Skip to comments.Do you HATE Evolution? Black Student Throws a Fit in Florida Evolution Class
Posted on 03/22/2012 7:44:32 AM PDT by Moseley
Here is evolution for you:
http://upressonline.com/2012/03/fau-student-threatens-to-kill-professor-and-classmates/ This is very sad. And it seems crazy at first.
BUT THINK ABOUT IT. It is obvious to me what is going on here. Yes, I am guessing / reading between the lines. But I think it is very clear.
The class was being taught about EVOLUTION:
A fellow classmate, Rachel Bustamante, was sitting behind Carr prior to her outburst and noticed she had been avoiding looking at the professor until 11:35 a.m. thats when she snapped. The classmate reported that Kajiura was discussing attraction between peacocks when Carr raised her hand to ask her question about evolution. She asked it four times, and became increasingly upset each time Kajiuras answer failed to satisfy her.
DID YOU CATCH IT? The professor was discussing the evolutionary role of "attraction between peacocks."
In other words, how do animals / people choose a mate?
If you remember what evolution teaches, it teaches that INDIVIDUALS *MATE* BASED UPON PERCEIVED *SUPERIOR* CHARACTERISTICS for evolution.
So this Black woman Jonatha(?) Carr obviously perceives that BEING BLACK IS ASSUMED (by many) to be INFERIOR and that evolution means that men CHOOSE women based upon what is perceived to be SUPERIOR qualities.
What evolution means to Carr -- and who can blame her, logically? -- is that men are going to choose "BETTER" women than her, and she is not going to get chosen as a valuable person or desirable mate.
Hence, the discussion of how animals, like peacocks, CHOOSE A MATE based upon how they other one LOOKS.
So this Black woman is obviously perceiving that evolution means that men will choose the SUPERIOR candidate for mating and reproduction, and evolution produces "improvement" over time by men selecting SUPERIOR women -- meaning NOT HER.
Whereas Christianity teaches the value and infinite worth of E V E R Y human being in God's eyes, and that every man and woman is not only valuable just for who they are, but infinitely valuable in God's heart, evolution teaches that this Black woman is INFERIOR to other women, to be discarded and rejected in the evolutionary march toward perfection.
Buried in her thinking must be the idea that Black men (so the cliche goes, true or untrue) prefer White women over Black women. (I suspect this flows from Blacks being persecuted and wanting the affirmation of being valued by a perceied more powerful class, not because there is anything inherently superior about White women over Black women in an evolutionary sense.)
God looks over the vast diversity of human types and characteristics, and says IT IS GOOD: ALL OF IT. All of the vast differences and variety. There is no "better" or "worse" in God's eyes. There is no human being more (or less) valuable than this Black woman Carr. Everyone is equally cherished in God's heart.
Somewhere, if we can learn to follow God's plans (which unfortunately is much more difficult and mysterious than it sounds, and can be a frustrating search), God knows the PERFECT CHOICE of a man for Jonatha Carr.
NO, the man isn't perfect, any more than Miss Carr is perfect. No one is perfect. Marriage involves the strange situation of two VERY IMPERFECT human beings trying to live a life together without killing each other. Therein lies the challenge of learning to APPLY God's principles in real life. Marriage is like the "lab class" in comparison with the "class lecture." We get to put into practice during the week what God tries to teach us on Sunday.
But God says that if Miss Carr can put her trust in God's hands, there is a perfect choice of a mate for her. God doesn't move on our time table, and God can be frustrating sometimes. But in God Miss Carr lacks nothing.
However, evolution tells Miss Carr that life is a hostile, adversarial, dog-eat-dog COMPETITION in which she is necessarily going to be the LOSER because (in her mind, as she has been bombarded with negativity) being a Black woman puts her at the bottom of the list of choices.
Evolution means survival of the fittest and (she thinks) that ain't her.
Can you see now why she yells "I HATE EVOLUTION!"
The question is:
DO YOU HATE EVOLUTION, TOO?
