Don’t waste your time with him, he’s just another plant. Ironically, these trolls never evolve.
The Theory Of Evolution Is Incompatible With Christianity
- Thread starter Roosh
- Start date
Bertrand Rusell, who literally wrote the book on why logic and mathematics are formally equivalent (Principles of Mathematics).
Name one atheist that said he is against logic, knowledge, or reason, on your grounds that it's immaterial. You're just putting up sophistic strawmen.
This doesn't justify the existence of logic and mathematics, it's a program to reduce one to the other. A cool goal, but not a justification for the existence of the two.
No need if they hold to a materialist paradigm and want to be logically consistent. Once you make that materialist move, you automatically reject all immaterial things. Unless you wish to argue sylogisms and consistency to be Sophist:
Address the argument, is it invalid? Is there a premise that isn't met? Be specific which premise you see as not being met, or demonstrate what is invalid about the argument.
For demonstration of what I mean by justifying the existence of knowledge, I've been in discussions where atheists I encounter day-to-day will pivot to saying:
1 Knowledge doesn't exist, it's all constructs
This runs into the problem of them not having a way to know this. I ran into this one three weeks ago in real life.
2 Knowledge is the material nerves in one's brain
This runs into the problem of communicating knowledge being impossible, since the nerves in their brain and the nerves in my brain are different and can't be the same.
3 knowledge is the pattern of nerves in ones brain
This runs into the problem of the pattern itself not being matter, thus the pattern itself being immaterial, thus rendering materialism incoherent and self-refuting.
I look forward to the day when I encounter a solid argument that knowledge is material. I've only personally known two atheists that decided to tackle the existence of the immaterial in an atheist framework, and both ended up adopting Plotinus' system. Hopefully God will bring them to Orthodoxy soon.
It's amusing how people miss the point with this.
Of course no atheist is going to overtly deny logic and reason. They act like those things are the be all and end all of everything. But they don't realise that their own materialism cannot account for these things.
It's the same when atheists make moral arguments. They argue as though morals exist (for instance when they judge God as evil) but their worldview has no basis for any morality whatsoever.
Many atheists are so proud of their intellects that they don't realise how retarded their own position is.
I agree with this.
Atheists will certainly say they support logic and reason, and in some cases will deeply believe they really, really do. That is to say, some will be completely comfortable with being anti reason because there is no God, so pushing anti-reason rhetoric is fine, but other atheists will be fooling themselves and think their beliefs are based on reason.
However, the atheistic premises they start from are untrue, therefore, any conclusions they reach are not actually based on reason.
In reality, reason leads to a belief in God and the Biblical Christ, our Savior. Atheists take a wrong turn from the beginning, and they wrongly think that reason has lead them to their beliefs.
Two interesting books on this topic are:
The Mystery of Life's Origin
Probably the most devastating attack on abiogenic origin of life out there.
and
The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution
Very rare and effective takedown. Focuses more on the human elements of the evolution business and shows you how the sausage is actually made. W.R. Fix has an unusual (Esoteric Buddhist?) belief on origins - which he only details in the last chapter - but the overall book is fantastic.
The Mystery of Life's Origin
Probably the most devastating attack on abiogenic origin of life out there.
and
The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution
Very rare and effective takedown. Focuses more on the human elements of the evolution business and shows you how the sausage is actually made. W.R. Fix has an unusual (Esoteric Buddhist?) belief on origins - which he only details in the last chapter - but the overall book is fantastic.
Evolution has a lot of demonic energy to it. The outcome of it is the inversion of the Christian paradigm. Rather than fallen, we are rising beasts. Not only does this lay the foundation for the New Age vision of utopia, but it also gives us the credence to act like animals, because that is all we are. Also it relates to the obsession with sex that we see. The most important thing in life, from an evolutionary perspective is to reproduce. Thus we create this notion that sex is everything, combine this with the idea that we are just animals, and there is no moral authority and you get weirdos doing degenerate and perverted things to each other, because all we are is animals and the only goal of life is sex.
I believe it is demonic for that, and also because it spell-binds people. There is a lot of energy put into getting people to fervently believe it with extreme zeal. I used to be fully signed up to it. I was an atheist, I read most of Dawkins' books on the subject, it was a passion of mine to learn about it for a time. This was extremely hard for me to shake off. When I became a Christian, it still had its roots in me, and it was hard for me to reconcile. When I first converted I just decided to set the issue aside until I felt more confident diving into it. Even though I knew Christianity is the Truth, and I could also see that it is incompatible with evolution, I still could not free myself from it's grasp.
Through the grace of God, I feel as though the scales have fallen from my eyes. Evolution just sounds absurd to me now. The idea that something as majestic as a bird, could simply have developed it's flight accidentally, starting out without wings, and slowly developing them through the generations is just ridiculous. And to further stretch this to the idea that randomly somehow a chemical just started to reproduce itself, and then somehow managed to become a cell which then eventually became a bird is insane. And watching evolutionists trying to come up with the stories for how each miniscule step in this process conveyed an advantage is just laughable, so much so, that I have to believe that some dark force is at work getting people to buy into it.
Having been in it's grasp, I do think it is important to approach the issue with new Christians compassionately. I'm not sure exactly what this looks like, but it really does have a lot of people under it's spell, and if we handle the subject badly I imagine it can create negative conditions for the seed of faith to grow in that person.
I believe it is demonic for that, and also because it spell-binds people. There is a lot of energy put into getting people to fervently believe it with extreme zeal. I used to be fully signed up to it. I was an atheist, I read most of Dawkins' books on the subject, it was a passion of mine to learn about it for a time. This was extremely hard for me to shake off. When I became a Christian, it still had its roots in me, and it was hard for me to reconcile. When I first converted I just decided to set the issue aside until I felt more confident diving into it. Even though I knew Christianity is the Truth, and I could also see that it is incompatible with evolution, I still could not free myself from it's grasp.
Through the grace of God, I feel as though the scales have fallen from my eyes. Evolution just sounds absurd to me now. The idea that something as majestic as a bird, could simply have developed it's flight accidentally, starting out without wings, and slowly developing them through the generations is just ridiculous. And to further stretch this to the idea that randomly somehow a chemical just started to reproduce itself, and then somehow managed to become a cell which then eventually became a bird is insane. And watching evolutionists trying to come up with the stories for how each miniscule step in this process conveyed an advantage is just laughable, so much so, that I have to believe that some dark force is at work getting people to buy into it.
Having been in it's grasp, I do think it is important to approach the issue with new Christians compassionately. I'm not sure exactly what this looks like, but it really does have a lot of people under it's spell, and if we handle the subject badly I imagine it can create negative conditions for the seed of faith to grow in that person.
I'm still confused how a one celled organism became a two cell organism. The actual scientific explanation is "it just happened because the given the circumstances the change helped the organism survive". So did one one cell organism become one two celled organism? Was there a huge one-cell organism orgy and now there were many two-celled organisms? It's all nonsense.
Evolution "theory" is 99% narrative. There's no real hard evidence of how any of it was supposed to have happened, but they say: look at us now, if we reached this state from the original state in the prehistorical biotic soup, these things had to have happened, therefore they happened.
In the case of 2-cell organisms, they say: well, it must have happened since clearly there are 2-cell organisms. So they had to construct a narrative to explain that, despite there being no hard evidence of that process actually taking place. In fact, the mere existence of 1-cell and 2-cell organisms is what they call evidence. It's circular.
Former atheist here as well, when I converted I developed a huge interest in this topic and read into it very heavily. The first time I encountered Dawkins' writing was in his famous The God Delusion book which an atheist friend loaned to me. I suppose since my first encounter with him was after I became a Christian, I didn't see him through the rosy lens that a lot of atheists look up to him through. I was able to spot a number of very sloppy errors and fallacies in his writing. Even the preamble he wrote in it had gaping holes I was able to immediately identify. Needless to say, I wasn't very impressed by the man and I was confused why atheists were holding him up as some kind of super intelligent Christianity-killer. Credentialism is a heck of a drug, I guess, despite the man being a credentialed biologist and not a credentialed logician.
Please no JF Gariepy. Just no.
Props to JF on becoming bilingual, and he might make good points, but I just can't listen to his accent for a long period of time.
He's such a coomer.
