Was Charles Darwin a fraud?

[AV1611VET]

The evidence is in God's Earthly Creation which does make it listening to God.

Is this what you hear?

Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

 

[dlamberth]

Is this what you hear?

Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

When listening to the Earth, is that what you hear?

 

[Apple Sky]

The evidence is in God's Earthly Creation which does make it listening to God.

And how did you come to this conclusion ?

 

[dlamberth]

And how did you come to this conclusion ?

The Earth is a Creation of God. Right? As such, what the Earth is showing us about itSelf is from God. Unless of course, God is deceiving us, which I kind of doubt in a major way.

 

[Apple Sky]

The Earth is a Creation of God. Right? As such, what the Earth is showing us about itSelf is from God.

I get this but what has this to do with Darwinism being from God ?

 

[AV1611VET]

When listening to the Earth, is that what you hear?

 

[AV1611VET]

The Earth is a Creation of God. Right? As such, what the Earth is showing us about itSelf is from God. Unless of course, God is deceiving us, which I kind of doubt in a major way.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What evidence ? You shouldn't be listening to men you should be listening to God.

The evidence that we have from God's creation. And since God speaks through His creation much more reliably than any other thing, then I've got no reason to doubt His creation.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I get this but what has this to do with Darwinism being from God ?

No-one is saying that Darwinism is from God. Who said that? The only person saying that it is is you.

 

[BCP1928]

If he can't understand genetics enough to understand race, what the unholy heck is anyone paying attention to his theories about creations species and even type. His conclusions prove his lack of understanding genetics in always.

It's not his theory any more. Darwin had the initial insight, but since then new evidence and new research has moved science beyond what Darwin ever thought of. It wasn't even only Darwin who was working on the idea, it's just that he happened to be the one who published first. If it wasn't for that you might now be complaining about something you called "Wallacism." named after Darwin's contemporary Alfred Russel Wallace.

 

[Reneep]

It's not his theory any more. Darwin had the initial insight, but since then new evidence and new research has moved science beyond what Darwin ever thought of. It wasn't even only Darwin who was working on the idea, it's just that he happened to be the one who published first. If it wasn't for that you might now be complaining about something you called "Wallacism." named after Darwin's contemporary Alfred Russel Wallace.

. Looks like garbage in garbage out to me..

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

. Looks like garbage in garbage out to me..

You can't even show how it is 'garbage' for either end.

 

[Reneep]

The dude was from the age where no-one knew about genetics! What did you expect? But the amazing thing about science is that people can take earlier ideas, along with new information gained, and then build on them. That's how science works!

And science shows that Darwin was, in the fundamentals, correct.

A true believer.. Yet God did know and does know . Still no one asks Him. Because if they knew , it would destroy the magic of evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A true believer.. Yet God did know and does know . Still no one asks Him. Because if they knew , it would destroy the magic of evolution.

Because God told us about evolution through the evidence that He put into His creation. So there's destroying 'the magic of evolution' at all.

 

[Reneep]

And in Revelations he says to the last church age.. that he was there for creation. He surely does not seem happy in his correcting them. They must believe just like you . And he knows how DNA works. And not one 8n the Dna studies has asked him how He did it. Or he would provide any with all the proof they might want.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

And in Revelations he says to the last church age.. that he was there for creation. He surely does not seem happy in his correcting them. They must believe just like you . And he knows how DNA works. And not one 8n the Dna studies has asked him how He did it. Or he would provide any with all the proof they might want.

If you're going to respond, use the reply or the quote button. I know you've only been here for a few days but still.

And none of what you wrote contradicts anything about the theory of evolution. God created all things, yes, which means He created things through evolution.

 

[Reneep]

He created things through evolution.

Does that thought create awe in you? it surely does not create awe in me. I worship an awesome God.. who made us and is the only one who can fix us. And I have been broke and fixed quite a few times. So I will continue to worship a complete God.. who wouldn't leave his creation broken but intends to fix all of it one way or the other.

 

[AV1611VET]

Charles Darwin is often cited as being sinister.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Does that thought create awe in you? it surely does not create awe in me. I worship an awesome God.. who made us and is the only one who can fix us. And I have been broke and fixed quite a few times. So I will continue to worship a complete God.. who wouldn't leave his creation broken but intends to fix all of it one way or the other.

Anything God does is amazing, as He is amazing. I don't need to limit God's power to purely brilliant and huge things. God is powerful no matter what he does.

 

[Reneep]

And Darwin didn't understand the first ,the fixed or the broken to expound on any.