RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 5:45:14 PM)

ORIGINAL:jtshafer
quote:

You cannot reconcile Modern science with the Christian faith, for they are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

That is because much of what is being passed as science today is in reality materialism in the guise of science. Real science is entirely compatible with the Christian faith. The founders of almost every scientific field were devout Christians.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 5:56:02 PM)

ORIGINAL:1dblthnk02
quote:

Empirical evidence does not support fundamentalist creationism.

Empirical evidence does not support evolution or the uniformitarianism it relies so heavily on.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 6:34:19 PM)

ORIGINAL:glaudys
quote:

Are you aware that evolution HAS taken race out?

Are you sure of that? Many today seem to think that the darker races have evolved inferior to the lighter races. After all, doesn’t TOE predict that people isolated to Australia will have a different evolutionary path than people isolated to northern Europe? Just look at the morphological differences between Australian Aborigines and Scandinavians. Is intellect immune to evolutionary change?

quote:

Evolution has confirmed that all people everywhere are one species, from one source,

Evolution has done no such thing, science has.

quote:

It has also shown that there are no human "races".

Wrong again. The lack of human speciation is counterintuitive to evolution.

quote:

There is no place for race in a modern evolutionary understanding of human origins.

Are you trying to claim that according to TOE humans will never consist of more than one species? The creationist perspective completely rules out that possibility, but your explanation of how TOE rules it out should be interesting.



drj11 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 6:38:31 PM)

quote:


I cannot bielive that any rational student of history could make the statement that Hitler was christian. Hitler used whatever was convenient to further along his self serving ideology. He took from the Bible, ancient Germanic religion, witchcraft, philosophy and many other sources. To be a christian is to be " Christ like", Hitler was a Nazi. Nazism was an ideolgy, a political movement to promote German Nationalism and his own rise to power among other things. To be a Chritian is to deni yourself and to become more like Christ! Hitler was a pagan, a drug addict and a physcopath. The Nazis would elevate whatever furthered thier agenda and would hunt down and destroy who or whatever they precieved to get in the way of thier quest for power. Some people say that Hitler was "Satan Incarnate!!!", but I think we give satan too much credit sometimes. I believe Hitler is a prime example of man living " the way that seems right to him" and not under God's Law! I do believe that demonic influences are all around and that these influences do seduce us, but it is our decision to resist or secume. I believe people have a right to thier opion, but you made your statement as a point of fact. Any rational person who has studied this point in our history would have to agree," Hitler was no Christian".


I agree somewhat... but I'm sorry.. you don't just get to disavow anybody that would cast Christianity in negative light and just claim they arent really Christian, but in the same breath when it comes to evolution... well, it has to own every single perversion of it and say that those perversions are the inevitable consequences of the idea.

Hitler claimed he was a Christian. It's seems to me, it would be very hard to produce someone as crazy and maniacal as Hitler without warped religious underpinnings driving it all. Read up on history, there's no shortage of proof showing Hitler's connection with Christianity.

I'm not going to sit here and say the end result of Christian belief is Naziism. But I'm going to call out every single person who would say that Naziism is the end results of evolutionary ideas. Its simply delusional and I might add.... wishful thinking.



gluadys -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 7:03:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
And I could go on, and on. The one word "creation" keeps being repeated. Nary a hint of anything like evolution is mentioned in Scripture.


Creation does not exclude evolution. As many clergy of the 19th century said when presented with the evidence for evolution, if the facts show evolution, then we must accept that as God's mode of creation.

To read the scriptural testimony to creation as if it excluded evolution is unwarranted.

quote:

Do not be angry with me, rather, if you have a problem with the teachings within the Bible, then your argument is with God, take it up with Him.


I have no problems with the teachings of the bible. Only with people who read more into the texts than the texts say. The simple existence of the word "creation" in a text does not exclude evolution. You only get that when you define creation as "not evolution" and the bible does not define creation in that way.



gluadys -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 7:23:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:glaudys
quote:

Are you aware that evolution HAS taken race out?

Are you sure of that? Many today seem to think that the darker races have evolved inferior to the lighter races.


Not today. That was an older understanding of evolution that has been falsified.


quote:

After all, doesn’t TOE predict that people isolated to Australia will have a different evolutionary path than people isolated to northern Europe?


