-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.

Comment viewing options

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

I agree as well, however the

I agree as well, however the point of the post was get people to view the video titled, "Did Darwin Kill God," and discuss. But the debate has been rich, nonetheless.

Columbus, Ohio

I agree.

I agree.

Globalist Agenda

Our rights are derived from Natural Law.

If we declare that there is no God then Man and his law becomes pre-enimite. That then gives authority to MAN to declare what is right and wrong and who is free or bound.

The Creator "The Great Poo Bah" should have final say.

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

So aside from physical

So aside from physical evolution, you deny that society and civilization could have evolved and constructed rules and laws to ensure its safety and survival?

I think he was speaking about

I think he was speaking about authority. ... a 'Sez Who' question as it relates to humanities laws, changing or not. Even if humanities laws can be said to change vastly over time (which they haven't, at their core, changed 'vastly'), that in no way effects the question as to whether human law has some overarching transcendental standard that has ultimate authority. In other words, some greater standard that is intrinsic to humanity and to which we are ultimately obligated.

That is indeed my point

"you deny that society and civilization could have evolved and constructed rules and laws to ensure its safety and survival?"

History shows that Man has always sought to enslave its fellow man. The Bible is a history of freedom from such enslavement. This to can be debated.

But what is clear is that world dominance by the powerful few has always resulted in history.

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

Society and civilization

Society and civilization evolved because of trade and industry. With the advent of manufacturing and money, the need to forage became less important and social rules (initially, superstitions and religions) kept the tribes from killing each other and eating their brains for breakfast. What civilization is today is still being shaped by trade. Because no one person is "hundreds of times" more superior to other people, we all remain roughly equal. In the next great 'evolutionary' disruption, artificial intelligence and the next gen (or two) of robots will actually represent a quantum leap that will give us, as human individuals, evolutionary competition.

Darwin...

There will always be unbelievers and believers. How many people do you hear say OMG - even the youngest today say it. Not that they are devout believers but the perception(s) of God will not disappear anytime soon.

All Darwin did was strenghten the inquiry and convictions of both sides of the debate. In a way Darwin has given the believers a bump to shore up their faith and teachings due to the overwhelming onslaught of evolutionary teachings and cultural marxism that permeate through western culture today...

...and look where we stand today. I rest my case.

donvino

Robust opposition can

Robust opposition can strengthen conviction... just as physical strength training empowers muscles. Opposing forces only win when one stops fighting against them. Otherwise, the strugle continues.

here here

I agree

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

I can't believe so many smart people can believe something

So Stupid.

BOOOOOM! The universe and all we can see and experience just appeared after zillions of years.

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

And it's not stupid to

And it's not stupid to believe in magic?

I try to avoid commenting on faith posts

But I don't care if you call it magic or the Great Poo Bah. . . one thing is certain these "scientists" stick their fingers into the wind to find out what their funders want to hear and alter their data to fit the "pay checks" desires.

ummm, ClimateGate shows us these guys are money whores.

You can't believe these "great men of science" anymore then you can believe in the "Great Poo Bah" Believe what ever you want.

These non-evolution "scientists" don't get paid for their research, in fact lose their jobs for doing it. What is the benifit or motive for them to publish. Its not money or prestige thats for sure.

I choose to believe in the magic maker. Believe what ever the hell you want. So long as we still call it "THE POSTULATE [THEORY]" of evolution, I am cool with it as its just another RELIGION.

Call Evolution a fact or law and force it on people and we gonna have some problems . . . you dig?

http://www.weloennig.de/Giraffe.pdf

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

What if your God was simply

the quantum vibration of the universe's energy as described in string theory? If we are all made in God's image, this would fill the bill.

"These non-evolution

"These non-evolution "scientists" don't get paid for their research, in fact lose their jobs for doing it. What is the benifit or motive for them to publish. Its not money or prestige thats for sure"

The people are all Christian fundamentalists. The benefit is being able to continue to believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. It is basic survival to them. They have a major conflict of interest and it ain't cash...

If you notice, creationists are always selling you. Why is that? Most scientists just let the research do the talking.

If someone tried to userp and destroy the US Constitution

You would fight them, no? Is that not why you are here on the DP?

Can you fault them for fighting for what they hold dear?

"They have a major conflict of interest and it ain't cash..." The same could be said for those who do not wish to subject themselves to the Lordship of The Great Poo Bah".

Many motives on both sides some good some bad.

We should learn to respect a diversity of opinion.

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

You see, the thing is,

You see, the thing is, evolution scientists are not out to kill god, but god believers are set out to destroy the scientific method. Religion is not science, creationist theories are not accepted by the scientific community and is not, and does not belong in the science classroom. Sorry they lash out at you, but if you stick your nose in a beehive your going to get stung.

"We should learn to respect a diversity of opinion" didn't you just say that people who believe in evolution are stupid?

More nonsense

Evolutionists start with the assumption they want to prove - that we can explain everything without God. That's not science. Then they claim they can explain one time events that they did not witness by observing what happens today. This explains why no one has ever created something out of nothing and life out of lifelessness and a bird out of a rock.

It is also not true that Christians want to destroy the scientific method. What baloney. It was Christians that gave us science and the scientific method.

Spend some time here and then apologize for misrepresenting Christianity.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers#/topic/science

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

Mr. Spock

I find your position "fascinating", but also highly illogical.

Are you sure about that?

