Evolution vs. Creationism

[ProtestantDan]

THE CREATION GOSPEL
1. Adam chose against God
2. God is life, thus Adam chose death
3. Jesus died for Adam's wrong choice
4. Adam confesses his mistake, accepts Jesus' sacrifice, and goes to heaven

GENESIS 1:2-4
The earth was without form and void.
The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
God said "Let there be light", and God saw the light that it was good.

THE SAME THING
The whole of the Bible points to Jesus, how we are diseased with sin, and how the only cure is Jesus Christ--- always. Even the Creation story can be seen as a parable of good coming from evil, like God changes us. The only way anything good can be done through us is by God's hand, by His power.

xjonx

Where in Genesis is Jesus mentioned?
Where in the Hebrew Bible (AKA the Old Testament) is Jesus mentioned?
How do you think Jews would feel about your assertion?
Their scripture includes the "Old" Testament (better to call it the Hebrew Bible, as utilizing "Old" and "New" Testaments gives the connotation that one is better than the other, one is meant to replace the other, or one fulfills one).
I'd think they'd have a bit of a problem with your idea.
But everyone is entitled to their own interpretation, as long as they have evidence (or lack thereof).

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

I realize the humanist public school system has brainwashed and "purified" the history books of a lot of data it would just as soon forget; sadly, most who started school in the @ 70' and 80's timeframes are unaware of this and have been raised on a diet of lies and deletions and feel such is true never knowing there is more they have been denied access to in the "public" school systems.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim, if so please present it.
Ghost

Sure, most (all?) of the mythologies about the cherry tree etc were washed out of the school books in the 1960s.

In some places the removal of religious references went to (and continues to border on) insane levels.

OTOH an accurate depiction of the role religion played in American life through the last 400 or so years would not make religious conservatives happy either. Only roughly 6% of the population were members of a church around 1776, it was (among other things) the three Great Revivals that occurred after the creation of the U.S.A. that pushed church attendence and membership up.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

Sure, most (all?) of the mythologies about the cherry tree etc were washed out of the school books in the 1960s.

In some places the removal of religious references went to (and continues to border on) insane levels.

OTOH an accurate depiction of the role religion played in American life through the last 400 or so years would not make religious conservatives happy either. Only roughly 6% of the population were members of a church around 1776, it was (among other things) the three Great Revivals that occurred after the creation of the U.S.A. that pushed church attendence and membership up.

What I was asking for was evidence to support Polgtim 33s theory that there was a deliberate and systematic attempt to misguide people by selectively purging certain sections of the public school curriculum. (Mostly in the USA, since some of the things you claimed had been purged from the “history” books were actually still on the curriculum in the UK as late as 1986 and may still be, they are certainly still covered in many university courses).

What I got was a statement that many religious references were removed from text books. I am not certain how that is supposed to support the assertion that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up the taxonomic tables issue and the notion of eugenics based scientific racism that resulted from the publication of the taxonomic tables.

I know a lot of religious references were removed form textbooks that are not intended for RE lessons, that's not what we were discussing.

I am sorry if I was a bit vague and caused confusion.

Ghost

 

[Arikay]

So are you suggesting that since "everyone sins" is is acceptable to knowingly sin?

-Romans 3:23

 

[william jay schroeder]

Where in Genesis is Jesus mentioned?
Where in the Hebrew Bible (AKA the Old Testament) is Jesus mentioned?
How do you think Jews would feel about your assertion?
Their scripture includes the "Old" Testament (better to call it the Hebrew Bible, as utilizing "Old" and "New" Testaments gives the connotation that one is better than the other, one is meant to replace the other, or one fulfills one).
I'd think they'd have a bit of a problem with your idea.
But everyone is entitled to their own interpretation, as long as they have evidence (or lack thereof).

Genesis 1:24 And God said "let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness. Study prophecy and your see all the rest.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

so it makes you wonder why AiG and co persist in their lies then really.

all sides are equally susceptible. all sides are equally guilty.

Not even close.