For the very same reason that Miss Carr understandably hates evolution, shouldn't we all?
Evolution is not simply an irrelevant side show for those who believe in God.
EVOLUTION IS A DIRECT AND VIOLENT ASSAULT ON THE WORTH AND DIGNITY AND SELF IDENTITY OF HUMAN BEINGS, TEARING DOWN THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF THEMSELVES, AND PITTING BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER AND SISTER AGAINST SISTER, IN AN UNGODLY COMPETITION. Evolution breeds violence, hatred, depression, and despair.
There is not a single human being alive whom God does not want. And there is not a single human being alive whom God wants any more than any other.
Yet evolution tells this young Black woman - and any one else who has ever, temporarily, felt inferior for a moment in time -- that she is destined to be discarded by life, that she is trash to be excluded and rejected by the world.
Do you hate evolution with a passion, yet?
Please advise, dear allmendream: In what way is this statement not an ad hominem attack on me and my "cohort?"
The issue is the discussion of a scientific theory.
There is a demonstrated tendency for some to discard discussion of a scientific theory in favor of accusing the proponent of said theory of being an atheist - or making the argument about atheism.
You attempting to make the argument about my credentials, or my personal religious beliefs is an ad hominem attack.
Me pointing out that you and your cohort tend to do so is an accurate observation - as demonstrated - it is not an attack against your personality or personal beliefs.
Is the Pope, in your formulation, a “HALF-believing Christian”?
It is those who accept “intelligent design” who think God needed to coddle his creation along through constant miraculous tinkering. God needed no “help” along the way, unless by “help” you mean the laws of reality that God put in place.
You have demonstrated that your knowledge of evolution is negligible. Far from understanding it better, it seems you have very little understanding of it at all. What you think you know about it is wrong.
The point I have been trying to make to you is that acceptance of any number of scientific theories conflict with a creationist concept of God - astronomy, geology, paleontology, archeology, anthropology, and physics.
The Pope said evolution was a “reality” that has “scientific proof” and it “enriches our understanding of life”. But go on pretending you didn’t read the quote I previously provided if your delusions are based upon the Pope not accepting evolution.
Considering that the Pope DOES accept evolution, using terms much stronger than I myself would use (I would never say “proof”) - does that make the Pope a “Half-believing Christian”?
First, I do not personally care what the Pope says on anything. I do not derive truth from what the Pope says.
However, what I said is that believing that God used evolution is incompatible with an understanding of the Christian God.
But human beings are perfectly capable of being inconsistent.
A person who is truly a Christian can — and almost always does — believe many things that are inconsistent or confused or inaccurate. That does not mean the person is not trualy a Christian. It measn they are simply WRONG about many things.
Being wrong about any number of things doesn’t mean one is not truly a Christian. It simply means they are wrong.
The trouble with Christians, including the Pope, is that they are not specialists in science enough to know they are being buffaloed by charlatan scientists. So when a Christian, including the Pope, feels unable to refute the hoax of evolution, that does not make evolution true. It merely means that those Christians are ill-equipped to recognize and expose the hoax.
You are tripping over the word “accept.” The Pope does not in any way believe or declare that evolution is true. The Pope says that evolution is a possibility, and if you want to believe in it, that’s okay. The Pope did not say that the Pope or the Catholic Church believes evolution is true.
I say that evolution cannot be reconciled with Christianity.
But most genuine Christians will enter eternity still confused, uncertain, or misunderstanding a great many things. We woll only know fully on the other side of eternity. So it does not invalidate one’s salvation to say that they are confused or wrong about some thing or some things.
I should clarify this a little better:
Is the Pope or someone else who feels the need to knuckle under to the hypothesis of evolution half-believing? Yes, his faith is weak — or else he just doesn’t want to fight about it, in order to gather up as many people as possible to the essential question of salvation.
Does that mean he or other people aren’t saved, or aren’t real Christians? No, not necessarily.
