As a Christian/ creationist would you find it easier to accept evolution if it didn’t include humans
Then you can continue to believe god made you special.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SW-User
There are a lot of problems that come with that view. There are some who have believed this nonsense and it doesn't solve anything but actually makes matters worse. Take for instance, Charles Carroll. Who wrote a book in the 1800's entitled, "The Negro a Beast, or in the Image of God".
He contended that blacks are not human and are the product of evolution, whereas the white man is created in the image of God. Observing different tribes separated from civilization and Africans in huts, the macro evolutionist can deem some as non human or at the very least conclude that some are less evolved.
You guys just say that we are all animals. Of course, you and your liberal ilk never admit the fact that evolutionary theory is a racial supremacist theory either way. Certain races would have to be more evolved, and some less evolved, as Charles Darwin taught with the Australian aborigines and other such people's being inferior.
It is without disputation a racial supremacist theory that was adopted by the elite up until 30-40 years ago when all the racial stuff started getting big in America.
The anglo saxon atheist people who followed him thought that they were the superior race and that they deserved to colonize the whole world because they were the superior race.
Not to mention, it is even in the very title of the book origin of species; the sub title is the preservation of the favored races in the struggle for life. No one ever quotes the whole title.
Evolutionary theory, whether only partially applied or not, has the same evil fruit.
The Bible on the other hand plainly teaches that God hath made of one blood all nations and that There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
He contended that blacks are not human and are the product of evolution, whereas the white man is created in the image of God. Observing different tribes separated from civilization and Africans in huts, the macro evolutionist can deem some as non human or at the very least conclude that some are less evolved.
You guys just say that we are all animals. Of course, you and your liberal ilk never admit the fact that evolutionary theory is a racial supremacist theory either way. Certain races would have to be more evolved, and some less evolved, as Charles Darwin taught with the Australian aborigines and other such people's being inferior.
It is without disputation a racial supremacist theory that was adopted by the elite up until 30-40 years ago when all the racial stuff started getting big in America.
The anglo saxon atheist people who followed him thought that they were the superior race and that they deserved to colonize the whole world because they were the superior race.
Not to mention, it is even in the very title of the book origin of species; the sub title is the preservation of the favored races in the struggle for life. No one ever quotes the whole title.
Evolutionary theory, whether only partially applied or not, has the same evil fruit.
The Bible on the other hand plainly teaches that God hath made of one blood all nations and that There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
This message was deleted by its author.
SW-User
@AkioTsukino Great addendum. I agree. The Nazi Eugenics program and evolutionary theory were more connected than people think. Eugenics is the bastard child of Evolutionary theory.
SW-User
@AkioTsukino A side note: The environmentalist movement was also created by Eugenicists. The original promoters of environmentalism were racists and eugenicists like Madison Grant, Savitri Devi and similar people.
DocSavage · M
@SW-User
[quote] SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@BlueSkyKing First of all, smart asses who think that the Bible is mythology and fiction are a dime a dozen. I've seen that with my own eyes. What they need to do before they tell me about mythology and fiction is quite simple. They need to learn more about mythology and fiction.
I've debated college professors from Jerusalem who didn't know their asses from a hole in the ground because they were dumb enough to think that being a scholar on the subject would make them knowledgeable. All it did was fill their head with tradition. Dawkins is an idiot. All you have to do is listen to him talk about the Bible and religion to see that. People like you listen to him. What does that tell you?
Even Hitchens, who at least was sensible and intelligent and possessed a modicum of integrity did a book tour with Al Sharpton. What does that tell you about the state of affairs? People like Hitchens and Dawkins make money off God. Like Jim and Tammy Baker did. You can't find truth in books or in schools. You can't find it very often in people. Scholars or lay people. You can't find truth in truth. You have to look through a thing to see it.
If you want to learn about fish in the Amazon you go to the people who live on the Amazon. If there is a sensible ichthyologist that's what he does. I can get more from Wikipedia than I can from someone like Dawkins. And in at least some sense, I can get more from lay people than there. I wanted you to teach me evolution because I wanted to know why you believe in evolution. Not evolution itself.
I got what I came for. I didn't really have that answer coming into this. I didn't expect it. There was more to it than I suspected, at least. It's disappointing, as truth often is.
I've always wanted to say this . . . ahem . . .[/quote]
It’s still just a snake.
Noah couldn’t fit the animals into the ark
Exodus never happened.
[quote] SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@BlueSkyKing First of all, smart asses who think that the Bible is mythology and fiction are a dime a dozen. I've seen that with my own eyes. What they need to do before they tell me about mythology and fiction is quite simple. They need to learn more about mythology and fiction.
I've debated college professors from Jerusalem who didn't know their asses from a hole in the ground because they were dumb enough to think that being a scholar on the subject would make them knowledgeable. All it did was fill their head with tradition. Dawkins is an idiot. All you have to do is listen to him talk about the Bible and religion to see that. People like you listen to him. What does that tell you?
Even Hitchens, who at least was sensible and intelligent and possessed a modicum of integrity did a book tour with Al Sharpton. What does that tell you about the state of affairs? People like Hitchens and Dawkins make money off God. Like Jim and Tammy Baker did. You can't find truth in books or in schools. You can't find it very often in people. Scholars or lay people. You can't find truth in truth. You have to look through a thing to see it.
If you want to learn about fish in the Amazon you go to the people who live on the Amazon. If there is a sensible ichthyologist that's what he does. I can get more from Wikipedia than I can from someone like Dawkins. And in at least some sense, I can get more from lay people than there. I wanted you to teach me evolution because I wanted to know why you believe in evolution. Not evolution itself.
I got what I came for. I didn't really have that answer coming into this. I didn't expect it. There was more to it than I suspected, at least. It's disappointing, as truth often is.
I've always wanted to say this . . . ahem . . .[/quote]
It’s still just a snake.
Noah couldn’t fit the animals into the ark
Exodus never happened.
DocSavage · M
@SW-User
Your view is obsolete. Evolution at that time was a fairly new science.The large majority of the public did not understand it , and used it as an excuse for their own racist agenda. (Oddly enough, mainly by Christian hate groups ) In the 150+ years since then, there has been some changes for the better in both the science and the public view. While there is always hate. The science of evolution has moved on to DNA and genetics , which includes all creeds and colors . Outside appearance, is no longer the biggest factor. It’s clinging to past ignorance that fuels racism and hatred. Better education brings in new respect.
Your view is obsolete. Evolution at that time was a fairly new science.The large majority of the public did not understand it , and used it as an excuse for their own racist agenda. (Oddly enough, mainly by Christian hate groups ) In the 150+ years since then, there has been some changes for the better in both the science and the public view. While there is always hate. The science of evolution has moved on to DNA and genetics , which includes all creeds and colors . Outside appearance, is no longer the biggest factor. It’s clinging to past ignorance that fuels racism and hatred. Better education brings in new respect.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User Which one of twelve tribes of Israel are you a member of? How do you expect to get into the giant golden cube called New Jerusalem when you have to pass through one of the twelve gates dedicated to the twelve tribes? They didn't include any gates for Christians or Gentiles.
DocSavage · M
@AkioTsukino
[quote] I would add that evolution isn't merely racist, it is, as I've said, eugenics. [/quote]
Wrong again. Evolution has no ability to be “racist” race is not a factor in the process. You are once again using interpretation of the science, as if it were the science itself that were to blame.
Much in the same way early pagans were blamed for not believing in Jesus. They were born and raised in a culture in which Jesus meant nothing to them. They had their own gods, and therefore no reason to believe in yours.
Evolution is change over time. It works on all races, all colors, all species.
Bigotry is man made, so is god. Evolution plays no favorites. It makes them.
[quote] I would add that evolution isn't merely racist, it is, as I've said, eugenics. [/quote]
Wrong again. Evolution has no ability to be “racist” race is not a factor in the process. You are once again using interpretation of the science, as if it were the science itself that were to blame.
Much in the same way early pagans were blamed for not believing in Jesus. They were born and raised in a culture in which Jesus meant nothing to them. They had their own gods, and therefore no reason to believe in yours.
Evolution is change over time. It works on all races, all colors, all species.
Bigotry is man made, so is god. Evolution plays no favorites. It makes them.
This message was deleted by its author.
DocSavage · M
@AkioTsukino
[quote] Oh, no! Can't be. Science can't be bad. There is never anything ever bad about science in any possible way. [/quote]
For once you got something right
[quote] Oh, no! Can't be. Science can't be bad. There is never anything ever bad about science in any possible way. [/quote]
For once you got something right
This message was deleted by its author.
DocSavage · M
@SW-User
[quote] Not to mention, it is even in the very title of the book origin of species; the sub title is the preservation of the favored races in the struggle for life. No one ever quotes the whole title.[/quote]
No, they misquote it
Survival of the fittest, does not refer to any one race as being superior to another. Nor does it mean that the strong will kill off the weak.
It means, that those best suited will thrive in their environment, and pass of those qualities to future generations. Those least suited, will either relocate to a different environment, or be replaced by the better adapted future generations .
You’re mistaking the science with man made concepts. Such as bigotry.
[quote] Not to mention, it is even in the very title of the book origin of species; the sub title is the preservation of the favored races in the struggle for life. No one ever quotes the whole title.[/quote]
No, they misquote it
Survival of the fittest, does not refer to any one race as being superior to another. Nor does it mean that the strong will kill off the weak.
It means, that those best suited will thrive in their environment, and pass of those qualities to future generations. Those least suited, will either relocate to a different environment, or be replaced by the better adapted future generations .
You’re mistaking the science with man made concepts. Such as bigotry.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User The Jesus character was a bigot. He called Gentiles dogs and swine and said that he had been sent to just the Jews. He spoke in parables so that outsiders wouldn't understand his messages.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User The Nazis got their ideas about eugenics from Americans.