Ah, BUT! Evangelicals have got it all wrong. Ask Meade. He's got it right.Econoline wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2020 6:31 amEvangelicals Are Confident God Will Stop COVID-19 Just Like He Stopped Gun Violence
God vs. Darwin
Re: God vs. Darwin
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
- MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21015
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: God vs. Darwin
Recognition at last! Although they can't have it all wrong, because I'm one.
[The spoof article is mildly amusing; the title was the funniest by far] IMO
[The spoof article is mildly amusing; the title was the funniest by far] IMO
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
-
- Posts: 4270
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
- Location: Near Bear, Delaware
Re: God vs. Darwin
Me, I wonder about the 'Evangelicals' alot. What do they really believe? They tell me it is very important to say frequently out loud and in public, that this in one nation, under God, with . . . . But then why do so many of those churches have a flag pole in the yard, with the national flag ABOVE the christian flag?
Re: God vs. Darwin
And why, after spending 2000 years warning us about the prophecies foretelling the coming of the antichrist, did they vote for the guy who fulfills them?
DEI: Definitely Earned It
“Because you have to be twice as good to get half as far.”
—The Ancestors
“I'm not courageous, I'm surrounded by cowards”
—Adam Kinzinger
“Because you have to be twice as good to get half as far.”
—The Ancestors
“I'm not courageous, I'm surrounded by cowards”
—Adam Kinzinger
Re: God vs. Darwin
The problem is people think Evangelicals are a monolithic group. They are not. They really don’t even have a unified belief system outside of they believe in Jesus and “screw that Pope guy.” (There’s a little more to it than that but most of it would make your eyes gloss over. But on those reasons are why Lutherans, Episcopalians, JWs, Mormons, Amish, Mennonites etc. aren’t considered Evangelical. (Catholics go without saying)
People like to use Evangelical interchangeably with Southern Baptist, but, that is a lot like saying Americans are White. That is to say they are the biggest subset of a larger whole. (One they aren’t even the majority of). And while you can identify trends in the whole, statements along the lines of “Evangelicals believe X” will often have a large minorities (and sometimes Majorities) that don’t in fact believe X.
In fact Evangelicals often suffer from being tarred by the brush of their noisiest “adherents”.
Example: preachers of the “prosperity gospel”.
Most evangelicals loathe these charlatans, but, because they dress and spend flashy, have big tv shows, books, and other vehicles <-(sometimes literally) designed to bilk their followers and other suckers out of money as long as they give rich (mostly)white people an excuse not to feel guilty about being rich, (mostly)white, and not giving a shit about the rest of humanity, they suck a lot of oxygen.
In short “evangelicals” is a broadly misused and misunderstood term.
People like to use Evangelical interchangeably with Southern Baptist, but, that is a lot like saying Americans are White. That is to say they are the biggest subset of a larger whole. (One they aren’t even the majority of). And while you can identify trends in the whole, statements along the lines of “Evangelicals believe X” will often have a large minorities (and sometimes Majorities) that don’t in fact believe X.
In fact Evangelicals often suffer from being tarred by the brush of their noisiest “adherents”.
Example: preachers of the “prosperity gospel”.
Most evangelicals loathe these charlatans, but, because they dress and spend flashy, have big tv shows, books, and other vehicles <-(sometimes literally) designed to bilk their followers and other suckers out of money as long as they give rich (mostly)white people an excuse not to feel guilty about being rich, (mostly)white, and not giving a shit about the rest of humanity, they suck a lot of oxygen.
In short “evangelicals” is a broadly misused and misunderstood term.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.
Re: God vs. Darwin
Ever read Revelation?
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.
-
- Posts: 4270
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
- Location: Near Bear, Delaware
Re: God vs. Darwin
Once more I chime in about 'Evangelicals'. They frequently are lumped in interchangeably with 'fundamentalist" I have a big problem in that much of the media just want a soundbite they can plug into their news show and Franklin Graham (son of Billie Graham) or Dr. James Dobson or Jerry Falwell Jr. are always ready to answer the call. It irks me that none of these researchers for Fox, or NBC, or even WaPo, ever call Jim Wallis, editor of the Evangelical monthly magazine 'Sojourner', which regularly carries articles written by Roman Catholics and Jews. I suspect he would not give them the expected outrageously ignorant quote.
snailgate
snailgate
Re: God vs. Darwin
I can quite happily tell you the authority for regulation of the size of gatherings applicable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and every city and town government therein. I won’t. But believe me when I tell you it exists, and in a number of places in our various laws and regulations.Sue U wrote: ↑Thu Mar 19, 2020 4:12 pmU.S. Congressman Clay Higgins is A Idiot and his declaration that "the state has no authority to enforce" the limitation in size of public gatherings has no legal basis, but is merely political pandering to his moronic "base."U.S. Congressman Clay Higgins, a Republican from Louisiana, sent a letter to the governor last week saying he believes the limit on the size of church gatherings is unconstitutional.
“I agree that all our constituents and religious leaders should follow the recommendation of the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC),” Higgins wrote. “However, the decision to gather should be the choice of the individual or institution and not a mandate by any government entity. The state has no authority to enforce this proclamation nor any ban on worship.”
In the first instance, it is more than obvious that the government has not issued any kind of "ban on worship," it has issued a ban on gatherings of more than 50 without regard to their purpose. Moreover, no religion that I have ever heard of requires worship in groups of more than 50 (although that may be a number too low for Pastor Pandemic up there to maintain a sufficient revenue stream).
Further, the Supreme Court has already addressed the fundamental constitutional question here, with Justice Scalia (no doubt Higgins's SCOTUS god) writing the opinion in Employment Division v. Smith, holding that a law of general application is constitutional even if it places a restriction on religious exercise.
But you go on, Dopey Clay Higgins. I'm sure somewhere in the 45 words of the First Amendment it says exactly what you imagine it says (it does not say that at all).
Of course we members of the first colony have become godless, or so assholes like Clay Higgins will probably say.
Last edited by Guinevere on Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké
- MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21015
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: God vs. Darwin
Fake news about flagpoles and "screw that pope guy" notwithstanding, there are evangelicals within all Christian traditions. Even in the Roman church.The term evangelical comes from the word "evangel" which is a word form in Greek from the New Testament that refers to the good news of Jesus Christ -- that Jesus came to save humanity -- and evangelicals have a particular take on the good news. That makes them distinctive from other Christians. It could be summarized, I think, with four cardinal beliefs that evangelicals tend to hold, at least officially.
One belief is that the Bible is inerrant. It was without error in all of its claims about the nature of the world and the nature of God. A second belief is that the only way to salvation is through belief in Jesus Christ. A third belief, and one that is most well known, is the idea that individuals must accept salvation for themselves. They must become converted. Sometimes that's referred to as a born-again experience, sometimes a little different language. Then the fourth cardinal belief of evangelicals is the need to proselytize, or in their case, to spread the evangel, to evangelize.
Now different members of the evangelical community have slightly different takes on those four cardinal beliefs. But what distinguishes the evangelicals from other Protestants and other Christians is these four central beliefs that set them apart.
And I agree with Guin. 'iggins is a hidiot.
Romans 13:1-2
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
And yes, I know full well that some interpret Paul as an apologist for the Roman empire. And yes, I know that when authority is contrary to God (e.g. A Hilter in North Minehead), it is a Christian duty to resist. But the civil authority here is not defying God but is doing its rightful job in caring for every neighbor.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Re: God vs. Darwin
Hmmmm Meade. Interesting. I will absolutely agree with the last sentence. I don’t know that one needs God to do the right thing, but not up for that argument right now n
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké
- MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21015
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: God vs. Darwin
Paul agrees with you, Guin. Me too. Even atheists choose to do the right thing (except in the atheist bit!)I don’t know that one needs God to do the right thing
Romans 2:13-15 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Re: God vs. Darwin
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: God vs. Darwin
While that may be true on an individual level it is hardly true on an organizational level. As there are Christian denominations that shun the accepted form of Evangelizing preferring the more traditional method of living as an example.MajGenl.Meade wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:45 amFake news about flagpoles and "screw that pope guy" notwithstanding, there are evangelicals within all Christian traditions. Even in the Roman church.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.
- MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21015
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: God vs. Darwin
...and as they often deny belief in Jesus as savior (along with Oprah Winfrey holding that any and all beliefs are just as good); deny the Bible as the inspired word of God and deny the need to be born again (which kind of follows from all the previous denying do it not?)
Nothing wrong with living as an example - I wish these j-off pastors coining it at the feet of Mammon and holding mass meetings, in defiance of the law and God, understood how important that is. Jesus however, was not "providing an example" - he was busy saving humankind from the punishment deserved by sin which is rather more significant than helping old ladies across the road (though better the latter than not at all; even the pagans do that).
At least, I believe so. Others' results may differ
Nothing wrong with living as an example - I wish these j-off pastors coining it at the feet of Mammon and holding mass meetings, in defiance of the law and God, understood how important that is. Jesus however, was not "providing an example" - he was busy saving humankind from the punishment deserved by sin which is rather more significant than helping old ladies across the road (though better the latter than not at all; even the pagans do that).
At least, I believe so. Others' results may differ
Last edited by MajGenl.Meade on Sun Mar 22, 2020 8:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
God vs. Darwin
The Devil never sleeps.
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.”
- MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21015
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: God vs. Darwin
Serves him right for wearing a blazer
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
-
- Posts: 5588
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
- Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018
Re: God vs. Darwin
I think the vicar put the p into (p)arson.
How many candles did he have? Was it just the four?
How many candles did he have? Was it just the four?
God vs. Darwin
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.”
Re: God vs. Darwin
It would be one thing if this dolt pastor and his moron followers were only endangering themselves, but their reckless behavior is putting at risk huge numbers of innocent people who have not embraced this stupidity...
It's a shame we don't have a virus that only targets idiots...
It's a shame we don't have a virus that only targets idiots...
Re: God vs. Darwin
#covidiot
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké