Evolution Promotes Brutality

[AV1611VET]

One doesn't need an answer or theory of why God would choose to create a universe in such a way that evolution would take place in it in order to accept the overwealming scientific evidence that evolution does in fact takes place. That it might be a tough question for theologians to answer doesn't imply anything negative for the veracity of the theory of evolution.

Evolution is a philosophy of the Devil.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So eugenics would still have been a passion of Germany's scientists?

Why not? Racial purity was a passion of the Old Testament Hebrews... Germany might have appreciated the irony, although admittedly, it might have been lost on the Jews at the time.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Evolution is a philosophy of the Devil.

Lies are his tool... and since you haven't been honest yet, it reminds me of something Jesus said about a house divided against itself...

 

[AV1611VET]

Racial purity was a passion of the Old Testament Hebrews...

Nice try.

Try tribal purity.

You know ... inheritance laws and all that?

 

[AionPhanes]

Tom: Why would God create a world where sentient beings must "brutally" eat one another to survive?

Bob: I'm not sure why he would allow such a scenario to take place.

Tom: See, God wouldn't do that thus the theory that sentient beings eat one another must be false. It just looks a lot like the do but it's an illusion. Kind of like embedded time in our other young earth creationist theory. The earth isn't old it just looks that way because of embedded time. Likewise animals don't eat eachother it's just the eating optical illusion that makes it seem that way to confuse the heathens who don't know God.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Nice try.

Try tribal purity.

You know ... inheritance laws and all that?

Even more self-centered than race... but in the end, it's all about preserving the right bloodlibes.... even among those God has chosen above all others...

 

[Astrophile]

Do you think evolution is being misused when it says we came from apes, instead of a Holy God?

I used to think it was both. Do you think that gynaecology and obstetrics are being misused when they say that you came from your mother, instead of a Holy God?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Evolution is a philosophy of the Devil.

It isn't a philosophy. Also, why blame the devil for it? Most people that support evolution are also theists, and for those that are Christian, I doubt supporting it would mean that they end up in hell. If God puts people in hell for agreeing with scientific theories that don't follow the bible literally, practically every modern Christian is doomed.

Additionally, even if evolution were evil, as you think it is, why assume the devil has anything to do with it. Do you honestly think all evil stuff has the devil directly involved?

 

[joshua 1 9]

It isn't a philosophy. Also, why blame the devil for it? Most people that support evolution are also theists, and for those that are Christian, I doubt supporting it would mean that they end up in hell. If God puts people in hell for agreeing with scientific theories that don't follow the bible literally, practically every modern Christian is doomed.

Additionally, even if evolution were evil, as you think it is, why assume the devil has anything to do with it. Do you honestly think all evil stuff has the devil directly involved?

Evolution has truth and error mixed together. Some people are purists and they have no tolerance for any error so they will throw the baby out with the bath water and reject it all.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Evolution has truth and error mixed together. Some people are purists and they have no tolerance for any error so they will throw the baby out with the bath water and reject it all.

You are playing it too safe. I could say any theory is a mix of truth and error; the statement isn't relevant if I don't say how much of each I think it has.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You are playing it too safe. I could say any theory is a mix of truth and error; the statement isn't relevant if I don't say how much of each I think it has.

This was relevant to Abraham because God called him to come out from among them and he left the Chaldeans. In Rev 4 we read: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.". God demands purity from the people that serve Him. In Isaiah 6: 6,7 "Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. He touched my mouth with it and said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is forgiven." Isaiah needed pure lips to be used by God.

This of course is not a condition of salvation. Still many are called but few are choose. Few answer the call of God because they are not willing to sacrifice themselves to be Holy and Pure before God. People reject God because they do not want to live Holy, Righteous and Pure lives before God.

 

[PsychoSarah]

This was relevant to Abraham because God called him to come out from among them and he left the Chaldeans. In Rev 4 we read: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.". God demands purity from the people that serve Him. In Isaiah 6: 6,7 "Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. He touched my mouth with it and said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is forgiven." Isaiah needed pure lips to be used by God.

This of course is not a condition of salvation. Still many are called but few are choose. Few answer the call of God because they are not willing to sacrifice themselves to be Holy and Pure before God. People reject God because they do not want to live Holy, Righteous and Pure lives before God.

Except I want to believe, and have been seeking belief for over 7 years. Also, think a little bit on human motivation, and how your religion works. Technically, Christians can sin all they want, and expect forgiveness for it. That's what Jesus died for; it is humanly impossible not to sin, and all sins are equal in the eyes of the lord. Lying to prevent yourself from hurting someone's feelings is just as sinful as killing a person, from the bible's perspective.

As it were, while people often don't look far ahead when making decisions, when comparing the benefits of temporary "sinful life" with eternal pleasant afterlife and avoiding the negative afterlife, no human in their right mind is going to choose to live sinfully. For one thing, most people don't want to live in sin, even without the spiritual threats of religion. I have no desire to murder, to have sex with everything that moves, to steal from people constantly, etc. In fact, through a combination of disorders and personal outlook, I restrict my life far more than the average Christian would. The problem is, in order for a person to feel like they are choosing between those options, they have to think that the Christian God is real, and thus automatically would be believers and thus saved. Unless they are Catholic, they require works along with belief.

 

[AV1611VET]

I used to think it was both. Do you think that gynaecology and obstetrics are being misused when they say that you came from your mother, instead of a Holy God?

Trying to justify macroevolution (my example) with microevolution (your example), are you?

 

[AV1611VET]

It isn't a philosophy.

Paul warns otherwise.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

If you disagree, then what did Paul mean by "rudiments of the world"?

Also, why blame the devil for it?

Credit where credit is due.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Paul warns otherwise.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

If you disagree, then what did Paul mean by "rudiments of the world"?Credit where credit is due.

Seeing as science as a formal practice did not exist at the time the bible was written, you interpreting it as science is a nonliteral interpretation. If he isn't literally and only talking about philosophy, then the garden of eden might not literally have existed, and so on and so forth. At least, that is the general trend biblical literalists end up with. So AV, you can either defy a literal interpretation to humor your own hubris, or admit that the bible does not explicitly warn against science.

 

[AV1611VET]

So AV, you can either defy a literal interpretation to humor your own hubris, or admit that the bible does not explicitly warn against science.

You mean like here?

1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

[PsychoSarah]

You mean like here?

1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Now I question why you didn't use that verse to begin with, but some context would be nice. It helps to show if it actually supports you or not. In context, it is advice given to one individual, whose mother is a believer, but whose father is implied not to be. It's not inherently advice for everyone to take.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Technically, Christians can sin all they want, and expect forgiveness for it.

Not really, if we are a Christian then we are born again of the Spirit. So we become a new creation we put off the old and we put on the new.

 

[46AND2]

Trying to justify macroevolution (my example) with microevolution (your example), are you?

They are the same thing AV. Only difference is time.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Evoluiton promotes rational attraction to being.