. Sheep themselves were bred to have short legs and thick wool, for easier husbandry and greater yield, by selective breeding millenia before. As for Darwin's apes, there is still no consensus when the beings we call Early Man became sentient humans, with morals and spirits (souls?). I like to think the body and the spirit have each their own source. I just hope people today do not maintain one without the other too much.

 

[Diamond7]

we are made of star-stuff (i.e., stardust

The Bible tells us that God made Adam from dust. "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being". Genesis 2:7

Sagan tells us what dust is. He does not talk about the breath of life and how dust become alive. We are told we return to dust.

" dust you are and to dust you will return.”Genesis 3:19B

 

[The Barbarian]

Atheists are led to believe that evolution theory is a modern discovery of science. What atheists are not told is that their gurus have been borrowing from ancient pagan philosophers and then taking the credit for the ancient philosophy they have plagiarized into their modern books. In this article we will explore a classic work by a 2nd century theologian named Theophilus of Antioch. Here you will see modern evolution theory addressed in the 2nd century!

A long time before Darwin, scientists realized that some kind of biological evolution must have happened. Darwin's great discovery was how it worked.

I forget who it was, but I love that one of Darwin's peers at the time basically responded to reading Origin of Species with "this is so simple we must have been idiots not to see it long ago!"

Thomas Huxley.

 

[Harry Larry]

Thomas Huxley.

Thank you!! It was driving me batty...