The God Delusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
by British biologist Richard Dawkins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion

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

Ok, well I'm sure there are

Ok, well I'm sure there are some nutjobs that believe in evolution as well. Just like the nutjobs that think creationism should be taught alongside evolution.

The whole sham is that creationists actually convince people they are in the debate. They are not. That is the scam. The scientific community rejects them.

Still cheering and betting but have no dog in the race.

"The whole sham is that

"The whole sham is that creationists actually convince people they are in the debate. They are not. That is the scam. The scientific community rejects them."

That's right people! Nothing to see here... just move along, go about your business. The scientific community (read "philosophical naturalist") have declared this part of the debate is over. No more question about it. Move along now.. hurry on home.

What a Hoot!

Absolutely correct. There is

Absolutely correct. There is nothing to see here. The only debate is in your head. If there was any scientific merit in the bible, it would be accepted by scientists. Don't make me go all pastafarian on this thread.

LOL

I haven't said anything about the Bible in this regard.

Okay. So now we know that F-Buzz wants us all to swallow the establishment explanation of things without question.
Perhaps you are posting on the wrong site.

Establishment? Isn't

Establishment? Isn't creationism what christians forced on people for hundred of years, with the threat of death for not believing? One could say that is the establishment.

Now if by establishment, you mean established, peer reviewed and accredited scientists, yes I side with the establishment.

As for you, I wish you to believe whatever gets you through the night. But when you drag magic or religion into the realm of science, you are asking for trouble.

Any self authenticating

Any self authenticating authority can run the risk of becoming an unquestionable establishment, complete with its own priesthood and mystifying language.

I have not defended either a religious organization or secular hierarchy as unquestionable authority. You on the other hand... Well, somethings are easy to see, at least for those who aren't blind, or blindly trusting nit-wits, take your pick.

"Most scientists just let the

"Most scientists just let the research do the talking."

Oh, How I Wish It Were So.
Researchers do quite a bit of interpretation of the data. They may publish the data itself, but it hardly ends there.

The saying "The facts speak for themselves" is nothing more than hogwash. Facts do not speak for themselves. All evidence is filtered through the lenses of ones basic presuppositions (or 'worldview' to use another phrase). A person's worldview will determine what they accept as valid evidence and how they interpret and reason through such evidence. A persons worldview will even dictate how they reason about reason itself.

agree

.

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

Check this out

From 3 billion years ago:

http://www.geo.mtu.edu/news/apr_20_04.html

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

A complete farce

As part of a response to an article by a biology professor and a chemistry professor from an Assemblies of God university, Dr. Terry Mortenson recently said,

"Science has not found anything that contradicts the straightforward, literal understanding of Genesis, and it is remarkable that a Christian chemist and biologist would say that science has. Science has not found a living cell spontaneously evolving into existence by chance from non-living matter, as evolutionists claim has happened 3.5 billion years ago. Science has not found transitional forms between different kinds of plants and animals, either living or in the fossil record, to support evolutionist claims that all life is descended from a common ancestor—the first living cell. And science has not found millions of years of time in the rocks or a gas cloud collapsing to form a star. None of those things has ever been observed by any scientist, so they are not findings of science.

"Rather, evolutionary scientists using anti-biblical (naturalistic and uniformitarian) assumptions and imagination have interpreted some of the observations of the natural world (while ignoring other observations) to invent a story about the past that contradicts the time-tested, historically orthodox and exegetically sound interpretation of God’s inerrant Word. It is not a conflict between the “findings of science” and “traditional interpretations” of the Bible. It is rather the conflict between the atheistic and deistic interpretations of God’s creation by people who are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18–20) versus the sound interpretation of God’s Word by godly leaders and pastors in the church down through history."

Evolution is a complete farce. If you really want the truth, spend some time at answersingenesis.org. Evolution has never happened, and all the "science" that supposedly proves it has is speculation, conjecture and a fairy tale - no real, observational science in the present has ever supported the myth of evolution. If you want the truth, read God's word.

And that's the point - the Bible is God's word. This bozo, who claims to be a Christian, starts off by doing the exact same thing that Satan did in Genesis 3 - casting doubt on God's word. Instead of taking Jesus' position; i.e., the authority of God's word ("Have you not read?" and "Your word is truth,") he calls Jesus a liar by calling the Bible myth and metaphor. The account in Genesis is written in historical narrative, and is meant to be taken no other way.

As E J Young said, "…the man who says "I believe that Genesis purports to be a historical account, but I do not believe that account" is a far better interpreter of the Bible than the man who says, "I believe that Genesis is profoundly true, but it is poetry."

Remember, when Jesus was asked about marriage and divorce, He said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'?"

Notice several things there. First, He quoted from Genesis as historical narrative. Second, He appealed to the authority of God's word (have you not read?) Third, He ruled out evolution by saying "He who created them from the beginning." If man was created at the BEGINNING, then he couldn't have evolved over millions of years, could he? Man was created on the sixth 24 hour day of creation, the same day the animals were (and, yes, that includes the dinosaurs) - he did not evolve over millions of years at the other end of the scale. Otherwise it wouldn't have been at the beginning, 4.5 billion years ago, would it?

The Apostle Paul tells us the same thing when he says in Romans, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness [that includes the bozo in this video], because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."

Since when have His attributes, power and nature been clearly seen? Since the creation of the world. Well, if that was 4.5 billion years ago, and man has only been around a hundred thousand years, Paul was just as wrong as the goon in the video states Jesus is. Of course, the other possibility is that Jesus and Paul are right, and the guy in the video is a liar.

I think I'll stick with Jesus.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul