Was Charles Darwin a fraud?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Charles Darwin is often cited as being sinister.

He wasn't left handed, actually. His father was, and his son was, but Darwin wasn't.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

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

Again, use the reply or the quote's button. We know you can use them, so use them.

And that commentary makes no sense. Darwin wasn't doing anything at all to replace God, or whatever it is you think he was trying to do. All Darwin was doing was explaining the biological world around him. That's all.

 

[AV1611VET]

All Darwin was doing was explaining the biological world around him. That's all.

But he did it in spite of the Bible, not with respect to It.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

But he did it in spite of the Bible, not with respect to It.

And you call me a broken record...

How does one explain the biological world with respect to the Bible?

 

[Reneep]

Charles Darwin is often cited as being sinister.

I think his work reveals a soul in conflict and rebellion, proving who his daddy is. It's in the fruits . It is a work of rebellion and lies. There is only one father of such works. Sinister m8ght be a fruit worth observing.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think his work reveals a soul in conflict and rebellion, proving who his daddy is. It's in the fruits . It is a work of rebellio. And lies. There is only one father of such works.

He was cracking a joke that in Latin, sinister means left and is used to describe someone who's left handed.

No-one can judge a dead person's intent except for God.

 

[River Jordan]

But he did it in spite of the Bible, not with respect to It.

Exactly how do you expect scientists to do their work? Let's take an example of a lab researcher studying the genetic and biochemical basis of bacterial resistance to an antibiotic. In what ways do you think they should incorporate the Bible into their work?

 

[Reneep]

He was cracking a joke that in Latin, sinister means left and is used to describe someone who's left handed.

No-one can judge a dead person's intent except for God.

The Lord Tells us to be fruit judges and what the fruit of " a believers " does and what it looks like. So that we can follow in those foot steps, so that we do not follow fools and the rebellious and get more broken than we started off. Darwins rebellion and ignorance of creation has destroyed many souls , and that is heart breaking.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The Lord Tells us to be fruit judges and what the fruit of " a believers " does and what it looks like. So that we can follow in those foot steps, so that we do not follow fools and the rebellious and get more broken than we started off.

And another non-answer from you.

The people that make the claim that evolution tries to displace God as the creator are one's such as you, or hardcore atheists and anti-theists (I feel that should be one word, but okay Firefox). All that evolution does is show that a literal, 100% factual reading of the Bible is wrong, and that's it. And nowhere outside of small sects of Christianity, especially in North America, is the claim made by Christians that the Bible must be take as literal and 100% factual.

 

[AV1611VET]

How does one explain the biological world with respect to the Bible?

God did it.

 

[River Jordan]

The Lord Tells us to be fruit judges and what the fruit of " a believers " does and what it looks like. So that we can follow in those foot steps, so that we do not follow fools and the rebellious and get more broken than we started off.

So when Charles Darwin's explanation of natural selection helps us understand how pathogens evolve ways around our efforts to control them so that we can save and improve lives, we should judge that to be a good thing, right?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

God did it.

And evidence shows that He did it through evolution.

See how easy that was?

 

[AV1611VET]

Exactly how do you expect scientists to do their work? Let's take an example of a lab researcher studying the genetic and biochemical basis of bacterial resistance to an antibiotic. In what ways do you think they should incorporate the Bible into their work?

Good question and good example.

In the case of bacterial resistance, we know how microevolution does its thing.

The Bible neither needs to be invoked, nor contradicted.

 

[dlamberth]

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

It's the Earth, as Created by God, and what it has to show us about the evolution of life on the Earth.

 

[River Jordan]

Good question and good example.

In the case of bacterial resistance, we know how microevolution does its thing.

The Bible neither needs to be invoked, nor contradicted.

But in some cases researchers use their understanding of evolutionary relationships to help them figure out which genetic sequences to look at, or what certain sequences do.

Are you actually saying you think scientists should utilize the Bible in their work but only in a way that reflects your interpretations and beliefs?

 

[AV1611VET]

The Lord Tells us to be fruit judges and what the fruit of " a believers " does and what it looks like. So that we can follow in those foot steps, so that we do not follow fools and the rebellious and get more broken than we started off. Darwins rebellion and ignorance of creation has destroyed many souls , and that is heart breaking.

IN MY OPINION, Darwin's book, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and another book 66 years later, My Struggle, are by the same author.

 

[dlamberth]

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.

Yet life evolves. God's own Creation, as Created by God is showing us that's how God Creates new life forms.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

IN MY OPINION, Darwin's book, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and another book 66 years later, My Struggle, are by the same author.

And your opinion is taken and put in the trash where it belongs, and your desire to intentionally mislead with you only quoting the subtitle of Darwin's book is telling.

Proverbs 12:22

 

[AV1611VET]

So when Charles Darwin's explanation of natural selection helps us understand how pathogens evolve ways around our efforts to control them so that we can save and improve lives, we should judge that to be a good thing, right?

Natural selection in helping us understand how pathogens evolve ways around our efforts to control them so that we can save and improve lives is one thing.

Natural selection in helping us understand how we came from Magilla Gorilla is another.

We are not, nor have ever been, Mangani.

 

[AV1611VET]

And evidence shows that He did it through evolution.

See how easy that was?

Yup.

On paper.

I've said this here a zillion times, and I'll say it again:

Evolution is nothing more than a game of connect-the-dots.