Promise me, that if Evolution doesn't work out, you will come back to considering "Creation"?

[Gottservant]

You guys can be Nazis if you want, but be a Nazi for Jesus.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Evolution may not be a religion but why do you not want to learn from one?

Religion has nothing to offer, that's why. But that's irrelevant to the discussion of evolution.

 

[Gottservant]

The problem is, that without a philosophical definition, you won't know how to develop "character"; without developing character, you won't ever be able to justify "faith".

No faith, disinterest; disinterest, powerlessness; powerlessness, incredulity; incredulity, disfavour; disfavour, dislike; dislike, disdain; disdain, desertion. Without colour, without connection, without response, without remark.

If I give you a way out, give me one! Evolution is still better, than believing faith but not doing the works of faith: so tell me, in what case is Creation still better? Better than believing theory that has an unattainable object?

An unattainable object is not a liability, if you work around the faith that goes with it (the difficulty is separating the lesser faith, from the greater reach (above it)).

 

[Hans Blaster]

The problem is, that without a philosophical definition, you won't know how to develop "character"; without developing character, you won't ever be able to justify "faith".

No faith, disinterest; disinterest, powerlessness; powerlessness, incredulity; incredulity, disfavour; disfavour, dislike; dislike, disdain; disdain, desertion. Without colour, without connection, without response, without remark.

Nope. That just isn't the case. Your biases are showing again.

 

[Gottservant]

Sin is knowing what to do, and not doing it.

You know to call "Evolution" 'theory', but you don't apply it.

If you applied it, you would see one change or another (as is reversible, in most cases).

I mean you don't even acknowledge that post-Evolution you theorize more or less, when if it was the truth: you would clearly theorize less.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That's so unforthcoming!

The issue here, is that you think "religion" is something you can rule in or out, completely - religion in a small degree has a welcome effect on most belief (you don't start ruling it out, before you know what that is).

For you to say "religion has no effect on Evolution" without giving a reason, is extremely naive.

Oh, I 100% think that you can rule out religion, because when it comes to science and scientific facts, you cannot use religion because religion is not testable.

Evolution is the name given to a descriptor of fact of biological science. The only naïve person here is you.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Sin is knowing what to do, and not doing it.

You know to call "Evolution" 'theory', but you don't apply it.

If you applied it, you would see one change or another (as is reversible, in most cases).

I mean you don't even acknowledge that post-Evolution you theorize more or less, when if it was the truth: you would clearly theorize less.

You're not making any sense.

 

[Shemjaza]

Sin is knowing what to do, and not doing it.

You know to call "Evolution" 'theory', but you don't apply it.

If you applied it, you would see one change or another (as is reversible, in most cases).

I mean you don't even acknowledge that post-Evolution you theorize more or less, when if it was the truth: you would clearly theorize less.

False.

Evolution is not a choice.
Evolution is not a theology or philosophy.
Evolution does not even apply on the scale of a single individual or a single lifetime.

You need to stop lying about evolution, it's shameful and you should know better.

 

[Ophiolite]

You need to stop lying about evolution, it's shameful and you should know better.

I wonder occassionally if the shame may not lie elsewhere. There are those who have a duty of care for members, to protect them from themselves when necessary. I am not sure that duty of care is always properly discharged. Since we are not allowed to question that, I merely express a moment of wondering.

 

[Shemjaza]

I wonder occassionally if the shame may not lie elsewhere. There are those who have a duty of care for members, to protect them from themselves when necessary. I am not sure that duty of care is always properly discharged. Since we are not allowed to question that, I merely express a moment of wondering.

Gottservant has serious issues with their own thoughts and mind working against them, for which I have nothing by sympathy.

But they are coherent enough to communicate and absorb the content of a message board so they are obliged to attempt to respond to the messages there not just to the imagined rants and opinions.