ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Is Darwinism Science Or Religion

Is darwinism science or religion? What evidence can you bring to support your view?

Moderator - The closest science that Darwinism falls into is science fiction.

Join Our Free Dating and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 7/26/09
     Helpful Blog Vote (5)

Post a New Blog



warwick- (8-5-09) Then you are a fine set of cookware - pot & kettle.

Jerry, thank you for your advice, though quoting scriptures is no crime.
---Betty on 8/11/09


//Lee on a closed thread you quoted Holman's Bible Dictionary on the meanings of 'day.' You insist the 6 'days' of creation are not 24hrs. Holman's gives 3 meanings for 'day.'

Totally FALSE, as my contention is that Genesis DOES NOT tell us the duration of the first 3 days of creation. That should be obvious to those who can read.

I could care less what you believe in regard to Genesis as apparently much of what you believe is either an assumption or a speculation on your part.
---Lee1538 on 8/11/09


StrongAxe, how can you separate microbe to man evolution from the billions of years which evolutionists propose it took for nothing to become everything?

The whole idea of billions of years is to allow time for the formation of the universe, and all that is in it.

In one way you are right. The story goes that after life apeared evolutionary processes came into being. However the evolutionary idea was invented to explain how everything arose naturally, i.e. without a Creator. However the whole story is necessarily interlinked, with one part dependant upon the other.
---Warwick on 8/10/09


Warwick:

Evolution only speaks about how species got here - NOT how the earth got here.


jerry6593:

Yes, yes, you all keep saying that. But you STILL haven't addressed my point. All these scriptures you mention again and again say HOW MANY days there were (and I have never disputed that) but NONE of them mention just WHAT the word "day" means - except from sunset to sunset. The Jews didn't have chronometers. They always counted days from sunset to sunset - that is, based on the position if the sun in the sky. However, during the first three days, there WAS NO SUN. So such a measurement COULD NOT have been meaningful during those three days.
---StrongAxe on 8/10/09


Axey: Warwick is right! There can be no explanation for your insistence that Exo 20:11 means something other than what it says besides a blind faith devotion to the false religion of darwinism.
---jerry6593 on 8/10/09




Au contraire StrongAxe it has everything to do with evolution, just as the belief in long-ages (billions of years) has everything to do with evolution.

You write 'it gives no enlightenment as to just how LONG those days were..'

That is just too ridiculous! God's people were told to work for 6-days but you say they could not have known how long those days were!

They were told not to work on the 7th day or face death (Exodus 31:12-17) but in your strange scenario they could not have known when this 7th deadly day was. Ludicrous.

You hold these beliefs which are plainly contrary to Scripture because you have accepted the long-ages ideas of man. If you say I am wrong, then please tell us how old the world is?
---Warwick on 8/9/09


jerry6593:

Once again, that passage says how many days there were (which was never at issue). However, just like Genesis, it gives no enlightenment as to just how LONG those days were, which is the subject that seems to be being debated to exhaustion here (and which has nothing to do with evolution, which is the topic of this blog).
---StrongAxe on 8/8/09


Strongaxe, conclusive Biblical evidence that the 6 days of creation are the same length, has been given here. See for example Jerry's quote 'For in 6 days the Lord made heaven and earth.' Exodus 20:11


Please now give Biblical evidence that the first three days are of different length than the last 3 days.

Otherwise accept the obvious.
---Warwick on 8/9/09


StrongAxe, I forgot to mention, 'sunrise' and 'sunset' are terms we use. You know what I mean, words which describe actualities from the viewpoint of the observer! As I am sure you know the sun neither rises or sets anyway. Just terms.

Maybe evening to evening would be better for you.

BTW if God was to remove the sun and replace it with His light would we notice? Wouldn't one rotation of the earth in relation to a fixed light source not also give us one day of the same length as yesterday or the day after the day after tomorrow? The answer is obvious.
---Warwick on 8/9/09


Axey: Fortunately, God clears up all this 1st 3 days nonsense in His own handwriting:

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth

Any questions?
---jerry6593 on 8/8/09




Warwick:

If you want to be pedantic and define a day from "sunrise to sunset", both of these terms rely not on a generic light source, but the "sun", which didn't exist for the first three days of creation.

