Political Insider Demonstrates Fundamental Lack Of Understanding What It Is To Be A Christian ……. While Claiming To Be A Christian!!!!

So, this happened, today …..

Matthew Dowd

I am Catholic. Being Christian is a state of being. Practicing love. Some of the most Christian folks i know in life are atheists.

Matthew Dowd is currently a political analyst for ABC.  He’s a sometime Dim, sometime Repub.

Full disclosure, I’m not Catholic.  I’m a Southern Baptist, so, perhaps I don’t know exactly what it means to be Catholic.  However, I do presume being Catholic requires belief in the Son of God, Jesus Christ.  You see, it is the belief that Jesus Christ is part of the Trinity, and you believe in the Trinity which makes one a Christian.  Yes, there’s a lot more to it, but, fundamentally, one has to, not only believe in God, but, believe the teachings of Christ.  For instance, on has to believe John 14:6 …… “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (KJV) ….. Well, let’s go all the way on this, because it is most important.  You also have to believe that the Son of God came to this earth in the form of man, lived and died for your sins, and defeated death, was resurrected and ascended to heaven.  He will come back and us believers are saved from eternal death and live eternal life with our Savior!

It isn’t a matter of ‘some, more, or most’, it is Boolean.  Either you believe, or, you do not.  It is entirely impossible for an atheist to be any bit of Christian.  Again, you are either saved by the Grace of God, or, you are not. 

Is it possible for Atheists to act nicer than Christians?  Of course.  That doesn’t make them more Christian than Christians.  It makes them nicer.  BTW, “nice” isn’t necessarily requisite to being a Christian.  There is a time and place for everything.  We should be typically nice, depending upon the circumstance. 

Are there Christians who act in very non-Christian ways? ……… Yes!!!  Me!!!!!  I don’t!  I’m one of those many who still need a lot of work!  (A whole bunch of work!)  But, I work towards it.  Oh, yeh, to be a Christian, you also have to believe this …….. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (Romans 3:23 KJV) ….. To become a Christian you have to acknowledge that you are flawed and you have to ask Christ to come into your life and save you.  

Well, I meant for this post to go a different way.  But, I could not.

An atheist doesn’t believe in any of the things I’ve mentioned that are requisite to being a Christian. They can be the nicest, most loving people on earth (most are not), but, that still doesn’t get them any closer to Christ, the Way, the Truth, the Life.

It’s beyond disappointing when someone claims to be a Christian and says/writes things such as Dowd wrote.  It is very harmful to the non-believers.  If a “Christian” tells atheists they are more “Christian” than believers, then, it gives them comfort in their state of denial.  There isn’t much worse than that.  It’s inviting them to a state of eternal torment!  And, pushes them further away from God. 

My friends, when I say I’m a Christian, I’m not saying I’m a better person than anyone else.  I’m saying I acknowledge I’m a very flawed person and there is One much greater than I.  And, I’m working to get closer to that One.  I’d wish you’d join me on the journey.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Christian, News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

77 Responses to Political Insider Demonstrates Fundamental Lack Of Understanding What It Is To Be A Christian ……. While Claiming To Be A Christian!!!!

  1. Me says:

    Well, the way I take it is, he is the kind of person that would help out anyone, but don’t want to be stepped on either! Live and let live kinda person, and I have no problem with that!!!! Isn’t that what everyone wants?

    • Me says:

      But noted!!!!! I didn’t follow the link, I am just going on what you stated here!

    • suyts says:

      Right Me, I’m sure Mr. Dowd is a well-meaning person, as well as his atheist friends he describes in his Tweet. But, that’s not the same as being a Christian, and it shocks me that a person who describes himself as being a member of a particular Christian faith doesn’t know this.

      • Me says:

        Well it is like I said before here, I was skeptical long before I have heard of any of these of these atheist! And until now that is the first I have heard of the one you mentioned. All I am saying!!!!!

