What has Christianity truly contributed to humanity

[Nishant Xavier]

Above was Saint Paul the Apostle on Love:

Here is Saint John the Apostle on Love: And Saint John is especially called the Apostle of Love for Good Reason.

---

"7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. The one who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. 10 This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.

More on Love and Hatred[hide]
11 For this is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another. 12 Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous. 13 Do not be surprised, my brothers and sisters,[b] if the world hates you. 14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love each other. Anyone who does not love remains in death. 15 Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

16 This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters. 17 If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? 18 Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.

19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us."

---

[Nay_Sayer]

I rebuke your evil Xavier

[The Architect Of Fate]

The Lie of Evolution is refuted by empirical, mathematical and statistical calculations from the fossil record.

No, it most certainly is not. The truth of evolution has endured for over 100 years and all its critics can do is yell from the peanuts gallery of making pop books and cowering in their echo chamber websites or engaging in carnival-style debates because have the balls to actually engage the subject in a serious matter. Because if they did they know they would fail. 

 However, the bad fruits of Darwin's Doctrine in Darwin's own life also evince its falsehood. 

Nope not everything that's true leads to good things 

False doctrines, especially dangerously false doctrines that war against God, bear bad fruits.

More nonsense

[Nishant Xavier]

Some Christians have answered Evolution from the very beginning. I doubt Evolution will even exist by 2050, except as a discredited outdated hypothesis. But you're right that Christians need to do more good work refuting it. Here are some points Rev. Williams made to Evolutionists long back, and I'll post similar material from Dr. Denton's more recent excellent work: "Evolution: Still A Theory in Crisis" when I can. When Evolution falls, Atheism will also. And if Evolution does not fall, Western Atheism never will. That's absolutely true. Evolution is the single most potent attack on Christianity that's ever been devised.

Here is the excerpt: "Of many species small and large, we have many fossils preserved but no transitional forms. The archæopteryx, a bird with a feathered tail, is the only alleged transitional form between the reptiles and the birds. Only two specimens of this same animal have been found. This could easily be an exceptional species of created birds differing no more from the normal bird than the ostrich or humming bird. If there were transitional forms we ought to have them by the millions. No transitional forms have been found between reptiles and mammals; and we have seen that there are no reliable forms between man and mammals. The numerous missing links make a chain impossible. Evolution is not simply growth or change, but the development of all species from one germ."

From: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/8508/850...htm#chap50

[Nishant Xavier]

There are still virtually innumerable gaps in the Fossil Record, which is not expected if Evolution were Actually True. Even Darwin recognized this was a problem in his time, and Dr. Denton confirms it still is in his very recent work. Again, you're not realistically accounting for what would be the case if millions of alleged intermediate forms had actually existed for millions of years, 100s of millions of years in some cases.

And let Christians not forget Darwin called Christianity a Damnable Doctrine. That was an attack on our Faith and why Christians who ignore Darwinism as a problem are mistaken on that.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's a tough thing to hang around your religions neck, don't you think? You sound like a common atheist with all this "if biology is true my religion is false" nonsense.

[The Valkyrie]

The gaps in the fossil record are being filled in every year.

Meanwhile, as those gaps are filled, the god of the gaps has fewer to hide in.

And Darwin was right about not only Christianity, but all Abrahamic beliefs.

[Nishant Xavier]

Here's "Evolution Outreach" on the "gappy nature" of the Fossil Record.

"Darwin used the words “extreme imperfection” to refer not to any personal character flaw but to the gappy nature of the fossil record (Darwin 1859). The vast majority of organisms that have lived on Earth never fossilized. Jellyfish and worms? Too squishy to fossilize very often. Butterflies? Too delicate, for the most part. Anything that lived on mountain slopes or in fast-moving rivers? Unlikely to be covered by sediment and preserved. Darwin saw such haphazard preservation as a serious problem for the theory of evolution. After all, he was proposing that different modern species share common ancestors—that organisms as different as lobsters and butterflies have the same great-great-great-great…great-grandparent species. Direct fossil evidence of all the intermediate forms connecting an ancestor to its modern descendents would have provided undeniable evidence in favor of his theory. In Darwin’s view, however, the fossil record provided no such support. Much of On the Origin of Species is taken up with marshalling other forms of evidence to support his ideas about common ancestry and natural selection."

https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral...008-0105-0 Evolution is the god of the gaps.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yes, I am aware of your dumb propaganda pop science book Rev Williams is a fraud whose objections have been dealt with a million times and I already addressed your nonsense about fossils and you're simply reciting the tired "it's not good enough " it's not different enough" it's not numerous enough" which can be ignored as it comes from a disingenuous prior conviction and people will accept the fact of evolution in 2050. 2060 2070 till the heat death of the sun as it is a fact and your pop books and creationist websites will not take it out.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's a great example of how we get it wrong with intuitive thinking. It sounds like finding literally every piece of evidence that could prove a theory true would be great for that theory - until you realize that this would entail "finding" a great deal of shit that we know would not actually be present to be found and which does not in fact, prove any such thing. We do this alot. I seem to recall you having a fascination with the piltdown man hoax. Well, that is what that would look like - in practice..or mere reality, if we prefer. There's a compartmentalized understanding of it in that post, the whole of the intro. So let me ask you this.

If we found a bunch of stuff that's not supposed to fossilize, would that make you think that your religion was false, or that..obviously..those things are hoaxes? Are you demanding hoaxes...as proof a theory is true? Exactly how many piltdown men would you require to abandon your religion?