If they were actually fully isolated, yes, but they have not been fully isolated. There have been plenty of people living between Europe and Australia to act as a bridge between them. Also the human occupation of Australia has been relatively recent.



quote:

Just look at the morphological differences between Australian Aborigines and Scandinavians.


It is mostly superficial, skin colour, hair colour and texture, shape of nose, eyebrows lips, etc. And the genetic differences are even less. Humans seem to have developed a lot of variety in facial features without much genetic basis.

quote:

Is intellect immune to evolutionary change?


By no means, since our intellectual endowment is a product of the evolution of the brain. But there is also no significant difference in intellectual capabilities among various human populations. All humans originated in the same African population in which the evolution of the brain occurred, so all have inherited basically equal intellectual capacities. There are individual differences, of course, but they cross all groups and none shows a consistent superiority or inferiority to others.

quote:

The lack of human speciation is counterintuitive to evolution.


Incorrect. Evolution is the changing distribution of alleles in a species, whether or not speciation occurs. To identify evolution solely with speciation is to misunderstand evolution.

quote:

Are you trying to claim that according to TOE humans will never consist of more than one species?


Not at all. Create the necessary reproductive barriers and maintain them long enough, and you could get speciation. There were many hominid species in the past (erectus, ergaster, neanderthalensis, florienses, heidelburgensis) but only sapiens remains. There is no reason why, under appropriate circumstances, sapiens could not speciate too. However, the current situation strongly discourages speciation.


Note, however, that all descendants of sapiens would be sapiens and therefore "human". Even if they speciated, they would still all share the same human ancestor.



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 11:18:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Darwin contributed to it.

How?

quote:

Then I think you should do a study of Egyptian writings.

Been there, done that.

quote:

but not according to his own writings, I would suggest you read link I posted. In it he talks about G_D.

So does Richard Dawkins. What does that prove?

quote:

Oh wouldnt you love that to be true! genetics is a branch of biology of science!!!

The foundation of the "biology of science" is evolution. It is true, my dear.

quote:

Africans being from the lower races, is not a theory of evolution or was once upon a time?

Not since about 1900.



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/6/2008 11:23:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Empirical evidence does not support evolution

You are mistaken.

quote:

After all, doesn’t TOE predict that people isolated to Australia will have a different evolutionary path than people isolated to northern Europe?

But the reality is that there are no truly isolated people.

quote:

Evolution has done no such thing, science has.

Genetics has, and genetics is based on the validity of the theory of evolution.

quote:

Wrong again. The lack of human speciation is counterintuitive to evolution.

"Counterintuitive?"
Evolution has nothing to do with intuition. You are the one who is wrong.

quote:

Are you trying to claim that according to TOE humans will never consist of more than one species?

What genetics tells us is that right here and now there is no difference between people; all are homo sapiens. Over time speciation may occur, but that time is not yet.



tracydolls -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 12:10:12 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Darwin contributed to it.
How?


by sending scientists on the wrong path for a long time, so many theories have been disproven. Charles was smart enough to know what he was doing. Africans are not the "lower" race. He had to have known that with the info coming out of Egypt. so then the next ? is, did he do it intentionally, yes. He sent scientists chasing smoke and mirrors,

the sad part is they still will not believe. Just believe G-D made us. He made the flowers, The Sun and the moon, elepants, panthers, ants, birds, man. what will it hurt? If for a moment you look around and say G-D made us, what will happen?


I said: The Egyptians had the Israelites as slaves. For 400 years.
Moses led them out. That's true.""

You said:"""However, there is a general lack of any conclusive empirical evidence that any of it happened, including the Egyptian slavery of Semites exclusively or at all. ""

I said read writings of Egyptians .

You said been there , done that.

I say reread, the Egyptians talked about who the called the "Hysokos.""


quote:

So does Richard Dawkins. What does that prove?


Off Topic We are talking about Charles Darwin and his contributions to the evolution theory and racism.

quote:

The foundation of the "biology of science" is evolution. It is true, my dear.


I know this :most of the evolution junk is being disproven daily. We now know Africa by DNA Tanzania is the birthplace of mankind.



quote:

Not since about 1900.
So the Bell curve written in 2000? was what?

A mass cover up that Thank G-D is finally over. I believe in G-D, do I believe every so called spokesperson is from Him, No. Just like I don't believe every scientist is crazy or racist. I just don't look at the theories from Charles Darwin. Same concept-False prophets, throw them out.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 12:14:15 AM)

ORIGINAL:
quote:

quote:

Evolution has done no such thing, science has.

Genetics has, and genetics is based on the validity of the theory of evolution.

That’s a laugh. Evolution and genetics have been at odds since their inception.

quote:

quote:

Wrong again. The lack of human speciation is counterintuitive to evolution.

"Counterintuitive?"
Evolution has nothing to do with intuition. You are the one who is wrong.

Oh yes, stasis and “change over time” go hand in hand. ROFLOL!!!



swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 1:23:24 AM)

quote:


quote:



Evolution has confirmed that all people everywhere are one species, from one source,


Evolution has done no such thing, science has.

unclemonkey is right for once about a technical issue. Evolution has little if anything to say about the definition of a Homo Sapiens or how to categorize races as belonging to Homo Sapiens. At various points in the past 1000 years, different groups of people could be defined as a different species just because these different groups never interacted with one another. They were genetically isolated. Defining a species can be as arbitrary as defining a planet: Pluto was recently kicked out of the club.


quote:


quote:


It has also shown that there are no human "races".


Wrong again. The lack of human speciation is counterintuitive to evolution.


Both statements are wrong.

1. It has been shown that there are more genetic differences between people of the same race than there are collective genetic differences between races. Some interpret this raw data as saying there are no human "races". However, for all practical purposes, Polynesians, Europeans, Africans and Asians have visible and non-visible indications of tangible genetic isolation. Yet, I'm "ok" with deluding myself that there are no human races for social reasons that are more important than using the technically correct label.

2a. Lack of speciation is no evidence of something, not evidence of nothing. The distinction is profound.
2b. The statement was presented with the wrong context. A lack of speciation in the genus Homo would be counterintuitive to evolution, luckily, human evolutionists categorize (using well founded principles) several extinct species as belonging to the genus Homo.



PromiseLander -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 8:42:57 AM)

OK, if we are to look at the world from a theological perspective - God centered, and using His revealed Word to us, understanding it's infallibility, truth, and teachings as read in the original languages in the contexts they were intended, accepting all literary devices as such, but with a literal meaning to be interpreted, and a literal understanding of the Bible as a whole is perfect and undefiled as it has come to us from God, penned by man under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - Then we must remove all of our biases, all of our prejudices, all of our opinions, and read from the texts what is there and what is intended.

OK, all of that by way of introduction to my point...

The idea of "evolution" and special creation are mutually exclusive. You cannot have "evolution" as a means of creation. If it is "evolution" then it is not creation - it's very definition makes it so. If it is creation, it is not "evolution" - it's very definition makes it so.

Understandings:
#1) God cannot lie
#2) God is not the god of confusion
#3) Creation - as defined in the early chapters in Genesis - was affirmed by prophets and apostles throughout Scripture in both our Old and New Testaments.

Creation is not an ambiguous term, rather, it is defined for us in Scripture as "calling into being that which does not exist" (Romans 4:17) In other words - something from nothing. And "nothing" is defined as a "zero" with the edges rubbed away.

Evolution in every definable case is making something from something else. The term "abiogenesis" is somewhat related as originally termed by T.H. Huxley as "theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation." Although this theory is now discredited...

To say that God used evolution as a means of creation is to say that God began with something else. God was not the originator. God must not be God. But why couldn't God use evolution after he created everything? Because evolution involves mutations - alterations within the genes that are rarely beneficial. We know that there was NO sin at the beginning of creation - therefore, no sickness, disease, or death - no mutations. If evolution was true, then there WAS mutations, sickness, disease, and death before sin. Therefore God lied to us, and God is not God.

My point? IF evolution is taught in the Bible, then there would be many passages stating such. Rather, we have many Scriptures that teach special creation.

IF you can point to even ONE unambiguous reference to evolution in the Word of God, then do so. If you cannot, then repent!



gluadys -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 10:00:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander

OK, if we are to look at the world from a theological perspective - God centered, and using His revealed Word to us,


We must first identify what is God's revealed Word to us. That is, unambiguously, his only-begotten Son incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth. All else is commentary on this revealed Word.

quote:

and a literal understanding of the Bible as a whole is perfect and undefiled as it has come to us from God,


When the literal meaning is not the intended meaning, it is not the perfect and undefiled meaning.


quote:

The idea of "evolution" and special creation are mutually exclusive.



Correct. Special creation refers to creation without secondary causes. Evolution is a form of creation involving secondary causes.


quote:

If it is "evolution" then it is not creation - it's very definition makes it so. If it is creation, it is not "evolution" - it's very definition makes it so.



Your argument relies on identifying all instances of creation as special creation. That is clearly not the way the term is used in scripture.

quote:

Creation is not an ambiguous term, rather, it is defined for us in Scripture as "calling into being that which does not exist" (Romans 4:17) In other words - something from nothing. And "nothing" is defined as a "zero" with the edges rubbed away.


By this definition, Adam is not a creation, since he was not made from nothing, but from the dust of the earth. You are not a creation, since secondary causes (reproduction) are involved in your existence. Do you not believe that God called you into being before you existed.

Consider Ecclesiastes 11:5 and Psalm 139:15-16 where the development of the embryo--though completely subject to secondary causes, is considered to be "creation" . Or Isaiah 54: 16 where the specific Hebrew verb 'bara' is used in reference to creating a smith. Does Isaiah mean that the smith had no mother and father? Consider the creation story itself where there is no command (like that in reference to light v. 3) that it simply "be", but rather a command that the earth bring forth vegetation.

The concept of creation is often linked in scripture with the use of secondary causes and is not limited only to creation from nothing.

quote:

To say that God used evolution as a means of creation is to say that God began with something else.


Evolution does not imply that the cosmos was begun from something else. This is a concept often found in paganism. In their cosmogonies, the framework of the cosmos often exists before the gods do, and the gods are born of the cosmos rather than creating it. But the theory of evolution does not apply to the beginning of the cosmos and does not contradict the origin of the cosmos in the direct and special act of God. Nor does evolution imply that life was begun from something else. We may find, as the bible itself suggests, that life came about as the earth brought it forth. However, the theory of evolution applies to already existing life, not to the origin of life. It does not contradict the possible origin of life in the direct and special act of God.

What it does say is the modern species are derived from older species by a process of inheritance with modification, much in the same way as each individual is derived from previous individuals by a process of inheritance with modification.

Since the bible clearly includes generation through reproduction within the concept of creation, this means evolution can be included within the concept of creation.


quote:

We know that there was NO sin at the beginning of creation - therefore, no sickness, disease, or death - no mutations. If evolution was true, then there WAS mutations, sickness, disease, and death before sin. Therefore God lied to us, and God is not God.


Sin is specific to humans. And the relation of death to sin is specific to humans. The suggestion that no plants or animals died before sin entered the world is incorrect both factually and theologically.

quote:

IF evolution is taught in the Bible, then there would be many passages stating such. Rather, we have many Scriptures that teach special creation.


I have never claimed that evolution is taught in the bible. What I do claim is that biblical teaching does not rule out evolution. And, as already shown, the biblical use of "creation" is not limited to special creation.



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 10:50:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Charles was smart enough to know what he was doing. Africans are not the "lower" race.

Apparently Charles wasn't smart enough, because science has proven otherwise about "lower races."

quote:

Off Topic We are talking about Charles Darwin and his contributions to the evolution theory and racism.

No, not off topic. You seemed to suggest that if someone mentions God, then they must be some sort of believer. Richard Dawkins is an atheist, yet he regularly mentions God.

quote:

I know this :most of the evolution junk is being disproven daily.

What have they disproved today? Or yesterday? Or the day before?
Just one thing. . .



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 10:52:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
That’s a laugh. Evolution and genetics have been at odds since their inception.

They were separate fields of study back in the 19th Century. In the 20th Century they melded, and have remained thus ever since.

quote:

Oh yes, stasis and “change over time” go hand in hand. ROFLOL!!!

This has nothing to do with intuition, hardy har . . .



tracydolls -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 11:15:53 AM)

quote:

Apparently Charles wasn't smart enough, because science has proven otherwise about "lower races."


charles knew, pride kept him from admitting it

quote:

No, not off topic. You seemed to suggest that if someone mentions God, then they must be some sort of believer. Richard Dawkins is an atheist, yet he regularly mentions God.


throwing up someone lese does not take away from the issue.

quote:

What have they disproved today? Or yesterday? Or the day before? Just one....



