What’s wrong with Darwinism? ( From Tony Campolo, Bill Clinton's spiritual adviser)

Christianity Today ^ | Feb 27,2009 | Tony Campolo

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!

[xzins]

Campolo is one of those rare public speakers gifted with the ability of humor. Humor is so entirely disarming. This entire culture has been changed via situation-comedies, so one shouldn’t overlook the power of humor.

If this guy can make me laugh, then surely he’s a good guy.

Unfortunately, Campolo began mixing a lot of political correctness in with his truth, and the next thing you know he looked like the Methodists (sorry) and the Catholics (tee hee), and nothing at all like the C-Chapelites :>).

[xzins]

My pleasure, sister. I hear we have the bad guys on the run.

:>)

[Jaime2099]

Science is dead here at FR. People like you are the reason why.

Your view of science may be dead, but true science is more than alive. Believing in Human Evolution means that one does not believe in the God of the Bible. If one maintains a belief in Human Evolution, then it is to call God and His words a lie.

Exact sciences will always be welcome to me and here at FR I'm sure. However, descriptive sciences (like Human Evolution) that force atheists' agendas on the ignorant masses will never be accepted by me nor most of the members I've seen post here. If phony Human Evolution science is dead here, then I say good riddance, true science lives on!

[P-Marlowe]

Tee Hee

[Alamo-Girl]

It’s always good to hear that bad guys are on the run!

[sam_paine]

Darwin even argued against advanced societies wasting time and money on caring for those who are insane, or suffer from birth defects. To him, these unfit members of our species ought not to survive.

On this I agree. Liberals should not be encouraged to procreate.

[Dog Gone]

Believing in Human Evolution means that one does not believe in the God of the Bible.

That is categorically false. I realize I have no chance of convincing you otherwise, nor do I even wish to try.

[LiteKeeper]

It is rare that I agree with Tony, but on this one he is right!

[Caramelgal]

Unfortunately, Campolo began mixing a lot of political correctness in with his truth, and the next thing you know he looked like the Methodists (sorry) and the Catholics (tee hee), and nothing at all like the C-Chapelites :>).

My pleasure, sister. I hear we have the bad guys on the run.

Tee Hee

It’s always good to hear that bad guys are on the run!

So just who are the “bad guys” in this case: The Evilutionsist, Methodists, Catholics, Mormons…..?

Sorry for asking, but it gets so hard to keep track of your all’s "enemies" list.

[Alamo-Girl]

The "bad guy" for me is the spirit of anti-Christ.

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. - I Corinthians 12:3

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. - I John 4:3

[xzins]

I’ve known P-Marlowe for nearly a decade now. We have fought in the trenches for conservatism in politics and religion as friends so much that we have an entire pantheon of insider jokes. Don’t ask me to explain KOETT.

But, when he picks at the Methodists and I at the C-Chapelites, it’s ‘cause I’m a Meth and he’s a CChap.

So, it’s just insider kidding around.

Please don’t call the SEC. Neither of us want to embarrass them. :>)

[Jaime2099]

That is categorically false. I realize I have no chance of convincing you otherwise, nor do I even wish to try.

Human Evolution is categorically false. Human Evolution seeks to disprove the literal Genesis, that is what the whole insane theory is all about. When the literal Genesis is proven to be false, then every scripture in the entire Bible can come into question. That would be an atheists unending delight to say the least.

One either believes the words of the God of the Bible or they do not. There is no maybe in this regard. The story of creation in Genesis is literal, if not literal, then why believe anything in the Bible? The religion of Human Evolution will never in a billion years disprove the literal Genesis with their phony, descriptive, false religion, atheistic inspired, science called Human Evolution.

[Dog Gone]

If Genesis is literal, how did the Sun get created on the FOURTH day? How were those prior days measured?

The first, second, and third days were created before there was such a thing as a day. Tricky, if literal, but that won’t stop you.

And all those stars that are millions of light years away that we somehow see from our porch even though the world is 6,000 years old (and we would only see the handful of stars 6,000 light years away or less), does not trouble you.

