PlastikBuddha
New member
Just like when it says God 'created' things it was actually a metaphor for evolution....
That is precisely what many Christians believe.
ARCHIVE: Best evidence for young earth supernatural creation.
- Thread starter noguru
- Start date
That is precisely what many Christians believe.
Real Sorceror
New member
Ok, both of you are right in that you shouldn't accept it, by itself, as true. Your actual reason for not accepting it are, uh, wrong.stipe said:
Lets just use a regular biology textbook as an example.
noguru
Well-known member
Just like when it says God 'created' things it was actually a metaphor for evolution....
If God created the universe and the processes that govern the material world. Then yes then biodiversity might be the result of evolution, and yet still be a creation of God's.
noguru
Well-known member
Most educated Europeans of that time were racist. This was due to the prevalence of a doctrine called manifest destiny. Simply stated it says "That White European Christians have not only the right but the obligation to bring their brown and yellow pagan neighbors into submission. This cultural imperialism or elitism was to further the cause of European Christianity."
A regular biology textbook that can be verified by cutting up the closest human being?
Why would I not accept what that said?
noguru
Well-known member
P8ntrDan
New member
:nono: Many implies a majority.... I THINK NOT!
P8ntrDan
New member
Nope, Genisis SPECIFICALLY states when and what God created. Are you one of those Christians Plastic mentioned?
P8ntrDan
New member
P8ntrDan
New member
Though it does have some sound science in it, if you try and verify alot of what's in it that deals with evolution, etc, you'll find that it's just standing on the unsteady legs of disproven theories.
noguru
Well-known member
I thought this was the exact issue you were inquiring about. Do you want to hear the other possibilities, or are you already certain that Genesis is a literal scientific and historical account of natural history?
I am not ruling out the possibility that evolution might be one of the tools God used when assembling the biodiversity we see today.
P8ntrDan
New member
I believe Genisis is just as literal as Jesus's literal death on the cross for your literal sins.
I might see micro, but macro? Gimme a break, DNA doesn't make new species, only mutations in a particular species (no new DNA, only altered original)
noguru
Well-known member
OH, I GET IT! :idea: Everyone's a racist, so this racist theory is ok!!!!
No, that is not my point at all. I was trying to point out that people who claimed to be Christian are as responsible if not more responsible for the racism that was prevalent during Darwin's time than the theory of evolution. People were racist whether they accepted Darwin's ideas or not. And back then very few people accepted his ideas. Therefore the majority of racist people back then were white Creationists.
P8ntrDan
New member
Quick question, were the people that you're refering to Catholic or Christian, because there is a massive difference. I'm sorry, but you still haven't proved that the fact that Darwin's theory was racist is ok...
BTW noguru, have you ever heard the Relient K song, 'Down in Flames?' I think you should listen to it.
noguru
Well-known member
I don't know. Do you think more people were prejudice in southern or northern Europe? I don't think it had anything to do with denomination or nationality. Nowadays, racism seems to be a popular attitude and practice with people who have their own self-esteem issues. Back then it was a popular idea among the aristocracy of Europe. It made them feel justified in their oppulence, when they compared their standard of living to less fortunate people.
Are you saying that Catholics may be racist, but Protestants never are?
That is not what I was trying to do. I was pointing out that Darwin ideas regarding race and ethnicity were mostly the result of the prevailing social climate of his time. This fact does not negate the veracity of his scientific ideas. Do you reject any idea just because you can link it to at least one racist?
No.
Why?
Last edited:
P8ntrDan
New member
I'm not saying Catholics are racist and Protestants never are, but just pointing out that for along time in Europe, the Catholic church was very powerful, influential, and corrupt, and produced things not in line with Christianity (take a look at the Crusades for an early example). I reject Darwin's idea for many reasons, the foremost of which is that it isn't logical/it doesn't line up with God's word, and the fact that it was written by a racist in support of racism is yet another reason. I think if you look up the song and listen to it, you'll get why.
In America, for example, slavery and racial segregation were championed by Protestant Churches, and opposed by Roman Catholics. If you see a segregated church in America today, you can be sure it's a Protestant church.
Or the thirty years war. Of course, there were Protestants by then. And they behaved as abominably as many Catholics.
That sounds like a good reason. Show us why it's not logical.
Most of the world's Christians think it does.
Actually, Darwin's view of race was pretty much the same as Lincoln's. They both thought that people of European descent were superior to other people, but they both insisted that all humans were entitled to freedom and dignity. This is why they were thought to be liberal by others in their time. Darwin's opponent, Capt. Fitzroy, for example, was violently opposed to evolution, and firmly in favor of slavery, which Darwin opposed.
Modern evolutionists oppose racism, because evolutionary theory has shown that there are no biological human races. But as late as the 1990s, prominent creationists like Henry Morris (founder of the Institute for Creation Research) were claiming that blacks were spiritually and intellectually inferior to other people. I'm not saying that all creationists are racist. They aren't. But they do have more tolerance for racists like Morris.
If you dislike racism, it's another reason to distance yourself from creationism.
PlastikBuddha
New member
Um, no it doesn't. Many means many- more than a few. I don't know the numbers, but a lot the Christians I know accept evolution.
Darwin was not a Catholic.
Darwin was a protestant.
Darwin was no more racist than Issac Newton was. Newton's science insight was not rendered incorrect by his beliefs in the superiority of certain races. So why should Darwin's be?
Racism is inherent in any society that believes in an inherited nobility. They believe that some people are born better than others. England in such a country, therefore English people are racists.
Darwin was a protestant.
Darwin was no more racist than Issac Newton was. Newton's science insight was not rendered incorrect by his beliefs in the superiority of certain races. So why should Darwin's be?
Racism is inherent in any society that believes in an inherited nobility. They believe that some people are born better than others. England in such a country, therefore English people are racists.
noguru
Well-known member
At the time of the crusades there was no Protestant church. Please learn some history.