Most analyses of Daniel's 70 weeks I have ever seen has split it into three parts - the first part starting when the decree to build the temple went out, then a gap, then 7 weeks around Jesus's time, then another long gap, then a final week during the Great Tribulation - even though there is no gap mentioned nor implied by Daniel at all.
---StrongAxe on 8/8/09


Axey: The Genesis account is a matter-of-fact description of a six literal day creation. There is no hint of a time extension, or any reason for it in its language. In contradistinction, the Book of Daniel contains several time prophecies relating to future world powers and events (most notably, the Coming of Jesus). That a literal day is equivalent to a literal year (not undefined eons) in Bible prophecy is established elsewhere in the Bible - most notably Eze 4:6. The starting point of Daniel's time prophecies is also defined by an historical event (Dan 9:25). And no, Daniel's prophecies are not arbitrarily spread out over time. You can thank Ribera's anti-reformation theology for that distortion.
---jerry6593 on 8/8/09


StrongAxe, in Genesis 1:3-5 God defines 'one day' in terms still used in the Middle East. The Sabbath begins Friday sunset, and ends at the following sunset.

For there to be evening (nighttime) and morning (daytime) 'one day', all that's needed is a rotating earth and fixed light source. We define and live each and every day, today, just the same. We in the west place them in a different order.

God later tells His people they are to work for 6 of these already defined 'days' and rest the 7th. Days as we know and live them.

Daniel's 70 weeks are contained in a book of prophesy.

If you are correct why is 'one day' today the same as 'one day', at the beginning?

It isn't we who insist, but God.
---Warwick on 8/8/09


jerry6593:

I find it curious how there are so many Christians who are adamant that the first three days of creation must necessarily be 24 hours long - yet if you ask them about Daniel's 70 weeks, they have no problem believing that those weeks are "obviously" not 7-day weeks, but rather weeks of years - and those same years are not contiguous, but split up into three different pieces that are arbitrarily spread out all over history. I'm curious what scriptural evidence there is for such a theory (but I've never seen any).
---StrongAxe on 8/7/09


It occurs to me that the long agers, who think that they can reconcile the Bible with darwinist long age theory by assuming that the first three days of creation were eons long, have yet another problem with their theory - the fossil record. If indeed day 3 (when vegetation was created) were eons long, then there should be a very thick Carboniferous-like, plant-bearing layer beneath the Cambrian. But alas, there is NOTHING. The PreCambrian layers are as devoid of life as their theory is of validity.
---jerry6593 on 8/7/09


please understand also that bearing false witness is dingerous. Yes we all meed correction at times,but all we do should be thru love. Just as we correct our children because we love them,we should have a similiar attitude with everyone.
---tom2 on 8/6/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Betty: Similar blogs have been shut down by the Mods when someone called several of us "fools" because we did not agree with him. Please don't get this one shut down too.
---jerry6593 on 8/6/09


Betty:

I don't call people names here, or accuse them of being fools, blasphemers, deceivers, heretics, liars, unbelievers, etc. (as various people on here have accused me and others of being). The worse I will do in that regard is to caution people lest they engage in perilous behavior. What I do is to challenge people to provide sources if they make unsubstantiated claims - otherwise, such claims are merely opinions Or, if the claims are provably wrong, to provide sources myself to show that they are wrong.

As far as strife and meddling, it takes two to tango - if two people are both doing it, it is disingenuous for one person to accuse the other of doing it. It is the pot calling the kettle black.
---StrongAxe on 8/5/09


Allen Genesis 1:1 reads 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty.'

It was formless, covered by water, dry land had yet to appear-1:9.

