1 of 13
1
The Cult of Evolutionists
Posted: 06 April 2005 10:36 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Since it takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution, and because it is a twisted faith that causes people to be powerless in this world, we have not registered a new cult with the world body of churches.

The new cult: Evolutionism!
This is a cult of believers who twist reality around, using faith to contradict obvious statistical facts, and suspect theories to gain converts. It is not a large group. Most of its members reside in positions of academia, where they can covertly brainwash the children of the masses, through a lengthy process of spiritual de-conditioning. Like most gangs, there is no hierarchy, but it is composed of many meandering and competing groups, which makes this cult so dangerous.

Most of the youth of the country are not swayed by the cult's use of twisted logic, as most kids get a good sense of right and wrong sometime between the 4th and 8th grades (usually comes with a paddle to the rump by a concerned parent). However, some kids become converts. Many of these begin an adventure into a lifestyle not in keeping with the norm (i.e., they do not attend church or lean on God in times of trouble, etc.). A subset of these converts become agents of the cult themselves, joining academia and the effort to corrupt the countries youth.

So far it is not illegal to be part of this cult. But they are kept under careful watch by the authorities. As soon as our Republican congress can get more seats in the house, they can enact laws to make it illegal for this type of gang activity to exist. Until then, evolutionists have free reign to attempt and de-condition the masses.

For more information, see Cults under your dictionary.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2005 12:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  128
Joined  2005-02-23

Champion, something tells me you have not yet read Kenneth Miller’s Finding Darwin’s God. You had thanked me so nicely for the recommendation that I was fooled into supposing you’d make a quick stop to Amazon.com. Live and learn.

Meanwhile, keep on with your unworthy struggle against humanity.

Sincerely   -Dave

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2005 01:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  291
Joined  2005-04-02

Keep talking and we’ll get tax-exempt status, just like your cult does. We’ll be able to get some of that faith-based initiative money, too. And we’ll be doubly protected by the first amendment of the constitution. Free speech AND free exercise. You may be onto something here, TC.

You are correct. It does require faith to believe in a scientific theory. You see unlike christians like yourself, scientists don’t know everything. In fact, a good scientist must assume that s/he doesn’t know everything. That is why science refers to even its most deeply held articles of faith as theories.

Can you imagine how much faith it requires to climb into the space shuttle. Astronauts are putting their fate not just in scientists, but also in every single mechanic, manufacturer, even the janitors that cleanup in the shuttle assembly building. They have to put their faith in the mathematicians and computer scientists that produce the flight path the shuttle will take. Science requires as much or more faith than it takes for you to believe that a cracker magically transforms into a ritual cannibalistic sacrifice every Sunday.

You may yet inspire me to start my own church someday, TC. If that day comes, I will owe you a debt of gratitude.

- Bulldog

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2005 01:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

tyhts, haven’t got the book yet. Thanks for the referral. Will let you know when I get it.

Everyone, Kenneth Miller’s Finding Darwin’s God. Let’s find out what all the hubbub is about.

bulldog, you said: “that is why science refers to even its most deeply held articles of faith as theories.” LOL! Thanks, I see you have an ironic sense of humor, quite like myself. We could be birds of a feather. Just get the right faith and we’ll be breaking bread! grin

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2005 05:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  291
Joined  2005-04-02

[quote author=“TheChampion”]
bulldog, you said: “that is why science refers to even its most deeply held articles of faith as theories.” LOL! Thanks, I see you have an ironic sense of humor, quite like myself. We could be birds of a feather. Just get the right faith and we’ll be breaking bread! grin

I do have the right faith. It wasn’t a miracle that put men on the moon. It was science. There was no irony in that sentence. Scientists have the humility to accept that they don’t know everything and probably never will. You would do well to exercise some humility yourself.

If science was a religion, they wouldn’t call them theories. They’d call them rules (or maybe commandments) and claim that god gave them to man through divine inspiration (and maybe that’s exactly what happened. Who knows? Not you or I). Anyone who doubts them would be punished or cast out. When the space shuttle explodes, its not because the rules are wrong. It’s because god is angry at us for allowing the christian blasphemers to poison our church.

TC, how exactly do you know that your god didn’t directly inspire Darwin to come up with the theory of evolution? How do you know that you are not like the jews that don’t believe that Jesus was the messiah? How can you be certain that every word you speak against evolution isn’t blasphemy and wicked in the sight of your god?

- Bulldog

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 06:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Bulldog, you said “TC, how exactly do you know that your god didn’t directly inspire Darwin to come up with the theory of evolution? How do you know that you are not like the jews that don’t believe that Jesus was the messiah? How can you be certain that every word you speak against evolution isn’t blasphemy and wicked in the sight of your god?”

1-Anything that contradicts the word of God, does not come from God, remember Jesus said that a house divided cannot be victorious.

2-Well, I don’t I speak blasphemy because I try to talk about known subjects related to the bible. I’ll certainly issue a retraction if somebody can biblically refute anything I said. I’m not perfect, that is why I need a savior. And if you are not in a state of perfection (i.e., you can pay the ultimate penalty for your sin yourself), then I guess you might not require any help from Jesus getting into heaven…..no, just being coy. I know you need him just as much as I do. But who will you listen to? The bible which is God’s word, or man? Who do you trust? (Listen to that still small voice inside you….)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 07:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  12
Joined  2005-04-02
[quote author=“TheChampion”] But who will you listen to? The bible which is God’s word, or man? Who do you trust? (Listen to that still small voice inside you….)

