How were you taught Evolution?

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by justlookinla

Pseudo-science classes address the question of all of life being created from a single life form from long long ago with the answer, and the only creationist view allowed, that it was by only, completely, totally, solely naturalistic mechanisms.
​

So you don´t understand the difference between the wordings, and in evading my questions you demonstrate that you are unwilling to learn it. Ok. Then I am wasting my time with you.

It took you that long to figure that out?

The benefit of the doubt I am willing to give before I stick with uncharitable assumptions is huge.

I would say so


.

 

[biggles53]

I didn't call you a liar, I pointed out that by disputing the fact that the definition of Darwinism you posted is taught in Christian schools, you are implicitly saying that those who profess this are lying.



Still waiting on other responses, but quatona's response is sufficient to show that you are wrong. He says that the definition of Darwinism you posted was indeed taught in his Catholic school. So now we are back to this:

1.We know from various people here that Christian schools are teaching the posted definition of Darwinism.
2.Christian schools are obviously not teaching atheistic creationism
3.Therefore, the posted definition of Darwinism is not atheistic creationism.

I'm sure you realize that in order to support your premise that schools are teaching atheistic creationism you need to provide evidence against point 1. Unfortunately for you it seems to be your persistently unevidenced opinion against actual testimony. So how do you respond to Quatona's testimony that the posted definition of Darwinism was taught in Catholic school? Do you have anything besides denial?

Nope....it's a one-trick pony....

 

[justlookinla]

Are you incapable of answering a question? Why on earth do you think that CREATION BY AN INTELLIGENT ENTITY is the only way for things to come into existence?

Several reasons.

1) It's impossible for the complexity and variety of life we observe today to be the result of only, solely, completely, totally, random, meaningless, mindless, purposeless (other than procreation) and directionless process acting in a single life form from long long ago.

2) The most important one.

Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
​

 

[Kylie]

Several reasons.

1) It's impossible for the complexity and variety of life we observe today to be the result of only, solely, completely, totally, random, meaningless, mindless, purposeless (other than procreation) and directionless process acting in a single life form from long long ago.

Maybe if you read the link you'd educate yourself.

2) The most important one.

Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
​

Yeah, but just because that's written in an old book doesn't make it true, okay?

 

[biggles53]

Maybe if you read the link you'd educate yourself.



Yeah, but just because that's written in an old book doesn't make it true, okay?

C'mon Kylie, don't you know the rule...?

The Bible is true because the Bible says its true.....

 

[justlookinla]

I didn't call you a liar, I pointed out that by disputing the fact that the definition of Darwinism you posted is taught in Christian schools, you are implicitly saying that those who profess this are lying.

And I've yet to have anyone claim that to explain how the Christian schools which they claim taught Darwinism reconciled the inherently atheistic creationist view of Darwinism with scripture.

Still waiting on other responses, but quatona's response is sufficient to show that you are wrong. He says that the definition of Darwinism you posted was indeed taught in his Catholic school. So now we are back to this:

1.We know from various people here that Christian schools are teaching the posted definition of Darwinism.
2.Christian schools are obviously not teaching atheistic creationism
3.Therefore, the posted definition of Darwinism is not atheistic creationism.

I'm sure you realize that in order to support your premise that schools are teaching atheistic creationism you need to provide evidence against point 1. Unfortunately for you it seems to be your persistently unevidenced opinion against actual testimony. So how do you respond to Quatona's testimony that the posted definition of Darwinism was taught in Catholic school? Do you have anything besides denial?

There is no 'actual testimony' concerning the reconciliation between the inherently atheistic viewpoint of Darwinist creationism and scripture. Simply saying 'we were taught Darwinism' in our Christian school, without addressing the creationist worldview of Darwinism, isn't telling us anything.

 

[justlookinla]

Science classes in the public schools I attended didn´t teach this.
They did exactly the same as the science classes in the Catholic school: teach solely the natural mechanisms involved in the process.

Ok, solely naturalistic mechanisms were taught and those solely naturalistic mechanisms were responsible for the creation of all the life we observe today, including humanity, from a single life form of long long ago?

No other impetus was taught, no other impetus was needed, nothing else to create the complex and varied life of today other than solely naturalistic mechanisms?

And you claim this was taught in both the Christian and public schools? Am I understanding you correctly?

There aren´t any "naturalistic" mechanisms, there are "natural" mechanisms. The resulting (rather: underlying) worldview would be naturalism, which indeed includes atheism (but then there´s Michael who believes in a natural God).