The act of salvation is something that God does to us in our weakness, need, and confusion. Being saved by God through Jesus Christ is like drowning in the middle of a vast ocean with nothing around, and a Coast Guard helicopter (God) comes along and plucks you out of the water.
So we often have imperfect understanding. God is the one doing the saving. We are just being hauled up out of the ocean to safety by God, our Savior.
So someone who is TRULY a Christian, genuinely saved, may nevertheless have weak faith about many questions, be confused about many things, and just “wrong” about many things — yet will still go to heaven.
St. Paul himself said that we know in part and see in part, that we see dimly as if through a dark glass. If even St. Paul acknowledged not knowing or understanding everything clearly or perfectly, we should not think anyone has to know all truth exactly right in order to be a Christian (to be saved).
So, yes, I would say that the Pope if he believes that God used evolution to create the world as we know it would believe that because his faith is WEAK and does not have the faith in an all-powerful God necessary to reject the shadows and appearances of the world.
Faith OFTEN requires us to look at the world which APPEARS to be one thing, but isn’t. Again, the Bible tells us that we walk by faith AND NOT BY SIGHT. The Bible tells us that what we see or think we see is often NOT TRUE.
But claiming that Christians must accept what we THINK we see as evolution is t oreject what the Bible tells us: NO, we do not nee to accept what we THINK we see. On the contrary, we are admonished repeatedly that what we THINK we see around us turns out NOT to be true. The world often presents us with false appearances, which I think are for the very purpose of giving you the opportunity to CHOOSE whether to believe the shadows and stage props and false images or to believe in God.
AND I WILL SAY THIS: I suspect that if we got into the question of whether Jesus was (is) God and whether Jesus actually performed miracles and actually rose from the dead, we would very quickly discover that your problem with evolution is that you reject the supernatural.
You, like many people, insist that you are a Christian.
Yet I am astonished at how many people who profess to be Christian, violently reject the core reality of Christianity that Jesus was and is God who entered the world in the form of a man, died, and rose again from death.
The objection is often the same: Many have joined the “Christian club” for social reasons, but violently reject the concept of a SUPERNATURAL God, who has the power to snap His fingers and turn the sun blue in the very next second, who could snap His fingers and make all the world’s oceans jump up a mile above the Earth and hang there, who could change the speed of light with just a thought, and who can create a new species out of thin air instantly on a whim.
“The Pope does not in any way believe or declare that evolution is true.” Moseley
“there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such. Pope Benedict XVI
I think the Pope has a plenty good understanding of Christianity and God. He certainly has a better understanding of his stance on evolution than YOU do. But it is amusing that you cannot mount an argument against a scientific theory without pulling out the TRUMP card - “My theology is correct and every other theology is wrong - because I say so!”.
I don’t understand your point, and I don’t think you understand what the Pope said.
Just because the Pope is trying to please everybody does not mean the Pope believes in evolution.
It is unfortunate that you are unable to understand. That doesn’t change that the Pope said evolution is a reality that enriches our understanding.
Well, so far, ‘better’ creatures have not appeared.
Men have steadily lost intelligence since Adam, and now can’t even figure out how useless socialism is.
Do you have a hump?
No, that is not what the Pope said. You are reading what you want to read into it. And for a “something for everyone” statement I guess it did its job.
Saying there is significant evidence for evolution, without saying I believe it, is just a sop to those who believe in evolution. Nowhere does the Pope say “I believe it.”
A Hump, like you said in post #15.
>> “The issue is the discussion of a scientific theory.” <<
Evolutionisn’t scientific in any way; it’s a political tool, and all of the purported ‘evidence’ to support it is fabricated and/or deliberately misinterpreted.
Same kind of ‘science’ as global warming, same kind of morals too.
>> “The issue is the discussion of a scientific theory.” <<
Evolution isn’t scientific in any way; it’s a political tool, and all of the purported ‘evidence’ to support it is fabricated and/or deliberately misinterpreted.
Same kind of ‘science’ as global warming, same kind of morals too.
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.