You are so certain in your beliefs that you can deem everyone who thinks differently as an atheist.

I have no doubt whether you have faith. You have it in droves.

Do you believe in dinosaurs?

[Jaime2099]

If Genesis is literal, how did the Sun get created on the FOURTH day? How were those prior days measured?

His light was taking place of the sun, he was not required to created the sun first. It's the beginning of time, what do you mean how were the days measured? They were measured as He chose to measure them. The first, second, and third days were created before there was such a thing as a day. Tricky, if literal, but that won’t stop you.

Empty words, God created days, he said he did it in a day and I believe Him. How long is a day to God? That's a good question, I don't know.

And all those stars that are millions of light years away that we somehow see from our porch even though the world is 6,000 years old (and we would only see the handful of stars 6,000 light years away or less), does not trouble you.

You just asked me how long a day was at creation, who knows. By your own words, a day to God could be a billion earth years. That does not disprove the literal Genesis even slightly.

You are so certain in your beliefs that you can deem everyone who thinks differently as an atheist. I have no doubt whether you have faith. You have it in droves.

Not true, I believe the people who founded the religion of Human Evolution are atheists, not everyone who follows them. They had to hide behind science in order to trick many Christians into believing their sack of lies.

As you have faith in droves as well. Your faith in nothing is passionate I will give you that much, but a faith in nothing is still, nothing.

[Dog Gone]

If a day is not a literal day, but however long God says it’s a day, then you’re definition of “literal” is utterly meaningless.

A “day” is either literal or it’s not. A “minute” means either 60 seconds, or it’s not literal.

If you think a day can mean a billion years, you’re coming over to my side, but don’t pretend that you’re reading the words literally.

[Caramelgal]

The "bad guy" for me is the spirit of anti-Christ.

So once again I ask you, in your opinion and in your own words, aside from us “Evilotionists”, who else would you place in the category of being in the spirit of the “anti-Christ”.

If a devout conservative, pro-life, Evangelical Christian says “I believe in God’s Creation” but doesn’t think the Earth is 6,000 years old, but perhaps 10,000 years or even older; are they “the spirit of anti-Christ”?

If a devout conservative, pro-life Roman Catholic says “I believe in God’s Creation” but doesn’t think the Earth is 6,000 years old, but perhaps 10,000 years or even older; are they “the spirit of anti-Christ”?

If a devout conservative, pro-life Jew says “I believe in God’s Creation” but doesn’t think the Earth is 6,000 years old, but perhaps 10,000 years or even older; are they “the spirit of anti-Christ”?

If a devout conservative, pro-life Mormon says “I believe in God’s Creation” and does think the Earth is 6,000 years old; are they “the spirit of anti-Christ”?

Seriously, I’m just trying to understand the ground rules. Is this really about science or is this just about religion and religious differences. If this is just an argument about religion, I’ll gladly step aside and let you all battle it out.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Part of the problem is also the secular humanist idea that school children should be taught Darwinism in science classes but not be presented with the Christian idea of man in philosophy, theology, religion, or history classes. Darwinism is an ideology with philosophical claims about the nature of man even when taught in science classes by teachers without adequate training in philosophy, theology, or the history of ideologies. They don't know that they are teaching an ideology. They think it's just "science." They are not adequately prepared in their training to distinguish between science and scientism.

[Dumb_Ox]

So does Campolo still have influence among the Dems? Or does “former advisor” mean “in pariahville”?

While not terribly concerned about the Darwin wars myself, I do like watching P.Z. Myers’ head explode. A prominent anti-Darwinist among the Dem ranks could make for some pretty intra-party fireworks.

[Alamo-Girl]

So once again I ask you, in your opinion and in your own words, aside from us “Evilotionists”, who else would you place in the category of being in the spirit of the “anti-Christ”.

You have erred for I have never said nor do I attest that all those who believe in evolution are anti-Christ.

Also, it could be true that all atheists are evolutionists. But it is not true that all evolutionists are atheist.