More on why I reject evolution

East of Eden

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,073
342
65
Albuquerque
✟36,726.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Well, that's a good question.

God shows Adam around the Garden:
"It's great here, Adam. I put in everything you'll need. Water, food, great climate and comfortable places to be. Enjoy all of it. Except for that tree over there. No, not that one, that one right by the path. Don't eat anything from that tree. If you do, something terrible will happen."

You don't need God's omniscience to know what was going to happen next. You only need a slight acquaintance with human nature.

So long as Adam remained like the other animals, not knowing good and evil, he was not like God and so was unable to have fellowship with him. But after he knew, he was still not able to be truly good. This is why we need a Savior.

Adam was never like the other animals, he was made in God's image, and had fellowship with Him. Christ didn't die on the cross to make us good, but to offer his free gift of salvation through faith in his atoning death.
 
Upvote 0

East of Eden

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,073
342
65
Albuquerque
✟36,726.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Barbarian observes:
That's why the KKK held a parade to celebrate Donald Trump's win in 2016.



The Loyal White Knights, a Ku Klux Klan group based in North Carolina, held a parade convoy in the city of Roxboro on Saturday to celebrate the presidential election victory of Donald Trump.
The KKK Held A Parade In North Carolina Celebrating Trump's Win

There aren't any KKK in your video, just a mob of protesters. If this is supposed to say something about the GOP, then the Revolutionary Communist endorsement of Biden means your part is Communist, right?

When democrats were conservatives.

There was nothing conservative about starting a Civil War, or ignoring the Constitution to establish Jim Crow. Most people were conservative back then, there was no group of liberals like today endorsing 9 month abortions, gay marriage, transgenderism, socialism, etc. Today's liberalism is a fundamentally un-American movement.

When they became liberal and endorsed civil rights for all, the Klan departed and eventually joined the republican party. This is why the Klan is now allied with republicans, and denounces democrats. Over time, things change. This is why loyalty to a party is foolish. At one time, republicans backed equal rights for all. And not surprisingly, they got most of the minority vote. And it's not surprising that when republicans ceased to support equal rights, minorities fled the party and became democrats.

LOL, they never ceased to support Civil Rights, the supported the '64 act in greater numbers than Democrats. The GOP under Trump enacted prison and sentencing reform and created the lowest black unemployment in history, probably why he got more of the minority vote than past GOP candidates.

IMHO blacks vote more for Democrats because that party feeds the Grievance Industry with their race hustling. How are those Democratic policies working out for blacks on the South Side of Chicago? As LBJ said, "I'll have those n*****s voting Democrat for 100 years."

(Regarding evolution)
About 90% of Hitler's final solution can be found in Martin Luther's The Jews and their Lies. The Nazis were proud of this and cited Luther as a great German patriot. It's in testimony at the Nuremberg trials.
Martin Luther - "The Jews & Their Lies"

And Jesus called the evil Jewish leadership of His time a brood of vipers and other tough things, are you going to blame Him for Hitler too? Nazism was based on the 'science' of Darwinism. I'm not sure what you find so offensive in Hitler given your support of candidates who support the murder through abortion of more innocent people than Hitler ever dreamed of, in both cases 'for the good of society' of course.

This is not to tar all Protestants as racists or monsters; Luther himself obviously loved God and was courageous in asserting what he felt to be truth. But he had flaws, and this monstrous evil was one of those flaws,

The same could be said for many popes.

I didn't know Clinton was running for anything. (checks) No. She lost. Get used to it.

And Trump isn't POTUS yet you bring up the irrelevant KKK 'rally'.

But do show us that she admired Sanger.

Happy to educate you.

“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision…. I am really in awe of her,” Clinton said.

Part of Sanger's 'vision' was the extermination of 'negroes'.

Hillary Clinton receives award named for famed eugenicist - Baptist Press

As ICR founders Henry Morris and William Tinkle did.

Still waiting for you to back up that slander.

Tinkle even advocated sterilizing "inferior" people, perhaps without their consent.

You mean like the SCOTUS upheld.

Racism is a basic part of their ideology.

Nonsense.

As I said, many YE creationists have abandoned the racism of their founders. But many have not.

Substitute Democrats for YE creationists and it would make sense.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
There aren't any KKK in your video,

No point in denial. The KKK officially designated the parade to celebrate their candidate's win.