        • Me says:

          But now I re read your post he isn’t atheist! He is catholic! And Hey I was Anglican, and we were not too friendly with each other at one time! But it was BS! And I asked why? and the more I asked why the more BS I got! then I looked into it more, and I was labeled an atheist! then I was labeled an agnostic later! It didn’t bother me, why because, because BS is the same as lying! But some part of me wants to believe but with so much BS involved, I can’t trust any of it! Bottom line!

  2. Me says:

    And if you can’t tell the difference in good and evil and the difference with the lesser of two evils by now?????? Then that is most likely the problem!

  3. Latitude says:

    Thank goodness your parts finally came in and you’re up and running again!

    We’re in big trouble….conservatives, Christians, republicans, etc are not organized…
    The left is so organized it’s scary.

    They even have awards for being left, awards for being non-christian, on and on…
    ..it’s a constant drum beat from the left

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, well, they came in, but, were the wrong parts. Hopefully tomorrow I’ll hav e the right parts. This came from an old laptop my wife has.

      As to the organization of the different parties/views, ….. well, I’d have a couple of posts on that. And will, in the very near future. Yeh, we’re not organized, and they are, sorta …. there’s a huge civil war going on in the Dim party. The left is organized, but, not the Dim party. Repubs ….. well, I don’t know how the party machine is running now, but, Reince” Priebus won the election for Trump because of his organizational skills and ability to think on his feet. He put in place a very good machine. Even when the campaign was going wrong, the RNC was doing the right things. ……. Now, conservatives, no, we’re not organized, and it’s costing us. Christians haven’t been organized since Martin Luther …. well, since Christ’s Ascension. But, if we maintain and continue moving forward, even it is just baby steps, we’ll do okay in the next couple elections.

      • Latitude says:

        dunno…..conservatives tried with the TEA party….
        …then you look at liberals….they have everything from Nobel and Pulitzer on down to the Oscars and Academy…..Occupy Wall street, BLM, Soros, teachers unions, on and on and on…polls..media….movies…and every one of them are liberal awards or designed to fortify liberal ideals
        It’s hard to fight something like that

  4. cdquarles says:

    Amen, James.

    This is why I cannot believe that one can be agnostic of the Reality of He That Is, who is the One we call God today, in English. Evidence of Him is literally you and all that is around you. It is up to you to accept it as evidence or not. That is the Free Will He gives us, and that also is evidence of the Reality of Him.

    • suyts says:

      You mean stuff like our neurons, heart, lungs, WBCs, and stuff, working towards the same goal, at the same time as photosynthesis and stuff working in plants, in conjunction with the sun and other astral things, is prolly not just happenstance? …… Yeh, I don’t understand it either. The proof of God is everywhere. I never needed the Bible to understand there was a much higher power. I needed the Bible to understand what that higher power wanted.

      • leftinflagstaff says:

        I think you can also understand what God wants from that nature you mentioned. I fear the Bible has too much of man’s influence. Men didn’t write nature.

        And it’s not a knock on Christianity. It’s s knock on the imperfections of men. The Christian ideals are still very honorable, besides just being the most inline with common sense.

        But even it can at times be used as a weapon against common sense.

      • Latitude says:

        . I needed the Bible to understand what that higher power wanted….

        You know, sometimes you are so profound it’s scary….spot on

      • cdquarles says:

        I mean that and much more. There are conditional truths and these are what we see and work with in the material world. There are also logically necessary truths. These do not depend on conditions by necessity.

        For instance, I did not bring myself into being. I brought my children into being yet it took another being to act with me to do that. They don’t exist as full beings without me. I don’t exist as a full being without my parents. My parents didn’t and so forth. There are material conditions required for biological life, in chemical bodies, to exist. These conditions did not bring themselves into existence, for conditions are not necessarily beings that can act. Finally, there is this question: Can any thing be if there is no thing? There are two logical answers to that. Those are yes and no. What follows logically if there must be a thing for material existence to exist and that material existence could not bring itself into being? Materialists logically must believe, by faith, that 1. material existence is all that can exist, ever, and 2. that material existence brought itself into existence, given no possibility of a non material existence.