I either case, God isn't involved in the process, even if one were to believe in God.

The worldview wouldn´t be accurately described as "creationism", since no creation is postulated. All that is postulated is change of that which already exists.

Postulate all you wish, dress it up in whatever suit you wish, facts are still facts. Humanity didn't exist. Now humanity exists. How? Why?

But since this isn´t what is taught in public schools, anyway, all this is irrelevant.

Now, since you are so convinced that science classes in public schools teach "that humanity is the result of solely natural mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago", I´m sure you can produce the curriculums and school literature that substantiate your claim.

If you believe that something other than the teaching that humanity is the result of solely natural(istic) mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago, I sure you can point it out. So far, you've not revealed what alternate theory is taught which includes any impetus other than natural(istic) mechanisms.

 

[USincognito]

The ignore function can be a blessing at times.
Which leads me to ask if I am also on someone's ignore list here......

You're ubiquitous. It's impossible to ignore you.

 

[justlookinla]

Maybe if you read the link you'd educate yourself.

Maybe if you'd actually post something of substance, you could support your Godless beliefs.

Yeah, but just because that's written in an old book doesn't make it true, okay?

Just because a bitter old man needed a Godless belief to support his existence, that doesn't make Darwin correct. Alright?

 

[sfs]

And I've yet to have anyone claim that to explain how the Christian schools which they claim taught Darwinism reconciled the inherently atheistic creationist view of Darwinism with scripture.

There is no 'actual testimony' concerning the reconciliation between the inherently atheistic viewpoint of Darwinist creationism and scripture. Simply saying 'we were taught Darwinism' in our Christian school, without addressing the creationist worldview of Darwinism, isn't telling us anything.

Since there is no inherently atheistic worldview of "Darwinism", there's nothing to reconcile.

 

[lasthero]

isn't telling us anything.

There's no 'us'. It's just you. As usual, you're a lone voice screaming in the dark.

 

[Kylie]

Maybe if you'd actually post something of substance, you could support your Godless beliefs.

Don't pretend haven't posted it just because you don't want to look at it.

Just because a bitter old man needed a Godless belief to support his existence, that doesn't make Darwin correct. Alright?

Maybe, but the evidence does.

Oh that's right, you pretend it doesn't exist because you refuse to look at it.

 

[lasthero]

I'm also curious what makes you think Darwin was bitter, or that anything he wrote had to do with his feelings on existence

 

[justlookinla]

Since there is no inherently atheistic worldview of "Darwinism", there's nothing to reconcile.

This is an inherently atheistic worldview of the creation of the variety and complex life we observe today....

"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations "

​

 

[justlookinla]

There's no 'us'. It's just you. As usual, you're a lone voice screaming in the dark.

Hardly. Darwinist creationism is the enemy to all theistic creationist worldviews.

 

[justlookinla]

Don't pretend haven't posted it just because you don't want to look at it.

Links aren't substance.

Maybe, but the evidence does.

Oh that's right, you pretend it doesn't exist because you refuse to look at it.

You pretend it does but can't simply post it.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

And I've yet to have anyone claim that to explain how the Christian schools which they claim taught Darwinism reconciled the inherently atheistic creationist view of Darwinism with scripture.



There is no 'actual testimony' concerning the reconciliation between the inherently atheistic viewpoint of Darwinist creationism and scripture. Simply saying 'we were taught Darwinism' in our Christian school, without addressing the creationist worldview of Darwinism, isn't telling us anything.

I'm certain you understand this, but let's lay it out clearly so you can't hide behind ambiguity.

You posted the following definition and claimed it was "atheistic creationism":

"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce"

Quatona has informed us that this definition conforms to what he was taught in Catholic school. This refutes your notion that the above definition is inherently atheistic.

 

[lasthero]

Hardly. Darwinist creationism is the enemy to all theistic creationist worldviews.

And yet you're the only one blabbing about it.

 

[justlookinla]

I'm also curious what makes you think Darwin was bitter, or that anything he wrote had to do with his feelings on existence

Read about the loss of his child, Anne and how it devastated him and his belief in God.

 

[justlookinla]

And yet you're the only one blabbing about it.

No, there are millions who reject the inherently atheistic Darwinist creationist viewpoint. No Christian embraces the inherently atheistic view of Darwinist creationism.