Was John Wesley an Evolutionist?

[Loudmouth]

Calvinists seem to be the people that take the most issue with Darwin.

How does that make "Arminianism was The Father of Darwinism"?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Some people speculate about aliens who kidnap cows. Doesn't make it true.

Can you show me your evidence for that? Methane gas has been known to cause hallucinations. Or perhaps you would like to speculate that the methane gas from cows is the leading cause of global warming.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Ok... so what?

When Darwin's argument went from religion to science he started to sell books and he could actually support his family.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How does that make "Arminianism was The Father of Darwinism"?

Darwin dressed the emperor in a new set of clothing.

 

[lesliedellow]

Calvinists seem to be the people that take the most issue with Darwin.

I have no issues with Darwin.

Mind you, I don't come from the American south.

 

[TLK Valentine]

When Darwin's argument went from religion to science he started to sell books and he could actually support his family.

You think that's what he did and why he did it? That's adorable....

 

[Hoghead1]

For me, the interesting part of the whole episode is that both Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace both stumbled upon the same theory at the same time, completely independent of one another. A common acquaintance of the two found out that Wallace was about to publish the very same theory of evolution that Darwin had been working on, but for a longer stretch of time. They agreed to publish their work at the same time, with Darwin begrudgingly agreeing to publish before he thought he was ready. As it turned out, Darwin's book was very well written and fleshed out more of the theory than Wallace's publication which led to Darwin's popularity today.

What this shows is that all of the accumulated science up to that point was clearly pushing towards this theory. It was only a matter of time before someone put it all together, and in fact 2 guys did put it together at about the same time.

It's interesting how Wallace conveniently gets dropped out of the picture. In 1858, it was to be called the Darwin-Wallace theory. But Darwin published first, whereas Wallace was still out in the field, didn't get back to England until 1863. By that time, the name "Darwin" and "Darwin" alone was on everybody's lips. The British Museum of Natural History has a statue of Darwin, but none to Wallace. In recent years, protests by Wallace people let the museum to at least include a painting of Wallace. If you ask me, I think Darwin nicked the whole thing off Wallace.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You think that's what he did and why he did it? That's adorable....

Yes, that is what Darwin did for a living. He had health problems, Darwin wrote: "Even ill-health, though it has annihilated several years of my life, has saved me from the distractions of society and amusement."

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, that is what Darwin did for a living. He had health problems, Darwin wrote: "Even ill-health, though it has annihilated several years of my life, has saved me from the distractions of society and amusement."

And that has what to do with your previous fantasy?

 

[joshua 1 9]

And that has what to do with your previous fantasy?

I prefer allegory rather then fantasy.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I prefer allegory rather then fantasy.

As long as you concede that it isn't reality.

 

[Hieronymus]

Some people speculate that: Arminianism was The Father of Darwinism.

It's "enlightenment thinking" and theosophy that probably inspired Darwin.
Evolution is the backbone of that school of thought, both in a spiritual and physical sense.

 

[joshua 1 9]

As long as you concede that it isn't reality.

In the Bible you know when the story is real because real names are used. There is a lesson to be learned and that is why we teach the stories to Children. I remember my Grandmother often made reference to the "little boy that cried wolf". This is a very effective story to teach people not to cry for help if you do not really need help. This is very effective in my family because if my wife or I tell my brothers that I need help with something both of them would be on the next plane here. They know that I learned as a child not to cry wolf and only to call on them for help if I was really needing their help.

 

[TLK Valentine]

In the Bible you know when the story is real because real names are used. There is a lesson to be learned and that is why we teach the stories to Children.

"George Washington" is a real name -- but did he really chop down a cherry tree as a child?

"Betsy Ross" Is a real name -- but did she really design the first American flag?

Even history is often, as they say in Hollywood, "based on a true story..." which leaves a lot of wiggle room.

I remember my Grandmother often made reference to the "little boy that cried wolf". This is a very effective story to teach people not to cry for help if you do not really need help. This is very effective in my family because if my wife or I tell my brothers that I need help with something both of them would be on the next plane here. They know that I learned as a child not to cry wolf and only to call on them for help if I was really needing their help.

And can you learn that lesson even though there really was no little boy?

Would you have thought the little boy was real if he had a name?

 

[joshua 1 9]

"George Washington" is a real name -- but did he really chop down a cherry tree as a child?

"Betsy Ross" Is a real name -- but did she really design the first American flag?

Even history is often, as they say in Hollywood, "based on a true story..." which leaves a lot of wiggle room.

I am talking about the Bible: a collection of 66 books written by about 40 authors, in three different languages, on three different continents, over approximately 1,600 years. The Bible is inspired and inerrant. No other books have ever passed the test to be considered on equal ground with the Bible.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I am talking about the Bible: a collection of 66 books written by about 40 authors, in three different languages, on three different continents, over approximately 1,600 years.

The Star Wars Expanded Universe has more books, written by more authors, in more languages.

Either it's more reliable than the Bible, or there's a flaw in your "logic..."

...don't you think?

The Bible is inspired and inerrant. No other books have ever passed the test to be considered on equal ground with the Bible.

What test? Did you make up a test? That's adorable!

 

[joshua 1 9]

The Star Wars Expanded Universe has more books, written by more authors, in more languages.

It is not the number of authors it is the God that is behind all the different authors. Do you really know and understand that little about the Bible. George Lucas and now Disney are not going to hold you responsible for the Star Wars Saga. God is going to hold you accountable for the information that we read in our Bible. In fact we are already responsible right now to follow the teaching of the Bible. Most atheists and agnostics acknowledge that much. If you break the laws and the commandments contained in the Bible you will have to deal with the consequences of that. Just like we have to follow ALL of the laws of the Natural world and the Universe.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What test? Did you make up a test? That's adorable!

I have already explained that the old and new testament are referred to as the old and new covenant. A covenant is a legal contract between you and the God that made you. If we do our part of the covenant then we can be sure that God will do His part. There are benefits when we follow the law and consequences when we break the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It is not the number of authors

Then why did you bring it up in the first place?

it is the God that is behind all the different authors.

And as far as you know, was also behind the authors of Star Wars... maybe even George Lucas himself... although it would appear that he suffered a fall from Grace somewhere between the original trilogy and the prequels...

Do you really know and understand that little about the Bible.

If your "logic" was all I had to go on, it'd be a miracle I knew as much as I did... about anything.

George Lucas and now Disney are not going to hold you responsible for the Star Wars Saga. God is going to hold you accountable for the information that we read in our Bible.

In your opinion.

In fact we are already responsible right now to follow the teaching of the Bible. Most atheists and agnostics acknowledge that much.

Indeed -- we acknowledge your failures even when you refuse to.

If you break the laws and the commandments contained in the Bible you will have to deal with the consequences of that. Just like we have to follow ALL of the laws of the Natural world and the Universe.

Funny thing about those "natural laws..." we keep finding ways around them.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I have already explained that the old and new testament are referred to as the old and new covenant. A covenant is a legal contract between you and the God that made you. If we do our part of the covenant then we can be sure that God will do His part. There are benefits when we follow the law and consequences when we break the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Utterly irrelevant.... you didn't even try to adress the issue.