Posted on 02/26/2017 3:49:04 PM PST by Slyfox
This is an important book that belongs in your library. It’s subtitle sums up the author’s message: “How a Flawed and Disastrous Theory Was Stolen and Sold.”
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is the philosophical basis of anti-Christian culture. It is the source of all the rot—runaway statism, institutionalized atheism, eugenics, “gay pride” parades, “transgender” restrooms, the destruction of “inferior races,” and all the rest. If it stinks, Darwinism is at the root of it.
It’s not only pervasive; it’s also politically powerful. Any public figure who says he doesn’t believe in evolution will be flayed alive by the media and our self-proclaimed intelligentsia. You may remember a Republican presidential primary debate in May, 2007, in which ten candidates were asked to raise their hands if they did not believe in evolution. Only three—Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, and Tom Tancredo—raised their hands.
“These three were the only ones to answer that they didn’t believe in evolution,” sneered the Left. “The question of a flat versus round earth did not come up. It is pretty pathetic when even three candidates do not believe in one of the fundamental principles of modern biology, but for a party which frequently expresses a world view which is counter to reality, this was better than expected.”[ii]
Even prospective world leaders are expected to genuflect to Darwin.
(Excerpt) Read more at chalcedon.edu ...
Also germane in this context is a book by Henry Morris: The Long War Against God:https://www.amazon.ca/Long-War-Against-God-Publishing/dp/B00SQE6XHQ/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1488153180&sr=8-3&keywords=Henry+Morris%3A+The+Long+War+Against+God%3A
Did anyone see “Is Genesis History?” on the 23rd?
I believe in genetics, physiology, pharmacology, microbiology and biochemistry. I believe in the underlying chemical and biochemical relatedness of living things. I believe in the scientific method. I am not sure what “believing” in evolution does to make me a better scientist.
FairWitness, Ph.D., Biochemistry
In the beginning God created evolution.
Aaaah, no!
You might as well blame kale, or broccoli for all the world's evils, that would make just as much sense.
"Darwinism" (whatever that means) is not the "root" of all evil, it's misuse is merely symptomatic of what evil minded people can do with any idea, whether scientific, philosophical, religious or whatever.
Indeed Darwin's ideas on evolution are simply the natural outcome of scientific assumptions and physical evidence.
No other theories meeting those basic criteria explain the evidence so well.
Of course the religious problem here is that scientific ideas which can well be used to explain "how God did it" instead are often assumed to claim, "no God is necessary or exists".
But those are religious or philosophical claims, not scientific, and neither Darwin nor any other scientist could make such claims scientifically.
So the enemy of Christianity is not science, or scientists per se, but rather atheists who proclaim their atheism masquerading as science.
Again, "Darwinism" strictly defined is simply a natural explanation for what the Bible tells us God created.
.
Joe, you haven’t the faintest idea what science is.
.
Yes I did. The theater actually had to have a second show as the first sold out by lunch time for the 7:00 p.m. show.
.
You’re going to be a real kick at the great white throne.
.
Strictly defined, there is no "belief" in science, no "faith" and no "truth".
That's because science, at best, is merely a model of reality as we see or detect it, and all it's data, hypotheses and theories are only accepted conditionally -- until better data or theories come along.
When they do come along, and it happens every day at some level, then old ideas are overturned and new ones again conditionally accepted.
That's what makes science the opposite of religion, and why religious terms like "faith" or "truth" should not be used in scientific discourse.
Right.
Evolution, in one sense is trivial. You can make Staph aureus methicillin resistant in a few generations.
In another sense, however, it’s ridiculous. You can’t turn Staph aureus into E. coli in a million generations.
Sorry, but it's you who insist on misrepresenting science in order to battle it on your religious terms.
In your mind science is just another religion, a form of atheism, which can be rejected on religious grounds.
In fact, because science strictly defined includes no "belief", "faith" or even "truth", but instead merely models natural reality, it's the opposite of any religion.
"Methodological naturalism" is the correct definition of science, anything else is just masquerading atheism.
Yep!
How was it? The preview was very interesting.
Can you give us your review of it?
New Documentary Shines New Light
Special Encores March 2 and March 7
IS GENESIS HISTORY? features over a dozen scientists and scholars explaining how the world intersects with Genesis. From rock layers to fossils to lions to stars, this fascinating film will change the way you see the world. Showing in theaters twice as special encore events on Thursday, March 2 and Tuesday, March 7, the film shines new light on our origins, providing a positive case for creation in six normal days, a real Adam and Eve, a global flood, and a tower of Babel. Dr. Del Tackett, creator of “The Truth Project,” serves as your guide—hiking through canyons, climbing up mountains, and diving below the sea—in an exploration of two competing views … one compelling truth.
“”Darwinism” (whatever that means)”
==
Here ya go
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/darwinism
“”Darwinism” strictly defined is”
==
See above. Yer welcome
Could you conceive of a common ancestor of both?
There were 'anti-Christian' athiests before 1859.
What did they use as their philosophical basis?
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.