Subduction Zone
Regular Member
"I don't understand evolution, or even the basics of science, therefore it is wrong."
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"I don't understand evolution, or even the basics of science, therefore it is wrong."Evolution can’t drag race with king mantis shrimp it packs quite the bunch the heat generated is hot as the sun and produces light.
"I don't understand evolution, or even the basics of science, therefore it is wrong."
In Genesis 3:5, the serpent promised Eve that she could become like God, through special knowledge apart from what God had chosen to reveal.
All religions based on salvation through one's own attainment of special knowledge or enlightenment, such as Gnosticism, Hinduism, Buddhism, occultism, new age, etc. stem from the same false promise that we can become gods unto ourselves.
With Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, this age-old promise of Satan became cloaked in scientific language. In the words of Richard Dawkins, "Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."
Darwin gave the masses permission to be gods unto themselves, making their own morality apart from God's commands, by demonstrating that we don’t need God for our very existence, but instead that we are the result of a mechanistic evolutionary process.
This sounds like, "The Bible says that Satan will try to give you knowledge without it coming from God," and then you can claim that any knowledge you don't like doesn't come from God, you can claim it comes from Satan, thus proving your holy book of choice correct.
I don't see how that's a logically valid argument.
I am re-reading the Book of Genesis, and I just finished the part where Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed.
It's very clear that the text is condemning their practice of homosexuality, and yet we are taught by public schools and mainstream media today that homosexuality is perfectly okay.
Why is this? Does this have anything to do with Charles Darwin, and how he created widespread doubt that God created male and female, as two distinct genders, for heterosexual relations alone?
Why is this? Does this have anything to do with Charles Darwin, and how he created widespread doubt that God created male and female, as two distinct genders, for heterosexual relations alone?
I am re-reading the Book of Genesis, and I just finished the part where Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed.
It's very clear that the text is condemning their practice of homosexuality, and yet we are taught by public schools and mainstream media today that homosexuality is perfectly okay.
Why is this? Does this have anything to do with Charles Darwin, and how he created widespread doubt that God created male and female, as two distinct genders, for heterosexual relations alone?
I am re-reading the Book of Genesis, and I just finished the part where Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed.
It's very clear that the text is condemning their practice of homosexuality, and yet we are taught by public schools and mainstream media today that homosexuality is perfectly okay.
Why is this? Does this have anything to do with Charles Darwin, and how he created widespread doubt that God created male and female, as two distinct genders, for heterosexual relations alone?
Darwin's views on gender and homosexuality were, as one biology professor puts it, "utterly conventional" for a man of his station, time and place. Another biology professor classes them as "remarkable only for their orthodoxy”.
Even in the sixth edition of On the Origin of Species, Darwin's view was that there were only two genders:
"Inasmuch as peculiarities often appear under domestication in one sex and become hereditarily attached to that sex, so no doubt it will be under nature. Thus it is rendered possible for the two sexes to be modified through natural selection in relation to different habits of life, as is sometimes the case; or for one sex to be modified in relation to the other sex, as commonly occurs."For his views on homosexuality - which were, again, pretty much exactly in line with the thinking of his time and place - you can read this article.
Short summary: Darwin didn't create "widespread doubt that God created male and female, as two distinct genders, for heterosexual relations alone".
I think that's his point.Maybe it is that public schools are no longer controlled by the church.
That is correct. But that's for other reasons.Estrid said:Chances are you do not want the Mormons, Scientologists, etc running the schools.
Not if the school is a private one.Estrid said:In America, that's illegal.
Well I could name others, but then that would just give you more names to huff and puff about.Estrid said:Trying to connect everything you find undesirable in society to Darwin is silly.
M
Trying to connect everything you find
undesirable in society to Darwin is silly.
Sure.Want to have some fun?
Sure thing ... let's go!Oneiric1975 said:Try pointing out things people of faith have done that are undesirable and see how many apologists turn up and how many excuses they come up with.
Want to have some fun? Try pointing out things people of faith have done that are undesirable and see how many apologists turn up and how many excuses they come up with.
Oh, c'mon ... just one, please?Uh, no thanks.
That's against the Bible too.Estrid said:We all know there's hypocrisy and failure to be found in people and their institutions.
Sure.Sure thing ... let's go!
I'll do my three favorites:
Excuse I came up with: All done in spite of the Bible, not with respect to It.
- the Crusades
- the Inquisition
- the Salem witch trials
Neat, huh?
Okay ... that's fair.And we've been through this before. So long as you are equally agreeable that horrors laid at the feet of "evolutionary theory" are done not because of evolutionary theory but in spite of it, we're all OK!
Why is the Bible so clear-cut, but evolutionary theory isn't?
For example, a child can take the Bible and show someone that the witch trials were wrong
So are you saying that those women were bona fide witches?Clearly that is wrong. The bible clearly states in Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
So are you saying that those women were bona fide witches?
I don't think they were.
The powers they possessed back then makes the self-proclaimed witches of today look like cartoon characters.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?