There was nothing conservative about starting a Civil War

The conservatives who tried to break away from the United States did so to preserve their culture of slavery.

or ignoring the Constitution to establish Jim Crow

You don't think John Stennis, Jesse Helms, and Stom Thurmond were conservatives? We found another problem.

When they became liberal and endorsed civil rights for all, the Klan departed and eventually joined the republican party. This is why the Klan is now allied with republicans, and denounces democrats. Over time, things change. This is why loyalty to a party is foolish. At one time, republicans backed equal rights for all. And not surprisingly, they got most of the minority vote. And it's not surprising that when republicans ceased to support equal rights, minorities fled the party and became democrats.

LOL, they never ceased to support Civil Rights

They always opposed civil rights. That's what conservatives do.

IMHO blacks vote more for Democrats because that party feeds the Grievance Industry with their race hustling.

Turns out, black people are a lot smarter than you seem to think they are. Racists have always tried to pick leaders for black people to follow. They never fall for it.

(German inspiration for the Holocaust)
About 90% of Hitler's final solution can be found in Martin Luther's The Jews and their Lies. The Nazis were proud of this and cited Luther as a great German patriot. It's in testimony at the Nuremberg trials.
Martin Luther - "The Jews & Their Lies"

And Jesus called the evil Jewish leadership of His time a brood of vipers and other tough things, are you going to blame Him for Hitler too?

Jesus never called the Jews those things. He is a Jew. He had contempt for many of the Jewish leaders, not the people. Luther's hated was different.

This is not to tar all Protestants as racists or monsters; Luther himself obviously loved God and was courageous in asserting what he felt to be truth. But he had flaws, and this monstrous evil was one of those flaws,

The same could be said for many popes.

Yes, there were Popes as bad as Luther. Arguably worse.

And Trump isn't POTUS yet you bring up the irrelevant KKK 'rally'.

Just pointing out the persistent connection between right wing extremism and racism. Trump's own AG pointed this out. Trump nearly fired him for it.

“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision…. I am really in awe of her,” Clinton said.

Too bad for Clinton.

As ICR founders Henry Morris and William Tinkle did.

Still waiting for you to back up that slander.

Already showed you that Morris considered black to be intellectually and spiritually inferior to other people. He was locked into classifying people's worth by race. Like other racists we've discussed.

Much more troubling, however, are Tinkle’s opinions of almost 30 years later, in his book “Heredity. A study in science and the Bible” published in 1967, while Tinkle was the Secretary of the Creation Research Society. In its chapter “The prospect for eugenics”, far from having abandoned his support for the practice, Tinkle sounds more radical about it. He writes positively about sterilization for the “feeble-minded” (carefully classified as “morons”, “imbeciles” and “idiots”) and people with other hereditary conditions. Sterilization in a male, he says “is a simple operation”, and “in a girl or woman, [it] is as serious as removal of the vermiform appendix” [11, p. 139]. While he admits that it is impractical to sterilize all “defectives”, he still thinks it’s worth a shot when possible:


At the present time there are in the United States more than a million people with serious hereditary defects, and to reduce their numbers by even a few thousand would reduce the amount of discomfort and hardship in the future. Unfortunate births are reduced by segregation also but there are not enough institutions to house nearly all the ones who have unfortunate genes. Institutional care is expensive but as compared to total government expenditure it is small.

Sterilization is sometimes employed with the consent of the patient for non-eugenic purposes. An example is a woman who has borne three children by Caesarean section and could not stand another birth. Persons who are on the borderline of normal mentality may be able to marry and care for themselves but would not be good parents. Their children might be normal or might be defective, and at any rate would have poor home discipline. Such persons sometimes are prevailed upon to submit to sterilization, to their own advantage.

Dr. West, meet Dr. Tinkle, Creationist eugenicist

You mean like the SCOTUS upheld.

At one time, it upheld racial segregation, too. The court was a lot more conservative at one time. Do you now see why racists abandoned the democrat party when it became liberal and pro-civil rights?

"It’s an interesting essay, though I have many disagreements of varying degrees. But let me start by saying that an easier—and better—question would be: “A question for conservatives: What if the right was wrong on race?”

This is a very different question, because it’s easy to argue that the right was wrong on race without having to concede that the left was right. As I’ve argued many times, the right, broadly speaking, was wrong on the question of civil rights in the 1960s. I am fully aware of all the caveats right-wingers pull off the shelf in these discussions, about federalism and the Constitution, about the fact that Republicans were on the whole better on civil rights than Democrats, that what constituted “right” and “left” a half century ago was hardly the Manichean binary people use as a shorthand today. But none of that changes the fact that the right—with many notable individual exceptions—failed to appreciate that Martin Luther King Jr.’s project was a necessary and consistent extension of the best principles found in the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address."

