In praise of Darwin this Sunday in hundreds of churches!

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

In praise of Darwin this Sunday … in hundreds of churches!


Comments please. (From nonevolutionists)

 

[WAB]

Guess that in the light of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, we should not be greatly surprised.

 

[notto]

Please point out where 'praise' is part of the event. The event is one of discussion and intellectual pursuite.

Leave it to AIG to try to pursuade with emotional appeal by trying to make it out as something it is not. They can't address the topic on intellectually honest grounds so their only option is to rally the masses by trying to make it look like evolution is somehow a religion with Darwin being praised.

Funny that they would do this to their fellow Christians and Christian Churches who accept Christ, isn't it?

You would think that an attack on those Christians such as what AIG is doing would be condemned. They claim that this is somehow an attack on God's word (and they even get BAAL in there). Why is this acceptable as Christians when they are clearly demonizing and bearing false witness against other Christians with little foundation?

 

[The Lady Kate]

Please point out where 'praise' is part of the event. The event is one of discussion and intellectual pursuite.

Leave it to AIG to try to pursuade with emotional appeal by trying to make it out as something it is not. They can't address the topic on intellectually honest grounds so their only option is to rally the masses by trying to make it look like evolution is somehow a religion with Darwin being praised.

Funny that they would do this to their fellow Christians and Christian Churches who accept Christ, isn't it?

You would think that an attack on those Christians such as what AIG is doing would be condemned. They claim that this is somehow an attack on God's word (and they even get BAAL in their). Why is this acceptable as Christians when they are clearly demonizing and bearing false witness against other Christians with little foundation?

You expect better from Ken Ham?

 

[notto]

You expect better from Ken Ham?

I know we shouldn't. God knows he has been told that accepting the mainstream scientific theory of evolution is not equivalent to embracing atheism yet he continues to try to frame evolution as atheism or secular humanism.

It is quite shameful that he feel that he can sit in judgement of Christians like that. Ken Ham doesn't know me yet by their statements, they claim that I am somehow under the influence of atheism and secular humanism.

 

[shernren]

I remember a quote from my devotional material that went something like "Belief is something you're willing to die for ... doctrine is something you're willing to kill for."

Sigh.

Note, of course, that the article will not give you a link to the Clergy Letter Project or even a hint of how to get to it. And note how Ken Ham seems to think that Richard Dawkins knows moderate evolutionist Christians better than they know themselves. Such respect.

 

[lismore]

In praise of Darwin this Sunday … in hundreds of churches!


Comments please. (From nonevolutionists)

I watched that TV programme religion the root of all evil by Richard Dawkin.

The only place I agreed with him was that Christianity and Theistic Evolution are incompatible. He said no-one could believe Jesus died under hideous torture to redeem us from an allegorical fall, or that the bible cannot be twisted to say something it doesnt.

Mind you, the whole programme was an attack on other people's beliefs - he never presented any evidence to support his belief and he went white with rage when Ted haggard and the jewish Rabbi questioned him on it.

 

[Numenor]

The only place I agreed with him was that Christianity and Theistic Evolution are incompatible. He said no-one could believe Jesus died under hideous torture to redeem us from an allegorical fall, or that the bible cannot be twisted to say something it doesnt.

And we're accused of siding with atheists??

 

[Numenor]

And note how Ken Ham seems to think that Richard Dawkins knows moderate evolutionist Christians better than they know themselves. Such respect.

It suits AiG to misrepresent their Christian brethren, otherwise their appeals to emotion wouldn't work.

 

[lismore]

And we accused of siding with atheists??

Im sorry I dont understand that. Can you re-phrase it?

You accused who

 

[Numenor]

Im sorry I dont understand that. Can you re-phrase it?

You accused who

rephrased.

 

[Willtor]

I don't think it helps to cite Richard Dawkins outside of a scholarly context. In Creation/Evolution threads, many Atheists appear to be embarrassed by him and his "outbursts."

 

[shernren]

Observation 1: Richard Dawkins hates Christians.
Observation 2: Richard Dawkins likes evolution.

AiG's conclusion: Christians are silly to believe in evolution.

TE's conclusion: Richard Dawkins is silly to hate Christians.

I leave it to you to consider which conclusion is more logical. Funny how AiG has more respect for the opinion of a self-proclaimed, fanatically outspoken hater of Christianity than for Christians themselves. (Or maybe they don't think we're really Christians. )

 

[Gwenyfur]

Dawkins (visibly angry at the Christian faith throughout his two-hour TV diatribe) stated: “People like to say that faith and science can live together side by side, but I don’t think they can. They’re deeply opposed. Science is a discipline of investigation and constructive doubt, questing with logic, evidence and reason to draw conclusions. Faith, by stark contrast, demands a positive suspension of critical faculties.”
Dawkins added, “Charles Darwin hit upon a truly brilliant idea that elegantly explains all of life on earth without any need to invoke the supernatural or the divine.”
Do you see the irony? The clergy supporting evolution, but the evolutionary, secular humanist insisting such a position is untenable. Dawkins has stated that evolution led him to his atheism.
But ... Dawkins is right this time—evolution and Christianity are incompatible.