I imagine they would say something like the following:
The first multicellular organism probably arose due to a mutation that meant upon division the cell two cells did not separate properly, and thus formed some kind of cluster of cells...
The problem here is that its not clear how being a cluster of cells is in anyway advantageous. Also there's no proposal for how cell division arose in the first instance. Getting DNA or RNA is difficult enough by random chance. But why would it just randomly arise that upon the genetic material replicating the cell would know to divide itself into two cells?
All evolutionists will say is 'well it had to have happened' and then its a case of playing just so stories.
I'm sure i don't have to watch it... But his premise on the Evolutionary or Revolutionary Phenotype or what ever seemed like a lot of really grandiose nonsense.
Funny enough we had an inquirer in our class last weekend, and since the person who teaches the inquirers class was not there he got to hear the priests class on Fr Seraphim Rose.
We are going over experts from his many writings and one we covered was about his unfinished book on evolution.
Anyway this inquirer asked began asking the priest about evolution, how he was an anthropologist, or at least in school for it, and became very argumentative. Saying how they had found some part of the brain that was XYZ and blah blah blah... As though my priest had never heard the argument before. He even got out of his chair to try and demonstrate the point.
The Priest, who's much more patient than I am finally told the guy enough...
This made me really really angry, much angrier than I should have been in Church. I suppose I needed to remember that I shouldn't have anger towards this person, who's inquiring, as even though they are arrogant, they are at least attempting to find The Truth.
But in general I think the biggest issue is that many who are so in favor of the Evolutionary theory are so condescending about things they really dont have proof of, and it requires them to suspend more disbelief to discount a divine creator than it does to simply say "I don't know and move on"
Funny enough we had an inquirer in our class last weekend, and since the person who teaches the inquirers class was not there he got to hear the priests class on Fr Seraphim Rose.
We are going over experts from his many writings and one we covered was about his unfinished book on evolution.
Anyway this inquirer asked began asking the priest about evolution, how he was an anthropologist, or at least in school for it, and became very argumentative. Saying how they had found some part of the brain that was XYZ and blah blah blah... As though my priest had never heard the argument before. He even got out of his chair to try and demonstrate the point.
The Priest, who's much more patient than I am finally told the guy enough...
This made me really really angry, much angrier than I should have been in Church. I suppose I needed to remember that I shouldn't have anger towards this person, who's inquiring, as even though they are arrogant, they are at least attempting to find The Truth.
But in general I think the biggest issue is that many who are so in favor of the Evolutionary theory are so condescending about things they really dont have proof of, and it requires them to suspend more disbelief to discount a divine creator than it does to simply say "I don't know and move on"
This really is the biggest issue. In the modern secular religion (undergirded by, among other things, evolution), intelligence is a saintly attribute, sought after much like we Christians seek after humility or good works. These people are, in a disordered way, striving toward virtue too. And so long as they believe what they are told to, they are regarded as virtuous (that is, intelligent). But if they fail to regurgitate the prevailing theory on any topic, their righteousness is stripped away and they are cast down amongst the sinners (that is, the ignorant aka Christians) -- and with little hope of forgiveness or redemption.
Before we can get through to these people, they must understand that intelligence is not a cardinal virtue -- it is the most significant barrier to their conversion (it is, after all, a manifestation of pride). And we must understand that we are not dealing with normal people, but rather fanatics of a false religion.
I've "converted" a couple from evolution by simply showing them the outrageous number of mutations required is physically impossible.
voxday.net
Speed Up Those Mutations - Vox Popoli
Biologists can’t do the math, but apparently they are beginning to understand that the mathematical critique of their evolutionary mutational model is posing a genuine threat to the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis and the theory of evolution by natural selection. New study suggests for the first time...
voxday.net
I think this was the argument Vox did with JF CreepyCrapey that exposed JFs lack of consistency and understanding of logic and math...I've "converted" a couple from evolution by simply showing them the outrageous number of mutations required is physically impossible.
Speed Up Those Mutations - Vox Popoli
Biologists can’t do the math, but apparently they are beginning to understand that the mathematical critique of their evolutionary mutational model is posing a genuine threat to the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis and the theory of evolution by natural selection. New study suggests for the first time...