In listening to that still small voice inside me, I am reminded of Emerson’s essay of “Self Reliance”.  I would recommend it as a true expression of wisdom.

Emerson:

A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the lustre of the firmament of bards and sages.

He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness.  Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.

Nature suffers nothing to remain in her kingdoms which cannot help itself.  The genesis and maturation of a planet, it’s poise and orbit, the bended tree recovering itself from the strong wind, the vital resources of every animal and vegetable, are demonstrations of the self-sufficing and therefore self-relying soul.

So whom do I trust?  I have read what you perceive to be god’s word, and I have read the word’s of many men, including your own.  I refuse to insult my own intelligence.  I believe what Nature presents to me as true. 

I trust the integrity of my mind, and rejoice in it’s ability to expand and grow, as it perceives a physical and spiritual universe, with no gods or goddesses or dogma created by the minds of primative mankind.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 08:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  291
Joined  2005-04-02

2 Peter 3:8 ‘But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.’

Is this literal or metaphor? (Or simile, technically.) Clearly the god of the bible doesn’t necessarily mean a 24 hour day when he says day.

Nowhere does the biblical god say that creatures have to stay the way they were made. In fact, there are clearly broad differences in various creatures of the same type. The whole science of animal husbandry is based on this. When animals breed amongst themselves, the offspring are never exact duplicates of the parents.

Anyway, any honest reading of the bible shows that it contradicts itself, and since the word of god isn’t supposed to contradict itself, then clearly at least some of what is in the bible is not the word of god.

- Bulldog

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 09:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

As in an earlier post, if we evolved from monkeys and apes, how come we still have monkeys and apes? Ha, explain that one to me professor.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 10:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  128
Joined  2005-02-23

Champion, you might stop making a fool of yourself if you read Kenneth Miller’s Finding Darwin’s God.

Dave

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 10:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

[quote author=“TheChampion”]As in an earlier post, if we evolved from monkeys and apes, how come we still have monkeys and apes? Ha, explain that one to me professor.

In the short time frame, would that not be similiar to saying, “if cabbots come from cats and rabbits, then how come we still have cats and rabbits?”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

sorry… “cabbits”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 02:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

As in an earlier post, if we evolved from monkeys and apes, how come we still have monkeys and apes? Ha, explain that one to me professor.

That is a very simple question, Champ, and I’m happy to answer it for you.  We did not evolve from monkeys and apes, we had a common ancestor.  The human line is often portrayed in diagrams as a straight line, and in fact, it is not.  There are various branches, some of which came to dead ends.

For instance, most Biological Anthropologists believe that the Neanderthal is such a dead end, and there are many others.  Therefore, you see, we did not replace the apes, the species Homo (from Homo Erictis to Home Sapiens Sapiens) developed in parallel to the apes.

Anything else I can help you with?

William

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 03:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Forgive me William, but that sounded pretty incoherent. Makes no sense whatsoever. Does not answer the question. Either WE evolved from monkeys and apes or we did not.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 04:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

OK, I’ll try again.  You have obviously never had a Biology course, or done any reading on the subject of Human history, so here goes.

Between five and six million years ago, Humans and Chimpanzees split off from a common ancestor in Africa.  Without getting too deep, if you do a blood test on a modern Human and a modern Chimp, you can tell, by certain componants in the blood, what the degree of separation is. 

The first known fossil (as far as I know) on the human side was named Ardipithecus Ramidus, and dated between four and five million years ago.  I am not going to go through the whole line, suffice to say that it was not a direct line.  There were some unsuccessful species along the way, and they were dead ends.

To date, as far as I know, we have specimens prior to the split, and we get more all the time.  What is working against you, Champ, is that there are more and more fossils being discovered all the time. 

So, to get back to what I was saying, for the last five million years or so, humans and the apes have developed along parallel lines.  There are many examples of species splitting off from common ancestors, and I would reccomend a trip to your closest Natural History museam if you are interested.

I know, as soon as I said five MILLION years, your eyes glazed over, and you didn’t read any of the rest.  Go back to christiananswers, and read what they have to say, then go to ICR, and see what they have to say.  Then, if you want to know the truth, go to  

That’s all for now, lesson over, learn the rest yourself.

William

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2005 04:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

[quote author=“William”][quote author=“TheChampion”]As in an earlier post, if we evolved from monkeys and apes, how come we still have monkeys and apes? Ha, explain that one to me professor.

That is a very simple question, Champ, and I’m happy to answer it for you.  We did not evolve from monkeys and apes, we had a common ancestor.  The human line is often portrayed in diagrams as a straight line, and in fact, it is not.  There are various branches, some of which came to dead ends.

For instance, most Biological Anthropologists believe that the Neanderthal is such a dead end, and there are many others.  Therefore, you see, we did not replace the apes, the species Homo (from Homo Erictis to Home Sapiens Sapiens) developed in parallel to the apes.

Anything else I can help you with?

William

[quote author=“TheChampion”]Forgive me William, but that sounded pretty incoherent. Makes no sense whatsoever. Does not answer the question. Either WE evolved from monkeys and apes or we did not.

When someone explains something to someone else, the usual assumption is that the one being explained to is actually capable of understanding.  William, hope you have a lot of time to spare and an infinite reservoir of patience.

g

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 13
1
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed