Posted on 02/28/2009 7:02:20 AM PST by SeekAndFind
“Nor did a belief in the reasonableness of natural selection lead me to any sort of racist philosophy, so I was either to stupid to make the connection, or there was no connection at all, and Darwin’s racism was a personally motivated contortion of his own theories.”
I actually did, maybe 55 years ago. Hearing that man evolved from apes, I incorrectly wondered if some people had evolved further than others. Not an illogical conclusion for a seven year old.
How does the insightful Marilynne Robinson deal with this? -
Lists of Banned Books, 1932-1939
Guidelines from Die Bücherei 2:6 (1935), p. 279
6. Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel).
http://www.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/burnedbooks/documents.htm
________________________________________
Der Fuhrer sez:
"The advantages of a personal and political nature that might arise from compromising with atheistic organizations would not outweigh the consequences which would become apparent in the destruction of general moral basic values. The national Government regards the two Christian confessions as the weightiest factors for the maintenance of our nationality."
-A. Hitler, Speech to the Reichstag, March 23, 1933
http://www.hitler.org/speeches/03-23-33.html
If governments didn’t run schools then republicans wouldn’t have to worry about this subject. They don’t seem to get that.
I remember being taught about evolution and natural selection, and that these theories were first advanced by Darwin, but never any of the horrible (and horribly naive) conclusions that Darwin himself drew from his work.
You were taught the "faith based" Darwinism, but not the conclusions to be made from that faith.
Campolo is such a socialist who preached against the tobacco industry and once complained that potatoes were being wasted on making potato chips when they could have fed the poor etc.....
A great deal of his popularity as a speaker comes from what I like to call his “persona.” He has the “persona” of Don Rickles. Campolo’s humor leads to his serious socialistic side. And yes, Jesus gets His name mentioned in the picture.
I once had a one on one interview with Campolo in my news reporting days. A really nice guy with a lot of bad ideas, but he got this one right.
Seriously, the evidence of apes turning into humans has not, and will not be found because it doesn't exist. Notwithstanding silly attempted analogies with tadpoles and crawling fish.
God created Manfor particular purposes on this earth -- to know, love, and serve Him in this world.
It is amazing “the bunk” that passes for news today.
It is always amazing to see the comments whenever any suggests that introducing any aspect of Intelligent Design into the school curriculum might be a worthwhile project. They call those of us who see the creator in the creation a bunch of “Neandrathals” or Troglodytes as if we who see creation as an act of God are not as highly evolved as those who see the creation and the ascent of man as the act of unguided collisions of atoms and molecules.
After teaching our children that there is no God and that they are nothing more than living breathing rocks that have been descended from the accidental cross breeding of amoebas and gorillas how can we be surprised when they act like animals?
If there is no God; if evolution is true and we are nothing more than living breathing rocks, then there is no morality and there is purpose. The survival of the fittest becomes not only a scientific principle, but a moral imperative. If man is to further evolve, then the weak links, the inferior races, those with inferior genetic make up must be eliminated. That is why Nazi’s could kill off the crippled, the Jews, and the gypsies by the trainload and still sleep soundly at night. They were doing “God’s work”. They were protecting future generations and advancing the evolution of man.
Maybe not every Darwinist thinks along those lines. Maybe not all of those who believe that God either does not exist or that God is irrelevant will succumb to the moral implications of Darwinian philosophy, but as we saw in Germany, it only takes a few.
Many people apparently think that introducing any aspect of intelligent design will somehow dilute the gene pool of future scientists. Well if a solid belief that there is no God and that God is irrelevant to science or to creation is the mark of a good scientist, then maybe those who believe in God and those who believe in Intelligent Design will need to be removed from the scientific gene pool, just as the Nazis removed Jews and Gypsies from the Aryan gene pool. We can’t have a polluted gene pool, can we?
“You were taught the “faith based” Darwinism, but not the conclusions to be made from that faith.”
Am I correct in saying that there is a difference between teaching evolution/natural selection and “Darwinism?” I was taught the former, and not the latter.
Who would want the type of Darwinism described in the article to be taught in ANY class, let alone a science class? Not me, but I don’t believe that is being taught.
Tony Campolo is the guy that was seen on the videoshalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
with slick willie yucking it up at a memorial after
Ron Brown died under very unusual circumstances.Some "christian"
Personally, I hold to the belief that, regardless of how we got here, we should recognise that there is an infinite qualitative difference between the most highly developed ape and each and every human being. Darwin never recognised this disjuncture. And that is why his theories are dangerous.
These people talk about a “material power” standpoint when the point is about justice.
A world does not advance nor diversifies when based around the predator/prey model standoff of natural selection. It’s when a form of domestication and civilization occurs that everyone is given a chance and proper time at adapting properly.
Darwinism is dangerous because it hints that a genocidal dark age is preferable. It’s an easy and PC system to defend simply because it is a “lowest common denominator” of thinking: it is easy to politicaly defend the races/tribes of laziness, mediocrity and cowardice when it is so widespread and intelligence is so few, but much harder to actualy survive such dumb downed brutish environment in the end.
Another aspect is on reproduction. Easily approachable females are prone to be killed, but so are foolish males. Still, this is a predatorial model of relations. The real challenge lays in the form of faith and respect of the thrones of authorities, science, truth and justice, instead of the mad feeding dethroning activities that predatorial activities entail.
Darwinism errs in that it challenges truth and puts the truth in subserviant position. It’s not about ID vs. Darwinism, another coopted political dialectical battlefield preset to supplant Darwinism, but truth vs. Darwinism the issue.
It’s too easy to say Darwin is right when he is faced with inferior theories or theories derived from distorted and retarded interpretations of the Bible. But this has been a common communist tool to advance communism: invent Nazism so that Communism looks better just like when a cute but not beautiful girl always will hang around ugly chicks.
Such cheap self-subsidy does not pay the idiots who think they are smart cons undertaking it. And indeed, sometimes one is too smart and intelligent for their own good.
Check out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
We’ve lost our Biblical foundation and thus we’re losing the youth to the public schools teaching them that the ‘creation’ is the stuff of fairy tales. Lots of good info on this website and Ken Ham is fantastic - heard him speak a couple of weeks ago .... one of the most powerful, thought-provoking, call-to-action sermons I’ve ever heard.
Evolution is not a religion. Nor does belief in it preclude belief in God.
Yes, your faith in creation is far greater than any faith I might have in evolution, since that requres no faith at all, only objective evaluation of the available evidence.
Science is dead here at FR. People like you are the reason why.
You learned the Quran and not the Hadith.
In this case they were written by the same guy.
In any event the "evolution/natural selection" is also faith based. You must have faith that life occured and advanced to the point that natural selection could take over and faith that evolution/natural selection will fill in all the gaps sometime in the future.
I see evidence of some persons turning into apes.
As have you, I have debated those who believe in evolution to the exclusion of God. They absolutely abhor it when we assert that there is no higher morality when God is out of the picture. But the obvious truth is that chaos reigns and localized, temporary moralities are the best they will get. And, of a truth, you might as well be Hitler as Mother Theresa, because you are random atoms doomed to death, nothing, and an invitation to a super-nova party in the distant future.
One guy, a barely theistic evolutionist, wanted to argue that God is not tri-omni. If they don’t require a non-existent God, then they definitely need a castrated one.
I simply told him that that is the definition of God. Anything less isn’t God in the first place.
Now that the socialists have won, Campolo is yesterday’s fish wrap. His useful idiot days have drawn to a close, and he’s no longer one of their mouths to feed.
I’m assuming he knows that, and this is the first round in his new campaign to get back in the good graces of those who are consistently Christian year in and year out.
Next we’ll probably hear about the evil, sexualized culture out of him.
IIRC about 30 years ago Campolo was on the cutting edge of Evangelical thought. He was, at that time, trying to get Christians to think beyond themselves to some higher “purpose” and that lukewarmness was not something to be tolerated. Campolo’s message, however “evolved” into something like the Social Gospel of the Methodists (sorry) and Catholics (tee hee) where they have attempted to use the power of the state to accomplish the Church’s goals of feeding the poor and caring for the widows, etc.
But the fact that Campolo missed is that God wants US as Christians to do the work of feeding the poor and caring for the widows and when we turn that work over to the state, we in essence give the glory to the prince of this world and not to God. God becomes irrelevant if God’s work is being done by the state.
I don’t know if Campolo is drifting away from that position at this time or not. But his message has been heard by the likes of Hussein Obama and his adoring minions and they are now in the process of fully implementing the social gospel that Campolo has so long advocated.
Maybe now that Campolo is seeing the fruits of his message (the collapse of the Free Market and the institution of a State Religion of Secularism and Social Darwinism) that he is now ready to start preaching the truth instead of the lie.
I don’t know. Campolo had a lot of promise 30 years ago. But that was 30 years ago.
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.