Evolution v Creationism

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What?!?

Are you a Christian? What on earth do you think Jesus' ministry was about? Good god! The Christ clearly discarded nearly every facet of the OT, all that crap from Deut and Numbers, all that stuff Moses said, thrown away.

I often wonder why the heck the OT is even part of Christian scripture, as far as I'm concerned it is a different God, the Lord God of Christ was in no way the same as the thing which demanded that no covenant be made with an enemy, that the "chosen" destroy utterly all whom stand in their way, men, women and children.

What are you? A Puritan?

Worse a Puritan Calvinist, so his God only loves some people, or loves some more than others.

[Incongruous]

Worse a Puritan Calvinist, so his God only loves some people, or loves some more than others.

I'm fuzzy on Heretical teachings (), but what?

How is this even justified by the ministry of Jesus? Where on earth did Jesus procalim that?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm fuzzy on Heretical teachings (), but what?

How is this even justified by the ministry of Jesus? Where on earth did Jesus procalim that?

Calvin decided that since God was all powerful then EVERYTHING must be according to his direct will. Ergo, evil acts must be something God ordained as part of his Divine Plan.

Further, God decides who he wants to save and inflicts upon them his "Special Grace" which compels them to love him, as opposed to "Common Grace" which is what everyone else gets, does not allow them to love God, condemns them to Hell, but makes their Earthly life bearable.

Such is Calvinism.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I read about Calivinist thought during my Humanities class and I also checked on him during my ethics class. I'm struggling to remember but... wasn't he really into the fire and brimstone kind of sermons? Or am I mixing him up with someone.

You know, I'm going to look him up right now. He was interesting to say the least, and not in a positive way as I recall.

[Samurai Waki]

I read about Calivinist thought during my Humanities class and I also checked on him during my ethics class. I'm struggling to remember but... wasn't he really into the fire and brimstone kind of sermons? Or am I mixing him up with someone.

You know, I'm going to look him up right now. He was interesting to say the least, and not in a positive way as I recall.

Yeah I think you're right, I seem to remember a section on John Calvin when I had to take Theology in School. Even the Catholics thought he was a bit extreme, and this was during the Witch Hunt Era.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Evolution, the Bible, homosexuality, history. Your views reflect a lack both of knowledge and of experience.

Maybe I shouldn't be so harsh on someone who valiantly (and without any ad hominems!) defends his views against so many detractors in various threads. Kudos to you for that sang froid.

But I also remember an exchange we had last year, when you told us that your family dissuaded you from reading the Bible and that you had therefore never really bothered to look at it. I impressed on you that you had a right to read anything you wanted and to pursue your own interest and curiosity. I even pointed out to you various angles from which to study the Bible.

It's not so much that they dissauded me, more it would have been embarassing, yeah I know I need some backbone.

I didn't come here to argue about creationalism, for now I'll just hold my hands up and say I'm not sure, if you re-read the first post you can see I'm not taking an argumentative tone. The only time I ever presented any sort of argument on the matter was when I asked (not stated) if it is possible that DNA similarties equated to common descent, something Sigurd also asked in more detail.

I started arguing more when things got off topic and people started telling me I don't know the Bible. I dind't read the whole thing and works of lots of other theologians to get told that. In fact, things like ATPG has said that I have made up are not actually my ideas. Take for example the non-eternal hell issue. I didn't come up with that, the Jehovas Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists did - two of the scrictest fundamentalist sects of there (with the former of course adding a word here or there).

Call me a sentimental old cynic, but I supposed that it would make you a wiser man. It is disappointing to see that only a year later you censure other peoples' lifestyles and views in the most scathing terms in the name of the Bible and 'nature', though based on scant knowledge of either. Have your curiosity and will to learn suddenly evaporated? Has one year of reading Scripture entitled you to pass judgment on science, parenting and other peoples' emotional or sexual life alike?

Did it teach you false pride instead of modesty?

Who's views did I censure? If I wasn't trying to learn I wouldn't have made a thread asking for other people to present their views. And on the original topic of evolution, I didnt' even argue against it, I just questioned if it could fit with the Bible! As for the thread on homosexuality... that is something I have always believed, that children should be raised by heterosexual parents. I'm not judging them, I'm not doing a Fred Phelps, I'm just saying that I don't think that such an environment would be good for a child. That's just what I think, a gut feeling, do I have to be an expert on stuff just to give an opinion?

What?!?

Are you a Christian? What on earth do you think Jesus' ministry was about? Good god! The Christ clearly discarded nearly every facet of the OT, all that crap from Deut and Numbers, all that stuff Moses said, thrown away.

