Social Darwinism and World War I

[seer]

Which part of "You are a complete waste of time." did you fail to understand?

Roy

No answer... OK...

[seer]

I'm totally flummoxed by Jorge's and seer's complete lack of understanding of this most simple of issues.

K54

What lack of understanding, can you be specific?

[whag]

Oh stop, that is just nonsense.

Didn't theologians believe in a literal creation until evolution said otherwise? You'd expect a counterreaction like atheists saying evolution proves the bible isn't supposed to be a literal record of events. That's impossible given why we now know.

The more you act ignorant, the more you'll get that reaction. You perpetuate that reaction by remaining ignorant about who you are. At the very least, you should accept the epistemelogical fact that you are an evolved animal. That's a crucial reality to process if you're going to be a mature Christian.

[seer]

The more you act ignorant, the more you'll get that reaction. You perpetuate that reaction by remaining ignorant about who you are. At the very least, you should accept the epistemelogical fact that you are an evolved animal. That's a crucial reality to process if you're going to be a mature Christian.

Really? An an evolved animal? Like the chimpanzees that slaughter each other - yes all perfectly natural and keeping with the evolutionary process.

[tabibito]

Didn't theologians believe in a literal creation until evolution said otherwise? You'd expect a counterreaction like atheists saying evolution proves the bible isn't supposed to be a literal record of events. That's impossible given why we now know.

The more you act ignorant, the more you'll get that reaction. You perpetuate that reaction by remaining ignorant about who you are. At the very least, you should accept the epistemelogical fact that you are an evolved animal. That's a crucial reality to process if you're going to be a mature Christian.

Augustine draws out the following core themes: God brought everything into existence in a single moment of creation. Yet the created order is not static. God endowed it with the capacity to develop. Augustine uses the image of a dormant seed to help his readers grasp this point. God creates seeds, which will grow and develop at the right time. Using more technical language, Augustine asks his readers to think of the created order as containing divinely embedded causalities that emerge or evolve at a later stage. Yet Augustine has no time for any notion of random or arbitrary changes within creation. The development of God's creation is always subject to God's sovereign providence. The God who planted the seeds at the moment of creation also governs and directs the time and place of their growth.

Augustine argues that the first Genesis Creation account (1:1–2:3) cannot be interpreted in isolation, but must be set alongside the second Genesis Creation account (2:4–25), as well as every other statement about the Creation found in Scripture. For example, Augustine suggests that Psalm 33:6–9 speaks of an instantaneous creation of the world through God's creative Word, while John 5:17 points to a God who is still active within creation.

Further, he argues that a close reading of Genesis 2:4 has the following meaning: "When day was made, God made heaven and earth and every green thing of the field." This leads him to conclude that the six days of Creation are not chronological. Rather, they are a way of categorizing God's work of creation. God created the world in an instant but continues to develop and mold it, even to the present day.

The early churches had influential members who argued that Genesis was not a strict chronological or literal account, as the records of Augustine of Hippo's analyses (which he never quite settled despite 4 attempts) show. Had Augustine been privy to later scientific knowledge, I think he would have had more success in making proper determinations.
It is also a matter of record that influential members of the early churches were undecided about whether the Earth might be spherical.
I have tried without success to determine why the concepts disappeared from view.

[Roy]

No answer... OK...

Hypocrite.

Roy

[seer]

Hypocrite.

Roy

How unoriginal and petty...

[Jorge]

No klaus, but they play into worldviews, give ammunition for said views. The evolutionary theory has been used to justify atheism, to bolster atheism - and that is a fact.

WARNING: you're speaking Advanced Calculus to a
person that has not yet mastered adding fractions.

Best of "luck" on your efforts.

Jorge

[Roy]

Hypocrite

How unoriginal and petty...

But true.

Roy

[whag]

Really? An an evolved animal? Like the chimpanzees that slaughter each other - yes all perfectly natural and keeping with the evolutionary process.

Yes, you are a mammal. We have the fossils and genomic evidence to show that.

It is true that tanzanean chimps are the only species besides humans to conduct war raids, I concur. That should actually give you pause for thought.

I think God's fern sign was wasted on you. Clearly, you'd go apostate if you found out that Genesis wasn't literal. Get over it, already, because you're shaming yourself with this lame argument.

[Roy]

Yes, you are a mammal. We have the fossils and genomic evidence to show that.

It is true that tanzanean chimps are the only species besides humans to conduct war raids, I concur.

IIRC some species of ants do too.

Roy

[seer]

But true.

Roy

Ok Roy, I'll bite - how exactly am I hypocritical. Be specific.

[Jorge]

I'm totally flummoxed by Jorge's and seer's complete lack of understanding of this most simple of issues.

K54

Figuratively speaking, the above 'jab' by Santa Klaus reminded me
of the clown that after watching a lecture by Einstein remarked,
"That stupid old guy doesn't know anything about math - he even writes his eight's sideways!"

Jorge

[seer]

Yes, you are a mammal. We have the fossils and genomic evidence to show that.

It is true that tanzanean chimps are the only species besides humans to conduct war raids, I concur. That should actually give you pause for thought.

So you agree that slaughtering each other is completely natural and keeping with the evolutionary process. No blame - we are just doing what the process created us to do.

Richard Dawkins:

But doesn't a truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make nonsense of the very idea of responsibility, whether diminished or not? Any crime, however heinous, is in principle to be blamed on antecedent conditions acting through the accused's physiology, heredity and environment.

[Roy]

Ok Roy, I'll bite - how exactly am I hypocritical. Be specific.

You comment on the lack of reply to your own points while making no reply to the points made by others.

You ask endless loaded questions regarding the views of others while refusing to discuss or even disclose your own.

You claim agreement where there is none, and even where there is explicit dissent.

Roy