The Dark Side of Darwin's Legacy

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
buffalo said:
There are currently two competing worldviews, neo_darwinism and Christianity. The fruits of each and their goals are obvious. The more people embrace the neo-darwin worldview the darker the world will become. Of this there can be no doubt.
Click to expand...
Buffalo, there are more than that. There are the Buddhist, Hindu, and Islamic worldviews as well, although some adherents of those might accept modern science like most Catholics do.
 
StAnastasia said:
Buffalo, there are more than that. There are the Buddhist, Hindu, and Islamic worldviews as well, although some adherents of those might accept modern science like most Catholics do.
Click to expand...
Those mostly are in between. In any case - by their fruits you shall know them.
 
buffalo said:
Those mostly are in between. In any case - by their fruits you shall know them.
Click to expand...
Buffalo,
These modernists conflate all religions as the result of vital immanence - condemned by Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis. The fact that we appeal to the Savior and His Divine Word makes no inroads with them, as they are drinking of another spirit and portend to ‘another gospel’ which St. Paul also warned the church at Galatia to regard as accursed.

The mere fact that they try to pass Hitler off as a Catholic reveals more than an all the squabbling about evolutionism.

Blessings,
cj
 
Catholic_Johnny said:
Buffalo,
These modernists conflate all religions as the result of vital immanence - condemned by Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis. The fact that we appeal to the Savior and His Divine Word makes no inroads with them, as they are drinking of another spirit and portend to ‘another gospel’ which St. Paul also warned the church at Galatia to regard as accursed.

The mere fact that they try to pass Hitler off as a Catholic reveals more than an all the squabbling about evolutionism.

Blessings,
cj
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
buffalo said:
It would show your ignorance of both.
Click to expand...
Ah, so the Pope calling crusades would not be a ‘fruit’ of Christianity? If not, then why are things that Darwin did not officially ordain ‘fruits’ of his theory?

And Genesis 9:25-27: "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, ‘Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave’. doesn’t justify slavery?
 
tjm190 said:
Ah, so the Pope calling crusades would not be a ‘fruit’ of Christianity? If not, then why are things that Darwin did not officially ordain ‘fruits’ of his theory?

And Genesis 9:25-27: "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, ‘Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave’. doesn’t justify slavery?
Click to expand...
The answer lies in the Light of Catholicism and the Darkness of Darwin.
 
buffalo said:
The answer lies in the Light of Catholicism and the Darkness of Darwin.
Click to expand...
Buffalo used dodge! It’s not very effective.

Would you care to demonstrate how something ordered by the leader of a faction is not a ‘fruit’ of the belief system that faction is built upon? And then how a different leader using a theory to justify his actions makes the actions a ‘fruit’ of the theory?
 
tjm190 said:
Buffalo used dodge! It’s not very effective.

Would you care to demonstrate how something ordered by the leader of a faction is not a ‘fruit’ of the belief system that faction is built upon? And then how a different leader using a theory to justify his actions makes the actions a ‘fruit’ of the theory?
Click to expand...
I think its pretty simple:

If you live in the light of Catholicism’s truths and propositions you could not justify eugenics. If you live in the darkness of darwin it is quite easy. One proposition is love the other is power.
 
buffalo said:
I think its pretty simple:

If you live in the light of Catholicism’s truths and propositions you could not justify eugenics. If you live in the darkness of darwin it is quite easy. One proposition is love the other is power.
Click to expand...
Buffalo, you seem to like a black-and-white model of reality. What about those priests who are both Catholics and evolutionary biologists? Where do they fit into your binary schema?
 
buffalo said:
I think its pretty simple:

If you live in the light of Catholicism’s truths and propositions you could not justify eugenics. If you live in the darkness of darwin it is quite easy. One proposition is love the other is power.
Click to expand...
Do you even remember my question?
 
StAnastasia said:
Buffalo, you seem to like a black-and-white model of reality. What about those priests who are both Catholics and evolutionary biologists? Where do they fit into your binary schema?
Click to expand...
You tell me - do they choose love or power? :hmmm:

Which priests are evolutionary biologists?
 
From StAnastasia’s (linked) list, I see "craters, “Mars,” and “telescope,” but no ‘evolutionary biologists.’

Peace,
Ed
 
I’d just like to post what G.K. Chesterton said about this (from his book Orthodoxy):
Evolution is a good example of that modern intelligence which, if it destroys
anything, destroys itself.** Evolution is either an innocent scientific description of how
certain earthly things came about; or, if it is anything more than this, it is an attack upon
thought itself.** If evolution destroys anything, it does not destroy religion but
rationalism. If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very
slowly into a positive thing called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox; for a
personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly, especially if, like the
Christian God, he were outside time. But if it means anything more, it means that there
is no such thing as an ape to change, and no such thing as a man for him to change into.
It means that there is no such thing as a thing. At best, there is only one thing, and that
is a flux of everything and anything. This is an attack not upon the faith, but upon the
mind; you cannot think if there are no things to think about. You cannot think if you are
not separate from the subject of thought. Descartes said, “I think; therefore I am.” The
philosophic evolutionist reverses and negatives the epigram. He says, “I am not;
therefore I cannot think.”
Click to expand...
 
tjm190 said:
I’m abit confused- do you or do you not believe that the individual most likely to pass down their genes are those most fit to survive?
Click to expand...
Concur. You are confused. 😉 God alone sets up and pulls down, exalts and humiliates, kills and makes alive. God delivers by His Almighty hand and wisdom, not by the brute forces of nature. I provided you one of hundreds of scriptural evidences for His sovreign dominion over nature and especially the grotesque postulations of darwin. Jesus saved the world by dying on a cross. God chooses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, the weak things to confound the strong, etc… (1 Cor 2).

Genes have nothing at all to do with it. As for causal relationships, you know very well that those societies that adopt evolutionism ‘darwinize’ themselves. Thank God only 39% of Americans believe in this horrible blasphemy even after 75 years of state sponsored intolerant-of-any-dissent indoctrination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top