It was also empty, as no creatures had yet been made. God created over 6-days as Genesis Ch. 1 shows and Exodus 20:8-11 confirms-once there was nothing, then He created the earth, covered in water, then dry land, then began to fill it with creatures.

What you propose is the now discredited 'gap theory',invented (by Chalmers I think) to try and explain where all the (believed) billions of years fit in. Chalmers had become convinced of the geologic long-ages.

It explains nothing and is contrary to Scripture. I also believed it once!
---Warwick on 8/5/09


strongaxe- I'm sure you're the model of propriety. Let's see some improvement from you, too. *******PRESS RELEASE******* Proverbs 20:3 "It is an honour for a man to cease from strife: but every fool will be meddling."
---Betty on 8/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


Neither,


One (man) not holy, not even educated as education gets uses some unfounded idea of where the human race came from by studying some monkey's cause a ruckus with this nonsense and the world just ran, and ran and Ran with it. He is a backslidden Racist and that is if he was saved in the first place!
---Carla3939 on 8/5/09


Betty:

Yes, those words are in the Bible, and there's nothing wrong with quoting them. However, quoting the Biblical definition of a fool is one thing. Calling someone a fool is something else entirely.

Note that the archangel Michael did not even accuse Satan himself - he left that job to God (Jude 1:8-11). Then again, many people think they're more important than archangels, and many think other people are worse than Satan.
---StrongAxe on 8/5/09


cluny- I think I found your name in the Bible, and it was Fool. Doesn't this sound like you "It is as a sport to a fool do mischief: but a man of understanding hath wisdom."? Proverbs 10:23. "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself." Proverbs 18:2. Here's some advice for you, cluny - Take the last train to Clarksville, and I won't meet you at the station.
---Betty on 8/3/09


WOW!!! I don't believe God gave us HIS WORD to use as a weapon to hit people with.

We really need to be careful how we HANDLE the Word of TRUTH!
---kathr4453 on 8/4/09


God himself that formed the earth and made it, he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited
Isaiah 45:18 the word vain from an unused root meaning to lie waste, a desolation, i.e. desert, figurative a worthless thing,confusion, empty place, without form, nothing,vain,vanity,waste,wilderness. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.without form means the same as vain Gen.1 from an unused root (meaning to be empty),a vacuity, i.e.an undistinguishable ruin emptiness,In Creation Something Happened between gen.1:1 and 1:2.how much time passed between them
---allen on 8/4/09


Shop For Christian Debt Consolidation


strongaxe- Why did you sing out when the fool was described? I found those scriptures in the Bible.
---Betty on 8/4/09


Betty:

For the sake of your soul, you should be most careful with your accusations:

Matthew 5:22
"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

(This caution also applies to anyone who calls people names or hurls accusations, whether on these blogs, or anywhere else.)
---StrongAxe on 8/4/09


A good answer Michael. Very simply but powerfully stated.

You get my vote.
---Warwick on 8/3/09


cluny- I think I found your name in the Bible, and it was Fool. Doesn't this sound like you "It is as a sport to a fool do mischief: but a man of understanding hath wisdom."? Proverbs 10:23. "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself." Proverbs 18:2. Here's some advice for you, cluny - Take the last train to Clarksville, and I won't meet you at the station.
---Betty on 8/3/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Michael, you are correct that Darwinism is not science (the belief in spontaneous chance) and is a religion. Philosophers use a word Shamanistic to define Darwinism.
Where I would part ways is with creation defined as a religious belief. Creationism, like the existence of the holy spirit or angels is fact its just not science.
The question concerning creationism is not whether it is fact but do we choose to believe or deny.
---larry on 8/3/09


Science is proving possible facts.
Religion is believing possible facts, based on evidence, that cannot be proven.
We all have the same evidence.
Darwinism is a religious belief.
Creationism is a religious belief.
They stand diametrically opposed.
I believe the evidence supports creation more than it does evolution.
---MIchael on 8/2/09


Exactly Tom2 excellent blog entry, Darwinism gives the unbeliever an explanation though its so ludicrous and so unreasonable with its spontaneous biogenesis and belief on results without cause it takes more faith to actually believe Darwinism than it does Jesus.
Maybe it's a religion?