In grades K-12 and even introductory college courses, textbooks oversimplify. Ask any expert in any field, biology, history, sociology ... and they will tell you that.

That is also true in the presentation of evolution. That is the closest you will come to systemic "deception" with respect to evolution. OTOH the AIG and ICR websites are replete with falsehoods, and let's not even go into the hundreds if not thousands of websites that brainlessly pass on dishonest, out-of-context quotes.

The two sides are not equally susceptible, scientists hold their own to a much higher standard than do creationists. AiG took nearly three years to put up an article pointing out some of the more egregious errors out there in the Creation Science community, I haven't heard of ICR doing anything of the like.

In science it isn't all that uncommon to get a letter notifying you that a rebuttal of your just published Journal article will appear in the letters portion of the next issue and asking if you want to respond. There may be places in the creation science community where such thoughtful timely criticism is the rule, but that is the exception rather than the rule as it is in science.

 

[ProtestantDan]

Genesis 1:24 And God said "let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness. Study prophecy and your see all the rest.

You do realize that by using "US" it doesn't mean Jesus. Any theology professor worth his degree could tell you that. It's the first thing we went over in my theology class this semester.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

I was asking for[...]evidence[...]there was a deliberate and systematic[...]purging[...]of the public school curriculum.

It's been a while since this subject has come up but as I recall there are heavy developmental roots in the 1880-1920 time frame when the earlier genesis of what later would also assume the philosophic ideology of public education effecting today even the NEA, something most teacher's appear to be unaware of.

It is also interesting all the similar issues that were in genesis and developing in that same 1880-1920 timeframe, Marx, Engels, Hitler, assorted new religions, education, the plan for world control by big money powers, League of Nations, among others and through it all we find humanism and its effects.

In any event, here's a few links to help kick things off.

1. Public Education's Twisted Roots
2. The Dilemma of Democratic Education
3. THE SECULAR HUMANISM ALLEGATION

1. Genesis of A Humanist Manifesto
2. Genesis of A Humanist Manifesto: Chapter 13: Publication of "A Humanist Manifesto"

1. Humanist Manifesto I - 1933
2. Humanist Manifesto II - 1973
3. HUMANIST MANIFESTO - 2000
4. Humanist Manifesto III - 2003

1. A Chronological History of the New World Order
2. New World Order Quotes
3. The New World Order (NWO) An Overview
4. BRAVE NEW WORLD NEWS
5. The Insider
6. Jeremiah's Project

& thrown in just for fun...

1. Terrorism Research Center

As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other means for survival.-The Manifesto's Long-Term Impact

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Humanist Manifesto II

• We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species.
• We need, instead, radically new human purposes and goals.
• But we can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.
• Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful.
• We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest.
• neither faith nor passion suffices in itself.
• In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life

 

[Pilgrim 33]

THE HUMANIST MANIFESTO 2000

Humanism is an ethical, scientific, and philosophical outlook that has changed the world. Its heritage traces back to the philosophers and poets of ancient Greece and Rome, Confucian China, and the Charvaka movement in classical India.

Actually, it goes back even further to Nimrod and old Babylon, Mother of Harlots

Scientific naturalism enables human beings to construct a coherent world view disentangled from metaphysics or theology and based on the sciences.

Isn't that what evolution is supposed to do?

BEFORE AFTER

Without evolution, there can be no Marxism, no Leninism, no Secular Humanism; unless the universe created itself, unless man is a god, unless there is no creator, none of these philosophies will stand.​

--Bill Keith, former Louisiana State Senator​

The Evolution Conspiracy​

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Question:
How could anyone, based on the previous three posts, claim to be a Christian AND a proponent of humanism &/or evolution? Obviously, they are diametrically opposed.

 

[TheUndeadFish]

Question:
How could anyone, based on the previous three posts, claim to be a Christian AND a proponent of humanism &/or evolution? Obviously, they are diametrically opposed.

Evolution as well as all science gives explanations for things we can observe.
Christianity and religion in general gives explanations for things we cannot observe.