Conservative commentator Jonah Goldberg
Racism and the Right — Jonah Goldberg
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Adam was never like the other animals, he was made in God's image,

As God is a spirit and eternal, and therefore cannot be a physical being, our likeness is in our minds and living souls.
 
Upvote 0

East of Eden

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,073
342
65
Albuquerque
✟36,726.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
No point in denial. The KKK officially designated the parade to celebrate their candidate's win.

Just as the Revolutionary Communists celebrated their candidate's win.

The conservatives who tried to break away from the United States did so to preserve their culture of slavery.

But were defeated by Republican conservatives.

They always opposed civil rights. That's what conservatives do.

Amazing, when it was your party that recently used the IRS against political opponents, spied on an opposition candidate, launched a Deep State coup attempt that denied civil rights to Trump and his millions of voters, that support the complete denial of civil rights to millions of aborted children, and that openly suppress the speech of political opponents, with not a peep from the the left or ACLU. Even Mexico and Russia protested this attempt to silence the opposition. The leftwing cancel culture and political correctness is a suppression of civil rights and free speech. The attempt to ignore the Second Amendment is an effort to suppress civil rights. This is why I'm sorry to say at some point we will have Civil War, when citizens are silenced and feel their votes don't count, bad things happen. It wouldn't be the first Civil War Democrats have started.

Turns out, black people are a lot smarter than you seem to think they are. Racists have always tried to pick leaders for black people to follow. They never fall for it.

More left wing lies. How come nobody called Trump a racist before he ran for POTUS? Black leaders all wanted their picture taken with him. Democrats prefer blacks helpless and dependent and staying on their plantation, the GOP wants them independent and prosperous.


(German inspiration for the Holocaust)
About 90% of Hitler's final solution can be found in Martin Luther's The Jews and their Lies.

90% from Darwin, you mean.


Already showed you that Morris considered black to be intellectually and spiritually inferior to other people. He was locked into classifying people's worth by race. Like other racists we've discussed.

Another pathetic attempt at trying to silence someone whose arguments you can't answer by name calling. Yet your hero wrote a book on favored races. All of the left's racism talk (it's all they have) does nothing to improve the quality of anyone's lives, it simply fosters division and animosity. From slavery days to today, it seems race is all the Democrats have.

]Much more troubling, however, are Tinkle’s opinions of almost 30 years later, in his book “Heredity. A study in science and the Bible” published in 1967, while Tinkle was the Secretary of the Creation Research Society. In its chapter “The prospect for eugenics”, far from having abandoned his support for the practice, Tinkle sounds more radical about it. He writes positively about sterilization for the “feeble-minded” (carefully classified as “morons”, “imbeciles” and “idiots”) and people with other hereditary conditions. Sterilization in a male, he says “is a simple operation”, and “in a girl or woman, [it] is as serious as removal of the vermiform appendix” [11, p. 139]. While he admits that it is impractical to sterilize all “defectives”, he still thinks it’s worth a shot when possible:


At the present time there are in the United States more than a million people with serious hereditary defects, and to reduce their numbers by even a few thousand would reduce the amount of discomfort and hardship in the future. Unfortunate births are reduced by segregation also but there are not enough institutions to house nearly all the ones who have unfortunate genes. Institutional care is expensive but as compared to total government expenditure it is small.

Sterilization is sometimes employed with the consent of the patient for non-eugenic purposes. An example is a woman who has borne three children by Caesarean section and could not stand another birth. Persons who are on the borderline of normal mentality may be able to marry and care for themselves but would not be good parents. Their children might be normal or might be defective, and at any rate would have poor home discipline. Such persons sometimes are prevailed upon to submit to sterilization, to their own advantage.

Maybe he was reading liberal icon Oliver Wendall Holmes opinion in the SCOTUS case approving of the same:

"We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.[16] Holmes concluded his argument by declaring that "Three generations of imbeciles are enough".

How are forced sterilizations worse than your party forcing abortion on millions of innocent children? That is the true holocaust, aided and abetted by your party and the abortion industry.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Just as the Revolutionary Communists celebrated their candidate's win.

There are a lot of parallels between Trump's win and the election of Chavez in Venezuela. While they had some differences, they favored autocratic government and their incompetence greatly damaged their respective nations. However, by the time the voters caught on in Venezuela, Chavez had brought down the media and controlled the legislature and the courts. Here, Trump fell short, and his insurrection failed.

Thank God.

The conservatives who tried to break away from the United States did so to preserve their culture of slavery.

But were defeated by Republican conservatives.

If you think Lincoln, Stanton, et al were "conservative", we've located yet another problem. They were abolitionists, and some in Lincoln's cabinet were radical progressives.

They always opposed civil rights. That's what conservatives do.

Amazing, when it was your party that recently used the IRS against political opponents,

You got that wrong, too.

Bush’s use of the IRS was but one part of that larger assault. As my Salon colleague Alex Seitz-Wald notes today in greater detail, in 2005, Bush’s IRS began what became an extensive two-year investigation into a Pasadena church after an orator dared to speak out against President Bush’s Iraq War. Not coincidentally, the Los Angeles Times reports that the church targeted just so happened to be “one of Southern California’s largest and most liberal congregations.” That IRS church audit came a year after it launched a near-identical attack on the NAACP after the civil rights organization criticized various Bush administration policies.
https://www.alternet.org/2013/05/bu...fter-opponents-where-was-fox-and-gop-outrage/

George W. Bush was never a libertarian.


spied on an opposition candidate, launched a Deep State coup attempt that denied civil rights to Trump and his millions of voters,

Sorry, not interested in QAnon conspiracy theories.

This is why I'm sorry to say at some point we will have Civil War, when citizens are silenced and feel their votes don't count, bad things happen.

While voter suppression and Gerrymandering do continue, they are only delaying tactics. As you have seen, Trump tried this and failed. When Georgia tried to limit voting, angry voters stood in line for hours, just to make a point. And it cost them the presidential race and both senators.

Turns out, black people are a lot smarter than you seem to think they are. Racists have always tried to pick leaders for black people to follow. They never fall for it.

More left wing lies.

I wasn't thinking of Trump specifically, but yes, he's there.

They did.
Trump’s characterization of himself as his dad’s newbie apprentice was pretty clever. In reality, though, in 1973, when the Department of Justice filed a civil rights case accusing the Trump firm of Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) violations, Donald Trump was twenty-seven, and was the president of the company.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...ion-lawsuit-against-him-it-was-actually-yuge/

(German inspiration for the Holocaust)
About 90% of Hitler's final solution can be found in Martin Luther's The Jews and their Lies.

90% from Darwin, you mean.

Nope. Far as I can see, Darwin didn't have any resentment toward Jews. Read the links to Luther's proposals on what to do with Jews, then read the Wannsee protocols of the Nazis. It's very enlightening.

Already showed you that Morris considered black to be intellectually and spiritually inferior to other people. He was locked into classifying people's worth by race. Like other racists we've discussed.

Another pathetic attempt at trying to silence someone whose arguments you can't answer by name calling.

I just quoted him...
Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they have eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.

Because the Libertarian party does not condemn abortion, I am no longer a registered libertarian. My experience is that libertarians are O.K. about abortion, and the other two parties lie about it.

 
Upvote 0

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
10,721
4,736
59
Mississippi
✟251,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
-

Evolution does not have the time (millions, billions of years) or the distance (billions and trillions of miles) to be true or to even exist.

What it does have, is a manipulative satan willing to deceive anyone willing to listen to and believe his complicated deception.

What i love about God's creation echoes his gift of salvation the beauty and mastery of simplicity. Only a great God creator could have pulled that off, kinda echoes the work of a master artist but on a whole other level.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: coffee4u
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Evolution does not have the time (millions, billions of years)

Actually, it happens every day and can be observed regularly. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. What do you think it is?
 
Upvote 0

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
10,721
4,736
59
Mississippi
✟251,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Actually, it happens every day and can be observed regularly. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. What do you think it is?

What ever you are speaking about you have applied the word evolution to it. To be able to use an example to back up your belief in evolution.

Show a time lapse of this occurring
 
  • Agree
Reactions: coffee4u
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
What ever you are speaking about you have applied the word evolution to it.

Because you have no idea what biological evolution is, you're just swinging blindly in the dark, hoping you'll hit something. Can you tell me the scientific definition of biological evolution? If not, why not go and find out what it is, so you can take part in the discussion?

To be able to use an example to back up your belief in evolution.

The great thing about science, is that no "belief" is required. Just evidence. So, for example:

Journal of Zoology
The House mice of the Faroe Islands: a study in microdifferentiation

R. J. Berry
M. E. Jakobson
Josephine Peters

May 1978
The House mice (Mus musculus L.) of the Faroe Islands (62°N, 7°W) are frequently quoted as examples of rapid evolution, because they seem to be clearly differentiated both from mice in other parts of the world, and between different islands within the Faroe group despite being introduced through human agency within the last millennium. They are also of interest in being among the most climatically stressed mice in the Northern Hemisphere.

The present study is an attempt to determine the extent of differentiation between the populations on the six Faroe islands which harbour mice. It is based on size and organ weights, measurements on the mandibles and scapulae, non‐metrical variation of the skeleton, and allozymic frequencies at 22 loci. Distance statistics calculated for all five groups of data between samples from each island compared with every other, showed that all the populations were clearly distinct. However the distances calculated from the different data were disconcertingly heterogeneous. The most likely explanation is that the different characteristics scored each depend on a relatively small number of different genes.

Taking all the results together, it seems most probable that mice first entered the Faroes via the main port of Torshavn and spread from there to Nols0y, Hestur and Sand0y, and from Sand0y to Fugloy and Mykines. The large inter‐island differences can be attributed primarily to “instant sub‐speciation” produced by each colonization depending on a probable small number of effective founders.

Shows evolution by definition. This is a mystery to you, because you don't know what biological evolution is.

 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
10,721
4,736
59
Mississippi
✟251,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Because you have no idea what biological evolution is, you're just swinging blindly in the dark, hoping you'll hit something. Can you tell me the scientific definition of biological evolution? If not, why not go and find out what it is, so you can take part in the discussion?



The great thing about science, is that no "belief" is required. Just evidence. So, for example:

Journal of Zoology
The House mice of the Faroe Islands: a study in microdifferentiation

R. J. Berry
M. E. Jakobson
Josephine Peters

May 1978
The House mice (Mus musculus L.) of the Faroe Islands (62°N, 7°W) are frequently quoted as examples of rapid evolution, because they seem to be clearly differentiated both from mice in other parts of the world, and between different islands within the Faroe group despite being introduced through human agency within the last millennium. They are also of interest in being among the most climatically stressed mice in the Northern Hemisphere.

The present study is an attempt to determine the extent of differentiation between the populations on the six Faroe islands which harbour mice. It is based on size and organ weights, measurements on the mandibles and scapulae, non‐metrical variation of the skeleton, and allozymic frequencies at 22 loci. Distance statistics calculated for all five groups of data between samples from each island compared with every other, showed that all the populations were clearly distinct. However the distances calculated from the different data were disconcertingly heterogeneous. The most likely explanation is that the different characteristics scored each depend on a relatively small number of different genes.

Taking all the results together, it seems most probable that mice first entered the Faroes via the main port of Torshavn and spread from there to Nols0y, Hestur and Sand0y, and from Sand0y to Fugloy and Mykines. The large inter‐island differences can be attributed primarily to “instant sub‐speciation” produced by each colonization depending on a probable small number of effective founders.

Shows evolution by definition. This is a mystery to you, because you don't know what biological evolution is.
Your guide is science first then possibly (more than likely not) The Bible.

Mine is Bible first and only concerning God's creation.

So i am looking forward to the day of truth and the disagreement ends.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Your guide is science first

For science. The Bible is about other things. Two different things. If you try to confuse them, you end up with all sorts of errors like flat earth and creationism.

But you were going to tell us what the scientific definition of biological evolution is. What do you think it is?
 
Upvote 0

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
10,721
4,736
59
Mississippi
✟251,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
For science. The Bible is about other things. Two different things. If you try to confuse them, you end up with all sorts of errors like flat earth and creationism.

But you were going to tell us what the scientific definition of biological evolution is. What do you think it is?

I could care less what the definition is, just as i do not need to know the false teaching of other religions. To be able to tell people how to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life. I do not need to know squat about evolution to be able to understand God's creation, He created. It is described in The Bible.

Looks like you are still looking for the truth (abet in the wrong place) maybe you will believe God's testimony about His creation one day, the one given in the Bible.

Or like the people who have rejected God out right, will eventually acknowledge God's as the true God, Savior and Lord
Everyone eventually will be able to know/see His true and only creation, the one described in the Bible.

(either by God's grace or just forced to accept it simply because it is true)​
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

East of Eden

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,073
342
65
Albuquerque
✟36,726.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
-

Evolution does not have the time (millions, billions of years) or the distance (billions and trillions of miles) to be true or to even exist.

What it does have, is a manipulative satan willing to deceive anyone willing to listen to and believe his complicated deception.

What i love about God's creation echoes his gift of salvation the beauty and mastery of simplicity. Only a great God creator could have pulled that off, kinda echoes the work of a master artist but on a whole other level.

Yup, and to add to my previous comments, Nazism was simply the political working out of Darwinism.

What's funny is Darwin himself in his writings was full of doubts on his theory, as well he should have had. Here's a couple: "That the eye could evolve with natural selection is absurd."

"I have the awful feeling of having deluded myself with a fantasy."

In some of his letters he described his theories as 'The Devil's gospel'.

To quote George Orwell,

“There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.”
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I could care less what the definition is,

That's why you keep running into walls. You hate something without even knowing what it is.

To be able to tell people how to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life. I do not need to know squat about evolution to be able to understand God's creation, He created. It is described in The Bible.

The problem is, you don't approve of the way He did it. Looks like you have given up on the truth Maybe you will believe God's testimony about His creation one day, the one given in the Bible, rather than your new revision of it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Yup, and to add to my previous comments, Nazism was simply the political working out of Darwinism.

It would be hard to support, given that Darwinists like Punnett and Morgan showed that Hitler's racial ideas were scientifically unsupportable. Hitler got his ideas from other places. Creationists like William Tinkle, co-founder of the ICR, were enthusiastic eugencists; so were the Nazis. But Punnett showed that their ideas for "improving the race" were not even possible.

And most of Hitler's "final solution" came from Martin Luther. His paper, "The Jews and Their Lies" contained about 90% of the Wannsee Protocols, developed by Hitlers henchmen, and formed the basis for the Holocaust.

This is not to say all creationists were racists or eugenicists. Today, it's likely that most are not. It's just that they were there at the founding of YE creationism. And as late as 1992, one of the founders, Henry Morris was still claiming blacks were "of a genetic character" that made them intellectually and spiritually inferior. Would you like to see that?

What's funny is Darwin himself in his writings was full of doubts on his theory, as well he should have had. Here's a couple: "That the eye could evolve with natural selection is absurd."

A lot of dishonest creationists have peddled that story to people who believed them and passed it on. I don't believe you intentionally tried to deceive here; more likely you were taken in by dishonest people you trusted. Here's the truth from a creationist source:

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”1

Darwin called the evolution of the eye “absurd”! Doesn’t that show he really didn’t believe in evolution? Isn’t this proof enough?

If our reading stopped here, then yes, we might argue Darwin had given up on his theory. However, reading further we find the following:

“When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei,2 as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.”3
...
Did the eye cause Darwin to doubt evolution? No, it didn’t. The “doubtful Darwin” is another argument Christians should not use.

Didn’t Darwin Call the Evolution of the Eye Absurd?

Just be careful before you believe those people again, um?
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,802
4,309
-
✟681,411.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Looks like you are still looking for the truth (abet in the wrong place) maybe you will believe God's testimony about His creation one day, the one given in the Bible.
It's sad to think that all truth is included in one 2000 years old book, as if God has stopped revealing the truth..
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,192
11,428
76
✟367,799.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
It's sad to think that all truth is included in one 2000 years old book, as if God has stopped revealing the truth..

God Himself says that not all truth is found in the Bible:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
10,721
4,736
59
Mississippi
✟251,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
It's sad to think that all truth is included in one 2000 years old book, as if God has stopped revealing the truth..

It is sad for you and others (who are placing faith in man), but not for me. I love that God communicated to His creation (humanity) the descriptions of His work in creating His creation.

The Hebrews learn it is mighty costly to believe lying man (the 12 spies) over God's word.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Derek1234

Active Member
Mar 11, 2021
143
36
51
London
✟24,724.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It is sad for you and others (who are placing faith in man), but not for me. I love that God communicated to His creation (humanity) the descriptions of His work in creating His creation.

The Hebrews learn it is mighty costly to believe lying man (the 12 spies) over God's word.

I hope I don't sound like I am trolling you, but I am genuinely curious. Are you arguing in the bottom part of your post that the earth is flat and stationary? And related to that, do you think it is an important part of our faith that we have the doctrine of creation right?
 
Upvote 0