I often wonder why the heck the OT is even part of Christian scripture, as far as I'm concerned it is a different God, the Lord God of Christ was in no way the same as the thing which demanded that no covenant be made with an enemy, that the "chosen" destroy utterly all whom stand in their way, men, women and children.

What are you? A Puritan?

I'm a puritan with a small 'p'. Please don't go down that road of calling all non-Catholics/non-close-to-Catholics as non-Christian, its not very nice and I could do the same to Catholic views but it's not what this thread is for.

Worse a Puritan Calvinist, so his God only loves some people, or loves some more than others.

Is there any other kind of Puritan (if we're using capital P's)?

[Adrian II]

[..] do I have to be an expert on stuff just to give an opinion?

That depends on the arguments you use. If you appeal to nature, the Bible or history in support of your opinion, you better make darn sure you cover those bases.

I remember I was totally delighted the first time my oldest son started talking to me. I mean talking as in: making sense of an issue by using his own brains, his own imagination, instead of preconceived notions handed to him by adults, including me.

I asked him what made Odysseus a hero, expecting the standerd kiddy answer that Odysseus was a winner. Instead, my son said: 'Because he was smart.' So I asked him what made Odysseus smart, expecting something along the line of: because he out-smarted his adversaries. Instead, my son said; 'Because he knew his own limits.'

Boink!

In his eleventh year of life, my son hit the fount of all wisdom. Just like that, between two bites of a sandwich. And thanks to a children's version of Homer, of course. It made him discover something about himself. That's what the good books are for, if they serve any useful purpose at all. Same goes for nature or history: in the end they are sources of self-knowledge for us, not of (natural) history or jurisprudence.

[Louis VI the Fat]

thanks to a children's version of Homer

A children's version? Tsk.

When I was eleven, being the refined intellectual that I am, I had already read Homer in its Latin original.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Louis, I will assume that was a joke.

[Rhyfelwyr]

When I was 11 all I was reading about was stories like how in a town in Mexico they dig a pit, but then people fall in so they need to fill it, and so they did another pit, etc.

Never mind your fancy continental education systems about philosophy and other such renaissance quirks, here you learn what you need to learn.

[Adrian II]

A children's version? Tsk.

When I was eleven, being the refined intellectual that I am, I had already read Homer in its Latin original.

Yeah, yeah. My kids fart, chew gum and start bitching if Dad doesn't serve them fries on Friday, dontcha worry. Real fries by the way, not the little French poof sticks.

[Louis VI the Fat]

little French poof sticks.

My girlfriend says that my lack of size isn't important, only what I do with it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's not so much that they dissauded me, more it would have been embarassing, yeah I know I need some backbone.

I didn't come here to argue about creationalism, for now I'll just hold my hands up and say I'm not sure, if you re-read the first post you can see I'm not taking an argumentative tone. The only time I ever presented any sort of argument on the matter was when I asked (not stated) if it is possible that DNA similarties equated to common descent, something Sigurd also asked in more detail.

I started arguing more when things got off topic and people started telling me I don't know the Bible. I dind't read the whole thing and works of lots of other theologians to get told that. In fact, things like ATPG has said that I have made up are not actually my ideas. Take for example the non-eternal hell issue. I didn't come up with that, the Jehovas Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists did - two of the scrictest fundamentalist sects of there (with the former of course adding a word here or there).

You don't interpret though, you just absorb. I've said this to you before, if you aren't willing to make your own judgements just don't ever touch theology, don't read the Bible, don't ever think about it. As to reading Theology, JW SDA are not reputable. Read Augustine, Boethius, Aquinus, Wesley, Hooker, Crammer, Wyclif, Luthor, and for some modern flavour try the last and current Popes, Rowan Willians and Alistair McGrath for starters.

Who's views did I censure? If I wasn't trying to learn I wouldn't have made a thread asking for other people to present their views. And on the original topic of evolution, I didnt' even argue against it, I just questioned if it could fit with the Bible! As for the thread on homosexuality... that is something I have always believed, that children should be raised by heterosexual parents. I'm not judging them, I'm not doing a Fred Phelps, I'm just saying that I don't think that such an environment would be good for a child. That's just what I think, a gut feeling, do I have to be an expert on stuff just to give an opinion?

It's your tone, not your content.

I'm a puritan with a small 'p'. Please don't go down that road of calling all non-Catholics/non-close-to-Catholics as non-Christian, its not very nice and I could do the same to Catholic views but it's not what this thread is for.



Is there any other kind of Puritan (if we're using capital P's)?

You look like a Puritan, not a puritan (what ywould hthat be anyway). As to the link with Calvinism, that is what the rest of Christianity finds disturbing, not your mode of worship.