Evolution can happen (based on observable evidence) and a God can exist (unobservable) at the same time.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

If evolution's religion is humanism's god then isn't evolution a means to their own god's end ?

 

[Ondoher]

If evolution's religion is humanism's god then isn't evolution a means to their own god's end ?

Evolution doesn't have a religion. It is a scientific explanation for the diversity of life. I suppose one could build a religion around evolution, or the big bang, or germ theory, or gravity. But that would not make any of these religions.

 

[raphael_aa]

Question:
How could anyone, based on the previous three posts, claim to be a Christian AND a proponent of humanism &/or evolution? Obviously, they are diametrically opposed.

Your view of humanism and evolution being inextricably linked to Nimrod is flawed at best. You assume humanism and evolution to be monolithic belief systems. They are not. Just as in christianity, there are many thoughts and opinions and interpretations. You assume conspiracy where there is none.

As a christian, I have no problem with an allegorical interpretation of Genisis. I also have no problem with people holding with integrity alternative views. What I do have a problem with, is people using their own views to discredit, disenfranchise and demean other christians.

 

[Arikay]

Because they understand that accepting the theory of evolution does NOT mean they are accepting humanism.

Because,
Evolution does not equal atheism.
Evolution does not equal humanism.
Accepting the theory of evolution does not mean you accept social evolution or any philosophies based on it.


Remember the lies I was talking about? This is one that many creationist groups are guilty of, lying about what evolution is and that accepting evolution means accepting humanism and atheism. Obviously you have just made the mistake of believing their lie. But I would recomend learning more about evolution so you do not repeat their lie again.

Question:
How could anyone, based on the previous three posts, claim to be a Christian AND a proponent of humanism &/or evolution? Obviously, they are diametrically opposed.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Your view of humanism and evolution being inextricably linked to Nimrod is flawed at best.

please present your evidence to refute this. URL's?

You assume humanism and evolution to be monolithic belief systems.

Please present your evidence and URL's to refute the evidence presented HERE, ALSO HERE and, FINALLY, HERE.

there are many thoughts and opinions and interpretations.

But, according to The God of The Bible there is only one opinion and interpretation, God's.

You assume conspiracy where there is none.

Please present your evidence and URL's to refute the evidence presented HERE, ALSO HERE and, FINALLY, HERE.

As a christian, I have no problem with an allegorical interpretation of Genisis.

The grammatical evidences within the texts deny such alleged and massive allegorical writing. Please present your evidence and URL's to refute this. This is not a matter of personal interpretation, our goal is to seek what God means and not what we want Him to mean.

I also have no problem with people holding with integrity alternative views.

aka, referential integrity, another way of saying relative right and relative truth as opposed to Universal right and Universal truth as God's Truth is Universal and man's truth is relative and individual. It's what makes man equal to God. aka humanism.

Please present your evidence and URL's to refute the evidence presented HERE, ALSO HERE and, FINALLY, HERE.

What I do have a problem with, is people using their own views to discredit, disenfranchise and demean other christians.

Integrity Many people appear to use the word "integrity" in a vague manner as an alternative to the perceived political incorrectness of using blatantly moralistic terms such as "good" or ethical.-Wikipedia

Just another way of saying relative right and relative truth as opposed to Universal right and Universal truth as God's Truth is Universal and man's truth is relative and individual. It's what makes man equal to God. aka humanism.

1 Timothy 6:20, "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:"

Colossians 2:8, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

 

[raphael_aa]

Well I guess that told mE1


... and I got hit over the head with scripture too!

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Because they understand that accepting the theory of evolution does NOT mean they are accepting humanism.

Please present your proofs and URL's to refute the evidence presented HERE, ALSO HERE and, FINALLY, HERE that contradict your assumptions.

 

[Ondoher]

Please present your proofs and URL's to refute the evidence presented HERE, ALSO HERE and, FINALLY, HERE that contradict your assumptions.

None of those links appear to provide an argument as to why a person who accepts the theory of evolution must be a humanist. In addition, the existance of nonhumanists who accept evolution serves to refute this claim nicely.