The evolution theory is a huge misinterpretation of the Bible.

a reply to: povray

I would not get your hopes up about him being correct, he does not even comprehend his own 10 commandments.

You're made from stardust put it that way, just like everything else.

a reply to: andy06shake

Nice, more energy to feed on. Thx!

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Aye well, you religious belief system could indeed be considered to be rather vampiristic.

Tuck in, and suck away. x

a reply to: andy06shake

It's just understanding about the nature of things.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Nature of things eh?

Evolution is the nature of things.

What does Christianity have to do with nature aside from appropriation of the Pagan festivals and holidays?

I don't think Yahweh and Pan get on very well.

a reply to: andy06shake

Your face is starting to show. It's ugly.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Just banter mate.

After all us "children of darkness" do like to take the pee.

It's not my face thats in question but that of the creator, is it not?

If its any consolation im sure he/she/it would wish us to question the nature of our existence, i mean he has got to wonder where he came from does he not?

a reply to: andy06shake

You're ignorant. Learn from this.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Aye all right Mr. Jefferson calm down.

Learn from what exactly???

Illuminate me then, if you think you must. x

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
You're ignorant. Learn from this.

You purport to be a Christian. You need to learn tolerance and forbearance.

This person is not a true Christian - he/she is full of hatred and malice. Have a read of some of the threads this person has originated. This person is a tragedy-in-waiting.

a reply to: TerraLiga

There is a phrase from the 90s I will throw in here, they are a Left Hand Path christian. They are embodying the vengeful, Jealous nature of the Deity in the Old testament, as opposed to the one in the New (who are probably different Gods, if you are being objective).

So yeah, they are a Christian, just ones who stopped reading before Jesus enters the myth.

And suddenly God is real and Jesus existed.

Can't win? Claim they are a bad Christian.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: andy06shake

... Earlier you mentioned the Roman Catholic killings which happened centuries ago.

The Catholic Church and the Holocaust; Awake!—1998

FROM as early as 1987, there was talk of plans by the Catholic Church to produce a document acknowledging its responsibility in the Holocaust. So there was great expectation when in March 1998 the Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews released the document entitled We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah.* [Shoah is the Hebrew name for the Holocaust, the mass murder by the Nazis of Jews, Gypsies, Poles, Slavs, and others during World War II.]

While the document was appreciated by some, many were dissatisfied with its contents. Why? What did they find objectionable?

Anti-Judaism and Anti-Semitism

The Vatican document makes a distinction between anti-Judaism, for which the church acknowledges guilt, and anti-Semitism, which it disclaims. Many find the distinction and the conclusion to which it leads unsatisfying. German rabbi Ignatz Bubis said: “To me it seems like a way of saying that it’s not our fault; it’s someone else’s fault.”

Although Italian Catholic historian Giorgio Vecchio accepts the distinction between anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism, he points out that “the problem is also that of understanding how Catholic anti-Judaism may have contributed to the development of anti-Semitism.” It is of interest that the Vatican paper L’Osservatore Romano, of November 22-23, 1895, published a letter stating: “Any sincere Catholic is, in essence, anti-Semitic: so is the priesthood, by obligation of doctrine and ministry.”

The part of the Vatican document that provoked the most criticism, however, was the defense of the actions of Pius XII, appointed pope on the eve of World War II. Pius XII had served as nuncio (papal legate) to Germany from 1917 to 1929.

The Silence of Pius XII

Italian jurist Francesco Margiotta Broglio did not think that the document “offers new or explanatory elements on the widely debated issue of the so-called ‘silence’ of Pope Pius XII, on his alleged German sympathies, and on his diplomatic actions toward the Nazi regime both before and during his papacy.”

The majority of commentators agree that no matter how one views the import of the document We Remember, the question of why leaders of the Catholic Church remained silent about the genocide in Nazi concentration camps “remains wide open.” According to American historian George Mosse, by choosing silence Pius XII “saved the church but sacrificed her moral message. He behaved like a head of State, not like a pope.” Well-informed Vatican observers believe that what delayed the release of the document was the difficulty in handling the role of Pius XII in the Holocaust.

The document’s defense of Pope Pius XII has irritated many. “Silence on the ‘pope’s silences’ makes this document disappointing,” writes Arrigo Levi. Elie Wiesel, winner of the 1986 Nobel Prize for Peace, said: “It seems to me that claiming we Jews should be grateful to Pius XII is a heresy, to put it mildly.”