        • Me says:

          Or #3. It was always here????????Bottom Line, Matter can not be created nor destroyed!!!!!

        • Me says:

          Bottom line is it was always here! Just not in this state! the universe was always here and in constant change, just like it will always be! There is no firmament that prevents anyone from leaving, the moon landing was real, or the Soviets at the time would have exposed it????? Remember that thing called the Cold War???? Ya know where the US and the USSR were to nuke each other????? Apparently they could sent up the first sat and track it but couldn’t track a mission to the moon???? Then the Dinosaurs??? If it was just dragons why are there so many different types??? Ir It can go on and on and on!!! The Flat earth??? LMAO!!!!! If it is flat then why are there mountains and hills???? If it is flat then ether we should have no land and be under water or there should be no water and all flat land! Maybe ground water???? And if all the oil and hydrocarbons on this rock was caused by Dinosaur and fossils???? Then how is there are moons out there that rain methane and the such that is to be fossil fuels???? But they still haven’t found life outside of our planet???? I thought it was the product of life they said????? And this Climate Change Shit is just that Shit! PPM, Power, Prestige and Money! Same as Religion, Bottom Line!

        • Me says:

          Bottom line is it was always here! Just not in this state! the universe was always here and in constant change, just like it will always be! There is no firmament that prevents anyone from leaving, the moon landing was real, or the Soviets at the time would have exposed it????? Remember that thing called the Cold War???? Ya know where the US and the USSR were to nuke each other????? Apparently they could sent up the first sat and track it but couldn’t track a mission to the moon???? Then the Dinosaurs??? If it was just dragons why are there so many different types??? Ir It can go on and on and on!!! The Flat earth??? LMAO!!!!! If it is flat then why are there mountains and hills???? If it is flat then ether we should have no land and be under water or there should be no water and all flat land! Maybe ground water???? And if all the oil and hydrocarbons on this rock was caused by Dinosaur and fossils???? Then how is there are moons out there that rain methane and the such that is to be fossil fuels???? But they still haven’t found life outside of our planet???? I thought it was the product of life they said????? And this Climate Change Shit is just that Shit! PPM, Power, Prestige and Money! Same as Religion, Bottom Line!

        • Me says:

          And If any of you believe that is what I believe they you are wrong! That is what I think, not believe!

        • Me says:

          And that is why Me is a conservative, because I think, and if I am wrong I will change Me view! I voted in the past for a liberal three times???? Just saying! But I don’t see that happening again anytime ever again!

        • cdquarles says:

          No, Me, you’ve got it incorrect. Energy, within the closed material system, once it exists, cannot be destroyed, only converted to other forms. That does not mean that energy has always existed. If you want to insist that matter/energy has always been, is now, and always will be, then you are saying that matter is God; but that’s not the case. Matter, of its essence, is not a being that can act. It takes a being that can act to make matter into beings that can act.

        • suyts says:

          Cd I Iike that! It’s true.

        • Me says:

          Energy is required the change the state of matter but in the end it all comes from Hydrogen! Bottom Line!

        • Me says:

          Thus matter cannot be created nor destroyed!

        • Me says:

          And if you want to deeper into that, yes there are parts of that, that matter that is even smaller that makes up Hydrogen! But it is still matter and requires energy for it to change! So still, in the end Matter cannot be created nor destroyed! Again! Bottom Line!

        • Me says:

          So in the end it always existed! But you are fixated on the created part??? Aren’t you, And I know why! 😉 But who created the creator???

        • Me says:

          And the answer to that is we did!!!! Human kind, unless there is some alien influence working in the shadows??? LMAO! We created the creator!! All goes back to PPM! Power, Prestige and Money!

