Atheists, Theists, and Evolution

[Ed Vidence]

The central point of the Theory of Evolution has nothing whatsoever to say about Genesis, or creation.

Imagine that....a Darwinist asserting his ORIGINS theory is mute about the Genesis Creator ?

Onlookers: If Darwinists would brazenly lie about this undisputed and uncontested point just think what they would do (and have done) with complicated scientific evidence ? This is my only point.

We know all evolutionists think there is no evidence of God in physical reality. Why are they afraid to admit what is not in dispute ? We know NS says a blind and mindless (God not involved) process produced every living thing.

There are only three possible answers: ignorance, wickedness (thanks Richard Dawkins) or fear of being labelled an atheist and having that identification erase all of their assumptions packaged as evidence in one moment of time. The last answer, at its root, knows the Genesis Creator cannot be refuted.

I have gotten every atheist-evolutionist to betray his worldview and Darwinian faith by the "silent" threat that each post of mine carries. I am satisfied.

http://bevets.com/equotesm.htm#M

Professor Ernst Mayr

"There is indeed one belief that all true original Darwinians held in common, and that was their rejection of creationism, their rejection of special creation. This was the flag around which they assembled and under which they marched. When Hull claimed that “the Darwinians did not totally agree with each other, even over essentials”, he overlooked one essential on which all these Darwinians agreed. Nothing was more essential for them than to decide whether evolution is a natural phenomenon or something controlled by God. The conviction that the diversity of the natural world was the result of natural processes and not the work of God was the idea that brought all the so-called Darwinians together in spite of their disagreements on other of Darwin’s theories." [One Long Argument (1991) p.99 ]


Gracchus: "The central point of the Theory of Evolution has nothing whatsoever to say about Genesis, or creation. To maintain this is to spread a falsehood. If you spread a falsehood knowing it to be a falsehood, you are a liar. If you spread a falsehood believing it to be true, then you are ignorant, or demented."

EV: Are we to believe Gracchus ignorant and/or uneducated or wicked knowingly spreading falsehood ?

EV

 

[Lord_Marx]

I'm really not seeing your point, Ed Vidence. Calling people Darwinists and giving them some type of universal dogma is as silly as calling people who believe in gravity "Newtonists".

 

[Willtor]

I have gotten every atheist-evolutionist to betray his worldview and Darwinian faith by the "silent" threat that each post of mine carries. I am satisfied.

Haha! You almost had me going until this point. This is too off the wall to be for real.

 

[Ed Vidence]

Haha! You almost had me going until this point. This is too off the wall to be for real.

IOW, you are unable to refute = substanceless one-liner explained.

EV

 

[Lord_Marx]

This board gives me a headache trying to tell when people are being sarcastic and when they are serious. If one uses the law of Poe, the people in question will just claim auto victory because you ignore them.

 

[Ed Vidence]

I will quote you the last two sentences of Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species, a copy of which I have in my hand at this moment

"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." (Emphasis mine.)

EV: The ending excerpt of Darwin's "Origin of

Species" book, that is, the bold emphasis portion is from any edition after the first. The first edition did not have what is written in bold above. Everyone agrees "Origin" rules God out of having anything to do with producing nature - the whole point of the matter. The point here is that Darwin is not crediting God with nature; he is taking the deistic stand in response to Christian support (Rev. Kingsley) of his theory and feelings for his wife a life-long Christian. Darwin did not think of mentioning whatever Creator he is talking about in the FIRST edition. In essence Darwin is insulting the Genesis Creator by saying He created a blind process that he (Darwin) invented. We know Genesis says origins was NOT by common descent. Darwin is "crediting" a God that he has no source for, an entirely subjective opinion.

The real issue is the massive ignorance of Darwinsts here at this piddling debate board; denying the central and undisputed point of Darwin's theory: Genesis Creator did not do what Genesis says He did. We also know Darwin was an atheist the last 30 years of his life. This fact plainly says whatever God-talk that came from him was placating theists in his life and was disengenuous.

Professor Ernst Mayr:

"It is apparent that Darwin lost his faith in the years 1836-39, much of it clearly prior to the reading of Malthus. In order not to hurt the feelings of his friends and of his wife, Darwin often used deistic language in his publications, but much in his Notebooks indicates that by this time he had become a ‘materialist’ (more or less = atheist)." American Scientist May 1977 p. 323

EV

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Imagine that....a Darwinist asserting his ORIGINS theory is mute about the Genesis Creator ?

All 'Darwinist' origins theories are completely mute about any creator.

Onlookers: If Darwinists would brazenly lie about this undisputed and uncontested point just think what they would do (and have done) with complicated scientific evidence ? This is my only point.

It's not a lie, so your point is void.

We know all evolutionists think there is no evidence of God in physical reality.

That's a blatant lie. Some evolutionists may well believe this; all evolutionists do not, and it is no requirement of evolutionary theory.

Why are they afraid to admit what is not in dispute ?

They're not.

We know NS says a blind and mindless (God not involved) process produced every living thing.

ALL science talks of 'blind and mindless (God not involved)' processes, because science does not deal with god.

There are only three possible answers: ignorance, wickedness (thanks Richard Dawkins) or fear of being labelled an atheist and having that identification erase all of their assumptions packaged as evidence in one moment of time.

You left out the answer that points out that your whole premise is flawed.

The last answer, at its root, knows the Genesis Creator cannot be refuted.

The Genesis Creator has been refuted many times, by many people.

I have gotten every atheist-evolutionist to betray his worldview and Darwinian faith by the "silent" threat that each post of mine carries. I am satisfied.

You haven't gotten every atheist or evolutionist to betray anything; your posts carry no threat, silent or otherwise.

Are we to believe Gracchus ignorant and/or uneducated or wicked knowingly spreading falsehood ?

No, we are to believe you are one of those things, for it is you spreading the falsehood.

Everyone agrees "Origin" rules God out of having anything to do with producing nature - the whole point of the matter.

No, they do not agree with that - and the claim that they do is a blatant lie.

The point here is that Darwin is not crediting God with nature; he is taking the deistic stand in response to Christian support (Rev. Kingsley) of his theory and feelings for his wife a life-long Christian.

Wow, you have ESP and can communicate with the dead in order to tell us why Darwin said something?

Darwin did not think of mentioning whatever Creator he is talking about in the FIRST edition.

Because he was writing a science work, not a religious one.

In essence Darwin is insulting the Genesis Creator by saying He created a blind process that he (Darwin) invented.

This doesn't even make sense. God created it, but Darwin invented it?

We know Genesis says origins was NOT by common descent. Darwin is "crediting" a God that he has no source for, an entirely subjective opinion.

ALL opinions are entirely subjective.

The real issue is the massive ignorance of Darwinsts here at this piddling debate board; denying the central and undisputed point of Darwin's theory:

The real issue is you making up something and calling it the 'central and undisputed point of Darwin's theory', when it's not.

Genesis Creator did not do what Genesis says He did.

Yup, we know that. So what?

We also know Darwin was an atheist the last 30 years of his life.

We do? Source, please.

This fact plainly says whatever God-talk that came from him was placating theists in his life and was disengenuous.

Great. Got anything from that point in his life that expresses a belief in god? Bear in mind, Origin was written when he was a christian.

 

[GoSeminoles!]

The real issue is the massive ignorance of Darwinsts here at this piddling debate board; denying the central and undisputed point of Darwin's theory: Genesis Creator did not do what Genesis says He did.

Deny it? Heck, I celebrate it. What sort of miniscule intellect thinks Bronze Age goat hearders with a talent for plagiarism would know squat about biology, geology, or deep-time astronomy? If Jehovah had known so many people were going to take Genesis literally, he'd have inspired the ancient Hebrews to write something substantially more useful -- like a crossword puzzle. I can see Achmed sitting in the desert 4,000 years ago..."Let's see, 5-across: an 8 letter word for people in the far future who give a rat's butt what we Hebrews think. Ah, yes...W-A-C-K-J-O-B-S."

 

[Ed Vidence]

Deny it? Heck, I celebrate it. What sort of miniscule intellect thinks Bronze Age goat hearders with a talent for plagiarism would know squat about biology, geology, or deep-time astronomy? If Jehovah had known so many people were going to take Genesis literally, he'd have inspired the ancient Hebrews to write something substantially more useful -- like a crossword puzzle. I can see Achmed sitting in the desert 4,000 years ago..."Let's see, 5-across: an 8 letter word for people in the far future who give a rat's butt what we Hebrews think. Ah, yes...W-A-C-K-J-O-B-S."

You have my utmost respect. The first atheist to say what atheists obviously believe.

Care to offer a reason why your fellow atheists deny the central point of Darwin's theory ?

EV

 

[Electric Skeptic]

You have my utmost respect. The first atheist to say what atheists obviously believe.

This is simply a lie. I am an atheist, and I do not believe this.

 

[Willtor]

This is simply a lie. I am an atheist, and I do not believe this.

He's probably a YEC parodying a Deist.

 

[Ed Vidence]

Bear in mind, Origin was written when he was a christian.

The only question is why did you evade the quote below that was in the post of mine that you replied to ?


Professor Ernst Mayr:

"It is apparent that Darwin lost his faith in the years 1836-39, much of it clearly prior to the reading of Malthus. In order not to hurt the feelings of his friends and of his wife, Darwin often used deistic language in his publications, but much in his Notebooks indicates that by this time he had become a ‘materialist’ (more or less = atheist)." American Scientist May 1977 p. 323



EV: "Origin" was written in 1859; 20 years after he lost his faith. Of course, your ego and lack of integrity already displayed by acting like this quote was not in the one you replied to will undoubtedly be relied upon to evade admitting that you were wrong.


My real point is Darwinian honesty and/or ignorance at this pseudo-Christian debate board.


EV

 

[Adriac]

You have my utmost respect. The first atheist to say what atheists obviously believe.

Care to offer a reason why your fellow atheists deny the central point of Darwin's theory ?

EV

Hah! Good luck with that. He knows well that the penalty for betraying the secrets of the EAC is death!

 

[Electric Skeptic]

The only question is why did you evade the quote below that was in the post of mine that you replied to ?
Professor Ernst Mayr:

"It is apparent that Darwin lost his faith in the years 1836-39, much of it clearly prior to the reading of Malthus. In order not to hurt the feelings of his friends and of his wife, Darwin often used deistic language in his publications, but much in his Notebooks indicates that by this time he had become a ‘materialist’ (more or less = atheist)." American Scientist May 1977 p. 323

I didn't 'evade' it -I ignored it because it's irrelevant. Who is Mayr that he is an authority on Darwin's religious beliefs? If you claim that Darwin was an atheist at the time of publication of Origin (which he wasn't), then it's up to you to show it by Darwin's writings, not by what somebody else says that happens to agree with you.

EV: "Origin" was written in 1859; 20 years after he lost his faith.

Provide evidence that he 'lost is faith' 20 years before Origin was written.

Of course, your ego and lack of integrity already displayed by acting like this quote was not in the one you replied to will undoubtedly be relied upon to evade admitting that you were wrong.

Your insults are rather amusing, but not much else - now, can you actually support your claim and show that Darwin was an atheist when he wrote Origin?

My real point is Darwinian honesty and/or ignorance at this pseudo-Christian debate board.

Well, when you can show anything about 'Darwinian honesty and/or ignorance', let us know.

 

[Ed Vidence]

Nobody has yet to dent the OP logic and arguments. What has been posted by opponents is one line denials or "nuh-uh" = inability to refute.

All honest and objective persons know that all atheists vigorously defend and support Darwinism. This logically means Darwinism is not about supporting God or any Deity (especially the Genesis Creator) or atheists would not support.

Yet a massive amount of persons who THINK of themselves as Christians and theists also vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

We have a gross contradiction and paradox. ONE of the two parties above is not genuine, unless of course you wish to assert black is actually white. There is another option though. One of the two parties could be confused or deluded or even worse: deceived.

How do we explain persons who think of themselves as Christians but support the origins theory that ALL atheists support ?

Has anyone ever actually seen an atomic particle ?

We know the answer is negative, of course. Does any scientist deny that these unseen material objects exist ?
Of course not. We know they exist because of the effects of their presence.

Therefore, I explain the beliefs of Christians who THINK they are as such to be (the same who support the origins theory that all atheists support) ....DECEIVED.

What is deception: you THINK you are okay with God....BUT YOU ARE NOT = deceived.

We know the Bible says Satan is a real supernatural being, invisible, and deception powers are indigenous part of his nature. Evidence of the effects of his presence = TEists. Bible claim about Satan well supported.

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

--Adolf Hitler (1922)

As we can see Hitler THOUGHT he was a Christian too.

EV

 

[chaoschristian]

So this entire charade was a set-up to a sophist's 'TE's aren't TRUE Christians.'?

Nice. Didn't see that one coming.

Willtor, where's your laughing preacher?

Nobody has yet to dent the OP logic and arguments. What has been posted by opponents is one line denials or "nuh-uh" = inability to refute.

All honest and objective persons know that all atheists vigorously defend and support Darwinism. This logically means Darwinism is not about supporting God or any Deity (especially the Genesis Creator) or atheists would not support.

Yet a massive amount of persons who THINK of themselves as Christians and theists also vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

We have a gross contradiction and paradox. ONE of the two parties above is not genuine, unless of course you wish to assert black is actually white. There is another option though. One of the two parties could be confused or deluded or even worse: deceived.

How do we explain persons who think of themselves as Christians but support the origins theory that ALL atheists support ?

Has anyone ever actually seen an atomic particle ?

We know the answer is negative, of course. Does any scientist deny that these unseen material objects exist ?
Of course not. We know they exist because of the effects of their presence.

Therefore, I explain the beliefs of Christians who THINK they are as such to be (the same who support the origins theory that all atheists support) ....DECEIVED.

What is deception: you THINK you are okay with God....BUT YOU ARE NOT = deceived.

We know the Bible says Satan is a real supernatural being, invisible, and deception powers are indigenous part of his nature. Evidence of the effects of his presence = TEists. Bible claim about Satan well supported.

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

--Adolf Hitler (1922)

As we can see Hitler THOUGHT he was a Christian too.

EV

 

[Willtor]

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Nobody has yet to dent the OP logic and arguments.

The OP 'logic' and arguments have been soundly refuted by many.

What has been posted by opponents is one line denials or "nuh-uh" = inability to refute.

What has been posted is a number of indications of the numerous errors made in the OP - which, of course, you have ignored.

All honest and objective persons know that all atheists vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

The vast majority of atheists couldn't care less about Darwinism, just like the vast majority of theists couldn't care less about it. It's simply not something important to them. Of the atheists that do care about it, nearly all that I know of do, indeed, defend and support Darwinism (although I know at least one who does not). So what?

This logically means Darwinism is not about supporting God or any Deity (especially the Genesis Creator) or atheists would not support.

Of course it's not. It's about science. It says nothing at all about any god or deity. This is, of course, vastly different to your false claim that it denies any god.

Yet a massive amount of persons who THINK of themselves as Christians and theists also vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

You've shown nothing at all to indicate any reason why persons who are Christians and theists cannot or should not vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

A massive amount of persons who think of themselves as Christian and theists also vigorously defend and support relativity, too - yet it, just like evolutionary theory, says nothing whatsoever about any god. Why aren't you railing against those so-called Christians who support relativity?

We have a gross contradiction and paradox.

No, we don't, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you for the reasons given above.

ONE of the two parties above is not genuine, unless of course you wish to assert black is actually white.

Nope, both of the above parties are genuine, and all that's needed to assert is that your OP and claims in it are false.

There is another option though. One of the two parties could be confused or deluded or even worse: deceived.

We don't need another option - the one that your OP was based on faulty premises is enough to dismiss your 'argument'.

How do we explain persons who think of themselves as Christians but support the origins theory that ALL atheists support ?

This is just stupid. Because atheists support it, Christians can't support it? Well all the atheists I know support the theory of gravity - so I guess Christians can't. All the atheists I know support germ theory - so I guess Christians can't.

Honestly, wake up to your silly little false dichotomy here.

Has anyone ever actually seen an atomic particle ?

We know the answer is negative, of course. Does any scientist deny that these unseen material objects exist ?
Of course not. We know they exist because of the effects of their presence.

Trying to work out what possible relevance this has to anything.

Therefore, I explain the beliefs of Christians who THINK they are as such to be (the same who support the origins theory that all atheists support) ....DECEIVED.

What is deception: you THINK you are okay with God....BUT YOU ARE NOT = deceived.

That's a nice opinion. They are of the opinion that you are deceived.

Now, if only you had something to support your opinion other than your silly little false dichotomy.

We know the Bible says Satan is a real supernatural being, invisible, and deception powers are indigenous part of his nature.

Nice little religious rant there.

Evidence of the effects of his presence = TEists.

Completely unsupported, insulting, and a violation of forum rules.

Bible claim about Satan well supported.

No bible claim about Satan is well supported.

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

--Adolf Hitler (1922)

As we can see Hitler THOUGHT he was a Christian too.

Well that's nice - Hitler, at at least one stage in his life, called himself a Christian. So what? That certainly says nothing whatsoever about the vast majority of Christians who happily accept evolutionary theory as being an extremely well-evidenced scientific theory.

 

[SteelEdge]

The Humilation continues....

I think a more appropriate word would be embarrassment, because your display is quite frankly, embarrassing.

All honest and objective persons know that all atheists vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

I'm an atheist and do not vigorously defend and support Darwinism, so you are wrong. I'm not even all that interested in it.

 

[Lilandra]

Yet a massive amount of persons who THINK of themselves as Christians and theists also vigorously defend and support Darwinism.

We have a gross contradiction and paradox. ONE of the two parties above is not genuine, unless of course you wish to assert black is actually white. There is another option though. One of the two parties could be confused or deluded or even worse: deceived.

How do we explain persons who think of themselves as Christians but support the origins theory that ALL atheists support ?

You claim it is wrong for Christians to support the Theory of Evolution because all atheists support it. But then you pick and choose which scientific theory you personally accept. As evidenced by the following...

Has anyone ever actually seen an atomic particle ?

You support Atomic theory which most atheists accept. Therefore by your own reasoning, you are confused and/or deceived, and a pawn of Satan.

By the same measure that you judge others, you will be judged.

What is deception: you THINK you are okay with God....BUT YOU ARE NOT = deceived.

Before you attempt to remove the speck out of your brother's eye, take the log out of your own eye.

We know the Bible says Satan is a real supernatural being, invisible, and deception powers are indigenous part of his nature. Evidence of the effects of his presence = TEists. Bible claim about Satan well supported.

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

--Adolf Hitler (1922)

As we can see Hitler THOUGHT he was a Christian too.

EV

As a TE, I am tired of rants like yours that defame Christianity as preposterous, unreasonable, and irrational.

Your feelings convince you that TEs are tools of Satan. Hitler also felt he knew God's truth. He demonized a group of people. You demonize TEs and atheists.

Perhaps you need prayer that whatever is causing this venom will quit afflicting you.