That must feel like a kick in the gut for TE's

In the TV program, Dawkins often attacked Bible-believing Christians with strident comments, such as: “Fundamentalist American Christianity is attacking science. But what is it offering instead? A mirror image of Islamic extremism. An American Taliban.” The next scene showed the burning towers of the World Trade Center in New York City on 9/11.
Dawkins likened Christians to terrorists!
He also stated:

To understand the likes of Osama Bin Ladin, you have to realize that the religious terrorism they inspire is the logical outcome of deeply held faith.
Even so-called “moderate” believers are part of the same religious fabric. They encourage unreason as a positive virtue. [Later he disdainfully calls them “fence-sitters.”]
What’s really scary is that religious warriors think of what they are doing as the ultimate good. Those of us brought up in Christianity can soon get the message: “Onward Christian Soldiers,” “Fight the Good Fight,” “Stand up, Stand up for Jesus ye soldiers of the Cross.”
But as far as I’m concerned, the war between good and evil is really just the war between two evils.
​

So, Christians are equated with Bin Laden and his terrorists!
At the same time, atheists like Dawkins (who continually have Channel 4 and the BBC at their disposal to influence millions of viewers) take glee when they see the clergy supporting evolution. Even though Dawkins unflatteringly calls them “fence-sitters,” he sees their compromise as a step towards atheism, for he expects that the next generation in the church will probably see the inconsistency of the clergy’s beliefs—and they will soon give up the Bible altogether.
The war between Christianity and secular humanism is really heating up now. Dawkins and other prominent evolutionists are using the airwaves time and time again to aggressively attack Bible-believing Christians.

kinda like this forum eh?

 

[notto]

That must feel like a kick in the gut for TE's

Why would it? Dawkins has no more bearing on my faith than Ken Ham does. Dawkins may be a good scientists but that doesn't mean he is good at theology or that his opinion on the matter of faith has any bearing. At least he is a good scientist so he has something going for him.

Ken Ham doesn't understand science and agrees with the atheist theology of Dawkins.

That must be a kick in the gut to YEC's, right?

(accepting evolution is not equivalent to atheism no matter what Dawkins or Ham say. It is funny to see Ham use Dawkins appeals to emotion in his own appeal to emotion. My guess is that Dawkins is laughing his head off at how silly that looks).

 

[Gwenyfur]

Why would it? Dawkins has no more bearing on my faith than Ken Ham does. Dawkins may be a good scientists but that doesn't mean he is good at theology or that his opinion on the matter of faith has any bearing. At least he is a good scientist so he has something going for him.

Ken Ham doesn't understand science and agrees with the atheist theology of Dawkins.

That must be a kick in the gut to YEC's, right?

Not at all...though it feels odd to be agreeing with an athiest....evolution and faith don't mix

 

[notto]

Not at all...though it feels odd to be agreeing with an athiest....evolution and faith don't mix

So you agree with an atheist who compared Christians to terrorists! You are as bad as the evolutionists!

Thanks for demonstrating just how stupid Ham's attempt at guilt by association is.

I am a Christian who agrees with Dawkins as a scientist and disagrees with his theology as an atheist and his opinion of Christians.
It would seem that YEC's disagree with his science (even though his work is very respected) and agrees with his theology.

Funny thing that.

This event and the letter that started this show that your claim that faith and science don't mix is simply not true. It is directly conflicted by reality and the very participants in this forum itself.

 

[Gwenyfur]

So you agree with an atheist who compared Christians to terrorists! You are as bad as the evolutionists!

Thanks for demonstrating just how stupid Ham's attempt at guilt by association is.

I am a Christian who agrees with Dawkins as a scientist and disagrees with his theology as an atheist and his opinion of Christians.
It would seem that YEC's disagree with his science (even though his work is very respected) and agrees with his theology.

Funny thing that.

This event and the letter that started this show that your claim that faith and science don't mix is simply not true. It is directly conflicted by reality and the very participants in this forum itself.

Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 3:19
The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.
Romans 1:22
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
1 Corinthians 1:19
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
1 Corinthians 1:20
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

All Scriptures KJV

You were saying????

 

[Willtor]

Dawkins (rightly) attacks faith that is opposed to reason. Now, for some reason he has the idea that faith of the sort God requires is opposed to reason. Of course, what does he know about such things? Seriously, take a look at the Creation/Evolution forum and see the Atheists nervously squirm when he says these things. He shoots his mouth off. It's not a good habit, but people who think they're geniuses often do.

I actually think he does more to keep Evolution from being honestly examined than the whole Christian Coalition, combined.

 

[shernren]

The more I think about it the more I start to wonder how much sense this situation is actually making. I mean, the one defining difference between a Christian and an atheist is not science, it's theology.

So for a Christian to be actively supporting an atheist's word about theology over the word of his fellow Christians is simply mind-boggling. It's like hearing a Muslim say to me, "You know what? The Western civilization is going to pieces and the Jews are running the show but hey - I agree with you that this Jesus Christ was really the Son of God!"

The more I think about it the more I feel that there can only be two possible explanations:

1. Ken Ham thinks all evolutionists are not Christian enough for his liking.
2. Ken Ham and Richard Dawkins are teaming up to make sure that no evolutionists ever become Christians.

Take your pick.