The idea that intelligence and wonder can be created by cells incapable to increasing their own complexity is laughable.
---larry on 8/2/09


Cluny: "I think that "race" in this context is not talking about people"

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla" (Darwin, Descent of Man, 1871, p. 521,).
---jerry6593 on 8/2/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


\\ strongaxe- The Bible doesn't say you have any sense, but you think you do, and I cannot prove it in the Bible.
---Betty on 7/31/09\\

And you think the Bible says YOU have any sense, betty?

Can YOU prove it in the Bible? I've checked several versions in several different languages, and I can't find the name "Betty" anywhere in it.
---Cluny on 8/1/09


Tom creatures do not evolve due to changing conditions but rather adapt. It isn't that a single creature evolves but that certain creatures in a population will be 'selected' as they already have genetic information which give them a survival advantage. Those in a population will survive and breed. The make up of the population changes within the population but they still remain the one kind. No kind has ever been observed to become another kind.

Darwin believed natural selection would lead to one 'kind' becoming another. See the documentary 'The Voyage that Shook the World' and you will see scientists pointing out his error.

'Refuting Evolution 1 and 2 by Dr Jonathan Sarfati are very informative.
---Warwick on 8/1/09


Betty:

When I make comments about biblical matters here, I either state things that unquestionably obvious to all, or I provide chapter and verse to back them up (or when I don't, I will supply them on request).

Otherwise, it's just my opinion and I don't claim any authority for my opinions (unlike some others on some of these blogs who proclaim their own opinions authoritatively without proof and refuse to provide any, or some who claim that God reveals his truth to them personally).
---StrongAxe on 8/1/09


demons know who God is.And jesus.Darwins theory on natural selection is a worlds view,without God as the creator.It promotes evolution,by nature, as a survival mechanismmstating that all species will evolve to meet needs required by their natural surroundings.If its cold you,ll grow more hair,if its wet, your feet will grow webs,mild climate produces fair haired norweigns,while hot weather produces african plains people.While some of this makes sense,life without God is a matter of belief,faith.I believe God made everything,including man,and he didn,t make a monkey,then sit and watch him turn into adam.
---tom2 on 8/1/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


\\"The Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection - OR - The Preservation of FAVOURED RACES in the Struggle for Life."\\

Thank you for printing the entire subtitle, too.

I think that "race" in this context is not talking about people, but is simply used as a synonym for "species" or "kind".

Have you read the book, too?
---Cluny on 7/31/09


strongaxe- The Bible doesn't say you have any sense, but you think you do, and I cannot prove it in the Bible.
---Betty on 7/31/09


"I wonder how many people here have bothered to read Darwin's ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION to see what he actually said?"
---Cluny on 7/30/09

I actually own a copy. Do you? Why don't you print the entire RACIST title?

"The Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection - OR - The Preservation of FAVOURED RACES in the Struggle for Life."

Surely a man as smart as you consider yourself to be is aware of the worldwide genocides that EVOLVED from this satanic theory! Do you also defend the results of darwinism?
---jerry6593 on 7/31/09


Cluny, you write of a 'literalist' reading of Genesis.

It seems to me it is only those who reject the truth of Scripture who talk of taking it literally. A straw-man argument!

I believe we need to take God's word 'at face value', unless there is good reason to do otherwise.

In Scripture we see Genesis often quoted from or alluded to and exclusively as historical fact. Never as parable, myth, poetry, etc, but as God's sober truth.

Nonetheless many refuse to believe even what Jesus the Creator said about the historical truth of Genesis. Surely this shows that their authority is not God, who was there, makes no mistakes, and cannot lie, but the opinions of falible sinful men who were not there.
---Warwick on 7/30/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Betty:

You claimed:
1) Darwin was Demon-possessed and crazy
There are a lot of people who are not Christians. However, the vast majority of them are not demon-possessed nor crazy (see New Testament for examples of how demon-possessed people behave). What evidence do you have that Darwin was demon-possessed and crazy?
2) The Devil knew better than to believe Darwin.
There is absolutely no evidence of this in the Bible.