        • Me says:

          As someone here claimed the Church of Metallica! LMAO! in the lyrics “you lie so much you believe yourself”??? well that works both ways here, so in this instance it can be, maybe or is it one or the other! It can be stated differently in ” you believe so much you lie to yourself”!!!! How about that? And I am still a skeptic!!!!!

        • cdquarles says:

          Me, sigh. No one created the Creator The Creator is He That Is Existence and the One Who Is Pure Act. That’s where you go wrong and so have so many others gone wrong. Personally, I think people do this because they are innately aware of the implication of that. Just as Lucifer deluded himself first, before he deluded others, so did Adam (the First Man) delude himself, and note, Adam did not delude Eve, Satan did that; and that’s why it is Adam’s sin that propagates to us, not Eve’s. Hydrogen did not always exist and this is implied by the Big Bang hypothesis. Hydrogen is not a being that can act of its own nature. That is why there is a Creator, who did not have to create anything, yet did because He sees that Life is Good and that there should be an abundance of it.

        • cdquarles says:

          Make that hydrogen is not a being that can act of its own nature beyond its simple chemical reactivity.

        • Me, I think if you want to argue whether it all happened the way our religions say it did, fine. But to argue that it was always here, is about as silly as saying the computer that you’re using was always here. For either the simple matter that makes it, or the functioning state of that matter which makes it work.

        • dirkhblog says:

          “the moon landing was real, or the Soviets at the time would have exposed it”

          Or traded their knowledge of the hoax for something else: Wheat deliveries during the early 1970ies, propping the USSR up during a drought; and machines that make precise ball bearings for ICBM guidance systems, which Nixon allowed to be exported.

          I can tell you what we would have now, had the moon landing actually happened:
          a) an American manned military base on the moon.
          b) mining on the moon and mass drivers shooting the mined metal into space to be used for parts for space stations
          c) Luxury resorts for aging American billionaires who want to play around in low gravity. Imagine what fun they would have with their teenage sugarbabes.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Dirk, man, c’mon… the landing was faked?

        • cdquarles says:

          Dirk, I don’t know how old you are, but several of us here lived through that era. With respect to an American military base on the moon, our government at the time and our people at the tine expressly rejected that. Of course, that would not have stopped a ‘black’ project, but having people go there to set up a permanent base would have been detectable by the radars of the day. With respect to mining the moon, that was suggested but the consensus of the day was that it would be better to mine asteroids rather than the moon. The ability to get the ephemerids and the launchers took about as much time as getting a human lander there in the first place. Then there was the financial will to do it. The ‘hard’ times of the 70s to early 80s meant putting emphasis on other things. Post 90s, the emphasis shifted to BMD. That’s just now paying off. With respect to a billionaire resort, that was precluded by government policy that excluded private parties from even attempting such a thing. Only within the last couple of decades has there been any serious effort put into ‘space tourism’.

        • >>
          I can tell you what we would have now, had the moon landing actually happened:
          <<

          Look at the Moon dust as it’s kicked around or as the Moon buggy throws it up. They are in a vacuum. The technology of creating and filming in a studio-sized vacuum chamber is more involved and advanced than just simply going to the Moon. Of course, it can be faked with today’s technology, but I like the real thing.

          Jim

        • Latitude says:

          Dirk, Nixon was president…..someone would have leaked it way before now

        • dirkhblog says:

          “The technology of creating and filming in a studio-sized vacuum chamber is more involved and advanced than just simply going to the Moon. ”

          The dust that the moon buggy throws up travels perfectly normal. Just speed it up two times. BTW dust. The astronauts left perfectly crisp footprints in allegedly ultrafine bone-dry dust. That doesn’t make sense.

          And, they landed a telephone box sized thing on the moon sitting on a pretty dangerous pile of explosives for the return. Yet they avoided the danger of bringing a generator because – get this – lugging batteries for 72 hours consumption was SAFER – and quite obviously, weight was AB SO LUTE LY no concern.

