Darwin’s Cause

Short and sweet. Very nice.

HA!!! Thank you goodusername for my first good laugh of the day. I was essentially thinking the same thing last night but could not dig up the jewel you have here.
But please, say it isn’t so that creationists engage in propoganda! I mean, they are so effective at using objective evidence to support the cogent arguments they build that surely you jest.

Please, B.K. what objective evidence? Do you mean the book of myths a.k.a. The Bible?

At last the evolutionist attempt to cover up the nasty secret that has been hiding in the shadows. If you actually read what Darwin wrote he clearly is a racist, and promotes racism. The superior and inferior races is a basic law in his theory. The law was correctly applied, according to evolution, to Hitler and Stalin in wiping out the weaker link. Also a clear view of evolution ( a religion of chance) has no moral foundation. You could even say is is amoral. It allows for all types of depravity, because you are only an animal, according to evolution. Yet I applaud the attempt to cover up this dark secret. At least someone recognized the need to white wash this part of evolution. Don’t just believe what you have been told over and over, but find out the truth. Hitler knew if you said something long enough, and loud enough people would believe it. So evolution has used the same technique. Historically those against slavery were those who had a good understanding of the Bible, grounding in truth, and a sound belief in God. See the movie Grace. Have a nice day……Know what you believe and why you believe it.

If you actually read what Darwin wrote you would know that there’s no such thing as “inferior” or “superior” races within Darwinism. Such ideas are pre-Darwinian and were actually popular among Creationists (e.g. “The Chain of Being”). Darwin even wrote in his notebook “never say higher or lower” as a reminder to himself not to use such language (the reminder was necessary because the idea was so ancient and pervasive, and he may have even broke his own rule a couple times – but in the times I recall him using the term “lower races” in regards to humans it is clear in context that he’s speaking about technological advancement, not biological evolution). In the Darwinian evolutionary tree, all extant races/species are branches that reach the top of the tree and thus none hold a superior or inferior position over any others. Hitler did speak quite a bit of superior and inferior races and he got such such ideas from people like Gobineau, a pre-Darwinian Creationist who wrote books like “An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races” (and who, by-the-way, came up with the idea of “Aryanism”). Hitler never mentioned Darwin and his writings and quotes all point to him being a Creationist. For example: “Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law–one may call it an iron law of Nature — which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind.” and “The consequence of this racial purity, universally valid in Nature, is not only the sharp delimitation of the various races, but their uniform character in themselves. The fox is always a fox, the goose is a goose, the tiger a tiger, etc.” (Mein Kampf). Darwin specifically spent a lot of time arguing against any “sharp delimitation” or “definite limits” of races and species and such “sharp delimitation” talk was a common Creationist argument. “Racial purity” is another pre-Darwinist idea that is pure babble within Darwinism, and the “fox is always a fox…” speaks for itself, as does the “multiplying their kind”. Hitler also railed against Oparin for daring to propose a “materialistic” theory for life’s origin. (Table Talk) I find your claim regarding abolitionists rather interesting considering that another name for the Bible Belt was once the Slave Belt, the largest Christian denomination in America formed as a denomination in favor of slavery, and most famous abolitionists I can name were not christian (Susan B Anthony, Elizabeth Stanton, Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, A. R. Wallace (co-discoverer of “Darwinism”), Thoreau, etc). Of course there were many Christian abolitionists, but I notice that there are conspicuously far fewer Biblical references in their arguments against slavery than what appear in the arguments of the pro-slavery side. As for evolution being “amoral”, well, of course it is. It’s just a scientific theory. What sort of morals do we get from gravity, or heliocentricity, or germ theory?