Since you claim these two things to be true, you yourself are implying that you have some kind of special insight into these two issues. I am not claiming that you do - just asking where you go it.
---StrongAxe on 7/30/09


Cluny there is a documentary being shown in many countries at the moment called 'The Voyage that Shook the World.' An excellent documentary which covers Darwin's life, work, and beliefs through the eyes of modern scientists and researchers. Quite an eye-opener.

You can Google the movie and find out when and where it is showing.
---Warwick on 7/30/09


Betty I believe most of them believe in the same God as we do. However most have gone through high school where they were taught evolutionary fables as fact. Many have also gone to churches where they have been lead astray by bad, and unBiblical teaching. Therefore most are victims, the deceived, not deceivers.

However from decades of experience I believe I can detect the deceivers and a few of them 'wolves in sheeps clothing' blog here.
---Warwick on 7/30/09


I wonder how many people here have bothered to read Darwin's ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION to see what he actually said?
---Cluny on 7/30/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


strongaxe- God created everything. The Bible said so. Jesus mentioned creation (Matthew 19:4). John the disciple of Jesus Christ confirmed it. Darwin's theories did not prove anything but his gall, stupidity & hatred of God. The devil used to be an angel in Heaven. Since that, he's been a demon. He knew the power of God. He & the rest of the demons know God created everything. They're famous for helping man go astray from God. Like old Darwin did. I can't believe the audacity some so-called Christians have, seeming to champion such deadbeats as old Darwin. It seems like Satan gave you a portion of his mind for you to use it. He is famous for twisting things like you are doing-as shown by the comment about me.
---Betty on 7/30/09


cluny- I don't know what it is you expect to be proven about that formerly demon-possessed Darwin. He is dead and gone and most likely burning in hell. If he is your hero, that's your problem. Can you prove God did not create heaven & earth exactly as the Bible says? No, you can't. You underestimate God's power, and seem intent on teaching everybody else does. As Jesus said in Matthew 22:29, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures nor, the power of God." Do you think God must wait for hell to evolve, too? Find out.
---Betty on 7/30/09


warwick- (7-29-09) You brought up some very good points. I can't help but wonder what god those darwinists believe in.
---Betty on 7/30/09


warwick:

Darwinism concerns itself merely with the origin of living species, not about how the earth, sun, or stars got here in the first place.

Also, can you find any specific mention of dinosaurs in Genesis? (or whales, for that matter)? Otherwise, your mention of dinosaurs and whales in the inconsistency list would be spurious.
---StrongAxe on 7/30/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


frankcos- Where did the material come from for the first matter, whatever it was. What did it evolve from?
---Betty on 7/30/09


I like what the Moderator said. Darwinism IS science fiction. Darwin himself (on his death bed) denounced his theory, saying we did NOT evolve, but God created it all. If Darwin himself denounced his own theory, that should say alot.
---Leslie on 7/30/09


I myself believe that God is sovereign enough not to be bound by a mere human and literalist reading and interpretation of Genesis 1.
---Cluny on 7/30/09


StrongAxe a few contradictions between Biblical creation and long-ages/ evolution:

Bible
Earth before the sun & stars
Earth initially covered in water
Oceans first then dry land
Life first created on the land
Plants created before the sun
Fish and birds created together
Land animals created after birds
Man and dinosaurs lived together

Evolution/long-ages speculation
Stars & sun before earth
Earth initially a molten blob
Dry land, then oceans
Life started in oceans
Plants came long after the sun
Fish formed long before birds
Land animals before whales
Dinosaurs died out before man appeared

As a Christian I choose to believe God over man's opinions!
---Warwick on 7/30/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Frank: "Darwinism/theory of evolution is, of course, by definition, science"

What? By what definition? Just saying it is science doesn't make it so. One could just as easily say "darwinism is by definition a religion or a lie." But without evidence to back up the statement, it is merely one man's opinion.