          And they didn’t even have Li Ion batteries.

        • dirkhblog says:

          “With respect to an American military base on the moon, our government at the time and our people at the tine expressly rejected that. […]With respect to a billionaire resort, that was precluded by government policy that excluded private parties from even attempting such a thing.”

          Well okay, those are rationalisations to explain away the lack of any technological progress since the super advanced 1960ies.
          I would say, these rationalisations are extremely cheap to produce – just give a journalist 5 bucks.
          Ok.
          That’s all nontechnical nonsense. The point is: In addition to these cheap rationalisations, they threw away all blueprints, and LOST all original video tapes. NASA just can’t catch a break, what with all the THINGS in the warehouse.
          Usually, you just have an accidental fire for losing all the things. What’s it called? Yiddish lightning.

        • cdquarles says:

          Dirk, you say they were cheap rationalizations. I lived through it. There was a national debate about it. Politicians made a rule respecting it. The point, Dirk, is *that this is what happened*, regardless of your opinion. I will take it as yes that you are too young to have lived through it. I also note something important that you didn’t address.

        • >>
          dirkhblog says:
          July 26, 2017 at 9:07 pm

          The dust that the moon buggy throws up travels perfectly normal. Just speed it up two times. BTW dust. The astronauts left perfectly crisp footprints in allegedly ultrafine bone-dry dust. That doesn’t make sense.
          <<

          You missed the point. The surface pressure on Mars is about 600 pascals. Compared to Earth, that’s about a 99.4% vacuum. Yet even that little bit of atmosphere raises clouds of dust, the atmosphere is full of dust, and the planet suffers from planet-wide dust storms.

          The Moon’s atmosphere is something like 1E-10% vacuum–we’re talking essentially a complete vacuum. There’s no clouds of dust kicked up by the astronauts walking or by their Moon buggies. As I said, the technology for creating a near perfect, studio-size vacuum on the Earth didn’t exist. The piles of dust move in clumps. They look sticky, but they don’t stick to anything. They are just dry clumps of dust moving in a vacuum.

          Also, who left all those retroreflectors on the Moon? Robots?

          I think that if you, yourself, went to the Moon and saw all those footprints you still wouldn’t believe it–so I’m wasting my time here.

          Jim

        • dirkhblog says:

          “Also, who left all those retroreflectors on the Moon? Robots?”

          IF such retroreflectors exist, they could have been placed by robots like the soviet lander. BUT, as Lasers are dispersed to a mile wide area, the ordinary albedo of the moon suffices to explain any photon reflected .
          The whole laser reflection miracle is one big piece of gaslighting – and typical for the “proofs” that the moonlanding proponents use. Giant plotholes; not unlike the typical Hollywood script – and as it was a Hollywood production, (in Lookout Mountain Labs at Laurel canyon, in the same building where they faked the nuclear explosion propaganda films of the 1940ies/50ies), maybe even the same scriptwriters.

        • dirkhblog says:

          “I think that if you, yourself, went to the Moon and saw all those footprints you still wouldn’t believe it–so I’m wasting my time here.”

          There are none.

        • Please tell me these Etch-a-Sketchs we’re interacting on are real, at least.

  5. Me says:

    And this pisses me off, with our veterans! This POS gets that kind of settlement and what do we get for fighting for our country???? Apparently we were both Canadian citizens and the shit we went through boot camp wasn’t bad enough but this snow flake goes against us and our allies and gets awarded 10 Mill!!!! BS! That’s the liberals fer ya!!! Same as the Dems down there! Bottom Line!

    • Me says:

      And to make things worse we have the General that saw the Rwanda genocide serving under the UN at the time that wasn’t allowed to intervene and let it happen, claimed on CBC radio that this settlement is justified?????????

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, Me, I saw that. I would have probably wrote about it if I had my PC up and running. It’s unimaginable. And, yeh, leftards are the same leftards everywhere. I know millions of Canadians are fuming about this. It’s really heartbreaking.

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, it’s not hard to understand that many universities harbor contempt for America and what she stands for.

    • dirkhblog says:

      They hate us so much, they MUST come to our countries to live in our cities with our sanitation systems. Flush toilets are racist because Thomas Crapper was a white male. And Christian.

  6. Thank you Sir for posting that message.
    The Word says “whosoever will may come”
    The Spirit says “such a One come
    When our Lord said “Lazarus come forth” it wasn’t request.
    Lazarus did not say I’ll get back to you on that, he came out
    of death alive again. It is same when we are called, we come to Life
    and are made New!!
    Alfred

  7. Latitude says:

    Foxworthy rocks………

    The “M” word… by Jeff Foxworthy.

    Have you ever wondered why it’s OK to make jokes about
    Catholics, Jews, Christians, the Pope, the Irish, the
    Italians, the Polish, the Hungarians, the Chinese, the
    French (including French Canadians), the elderly, bad
    golfers, men/women, blacks/whites, etc, but its insensitive
    to make jokes about the Muslims?

    Well, it’s time to level the playing field and be
    politically incorrect, by including our friends, the
    Muslims, on this grandiose list.

    So Jeff Foxworthy did his part to include the Muslims on his
    list …

    1. If you grow and refine heroin for a living, but morally
    object to the use of liquor, You may be a Muslim.

    2. If you own a $3,000 machine gun and a $5,000 rocket
    launcher, but can’t afford shoes, You may be a Muslim.

    3. If you have more wives than teeth, You may be a Muslim.

    4. If you wipe your butt with your bare hand, but consider
    bacon to be unclean, You may be a Muslim.

    5. If you think vests come in two styles, Bullet-proof and
    suicide, You may be a Muslim.

    6. If you can’t think of anyone that you haven’t
    declared jihad against, You may be a Muslim.

    7. If you consider television dangerous, but routinely carry
    explosives in your clothing, You may be a Muslim.

    8. If you were amazed to discover that cell phones have
    uses, other than setting off roadside bombs, You may be a
    Muslim.

    9. If you have nothing against women and think every man
    should own at least four, then you, too, may be a Muslim.

    10. If you find this offensive and do not forward it, you
    are part of the problem here in America …but if you delete
    this, you are most likely a Muslim.

  8. Latitude says:

    MAGA! Trump Has Made America $4.1 TRILLION Richer…

  9. dirkhblog says:

    The explanations of atheists for the beauty of creation all around us are just stupid. If evolution followed Dawkins’ idea of the selfish gene, it would have stopped at the algae. A perfect gene reproduction machine. An algae reproduces more than 10,000 times as quickly as a human. Under the Dawkins criterium humans are a completely useless lifeform. Brains are even more useless. They don’t help in reproduction at all and cost huge amounts of energy.

    • leftinflagstaff says:

      The varied life forms aren’t useless if something threatens the viability of algae. Why can’t the progression of varied life, physically and intellectually, also be by intelligent design?

      If we’re all algae, and algae ends, life ends.

      • leftinflagstaff says:

        Is that why you reject the moon landing? Algae isn’t getting us to a new, livable planet, if that actually became life’s need. Or, if the need is to return to algae, and start over, why not design both options?

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Noah and the Ark, Dirk.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          The lesser life on the ark doesn’t survive without Noah. Noah doesn’t survive without it.

        • dirkhblog says:

          “Is that why you reject the moon landing? Algae isn’t getting us to a new, livable planet, if that actually became life’s need.”

          I reject believing in the moon landing exactly because of what I stated. I could add, it’s a giant government program that ACHIEVED ITS GOALS, and SIX MONTHS EARLY. Talk about miracles right there. Mostly under democrat administration. Double miracle.

          As to algae wouldn’t get us to a new livable planet, well first, the moon landing didn’t either; and second, I use DAWKINS argument here to show that after HIS argument, humans are a faulty lifeform – not algae.

          You can of course say, yeah, accidentally the algae gave rise to the complex lifeforms that eat algae, but, algae is already the perfect engine for Dawkins’ argument, still making humans a completely crappy byproduct. Moon landings and colonizing other planets and writing books like THE SELFISH GENE are therefore entirely pointless exercises.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Not if the goal is to best insure that life continues. Our star will burn out.

        • dirkhblog says:

          And, I watched INTERSTELLAR. As a silent movie. I sat in the train and a girl next to me watched it with headphones on her tablet. Took me a while to identify it, first I thought it was GRAVITY. Well anyway. It’s fun to watch Hollywood productions without sound on tiny screens because you analyse the pictures only. And Boy, did it look like cheap crap with silly computer effects.

        • dirkhblog says:

          “Not if the goal is to best insure that life continues. Our star will burn out.”

          Even Dawkins doesn’t claim that algae DNA has some magical plan to escape the planet. Making humans a crappy byproduct that accidentally saved the bacon of the algae.
          But then, all of evolution is a series of accidents, n’est-ce pas?
          All of the time, evolution optimizes for ONE THING: rapid multiplication, yet SOMEHOW the incredibly INCAPABLE humans arise, a TOTAL failure of that optimization program, but before you can blink, this doofus species saves all of life from perishing.
          Magical thinking. Humans are just too complex to be an accidental crappy byproduct. All other complex lifeforms as well. As an optimization problem, nothing of this makes sense. Dawkins is a biologist and biologists are, let’s say, not optimization experts. Keep them away from maths. It’s a toxic brew.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          I think a God could pull it off.

    • leftinflagstaff says:

      And of course, even the creation story happens in stages. From the sea, to land, to man.

      • dirkhblog says:

        But Genesis is not THE SELFISH GENE and vice versa. Genesis is PLAUSIBLE.

        • dirkhblog says:

          Or in other words, evolution violates Occam’s razor.
          Evolution is the best that the materialists could come up with. And of course, there are plot holes all over it. Starting with the origin of life. Starting at the start, that’s how crappy it is.

        • I just see don’t why the concepts of God and evolution have to be mutually exclusive. Especially now that we’re gaining knowledge of genetic modification. And understanding that Genesis was written before we did.

        • cdquarles says:

          Leftin, they aren’t mutually exclusive. The objection with respect to evolution is that people, including scientists (scientismists?) substitute Evolution for God. Oh, if pressed, they’ll deny it. but there is evidence for it. I have, for instance, taken papers that really had nothing to do with Evolution at all and have Evolution invoked in a manner such that semantically I could substitute God and the meaning would not have changed.

        • cdquarles says:

          I’ll put it this way, leftin: beings subject to change are subject to transformation. Evolution is a generic label for transformation over time. Evolution, as such, explains nothing about said transformation. It just says transformation happens and possibly happens via this path or some other path.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Yes. I think Man could be the intended result of evolution, not an ‘accidental crappy byproduct.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Intended by God.

        • dirkhblog says:

          leftinflagstaff says:
          July 27, 2017 at 12:49 pm
          “I just see don’t why the concepts of God and evolution have to be mutually exclusive. Especially now that we’re gaining knowledge of genetic modification.”

          The very core of the concept of evolution is that it is an UNGUIDED process of random changes. It’s dogma #1 of the materialists. Materialism collapses without it.

          GENETICS actually DESTROYS the concept – as geneticists clearly show that all mutations they find are neutral or negative, and that in each generation these neutral or negative mutations accumulate in EVERY CHILD. 100 new ones per parent given to each child.

          Currently I assume that humans can only last due to constant divine interference.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          I find it interesting that most of the Evolutionists and Creationists are completely certain that God was not involved. For different reasons of course. The former doesn’t want God to exist, the latter doesn’t want it to be the method He used. Often, in these situations, both sides are wrong.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s