People who oppose Darwin and evolution on religious grounds must ask themselves the question, is this truly the way the world is or the way I wish it was? Darwin came to his theory based on research and observation, and a vast ammount of evidence, just as Einstein did with the Atom and the Universe. Does anyone still argue that the earth is the center of the Galaxy? Religious scholars look mainly to one book…one book… written not by GOD but by men. The Bible has been sifted thru for hundreds of years. What have we learned in all that time? We have learned that the Bible is a book of interpretation. We have hundreds of religions based on one book. Why is there a difference between Catholic and Baptist teaching? There are NOT hundreds of interpretation as to why life on this planet has changed and adapted or died
out. Some species have become extinct by the very practitioners of religion…The American Bison was nearly wiped out by good God fearing christians, I won’t even start on our treatment of the native peoples, that has to be a sin, don’t you think? Maybe capitalism trumps religion for those less zealous…
Hats off to “goodusername” for an excellent blog entry. Sorry I didn’t read more of them. I do not profess that God does not exist, but rather that my faith has been weakened by what I have learned. My faith is in knowledge and the search for truth. I am however, a follower of the teachings of Jesus of Nazarath, not because of his divinity but because of his humanity. Be good to each other… especially when it is hard.

Bravo goodusername! i like it when people use their brains!

For those of you who say you follow the teaching of Jesus Christ (I assume that’s what JC means), I would like to suggest that we today have as much evidence that God exists as we do that Jesus Christ existed (or exists). Isn’t the primary evidence we have for Jesus Christ the New Testament? And then there are also the writings of Josephus a Jewish historian living in Christ’s day. I believe there may be a very brief reference to him by a Roman historian whose name I have forgotten. And then there are the writings of the early Church fathers which were the first generation students of the apostles of Christ. I hope I covered most of the bases. But most of the first hand documentation of Jesus Christ is in the New Testament. And it is in, at least, one of the books of the New Testament that he claims to be the God of the Old Testament. (John 8:58) He said, “Before Abraham was, I am” not “I was”, but “I am” indicating for Him there is no differientation between past, present or future. They are all “now” for him. This use of “I am” is precisely the name God gave for Himself to Moses in Exodus 3:13,14. There God told Moses to tell the Israelites “I AM hath sent me”. At this point, the words of C.S. Lewis are very appropriate which essentially are these: “Jesus Christ is either a liar, a lunatic or who He said he is…God.” By the way, John records that the Jews tried to stone him for such a statement because they considered him to be only a man and, if so, a blasphemer and worthy of death according to their law. So, if he is not God, then which of the other possibilities are you following? Just some food for thought. I’m sure there will be some interesting responses. (a little break from the Darwin controversy)

If evolution is in question ever, refer to the canine species (dogs). Look at the great dane and the yorkie, both the same species but through selective breeding and training evolution has rapidly shown the changes that have happened to mankind over hundreds of thousands of years. People select normally the strongest or the weakest. The largest or the smallest and the outcome shows. Also compare darwins teachings to christian teachings man talks to snake snake convinces man to disobey god, angels fly around and stairs are opening and closing from heaven. Amazing otherwise intelligent people can live their life around mother goose stories.

The most troubling thing about religion for me has been the quickness with which people will KILL others who don’t share their beliefs or who disagree with those beliefs. I thinks there is value in the 10 Comandments..but the most important one is…Thou shalt not KILL…Any religion or clergy who propose death as a solution to anything is WRONG…Undoubtedly Darwin would have to have armed security guards if he lived today…In the last few day I have heard that he waited for many years before publishing his findings because of his concern about how his work would be viewed and how people would react. Clergymen from many faiths have denounced his work and although they themselves might not advocate violence, the message sometimes gets foggy for those more inclined to violence. Killing for God sake is appealing to many.
If God exists, I believe he would want us to use our talents and abilities to their fullest. Darwin was not a atheist. If he had found evidence of “The Garden of Eden” he would have published that too.
Religion as a means of intimidation is
wrong.

alright the person who claimed hitler was a creationist is uttering a lie. Hitler was not a creationist, there was no evidence of that. He was however agnostic and hated the catholic church, because he saw it as a threat to him. read some history.