Yep, and a religion.
So, an evolution believing Doctor says evolution is a religion.
Not only that but he states that it is an alternative to Christianity.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yep, and a religion.Ruse has clearly stated that he believes Darwinian theory is CORRECT.
No. No. No. Ruse believes in the science supporting evolution. Must I prove this? He also believes that scientists PROMOTE evolution in the same manner that religious people do.Yep, and a religion.
So, an evolution believing Doctor says evolution is a religion.
Not only that but he states that it is an alternative to Christianity.
Sure but you can keep the ale to yourself.Completely false. There is no one (aside from the perhaps the odd exception) outside the community of creationists who would agree with your claim. Belief in evolution is not a "faith" in any remotely reasonable popular understanding of what the term "faith" means. In perhaps an exceedingly contrived and strained sense it can be called a "faith", but, in that case, belief that smoking causes cancer - universally held to be true - would also fall into the category "faith".
I will bet a flagon of fine October ale that this is patently false - you are either quoting someone without proper education or training or you are not giving us the full context. And I will bet that it is the latter.
But, please, prove me wrong. Give us the name and put me in my place.
Please my post carefully, I never denied that there might be the odd exception.You can keep the ale to yourself.
Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless. (Prof. Louis Bounoure, Former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research - as quoted in "The Advocate, 8 March 1984, p. 17.)
Is that good enough? Or do I need to quote more?.
Well you must be in disagreement with various other evolutionists which are taking the catastrophic approach.Traits of all kinds (physical, mental) that favour survival till offspring are produced. This should not be new to someone who is at least somewhat conversant with evolutionary theory.
Is this a serious question? Evolution, at least the kind that is really at issue here, operates over relatively long time-scales - you can't see it happening on a day-to-day basis.
Obviously you do not know the 4 basic tenets that proves that Evolutionism is a Religion/Faith. And scholars agree! But I'm surprised that you don't know!Completely false. There is no one (aside from the perhaps the odd exception) outside the community of creationists who would agree with your claim. Belief in evolution is not a "faith" in any remotely reasonable popular understanding of what the term "faith" means. In perhaps an exceedingly contrived and strained sense it can be called a "faith", but, in that case, belief that smoking causes cancer - universally held to be true - would also fall into the category "faith".
I will bet a flagon of fine October ale that this is patently false - you are either quoting someone without proper education or training or you are not giving us the full context. And I will bet that it is the latter.
But, please, prove me wrong. Give us the name and put me in my place.
Go wild. The Bounoure quote is demonstrably taken out of context. If I were you, I would not pursue this.J
Just one you say! Do you want me to quote more?
So apparently the early church and the early church fathers including Jesus and the disciples were Sola Scriptura literal innerrancy etc etc people. They were also creationists. I'd say we are in pretty good company.Sola Scriptura, literal inerrancy, perspicuity, self-interpretability and plenary verbal inspiration.
Nonsense. Name one scholar who agrees that evolution is a religion.Obviously you do not the 4 basic tenets that proves that Evolutionism is a Religion/Faith. And scholars agree! But I'm surprised that you don't know!
Maybe I should quote again - a little more direct.I am reminded of the quip "Just because no one understands you, that does not make you an artist."
Here is your argument, expressed so that the problem is obvious:
1. Jesus was considered a madman and a trouble-maker;
2. Jesus had access to the truth:
3. I (the creationist) am termed a madman and a trouble-maker);
4. Therefore, like Jesus, I must have access to the truth.
Do you see the problem now? We all (Christians at least) believe in 1, 2, and 3. But 4 certainly does not follow logically.
Mods, if this isn't in the right section please move, I wasn't sure where the best place for this discussion would be, as this has more to do with the entire book and not only creation.
Genesis is the history of Israel's roots...most believe Moses to be the author of the book, and if we go by the chronology from Genesis to Exodus, he wouldn't have been born until a couple thousand years after the account of Adam. Prior to this, these stories would have been handed down through oral tradition.
When stories are told from one generation to the next things change. Some things may be added, others taken away...things become embellished...that's just how it is. It doesn't mean that anyone is lying, necessarily, just that what we hear as a child and what we teach to our children about a subject may change slightly based on our recollection. And then there are those that like to add their own spin to make things more interesting, and it sticks...
A good, more modern example of this would be the story of Jesse James...many accounts made him out to be a Robin Hood of his day, only stealing from the rich and helping the poor...after the Civil War there was a lot of distrust in this country, and people wanted a hero they found him in this notorious outlaw...the truth of the matter was he was your typical run of the mill thief...albeit a very good one...but stories were made up about him in newspapers, books and songs...and now, 140 years later, there are those that think he was, as the "The Ballad of Jesse James" said, "a friend to the poor that would never have a brother suffer pain." In this instance, of course, we can look back at actual accounts from the day and easily put these claims to rest.
So, is it possible that this is what happened with Genesis? That after years of oral tradition some of the "facts" changed? I'm not saying this as a dig at creationism, or anything like that. Nor am I saying that there is no truth to be found in Genesis...I believe it paints a beautiful picture of creation, of God's desire to have a relationship with His people, of man's biggest obstacle to overcome being his sinful nature, and how the foundation was being laid for the Christ.
It is not deceptive in the least. It is actually deceptive not to. Literalness is not measur d by using the word "literal". You are the one continually harping on modern history interpretation of OT. Yet you use the same argument to try and say since the apostles and Jesus didn't use the modern words modern words therefore we can't say they believed the same way. Nonsense. If you take their words, their words define what they believed. The modern words are things WE came up with to out a word on the belief. Similar to the word Trinity. The word Trinity isn't in the bible either but the things that Jesus and the apostles taught show they believed in the trinity even though they didn't use the word. The words they used and the things they said are proof they believed in Sola Scriptura and all those fancy words describing the inspiration of Scripture.Jesus' use of scriptures proves that He thought they are the authoritative word of God. What he thought of the creationist doctrine of literal inerrancy is not recorded. Paul's use of the scriptures also proves that he thought they are the authoritative word of God. It also appears from his writings that he thought Genesis was in a real sense historical, as did the early Church and most Christians today. But that is a long way from the Bible doctrine of the creationists and it is deceptive to impute it to them.
LOL! If so, you've got an uphill battle on your hands. All of the non-YEC denominations are teaching their flocks something different than that about Christian history, even those which reject evolution. During the gulf war the YECs sent missionaries into Iran under the protection of our crusader army to convert the local Assyrian and Armenian Christians to your one true version of Christianity. How did that work out for you? Do you really think you will be able to convince the Catholics that they have never believed in Sacred Tradition? Do you really think you can make fundamentalist Protestants out of the Copts? The Ethiopians?So apparently the early church and the early church fathers including Jesus and the disciples were Sola Scriptura literal innerrancy etc etc people. They were also creationists. I'd say we are in pretty good company.
How about this quote:Nonsense. Name one scholar who agrees that evolution is a religion.
And no, finding a scholar, like Ruse, who believes evolution IS scientific, yet PROMOTED like a religion doesn't count.
List them.Care to withdraw before I show otherwise?
The Bible tells us how that happened. Why do we need "some other way?". And since the Bible doesn't give us another way, anything else is man's speculation. The Bible is God's word on how it happened.All creatures have always been subject to cessation of life, but only humans have the ability to contemplate their own mortality, to 'know death." Thus, death came into the world when we acquired that ability, whether it was as literally described in Genesis or in some other way.
Oh yes you are definitely right at about "decieved teaching the decieved!" BUT, that certainly doesn't make it right. Because:LOL! If so, you've got an uphill battle on your hands. All of the non-YEC denominations are teaching their flocks something different about Christian history, even those which reject evolution. During the gulf war the YECs sent missionaries into Iran under the protection of our crusader army to convert the local Assyrian and Armenian Christians to your one true version of Christianity. How did that work out for you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?