Evolution is a part of a "strong delusion" in the end times?

[Armoured]

A delusion that they should believe a lie. Believing we share common ancestry with chimps fits the bill.

Why? Because you say so?

 

[Armoured]

God doesn't deceive nor lie.

He gives man over to their lusts and desires. A strong delusion was created, most likely by Satan if I'm a guessing man, and God gives the unrighteous over to it.

Maybe Biblical literalists are the deluded ones? Ever consider that possibility for even a second? I'm guessing not.

 

[CodyFaith]

Maybe Biblical literalists are the deluded ones? Ever consider that possibility for even a second? I'm guessing not.

Lol.

You think because I'm a literalist and a YEC I'm not a philosopher? That I don't have wisdom? I'm 24 but could probably trump you in any philosophical topic. Just saying.

 

[Armoured]

Lol.

You think because I'm a literalist and a YEC I'm not a philosopher? That I don't have wisdom? I'm 24 but could probably trump you in any philosophical topic. Just saying.

Could you indeed? The fact you couldn't answer my simple question without condescending and obfuscation suggests otherwise. But if you're after a philosophical measuring contest, I'll see you behind the Cathedral at dawn.

 

[CodyFaith]

Could you indeed? The fact you couldn't answer my simple question without condescending and obfuscation suggests otherwise. But if you're after a philosophical measuring contest, I'll see you behind the Cathedral at dawn.

Your condescending question got a just reply.

 

[Armoured]

Your condescending question got a just reply.

Not a relevant one. Care to try again?

 

[CodyFaith]

Not a relevant one. Care to try again?

I have considered the possibility of the Bible not being literal, then I quickly realized that it's either all or nothing. You can't pick parts you do or don't like, because the very writings say that such a thing is not possible. The Bible demands the whole thing to be believed fully or not. The gospel's were written to be seen by man, and to be followed. Jesus said his words would carry on. Why would he carry it on in a corrupted book? Why would he carry his message in a book that claims the entire thing to be literal, if it was not the case?

Just as was said in the thread, God is not the author of deceit.

But, this of course, is off topic. Not that I care much however, as who knows, perhaps I could convince you or plant a seed and you change your mind one day.

 

[Armoured]

I have considered the possibility of the Bible not being literal, then I quickly realized that it's either all or nothing. You can't pick parts you do or don't like,

So was Jesus a sheep?

John 1:29 literally tells us he was.

How about grasshoppers with four legs (Leviticus 11:20-23) or cud chewing rabbits (Leviticus 11:6 ) are these claims literally accurate?

Judges 1:19 says "God was unable to overcome chariots of iron", is that literal?

And that's before we get into the verses that literally contradict other verses.

 

[SteveB28]

I have considered the possibility of the Bible not being literal, then I quickly realized that it's either all or nothing.

Why? This is a statement of desperation. Remember, the bible was written by no more significant people than fallible men, like you and me.

You can't pick parts you do or don't like, because the very writings say that such a thing is not possible.

Again, a claim made by men. Frightened, gullible, superstitious men.

The Bible demands the whole thing to be believed fully or not. The gospel's were written to be seen by man, and to be followed.

By men.....

Jesus said his words would carry on.

No. Some men claimed that a man called Jesus said that. We have no writings of this man to corroborate that claim.

Why would he carry it on in a corrupted book? Why would he carry his message in a book that claims the entire thing to be literal, if it was not the case?

He wrote nothing, that we are aware of, in any book.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I would slightly disagree, we learn more about our natural world by self-experience. However, what I mean is that, no information (or, more correctly 'tentative' information) gained by scientific inquiry has provided anything of substantial meaning or relevance to humankind. Which is to say, for example, the tentative theory of a big bang provides information which is substantially irrelevant. In other words, in light of this tentative information, people are still divided, wars are still on going, women are still being abused, children are still going hungry, bills are still needing to be paid, lives are still emotionally difficult.

So to the tentative proclamation that "This is how we theorize things came to be the way they naturally are" the collective of humanity is subconsciously replying, "Who cares?"

HS said that science is how we learn about the natural world.

He wasn't speaking about society's problems. Learning about the natural world is how we gain knowledge that helps us develop technology. And you know, just for our curiosity's satisfaction, it is nice to know and understand.

Try to stay focused.

 

[Armoured]

So was Jesus a sheep?

John 1:29 literally tells us he was.

How about grasshoppers with four legs (Leviticus 11:20-23) or cud chewing rabbits (Leviticus 11:6 ) are these claims literally accurate?

Judges 1:19 says "God was unable to overcome chariots of iron", is that literal?

And that's before we get into the verses that literally contradict other verses.

Well. That was quicker than I expected.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not at all. Medicine itself is without substantial benefit to mankind. That it has an substantial effect is an illusion of misperception. For instance, medicine cured polio. But that has no substantial impact on the state of well-being, since no man cares about what "he can't get/doesn't have" but only cares about what "he can get/does have"; once polio was cured, mankind still had the same potential to become crippled by disease.

Uhu, right, right.....

Yep, curing awefull and lethal deseases has "no substantial effect on humans". Yep. Any "positive thing" that seems to be the curing of otherwise lethal deseases is "just an illusion".

Uhu.

I presume "medicine" is the only "card" in the hand? Are there any other fields of scientific investigation which you feel provide substantial and meaningful information for use by mankind in the real problems it faces?

Life expectancy used to be 25. Now it is 80.
Infant mortality used to be expressed in "x in 10", now it is "x in 1000".

This is so, literally and explicitly, because of technology that was made possible by scientific progress and understanding. Not just medicine, but the entire collective of science and engineering.

Medicine, central heating, electricity, water filters, nuclear power, agriculture,....

In fact, there's a really good chance that the only reason you are alive today, is because of our understanding of the natural world.

 

[Armoured]

Not at all. Medicine itself is without substantial benefit to mankind.

Wow.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Am I to understand that you are of the belief that "systematic investigation of the natural world through the scientific method" has anything to do with alleviating "ignorance" which causes racial/theological/cultural/philosophical division

Dude.... learning more literally IS alleviating ignorance.

Could you please outline this in the scientific method used by you in such "investigations"?

Sure.
You are ignorant of X or believe a thing concerning X that is actually wrong.
Scientific investigation gathers knowledge concerning X.
You now are no longer ignorant of X or you understand that what you believed about X is wrong.

Many things encourage understanding. Ethical philosophy encourages understanding. Am I to understand that you believe "scientific investigation of the natural world by means of scientific method" is a philosophy of ethical understanding? If so, I question your understanding of the word "science"

I wouldn't put it that way, but science most certainly informs ethics.

 

[Jimmy D]

Wow.

That one really stood out for me too. It seems, in the minds of some, the well-being of their fellow man is less important than maintaining their unsubstantiated beliefs.

 

[AV1611VET]

Remember, the bible was written by no more significant people than fallible men, like you and me.

So tell me:

How did 'no more significant people than fallible men like you and me' survive through a fiery furnace that was heated seven times beyond its normal capacity?

 

[durangodawood]

God doesn't deceive nor lie....A strong delusion was created, most likely by Satan if I'm a guessing man

How is sending a delusion (an obstruction to clear-seeing, or an error in seeing) NOT a deception?

And God sent it, not Satan, if the OP quote was correct.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

 

[AV1611VET]

How is sending a delusion (an obstruction to clear-seeing, or an error in seeing) NOT a deception?

And God sent it, not Satan, if the OP quote was correct.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

QV please:

For this very cause, that they would not receive the love of the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness, therefore God permits strong delusion to occupy their minds; so that they believe a lie rather than the truth, prefer false apostles and their erroneous doctrines to the pure truths of the Gospel, brought to them by the well-accredited messengers of God; being ever ready to receive any false Messiah, while they systematically and virulently reject the true one.

It is not necessary here to suppose that there was any positive influence on the part of God in causing this delusion to come upon them, but all the force of the language will be met, as well as the reasoning of the apostle, by supposing that God withdrew all restraint, and suffered men simply to show that they did not love the truth.

And for this cause, God, as a punishment of their wickedness, will permit the inworking of error in the minds of these false teachers, to lead them to believe a lie, the most monstrous and pernicious that ever was invented.

In other words, God allows it to happen, while taking the credit for it.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I don't see how evolution and age of the earth and other like-minded theories cannot be a part of it really. They're too powerful, too well-known, too believed.

That's what happens when theories are well-supported by evidence. They flourish, while the poorly supported competing theories die away, with only a few cranks hanging on to them desperately.

 

[durangodawood]

QV please:

In other words, God allows it to happen, while taking the credit for it.

No. God sent it.
Isaiah says so.

"Allows to happen" is a policy of non-interference.
To "send" a delusion is interference, without doubt.