Why Is Darwinism So Dangerous? (5)

[PsychoSarah]

This site can do it to you. There there sweet pea, its not as bad as it seems.

It couldn't possibly be as bad as it seems. But being able to write that statement honestly is bad enough.

 

[Oncedeceived]

It couldn't possibly be as bad as it seems. But being able to write that statement honestly is bad enough.

Uh,,,,yours or mine?

 

[justlookinla]

It's this site, I was already a pessimist to begin with, but I think I might be turning into a misanthrope.

Evolution before our very eyes???

 

[PsychoSarah]

Evolution before our very eyes???

Being a misanthrope is not genetic, so, no.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Uh,,,,yours or mine?

You know, I guess it works for either. I meant mine, but both work.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Evolution before our very eyes???

 

[Oncedeceived]

You know, I guess it works for either. I meant mine, but both work.

Humph. See if I try to console you again.

 

[justlookinla]

 

[PsychoSarah]

Humph. See if I try to console you again.

what? No no, I meant you saying it isn't as bad as it seems, not your attempt to make me feel better. I can't seem to get through 1 conversation with you without a misunderstanding.

 

[Oncedeceived]

what? No no, I meant you saying it isn't as bad as it seems, not your attempt to make me feel better. I can't seem to get through 1 conversation with you without a misunderstanding.

I was messing with you. You are fine.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I was messing with you. You are fine.

Ugh, don't mess with the socially challenged girl, especially through written word, I have 0 chance of knowing you are kidding.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Ugh, don't mess with the socially challenged girl, especially through written word, I have 0 chance of knowing you are kidding.

I rarely start a sentence with Humph. IF you see that, you might regard that as a hint that I am joking.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I rarely start a sentence with Humph. IF you see that, you might regard that as a hint that I am joking.

I know not your social ticks. One of the big things in autism is not recognizing social patterns.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I know not your social ticks. One of the big things in autism is not recognizing social patterns.

Ok Sarah. When I am going to make a joke I will put this in front of the sentence.

You will never be caught unaware and need not worry about recognizing social patterns.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

Right I said I didn't see that it was your response when I saw the link. Sorry.

In a worldview that comes from a non-intelligent process without meaning or purpose there is no reason to believe that intelligence, meaning or purpose arise in that process. It is not cohesive with that worldview. To have that worldview, one must have an explanation for that to be a reality.

In the Christian worldview, it is cohesive for our intelligence to be from intelligence, to have meaning and purpose when that is what we come from.

So are you going to respond to the post I linked?

Also, you didn't respond to the point that you are begging the question when you claim that evolution doesn't fit with the fact that we have meaning. You haven't established that with anything beyond your belief that it is so.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Ok Sarah. When I am going to make a joke I will put this in front of the sentence.

You will never be caught unaware and need not worry about recognizing social patterns.

That works. If you remember to do it

 

[Oncedeceived]

That works. If you remember to do it

Your memory would be faulty too if you had a three year old constantly needing attention when posting. Thanks though for not letting me live it down.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Your memory would be faulty too if you had a three year old constantly needing attention when posting. Thanks though for not letting me live it down.

I have to preemptively make fun of you, in case I forget to later

 

[DerelictJunction]

Since my position was incorrectly presented, let me interject and set the record straight.

For the slightest instant I thought there would be a cogent response....then...

It's not my chosen definition of Darwinist creationism, it's precisely what Darwinist creationism teaches. I've given the definition of Darwinism probably a hundred times now and I've yet to have anyone to point out error in it. Once again, from Wikipedia....

"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. "​

That's an inherently atheistic view of how humanity was created.

It is atheistic. Darwinist creationism, i.e., the explanation of how humanity was created is only, solely, totally, completely by naturalistic mechanisms. Nothing else is allowed. Everything else is discarded. Other views are dismissed. One and only one creationist view is permitted, the inherently atheistic Darwinist creationist view.

The question is concerning how the complex and variety of life we observe today was created. It was either theistic in some form or it was atheistic. Darwinist creationism demands that only one creationist view is allowed.

At least Once isn't acting the part of Long John Silver's shoulder pet. Wake me when something important or, better yet, truthful is written by you.

 

[justlookinla]

For the slightest instant I thought there would be a cogent response....then...

Life is full of disappointments.

At least Once isn't acting the part of Long John Silver's shoulder pet. Wake me when something important or, better yet, truthful is written by you.

Try on this for size.....

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Joh 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
Joh 1:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
Joh 1:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
​

Lot of truth in those few verses. What do you think?