Skip to comments.The Nature of Darwin and the Darwin of Nature (Muzzies adopt Darwinism to combat Christianity!)
Posted on 11/03/2009 8:28:54 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Oct 29, 2009 Even the most ardent fan of Charles Darwin might be feeling weary as his anniversary year draws to a close, remarked Clive Wynn in another issue of Nature celebrating his bicentennial.
The Editors are not done celebrating, though. They just began a 4-part essay series on how Darwins ideas were received around the world...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
You didn't ask me that question.
However, in answer, just like anyone else, if a Catholic has repented of his or her sins and has trusted on Jesus Christ through faith alone, apart from relying on his or her own works, then that individual is a Christian. If he or she has not, then they are NOT a Christian.
Both the Nazis and the Soviets were hardcore revolutionary evolutionists. Marx and Engles were quite infatuated with Darwin’s work, as was Lenin. Granted, the Soviets briefly banned Darwinism in favor or another God-denying evolutionary theory during the reign of Stalin, but the Soviets restored Darwin to his rightful place of evo-atheist honor a decade or so after Stalin’s death.
An honest response. But why is it a litmus test for an entire sect of Christianity must be imposed from the outside for them to be “real” Christians?
From the article;
so the ultimate victor in the struggle for ethics was the martyr dying for the sake of something bigger. Thats a twist.
Hmmm,,, Thats a twist. ??? Sounds sort of familiar!
Remind you of anyone G-Cube?
The merit of “2+2=4” does not depend on who proclaims it. It’s objective.
That is what the author is subtly alluding to when he says “that’s a twist.”
It's not a litmust test for one sect - it's a litmus test for everybody. If a Baptist hasn't been born again, they're not a Christian. If a Presbyterian hasn't been born again, they're not a Christian. If a Catholic hasn't been born again, then they're not a Christian. It applies to everybody, across the board.
Because that's what the Bible says - and GOD gets to define who is a Christian and who isn't.
Jesus said, "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3) That's a litmus test. Jesus is saying that except a person has one, particular event happen in their life, that person won't see the kingdom of heaven. All this wishy-washy "well, you just can't ever know" stuff doesn't fly when viewed from the perspective Jesus sets here.
God says that repentance is necessary for salvation, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out...." (Acts 3:19). Without repentance, without the specific choice in the heart and mind of a person to turn away from their sin and desire to live for God instead, sin cannot be blotted out. Repentance is really just a part of faith - a person who won't repent is a person who cannot credibly make a claim to having placed faith in Christ.
God tells us that a person has to believe and call upon God for salvation through Jesus Christ. "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved....For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Romans 10:9,13)
God also tells us that this is completely apart from any works which we might think to do to "earn" salvation. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." (Titus 3:5-6)
THESE are the criteria for Christianity - not what denomination one holds to, etc.
Very good. So which of those tenets does the Catholic not follow?
I’m sorry to belabor this but Catholicism takes a beating on triple G’s posts and I want to see why the disconnect between they and other Christians.
Hundreds of thousands? Really?
Oh, goodness. Don’t be such a jerk on FR.
I’ve reported you to the admins, by the way. This is not a forum for Christian-bashing, all right?
“burned hundreds of thousands of people at the stake for being witches or heretics”?
Try a few dozen. You relish your ignorance, don’t you, since it supports your hatred of God?
Brian Thomas just wrote that Muslims are old earth creationists.
Pick a theme.
Please—decorum demands that you maintain at least a veneer of veracity in your posts. “Darwinists” as a group and acting as such have killed no one.
Don’t lie to support an unsupportable point.
“Both the Nazis and the Soviets were hardcore revolutionary evolutionists.”
Horrors! I’m also reliably informed that both groups liked Chinese food and dancing the tango, so we should beware those affinity groups as well.
“Both the Nazis and the Soviets were hardcore revolutionary evolutionists.”
—You’ve already explained that by “revolutionary evolution” you’re talking about a theory of cultural change, so I’m not sure what your point is there.
It’s not even a social theory that’s analogous to Darwin’s theory of biological evolution: Revolutionary evolution says that change is predictable, as opposed to Darwinism, and that change occurs in huge sudden jumps, as opposed to Darwinism, etc.
“Marx and Engles were quite infatuated with Darwins work, as was Lenin.”
—We have many hundreds of articles, books, and letters from Marx, Engels, and Lenin spanning decades, and everything they have to say about Darwinism comprises of a few sentences that would fit on a post-it note. To say they were “infatuated” would seem to be a tad of a stretch.
“Granted, the Soviets briefly banned Darwinism in favor or another God-denying evolutionary theory during the reign of Stalin, but the Soviets restored Darwin to his rightful place of evo-atheist honor a decade or so after Stalins death.”
—More like they simply stopped persecuting Darwinism.
Does your tagline imply that Rome (by which I assume you mean the Catholic Church) does not recognize Christ?
If they strictly follow the teaching of the Church that the sacrifice of Jesus gives grace to then allow the individual to earn merit towards salvation, then they are trusting on Christ by grace alone.
In fact, the Church teaches that it is presumptious to claim that you "know" you are saved. That rejects the notion that a person is born again at a particular point in time, and then has the assurance of being blood bought and born again. As such, people are to continually perform meritorious deeds so as to "move toward" heaven, after a period of time in purgatory.
If a Catholic rejects these teachings and believes what the Bible says (and many have and do), then they are born again and Christians.
But “Young earthers and muzzies have a lot in common,” a sentiment which you agree with.
If you want to play dime store moralist, do it somewhere else.
Please provide prof for the numbers in your statement
“burned hundreds of thousands of people at the stake”
since the best guess I’d ever heard was maybe 10,000 tops and only because the average given was about 100 years at upto 100 per year. That is bad enough by itself but then none of us were there nor do we know all the details.
Another thing not mentioned is other genocidal acts by comparison nor how much even my figures may have been exaggerated since these were devilish acts purported by supposed christians - gasp.
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.