Posted on 02/20/2009 2:58:53 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Darwinism as Religion in a Holy War
Feb 19, 2009 — It might be expected that media attention on Darwin would be exceptionally high this month because of his bicentennial, but some of it seems downright religious. The adulation he has been receiving is almost embarrassing sometimes. It is only exceeded by the righteous indignation frequently expressed against intelligent design. In any other context, the fighting words of the Darwinians would be described as hate speech. Here are some recent examples:
1. Shrine to Darwin:...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
"Is there any doubt that Darwinism is a religion? Look at this. We should save the word hysteria for milder situations. Darwinists are beside themselves with euphoria over their bearded Buddha and with rage over anyone who would shine some reality on their religious experiences. While claiming to be champions of truth, they tell lies. While claiming to be victims of harassment, they persecute. While claiming to be naturalists, they steal Christian armaments like truth, morality and righteousness and wield them against those who do not bow down at their shrines."
Ping!
Any faith based philosophy is religion, to me. These idiot liberal atheists give us conservative atheists a bad name, and lower standards across the USA and the world in the process. Basically, they are very, very unhappy and unfulfilled people. It kind of sucks to be them.
I have no dog in the hunt, but Darwinism pales in comparison to advances in math, physics, and real science. The chemicals and other things that we use to influence health do not give an Obama (new word for worthless tripe) what believe system is held by the recipient.
And, if one decides to believe in creationism, just exactly what jobs will that exclude - besides perhaps some very few university positions? Will it affect a good chemist? Physicist? Physician? Good grief, an idiot faker like Ward Churchill has done far more damage than some creationism preacher.
And yes, I believe in evolution. I simply let the creationists prattle on. I’ve got much better things to do.
It’s a fascist cult of delegitimizing and murdering those perceived as weak. Strangely, those supporting it and delegitimizing the very diverse voices which would make the primordial soup of thoughts work, are those most likely to be selected off most quickly as retards in a bare limited world of their bragged cause.
Can you guess which side of the debate considers people with “no dog in the hunt” as ignorant enemies of science?
LOL!
bookmark
.jpg)
It’s a religion in a holy war, but it’s not their religion and not their war.
So the ID proponents want to convince people that religious beliefs belong in science or schools, but they also say that science is a “religious belief” and therefore unacceptable. Isn’t that like shooting yourself in the foot? That’s a rhetorical question.
Creation, evolution, and ID are historical inferences about the unobservable, unrepeatable past. The question is, which historical inference fits the available evidence the best. And as it stands now, the HMS is leaking on all decks and is sinking rapidly...so rapidly, that Even the Evos are starting to abandon ship in search of a new God-denying evolutionary vessel. The HMS Creation and the HMS Design, on the other hand, are in tip-top shape and gearing up to do battle and defeat with the next mindless materialist theory that the Evos will most assuredly erect in their vain effort to hide their faces from the living God.
Oh, I get it, it’s a quadruped fish. What’s the name of this species?
Funny you would post this religious symbol, with Darwin on it, to this particular thread. Are you being facetious?
Are there any other religious symbols getting the Darwin treatment, or is it strictly targeted at Christians?
So many questions.
The Darwinists have been able to frame the debate as the Bible vs. science when, in fact, it's the Bible vs. Darwinism, a religion with its god, saints, and relics, driving spirit and holy writ.
Darwinism has its own narrative of history to explain man's place in the universe that has no need of a God that we might be accountable to.
I completely agree. But creationists are waking up to this fact en masse, as is evidenced by many of the articles I post. Now, if we can just get YEC, OEC and IDers to put asside there differences to hasten the demise of neo-Darwinism, all will be well with the world of origins...that is, until the next God-denying evolutionary theory comes down the pike.
There is no debate. There is scientific truth and dogmatic irrational belief
==There is scientific truth and dogmatic irrational belief
That’s why the Temple of Darwinian Materialism needs to be exposed for the religion it is, and forced to compete against rival theories of origins in the free market of scientific ideas. Let’s face it, the HMS Beagle is already in the process of sinking. Even the Evos are starting to call for the funeral of Darwin’s fanciful creation myth so that “evolution might live.” However, if the unconstitutional government and court supports are knocked out from underneath the Temple of Darwin, the HMS Beagle will sink faster than the lead weights the Mob uses to send their victims to watery graves.
Dogmatic irrational belief is a very good description of Darwinism, thanks!
But really, what are “scientific truths”? And what scientist speaks of finding “truth”?
I remember Carl Sagan saying on the t.v. program COMOS, that the cosmos was all there is or ever will be and that he might accept the idea of God, but only if He were benign and indifferent to man’s affairs.
Darwinism at its heart must be materialistic but it’s no less a religion.
And, I might add, its just as opposed to my view of the earth and creation as it is to yours.
You remember the ancient city of Babylon, so mighty that no one could imagine it going down. Though protected by water and walls thick enough on top to use for a road it fell in one night.
So that which denies God can crumble very fast and unexpectedly and by means we might not expect.
One way or another The Temple of Darwinism is coming down.
Do you guy’s take some sort of flowery rhetoric course where you learn how to talk like an Imam from the Ministry of Military Hogwash? Every other post is a jihadist metaphor festival — “Our pus-filled enemies from the unwashed ranks of the Evo-Cult will feel the wrath of our holy lashings and will swim in a sea of their own eyeballs as the tips of righteous swords sink their ship of lies and the HMS Creationist emerges from the fog victorious, etc., etc.”
Hey, you’re way better at that than I am. Our “flowery” rhetoric is obviously no match for the Temple of Darwinistic Materialism d:op
Thanks for the ping!
An inversion of reality GGG. You’re suffering from YEC-centrism when really you’re all just living on the margins.
For every single evidence-less polemic that you post, hundreds of scientific papers are published, reviewed and confirmed that add a little piece more to our understanding of evolutionary science. These individual facts help science refine and deepen our understanding of the natural world. Happily, science realises that it doesn’t have all the answers - unlike the YEC’ers.
Anyone who believes that death didn’t exist prior to a few thousand years ago in the face of everest of evidence for carnivorous activity or who can hang their hat on the idea that contintents can move thousands of miles in a few months is operating on the farthest margin of sanity.
Perhaps you need to hit the books and spend a few days in the field or laboratory. Perhaps you need to get your hands dirty with some real science. To ask such a question here is to illustrate severe misunderstanding of the world. Your question cannot be answered by a sound bite.
You wish
Come on, you can share just one or two “scientific truths” with us, can't you? Just a tiny one?
And to make it easy for you, just one or two scientists that speak of “scientific truth”.
Come now, don't be shy, I'll wait if you need more time.
So that which denies God can crumble very fast and unexpectedly and by means we might not expect.
Like flying airplanes into buildings?
I don’t think they had planes back then.
Holy wars change with the times.
To ask such a question is in order.
As a simple task that any one should be able to comprehend with a little application of brain power, go buy a Peterson Field Guide, any one of the series will do, and head out into the field. I would suggest the Peterson Guide to the Wild Flowers. Go every Saturday afternoon for a while till you get to know your study area. Identify as many of the flowers as you can.
If you have the ability to comprehend what you see, your will need to consult other books to develop a better understanding of what you actually saw. You might even find the need to take a night school course in botany.
It takes a little more effort than sponging in a pew
I have spent quite a few years studying the plants and animals in my area and have become familiar with them.
Thank you for the recommendation of Peterson’s Guide but I’ve more interested myself in native edible plants and fungi, and wildflowers only if edible.
There, you see answering a question about something you stated wasn’t so hard. I’m sure you can, with your comprehension and brain power tell me what is “scientific truth” and name a scientist or two that spoke of such thing.
I mean you’re the one that said, “There is no debate. There is scientific truth and dogmatic irrational belief”.
Had I asked what is “dogmatic irrational belief”, you would’ve give an answer soon enough, so why choke on so-called “scientific truth”?
But go ahead and think on it while I wait.
Can you distinguish the members of the violet family, the golden rods? Have you observed the parts with a magnifier? are they similar or different? How are they similar or different? what about color? are they similar or different?
Perhaps your plant horizon is not adequately broad.
While the other side see all actions and results as the outworking of strictly materialistic forces and rejects the above as myth fable and quaint naivety.
It's less science than interpretation of the evidence.
The title says "holy war".
That’s what holy wars really are. Two or more religious groups doing battle to survive or at least gain the upper hand.
And the first casualty of war is truth.
It's less religion than sophistry.
A cliche’ too often true. As a starting point for truth about man and our position vis a vis our Creator I look to what Jesus said addressing his Father, “Your word is truth”.
And it gets batted about a plenty.
A war of ideas and view of the world. Striped to the essentials, one side views the cosmos as created by a higher intelligence, God, who is and has been active in man's affairs and that man is thus accountable to. While the other side see all actions and results as the outworking of strictly materialistic forces and rejects the above as myth fable and quaint naivety.
How many who believe in God have been labeled "Darwinists"?
I take for granted that those who tout Darwinism believe what they say, but if you see sophistry there, by all means do share with other posters like myself.
There's some right there.
How so? Really what are saying? If there’s something you just have to say, say it!
You know it happens, and you know that this "war" isn't about just whether or not you believe in God.
How so? Really what are saying? If there’s something you just have to say, say it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.