You also say "But don't teach religion in a public school." Why not? If religion is true and darwinism is false, should not the truth be taught? If you believe that religion is false, then what are you doing here? Or do you think that children should be indoctrinated with lies?
---jerry6593 on 7/30/09


warwick:

Genesis says that God formed man from the earth, animated by the breath of life.

Evolution says that man evolved from lower and lower forms - ultimately from base chemicals from the earth (and life relies on oxygen).

I don't see any conflict between these two descriptions.

Remember, the Bible says WHAT God did at creation, but doesn't get into a lot of detail about HOW. That's where science comes in, to try to figure out the HOW (while leaving the WHO and WHY to theologians)
---StrongAxe on 7/29/09


Frank, microbe-to-man evolution, as opposed to natural selection, is a belief about the past which cannot be proven scientifically. It is therefore held by faith.

Genesis creation is, likewise, a belief about the past which cannot be proven scientifically. It is therefore held by faith.

Many Christians do not object to evolution being taught as a belief but object to it being taught as scientific fact, which it is not. And that it is taught as the sole view of our origins. This is indoctrination, not education.


You may insist evolution is scientifically proven. If so tell us how it can be proved by the scientific method of testability, repeatability, observability? How can we put it in the laboratory and test it?
---Warwick on 7/29/09


Darwinism/theory of evolution is, of course, by definition, science, and has nothing to do with religion. Why so many christians are so threatened by it being taught only begs one question: why do so many christians have such little faith in their religion? Why do they care at all? You can study it, learn it, and still choose to believe whatever you want. I say, teach on! But don't teach religion in a public school.
---frank_cos on 7/29/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


\\
cluny- His theories proved it. Jesus Christ said you shall know a tree by its fruits. Sometimes I wonder about you, cluny. Do you think you evolved, or something? \\

In other words, betty, you can't prove your contention.

At least you admit I think, betty.

And I think LOTS of somethings.
---Cluny on 7/29/09


StrongAxe any Christian who does not see contradictions between Genesis creation and evolution has not carefully read either.

Evolution was an idea created to explain how everything came to be, without a supernatural creator.

Contradictions? For example evolution claims man is descended from previous creatures, while God clearly says He created man as man.

Why would a God of unlimited power, living outside of time, use billions of years of time, plus such a brutal process, when He could do it all instantly or in 6 days, should He so desire? How after eons of death disease and struggle could God then claim creation was 'very good?'

Why did He lie?
---Warwick on 7/29/09


Betty:

I am curious why you believe that even the devil did not believe Darwin's theories. Do you perhaps possess a special insight into the devil's mind that the rest of us lack?
---StrongAxe on 7/29/09


cluny- His theories proved it. Jesus Christ said you shall know a tree by its fruits. Sometimes I wonder about you, cluny. Do you think you evolved, or something?
---Betty on 7/29/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


\\As an evolutionist of course he did not believe in God now that there was an afterlife.\\

This does not follow.

There are plenty of people whose believe in a God big enough to work through evolution, if He so chose.

Why do you limit God's freedom, mima?
---Cluny on 7/28/09


mima:

I find your statement "As an evolutionist of course he did not believe in God" makes unwarranted assumptions. There are many people who believe in God, and who also believe that he may have used evolution to create the species alive on the world today, and find no conflict between the two beliefs.

Walter Cronkite was an Episcopalian. (Now, if you wish to make the argument that "Episcopalians aren't Christians" or any similar argument like "Methodists aren't Christians" or "Catholics aren't Christians", those would be an arguments for another blog.)
---StrongAxe on 7/29/09


Mima ... "As an evolutionist of course he did not believe in God"

I know nothing of the man, and maybe he did not beleive in God.

But what you said is a fundamental non-sequitur. Many Christians who believe in God accept evolution.

Myself ... I don't know ... except that God was the Creator
---alan8566_of_uk on 7/29/09


As I see it Darwinism is neither science or religion.

Do a web search on 'The Voyage that Shook the World' and you can discover when this excellent documentary is going to be shown in your area. It has received excellent reviews, for example "One of the best-produced documentaries ever made" and this from Dr Ted Baehr, Movieguide, who is, as I am sure many know, a leading critic.

CONTENT: (CCC, Ev) Ultimately very Christian worldview that exposes and explores the true story of Darwin and presents his humanist, anti-Christian views with dignity and respect, but in the process reveals the flaws, confusion and falsehoods of his theories, and, nothing objectionable.


---Warwick on 7/28/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


When I saw this question I was reminded of the fact that the late Walter Cronkite(CBS news anchor) believed that evolution was a fact not a theory!
Cronkite was well-educated, well-traveled, and yet totally mistaken. As an evolutionist of course he did not believe in God now that there was an afterlife. Perhaps his beliefs are different this hour.

Evolution is just a theory. Theories like broken jars did not hold water!!
---mima on 7/28/09


\\Darwinism refers to the hellish theories of a demon-possessed, crazy man. It was not science or religion. Even the Devil knew better than to believe Darwin.
---Betty on 7/27/09\\

betty, what evidence do you have that Darwin was demon-possessed or crazy?
---Cluny on 7/27/09


There is no evidence for evolution as it takes too long to prove.
---amand6348 on 7/27/09


Darwinism refers to the hellish theories of a demon-possessed, crazy man. It was not science or religion. Even the Devil knew better than to believe Darwin.
---Betty on 7/27/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


In a non-theistic world, there is a god and his name is Darwin, and he has a prophet called Richard Dorkins.
Darwinism is not even science, it is a pack of lies that you have to kowtow to if you want to be anything in science.
We shpu,d confront science and ask them questions, not accept their lies.
1/ How do you date the fossils, as you cannot C14 rock.
2/ How do you establish the age of the Earth, and not by their fiat.
The key factor is that if it is science, they must have proof, no proof, just theory. The essence of thr ecoentific method is that it mu be proven.
---mike8384 on 7/27/09


Darwining fanatics are like most fanatics, they see what they want to see in everything. Its like the religious fanatics that see a picture of Mary in an inkblot.
I believe in God, but also believe that God most likely used evolutionary type processes to bring the world to what it is now. I see the world around me that only a being as great and powerful as God could have created. The world is God's creation and is thus also his record. If it is a record that includes millions of years of fossils and stratified dirt and ice records, that is still God's record. I seek God's truth whereever he will allow me to find it.
---sophia on 7/27/09


Neither!!
Just something that, the devil would have you to believe in, instead of the Bible!
---Ruby7969 on 7/27/09


Moderator:

I love your answer LOL!
---Carla3939 on 7/27/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Go Google the Alaska Blob. The Darwin scientist would say that the organism existed before but we never saw it. That's a convenient excuse.

And it's likely one they will try when Jesus comes back. We believe now! We believe now!
---stephen on 7/27/09


religion,is a faith based belief,such as hindu,buddah,moslum,and others.science is the study of the physical reality around us,and has many different branches.There is only one truth,and it is in Jesus christ,God the father,and the holy spirit.
---tom2 on 7/26/09


Sciences are dedicated to receiving the truth by the proof of facts. But can we ever have all the facts? The Whole Truth is never known, until all facts are laid before the sciences & proved. This is why religious folks view the sciences as 'Science Fiction'

Spiritually we're Blessed by receiving the Truth by the Hopes of Faith of Believing in the absence of proof. Knowing that many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of His disciples, which aren't written in the Bible(John 20:29-30). But from the point of view of the sciences, this appears to be 'Religious Fiction'

Views are Relative! Darwin is just a man, capable of being dedicated & blessed in his deeds : which shall be discerned to you, if you have eyes to see ???
---Shawn.M.T. on 7/26/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.