Shifting the Blame

The document adopts the traditional distinction made by Catholic theologians, according to which it is claimed that the church as an institution is holy and preserved from error by God, while its members, who are sinners, are the guilty parties for any evils perpetrated. The Vatican commission writes: “The spiritual resistance and concrete action of other Christians was not that which might have been expected from Christ’s followers. . . . [Such ones] were not strong enough to raise their voices in protest. . . . We deeply regret the errors and failures of those sons and daughters of the Church.”

...

Hmmm, sounds familiar somehow (the bolded part).

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

What's the bet people subverted science to there own evil purposes rather than science being directly responsible?

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: andy06shake

The Catholic church in those days had people doing evil deeds, but they made their own rules.

Why the Churches Kept Silent; Awake!—1995
Religion Takes Sides; Awake!—1994

ON September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland, starting World War II. Three weeks later The New York Times carried the headline: “German Soldiers Rallied by Churches.” Did German churches really support Hitler’s wars?

Friedrich Heer, Roman Catholic professor of history at Vienna University, acknowledged that they did: “In the cold facts of German history, the Cross and the swastika came ever closer together, until the swastika proclaimed the message of victory from the towers of German cathedrals, swastika flags appeared round altars and Catholic and Protestant theologians, pastors, churchmen and statesmen welcomed the alliance with Hitler.”

Indeed, church leaders gave unqualified support to Hitler’s war effort, as Roman Catholic professor Gordon Zahn wrote: “The German Catholic who looked to his religious superiors for spiritual guidance and direction regarding service in Hitler’s wars received virtually the same answers he would have received from the Nazi ruler himself.”
...

Of course, (neo-)Darwinism or evolutionary theory (evolutionary philosophies/ideas and storylines) are only labeled as "science". In reality it has little to do with true science/knowledge (from the Latin scientia meaning knowledge).

Maybe a clue why evolutionary theory is approved of by the Roman Catholic Church, among those Roman Catholics that also earn a nice living with promoting evolutionary ideas and storylines such as Kenneth Miller with his 'chromosome #2 fusion' story.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: andy06shake

Yea, science is as good as the people doing it.

Do a google search for scientific blunders.

Yeh we are gods children so , must be as good as him at it eh , like how he made a species and a planet

then #ed it up and had to kill us all with a giant flood

talk about Epic mistakes , I thought god was infallible .

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance

originally posted by: TerraLiga

Just as we are unlikely to turn you from your book, you are certainly not going to turn us back to something we rejected in search of better and more fulfilling answers.

You reject nothing, you deny it seemingly because you are afraid to know anything different that what you can observe with your 5 senses.

What more is there to religion other than " god done it all "

and that is the end to any investigation into the mystery of the universe under religion.

You say that we are afraid of anything other than what we observe with our own 5 senses

then clearly you have no clue about science , tell me , how can humans detect xrays with their 5 senses ?
can humans detect gravitons ? gamma rays ? Alpha rays ?

I think that you are wrong , science goes far beyond what humans can detect or experience with our limited senses
so we invent experiments to allow us to understand things we cant sense .

and you completely disregard the millions of humans who were here before organised religion even existed, who practice shamanism using various methods , none of which led to a monotheistic deity .

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Where, when?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: andy06shake

What i don't hold with is Mans organized religious practices, interpretation anthropomorphization of God.

Why throw away the potential for anthropomorphism? It insists on a direct link between the Source God and our human experience. The human being the manifestation of this creative Spirit. We are definitely a vessel capable of all sorts of creation (and destruction).

"The Mind, O Tat, is of God's very essence - (if such a thing as essence of God there be) - and what that is, it and it only knows precisely. The Mind, then, is not separated off from God's essentiality, but is united to it, as light to sun. This Mind in men is God, and for this cause some of mankind are gods, and their humanity is nigh unto divinity. For the Good Daimon said: "Gods are immortal men, and men are mortal gods."

Evolution insists that consciousness came from matter, but it makes more sense that matter came from consciousness, especially in light of empirical evidence from quantum physics.

All just a fancy way to say man is the next best thing to god. What an ego on this one.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Prove God is real, but my many gods are not. Prove Jesus existed, and the teachings he had are the teachings in the bible. At the same time they Mithra, Adonis, etc did not exist.

You can't have it both ways.

a reply to: sapien82

I have no clue why you guys are always stressing. LOL

Enjoy life.