Evolution is an ancient Creation dogma

[TheBear]

False, since God has advised me to NOT judge but to be a fruit inspector. Until you can come up with a false religious view which AGREES with Genesis, I will limit my study to it. I support what I post with the AGREEMENT of Scripture with science, history and every other discovered Truth. Anything less is a part truth.



How do you know who the Christians are? Is your measurement one of being born again Spiritually or just anyone who says I'm a Christian? Scripture tells us to "try the spirits" Remember that most people say they are Christians instead of Muslims or Buddist, etc.

1Jo 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

You're really making this painstaking and arduous to explain. So, I'll have to break it down, piecemeal. I'll lay down one precept at a time.

If someone believes in the existence of god(s), they are, by definition, theists. Agree or disagree?

 

[Tanj]

Evolution is a hidden dogma

You are quoting wikipedia. "hidden" doesn't mean what you think it means

 

[lifepsyop]

You are quoting wikipedia. "hidden" doesn't mean what you think it means

Not really 'hidden' as the truth can be found quite easily. But it is hidden in the sense that evolutionists hide the ideological roots of their creation story from new students (or are ignorant of it themselves). Evolutionists present the falsehood that their belief was born only out objective study of the natural world by intrepid scientists concerned only with the facts.... while students remain ignorant to the reality that the foundational evolutionary belief in this mystical creator-power of nature is a tradition reaching back thousands of years.

Really... to believe star-dust can eventually self-organize itself into humans could be the height of magical-thinking.

 

[Jjmcubbin]

In some cases, we'll actually see this dogma freely admitted. Take modern "Origin of Life" (abiogenesis) studies for example. Within our scientific institutions, it is simply taken for granted that IT HAPPENED. "Nature created life, we just need to figure out how.". Only the HOW is to be questioned, but never IF it happened. Here we have this ancient dogma exposed for all to see. And we see that the scientific institutions are not even equipped to question that central dogma that nature is the creator of all things.

That is absolutely not true. When you learn about origin of life in biology, you start with all the hypothesis given. I was taught the religious one from each religion. And you are taught about Panspermia (where nature did not create life), with a few evidences in support (Mutchinson meteoroid), Catastrophic Theory, Spontaneous Theory (and the experiments that led to it being false) and then Abiogenesis (Oparin-Haldane Hypothesis/Theory) and the experiments that support it like Urey Miller, Sydney Fox,etc.
So it definitely ISN'T that biologists just say nature created life. There was Panspermia and Spontaneous theory after all. And central dogma means something else in biology, so try not to use that.

 

[lifepsyop]

So it definitely ISN'T that biologists just say nature created life. There was Panspermia and Spontaneous theory after all.

? ... Those are both "nature created life" beliefs. Panspermia is just kicking the can down the road and assuming nature created life somewhere other than earth.

Within modern scientific institutions, any idea can be proposed as long as you dare not leave the parameters of the mystical belief that natural powers organized stardust into humans. This magical creation narrative must never be questioned on pain of excommunication.

 

[Jimmy D]

Within modern scientific institutions, any idea can be proposed as long as you dare not leave the parameters of the mystical belief that natural powers organized stardust into humans. This magical creation narrative must never be questioned on pain of excommunication.

Which modern scientific institutions have you attended?

 

[durangodawood]

...Hmmmm... I thought Evolution was all about objective science and reason prevailing over faith-based dogmas?
How did these guys already 'know' Evolution was true *before* the advent of scientific theories supposedly demonstrating it? A feeling, a hunch, an educated guess?.....

Nothing wrong with people having an intuition prior to scientific scrutiny.

Its what people hold to after scientific scrutiny thats telling.

 

[essentialsaltes]

the reality that the foundational evolutionary belief in this mystical creator-power of nature is a tradition reaching back thousands of years.

Nobody is buying your Dan Brown version of history.

Evolutionary theory is not an occult dogma passed down secretly in an unbroken line from the ancient Greeks. Evolutionary theory is a robust scientific explanation of a basic question of science, suggested by the evidence of the natural world; a question that has existed for thousands of years, and on which many people over that time have commented. Darwin was the first to provide a conclusive answer.

 

[xianghua]

Interesting you say that evolution is an "anti-god theory", when most theists accept the theory.

i think that most theists actually reject it. and they need to because we do have evidence against it (you can see one of them in my signature link).

 

[lifepsyop]

Nobody is buying your Dan Brown version of history.

Rich, coming from the camp so often promoting the "Science vs. Christianity" mythological view of history.

Evolutionary theory is not an occult dogma passed down secretly in an unbroken line from the ancient Greeks

The mystical belief in the creative power of nature to self-organize stardust into humans over time.

In 50 years we'll likely have a new biological evolution theory grown out of the ashes of neo-Darwinism. But that same magical idea will be rooted behind it.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Rich, coming from the camp so often promoting the "Science vs. Christianity" mythological view of history.

Looking broadly at the Evolution/Creation debate, it's clear which side is pushing the idea that science and religion are incompatible.

But that same magical idea will be rooted behind it.

Yes, like chemistry is entirely based on the magical dogma that matter is composed of indivisible units that capriciously swerve in their motion to compose new things.

 

[lifepsyop]

Yes, like chemistry is entirely based on the magical dogma that matter is composed of indivisible units that capriciously swerve in their motion to compose new things.

Mmmhmmm, and when do the evolutionary mystics get around to explaining where the physical laws that govern such things came from?

.............It's almost as if those natural laws had to come from outside of the natural universe they govern, no? -

- Oops!! Can't invoke philosophical mumbo-jumbo like that in science... now let's all go talk about how space dust organized itself into people who invented the internet. Ya know, "real science"....

 

[Aman777]

If someone believes in the existence of god(s), they are, by definition, theists. Agree or disagree?

Amen, but not necessarily Christians.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Mmmhmmm

Given your abrupt change of subject, it's hard to tell -- Do you reject the idea of atoms because the concept is 'rooted' in Greek philosophy? Isn't hidden Epicurean dogma a problem for you?

 

[Tanj]

Not really 'hidden' as the truth can be found quite easily.

so...not hidden...even a little bit.

But it is hidden in the sense that evolutionists hide the ideological roots of their creation

We hide it in wikepedia...riiiiight.

Evolutionists present the falsehood that their belief was born only out objective study of the natural world by intrepid scientists concerned only with the facts.

Which works for everyone that can't access wikepedia, so basically people in Somalia.

Really... to believe star-dust can eventually self-organize itself into humans could be the height of magical-thinking.

Still not hidden.

 

[lifepsyop]

Given your abrupt change of subject, it's hard to tell -- Do you reject the idea of atoms because the concept is 'rooted' in Greek philosophy? Isn't hidden Epicurean dogma a problem for you?

Can you find somewhere where I claimed that just because an idea is old, that its necessairly wrong? That would be a pretty foolish position for a Bible believer to take, and was not my argument at all.

 

[lifepsyop]

We hide it in Wikipedia

No, you just hide it from students of biology when you're teaching them about the origin of the theory. It's embarrassing for you that Darwin's grandfather was writing poetry on universal common ancestry because it takes the wind out of the fable of Charles being a disinterested naturalist with no agenda. He was looking for ways to advance his evolutionary faith.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It's embarrassing for you that Darwin's grandfather was writing poetry on universal common ancestry because it takes the wind out of the fable of Charles being a disinterested naturalist with no agenda. He was looking for ways to advance his evolutionary faith.

It is not embarrassing that people were thinking about the evidence they saw in the world around them before someone came up with a robust explanation of it. Nobody is quite sure what your obsession with poetry is about. Erasmus Darwin wrote several scientific works, including Zoonomia, in which he put forth early ideas of evolution and the inheritance of acquired characteristics. It is by no means embarrassing that scientific thinkers were circling in on the correct explanation of the evidence around them. And it has nothing to do with an 'evolutionary faith', even if these ideas were also expressed in poetry.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Can you find somewhere where I claimed that just because an idea is old, that its necessairly wrong? That would be a pretty foolish position for a Bible believer to take, and was not my argument at all.

No, but surely you must accuse scientists of hiding the fact that John Dalton was not a dispassionate scientist with no agenda. He was looking for ways to advance his atomic faith. Lucretius wrote a poem about atoms. QED.

 

[Tanj]

No, you just hide it from students of biology

...who cant access wikipedia, apparently.