Why narrow it to today?


like I said in FIRST post, no evolutnionist has EVER been able to destroy my theory. No missing link! It was a cover up. AFrica is the birthplace of mankind.

Straw man , debating non-issues, just posting to fill up space does not take away from it


Evolution has been debunked!!!! thank G_D[:D]



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/7/2008 1:03:54 PM)

ORIGINAL:tracydolls
quote:

Evolution has been debunked!!!!

Not so. The humanist dogma (religion) of evolution thrives.



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/8/2008 10:22:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls
charles knew, pride kept him from admitting it

Well, he obviously couldn't keep a secret because the word is out now.

quote:

throwing up someone lese does not take away from the issue.

It proves that you are wrong. Mentioning God does not make somebody a believer. Nonbelievers exclaim thinks like "Thank God!" and "Oh, my God!" everyday without any religious bias at all. Were the Beach Boys a Christian band just because they sang "God Only Knows?"

quote:

Why narrow it to today?

Because you claimed, "I know this :most of the evolution junk is being disproven daily."

Well, I'm calling your bluff. What just got disproved today? Or yesterday will do-- the day is still young.

quote:

like I said in FIRST post, no evolutnionist has EVER been able to destroy my theory.

You don't have a theory.

quote:

No missing link!

Evolution does not require a "missing link."

quote:

AFrica is the birthplace of mankind.

You apparently do not realize that most anthropologists already contend this.

quote:

Evolution has been debunked!!!!

Wow! Whaddya know . . .

Now if only we could explain how so many scientific advances were made based on a faulty theory . . . . gee, it sure is a mystery!



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/8/2008 10:25:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Not so. The humanist dogma (religion) of evolution thrives.

And the opposition dwells in the "No Dogma Zone?" I think not, pot.



tracydolls -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/9/2008 2:29:17 PM)

quote:

It proves that you are wrong. Mentioning God does not make somebody a believer. Nonbelievers exclaim thinks like "Thank God!" and "Oh, my God!" everyday without any religious bias at all. Were the Beach Boys a Christian band just because they sang "God Only Knows?"


by your own logic, YOU KNow he was not a believer, because his daughter said so. I agree, No one knows. I'm hoping he was. that he went back to his first love G-D.

quote:

You don't have a theory.



Yes, I do, Charles Darwin contribututed to the coverup of we come from Africa.

quote:

AFrica is the birthplace of mankind.
You apparently do not realize that most anthropologists already contend this.


For a counter point I would use what you posted earlier in post ie the word is out.
quote:


Well, he obviously couldn't keep a secret because the word is out now.



essentialsaltes -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/9/2008 2:56:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Yes, I do, Charles Darwin contribututed to the coverup of we come from Africa.


In Descent of Man, Darwin wrote the following:

quote:

On the Birthplace and Antiquity of Man.- We are naturally led to
enquire, where was the birthplace of man at that stage of descent when
our progenitors diverged from the catarhine stock? The fact that
they belonged to the stock clearly shews that they inhabited the Old
World; but not Australia nor any oceanic island, as we may infer
from the laws of geographical distribution. In each great region of
the world the living mammals are closely related to the extinct
species of the same region. It is therefore probable that Africa was
formerly inhabited by extinct apes closely allied to the gorilla and
chimpanzee; and as these two species are now man's nearest allies,
it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived on the
African continent than elsewhere.


Rather than 'covering it up', Darwin supported the idea as the most probable, even though there was little physical evidence at the time.



tracydolls -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/10/2008 11:33:21 AM)

Yeah, he said apes came from AFrica, true, but then he connected to man, that's where the cover up started.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/10/2008 12:42:14 PM)

ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Not so. The humanist dogma (religion) of evolution thrives.

And the opposition dwells in the "No Dogma Zone?" I think not, pot.

At least you admit evolution is dogma. That is a step in the right direction.



Veritas -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/10/2008 6:05:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tracydolls

Yeah, he said apes came from AFrica, true, but then he connected to man, that's where the cover up started.

OK. So, Darwin said man came from apes that lived in Africa. Remind me agin: What exactly is being coverd-up?



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/12/2008 4:14:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
At least you admit evolution is dogma. That is a step in the right direction.

No, I have inversely-contrapositively indicated that anti-evolution is not non-dogma.

Wow! That one nearly bamboozled me . . .



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI