-18 votes

Did Darwin Kill God?

I don't want to promote that neocon-running-for-office's thread about evolution anymore.

Here is a wonderful documentary, Did Darwin Kill God?, on how evolution and God can and should coexist.

Did Darwin Kill God? Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVLRZkNeclE&feature=related

Did Darwin Kill God? Part2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikA25j99udc&NR=1

Did Darwin Kill God? Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbFW35IWMP8&feature=related

Did Darwin Kill God? Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3ZGmXDyG1c&feature=related

Part 5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mgIA0NZdMU&feature=related

Part 6 isn't worth watching.

You cannot argue that evolution occurs. It can be created in a laboratory, in our very own DNA mutation, and through observation of nature. Evolution does not equal atheism and it is a false dichotomy.

This issue is not black and white. It is gray. Both sides on the extreme should watch this series and realize the either-or fallacy.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Much of the Bible is written as parable

Beware of mixing metaphor with science. It's reported that someone asked Jesus why he spoke in parables. You might find some clues there.

Free includes debt-free!

Parables?

Was the old testament in parables? Was not "jesus" the "god" of old testament? How is that quote from "jesus" a parable? Ever look into the Inquisition?

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Lamb of God - As the Palaces Burn
http://youtu.be/eWVrdFrpXHE

Are you allergic to doing your own homework.

Read all of that chapter in Luke, I fear you have been deceived.

Wicked men ran the Inquisitions. By their fruits you can know this. The tortured an murdered, yet thought themselves saved. Foolish humans.

Luke was a doctor, who was convinced by Paul to seek the narrow path. But he wanted to know the whole story, so he went to Palestine to find out for himself.

Free includes debt-free!

Most xtians I know don't care

Most xtians I know don't care about the Old Testament, it's all about the New one. I also had one say to me that the prophecies of the Old were fulfilled in the New. I found that to be hilarious, as if the writers of the New couldn't possibly have read the old and fulfilled them when they wrote it.

You have done a survey?

Most as in a majority, or all but a few?

Guilt by association of what you think all believe because some have said this?

Is it possible you misunderstood?

Free includes debt-free!

If you watch the documentary

If you watch the documentary I think you could learn a lot of insight.

Columbus, Ohio

man ought to trust God

above men in white coats with fancy hats!

Okay. Nevermind.

Okay. Nevermind.

Columbus, Ohio

Darwin ... It's interesting

Darwin ... It's interesting that a person who didn't introduce Evolution as a theory and didn't coin the phrase Survival of the Fittest always gets so much attention on this subject.

He almost didn't publish his book "The Origin of the Species by Natural Selection", he waited 2 decades after he returned from his beagle voyage and he only wrote it when he did because he received a letter about somebody else working on the same theory.

An 1855 paper on the "introduction" of species, written by Alfred Russel Wallace, claimed that patterns in the geographical distribution of species and fossils could be explained if every new species always came into existence near an already existing, closely related species. Charles Lyell recognised the implications of Wallace's paper and its possible connection to Darwin's work, although Darwin did not, and in the spring of 1856 Lyell urged Darwin to publish his theory to establish priority. Darwin was torn between the desire to set out a full and convincing account and the pressure to quickly produce a short paper. He decided he did not want to expose his ideas to review by an editor as would have been required to publish in an academic journal. On 14 May 1856, he began a "sketch" account, and by July had decided to produce a full technical treatise on species.

Darwin was hard at work on his "big book" on Natural Selection, when on 18 June 1858 he received a parcel from Wallace, who was working in Borneo. It enclosed twenty pages describing an evolutionary mechanism, a response to Darwin's recent encouragement, with a request to send it on to Lyell if Darwin thought it worthwhile. The mechanism was similar to Darwin's own theory. Darwin wrote to Lyell that "your words have come true with a vengeance, ... forestalled" and he would "of course, at once write and offer to send [it] to any journal" that Wallace chose, adding that "all my originality, whatever it may amount to, will be smashed". Lyell and Hooker agreed that a joint paper should be presented at the Linnean Society, and on 1 July 1858, the papers entitled On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection, by Wallace and Darwin respectively, were read out but drew little reaction. While Darwin considered Wallace's idea to be identical to his concept of natural selection, historians have pointed out differences. Darwin described natural selection as being analogous to the artificial selection practised by animal breeders, and emphasised competition between individuals; Wallace drew no comparison to selective breeding, and focused on ecological pressures that kept different varieties adapted to local conditions.

In later editions of the book, Darwin traced evolutionary ideas as far back as Aristotle; the text he cites is a summary by Aristotle of the ideas of the earlier Greek philosopher Empedocles. Early Christian Church Fathers and Medieval European scholars interpreted the Genesis creation myth allegorically rather than as a literal historical account; organisms were described by their mythological and heraldic significance as well as by their physical form. Nature was widely believed to be unstable and capricious, with monstrous births from union between species, and spontaneous generation of life. So among religious leaders, Darwins theory drew minimal attention.

hmmm births between species??

hmmm births between species?? why don't we see these "births" taking place today? The only place you see them is in laboratories. ummm half elephant half rhino? half ape half human? what about half human half german shepherd?

Every thing you wrote above is it's self a "theory" You have no proof of unions between species..

Now the only place where you see unions between species was Angels and mankind. Read genesis 6. See what this unholy union produced.

You just want to argue ...

"Nature was widely believed to be unstable and capricious, with monstrous births from union between species, and spontaneous generation of life."

Is a phrase that is Darwins explanation of how the Ancient Greeks/Romans viewed the world. i.e. Centaurs, Minotaurs, Satyrs.

But even christian sailors believed in this in the 16-1700's with Mermaids and Sirens.

Nothing to do with current theories of evolution.

Dar who???

Who was here first?

I think the opposite was true...

God killed Darwin in the end.

I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...

God and Darwin

Does this now mean that rights come from Darwin and not God?

donvino

Maybe rights exist by your very existence.

Could we say that rights exist by your very existence.
If God were proven definatively not to exist, do you loose all your rights? Do they exist no matter what our origin?
They exist in as much as we fight for those rights.
Do non-God believers enjoy any rights? certainly they do. I do not believe that rights exist as a result of accepting God.
Although, make no mistake, rights are a percieved thing. They do not actually exist at all, short of an agreement with your fellow man to recognise them. You may have a right to life, unless someone chooses not to recognise your right to life and they kill you.
The idea of real rights is very interesting, in that they can be violated whenever another person wants to violate them.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

Thanks pil45

You explained it in a way I haven't heard and I learned something.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Lamb of God - As the Palaces Burn
http://youtu.be/eWVrdFrpXHE

A Perfect Circle

Genesis 1 verse 26 "Let us make man in our likeness." What sort of God does man resemble at our present stage? Irrational, fearful, greedy, violent, vain, hypocritical, and proud. It seems that human kind has reached an optimal biological stage in our evolution for now. However, an evolution of sprit is long overdue. Science may have proven how evolution occurs but not why. The why is everything.

Never does nature say one thing and wisdom another.
Juvenal

I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts.
John Locke

Yes. My favorite part of the

Yes. My favorite part of the movie reiterates that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mgIA0NZdMU#t=4m2s

Columbus, Ohio

Why are these kind of threads even on this site?

They are divisive and unproductive.

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

We are not free to evolve?

Evolve means literally "to roll out"

It is easy to let another be free when all are in agreement. But that is not the way of life. Can we leave each other free even when we disagree?

What kind of philosophy one chooses depends on what kind of man one is. Death will dispose of the wrappings.

I would argue that much of the divisiveness comes from misunderstanding. Individuals on each side of the debate have come to see that the individuals on the other as sincere and honest about their beliefs.

Many are drawn here out of curiosity. They want to know how and why someone can hold the beliefs that they do. Man is a rational animal and we have our doubts.

Much damage has been done by those who label groups as good or bad and judging individuals by their association with one group or another. Such thinking make life pinched and poor.

Dr. Paul's foreign policy applies to individual policy as well. Someone else's thinking is almost always foreign. "Trade with people make friends with them." The trade in ideas here has been friendly, even when frustrating.

If one thinks productive means conversion, then yes I do believe your right.

But if productive mean making and being friends, that is leaving each other free, well you would have to see for yourself.

Free includes debt-free!

This thread is the opposite

This thread is the opposite of divisive and it is a discussion. And if it is unproductive, then don't post. Go be productive.

Columbus, Ohio

I'm sorry, but are you trying to censor my opinion?

LOL -- it's not divisive because you say it's not?

Okay.

I am productive. I recently created a FB group (just about to hit 900 members) who are organizing a nationwide educational campaign on November 5th with groups forming in over 70 cities.

I know -- not nearly as valuable as the 800th thread on evolution we've had.

That's cool.

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

Congrats. You better get back

Congrats. You better get back to that.

Columbus, Ohio

Thanks.

It's not a problem. It's why the Daily Paul exists -- to bring people together to promote the ideas of Ron Paul while working to restore the Constitution.

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

God's fine

Darwin on the other hand . . .

Patriot News
http://redpillpost.com
*
Stand up For your Civil Rights
http://SueBadCops.com

The whole point is that this

The whole point is that this is a false dichotomy. Please watch the video.

Columbus, Ohio

Evolution?

If people "evolve", then why hasn't the level of intelligence in humans increased over the last 6,000+ years? Nothing has changed except we have a plethora of worthless electronic gadgets. Perhaps intelligence in general has decreased. Then are people turning back into monkeys?

Why doesn't "natural selection" apply to humans if people are 'animals' too? If we evolved from apes than that makes us animals, right? (I don't believe people are animals of course)

The theory is highly flawed so I don't understand why it is taught.

Level of intelligence has

Level of intelligence has nothing to do with evolution.

The most successful species in the world is the Shark who have been around since before the day of the dinosaurs and are still around. They are highly efficient killing machines but have minimal intellect.

What we humans have that most other animals don't is creative thought and imagination.

To show how "People" have evolved all you have to to is to look at the different pigmentation and body types of people.

Africans have dark skin to protect themselves from the extreme radiation from the sun, they typically have flatter noses which cause their breathing from their nose to move the air around their body more than people with pointy noses. Africans who move to other areas of the globe (such as Northern Europe) have to take great caution to get enough sun exposure to keep their pigmentation as well as getting enough Vitamin D. They require significantly greater amount of sunlight to get their Vit D levels because of how efficient their skin is at blocking out the sun.

White people from Europe have a lighter skin tone, the further north you go the lighter the color. This is a development in the human race that happened over tens/hundreds of thousands of years to increase the amount of sunlight the skin was taking in. The noses grew further out to blow the air further from the body (you don't want too much desturbance of cold air close to your body).

Asians used to be smaller than Westeners due to the density of the enviroment they were living in. The more spacious the area you live in, the enviroment can support larger creatures/people. It's not an accident that creatures that live in the Savannahs in Africa are much larger than the creatures who live in the Amazon. And as you may have noticed, with more space in cities and abundance of food, the human race is getting larger. According to science 4 million years ago the human ancestor Australopithecus only reached 120-130 cm todays average human is much taller than that. For info on this read
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621836499.html

Just because you don't see the change happening in front of your eyes doesn't mean it's doesn't happen. Evolution as Tyranny doesn't happen in one day, it comes in progression of changes through many years/decades/centuries/millenia.

Baldness also increases vitamin D absorption

Manly pride then thwarts nature by putting on a hat. LOL.

Free includes debt-free!