Things I share with Darwin worshipers.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
Some random thoughts:

If there is no God, then can there really be evil?
If there has to be a common consensus to determine what is good and what is evil, then why is it not consistent over time? Why are some virtues lost as a whole in the past? Why are some virtues gained in the future?
There is only one book on this that has stood the test of time.
And what about the laws of logic in order to determine what is good and what is evil?
Did man create the laws of logic? Or were the laws of logic there before humans were held in contempt under them, as humans have tried to abide by them?

And what about the notes of music on a scale? There are seven major keys. Even minor diminished chords abide by musical theory that existed before humans recognized its existence.
Alas, some chord progressions transcend the current musical theory from time to time. The Beatles procreated some illogical music theory at times. But there is some kind of transcendent truth in all of it. These things must have been preexistbefore an artist created something somewhat original.
If you play in minors with a slow tempo, then it may appear intense or sad. Maybe reflecting the truth of darkness?
If you play minors in uptempo, then you may be celebrating like in Jewish songs that use minor keys.
And there are only in this manner that many keys and chords of the notes to use when creating or producing music.
In the end, all is going to be music. All is going to be art.

Anyway, point is that Maslow's hierarchy of needs didn't evolve the perfect standard of God's holiness that preexisted.
Musical notes and chords didn't come into existence because some people later acknowledged them.
The laws of logic didn't come into existence because some people later acknowledged them.
Without God in the worldview, how can anyone account for the connection of the preexistence of transcendental truths like these three examples?
They just have to believe that they magically appeared out of thin air or something?

Colossians 1:15-20 ESV (Apostle Paul)
"15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authoritiesall things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross."
This could be seen as Paul's teleological for everything, including evil. ^
Christ died and rose again to do all that he will accomplish. "That in everything he might be preeminent"...."...and through him to reconcile to himself all things." "...and in him all things hold together."

I would just like to add a reflection on the first and second commandments. "I am the Lord your God" is the first. "No other gods before me" is the second.
Even good things can become idols or other gods before God.
Morality is so powerful in us as imago dei that we can make our good works, which are required, a god.
The deists were moralists, but denied the resurrecting power that creates good works in us from the motives of gratitude for what Christ has done. It was a mere external righteousness that Jesus called a white washed tomb, so to speak.
The laws of logic are so powerful that many people worship reason as their god. God gave us brains....true. But the mind of the Spirit is greater than the mind set on the flesh that cannot please God. We are commanded to renew our minds in Romans 12 and renew our minds in the Spirit in EphesiansRomans 8 teaches us that to be naturally minded is death. But to be spiritually minded is life and peace. We give credit to God. For all knowledge is from above. If we trust in our mental vigor, while studying to show ourselves well approved, then we have thrown the baby out with the bath water.

Music is so powerful that many people claim that music is their god. Even Lucifer fell from heaven and became known as Satan with the other fallen angels. Lucifer was basically the worship leader in heaven. The ancient Jews had some great wisdom on the dangers of music because it is that beautiful or good.
People by nature are homo religionus, which means that our soul/heart (mind, will, and emotions) is a perpetual idol factory. The word religion comes from the Latin root word to adore or give adoration to.
It's no coincidence that all three of these transcendental occurrences occur outside of the realm of the role of the scientific means to explain how they came into existence, nor is science able to give an educated account of why these three existed before evolution (to those who believe in it).

Are we worshipping the law or the law giver?
Are we worshipping the logic or the divine logos?
For how can a finite ever completely comprehend an infinite?
Are we worshipping the music or the one whom only gave us so many chords and notes on a scale.

"For in him we live and move and have our being."
Acts 17:28

The beauty of women is also a good thing. Writers of songs throughout history have compared them to angels. Sometimes the female worship is such a lure that it becomes redundant. But it too reflects God's beauty as image of God bearers. Both the Greek and Roman writers feared the dangers of the beauty of women. Hellen of Troy comes to mind by Homer. But there are also examples of the warnings in Virgil.
Also, we all know the stereotype of how pretty people can be inclined to become conceited.
Now for the bride of Christ, we have these struggles as well. We may be attracted to Christ at first by his outward beauty. Then when years go by, our marriage grows in a greater inward love as gravity, wrinkles, hair loss, or grey hair occurs.
The bride of Christ doesn't exactly make a blind leap of faith. It is a leap of faith. Reason isn't exactly checked at the door of entrance. It is reformed.
And as the bride of Christ, we exchange lovers from that of ourselves and Lucifer, which can come as an angel of light.

When we exchange lovers and have our disordered loves reordered, we don't swing from the vine of another tree, unless we can see that the platform is more secure than the one we are currently standing upon.

And the bride doesn't let go of the vine, until both of her feet have landed on a more solid and secure foundation.
 
Last edited:

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
God is in a different economic class. He can lavish an immaterial wealth upon us that creates the staying power in our relationship.

We really don’t understand how so many are switching partners in deities out there in a different spiritual class, especially middle-middle spiritual class to low spiritual class.
 

Jake

Puritan Board Senior
I'm not quite sure what to do with this thread, but...


What is a "Darwin worshiper"?
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
A skeptic of the faith...not a label that I would use speaking to the unbeliever. I’m in front of a different audience. Wanted to be clear that i am not a Darwinist. I’m sympathetic to Augustus Strong and BB Warfield. But I may be getting those two confused with something else.
Sorry for the apparent incoherence.
I’ve got something to do in a minute.
Grace and Peace to you.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Amanuensis
God is in a different economic class. He can lavish an immaterial wealth upon us that creates the staying power in our relationship.

We really don’t understand how so many are switching partners in deities out there in a different spiritual class, especially middle-middle spiritual class to low spiritual class.

Are you getting your threads mixed up? You started this thread dealing with Darwinism, but your comment seems aimed at relationships. I just don't see the connection in the conversation.
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
Our more than wealthy God is easier for us to submit to than all other forms of idolatry.

It doesn’t believe that we who are reformed don’t have our struggles with the authority of God. It just means that we can grow in grace in the security of God’s nesting principle.

When one divorces from God with children of works of his or her own, then it’s virtually impossible to rebuild a nest suitable for the next possible birdy to stay, when following other unreformed theologies.
May we never leave the high class family secret of God’s predestination.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Our more than wealthy God is easier for us to submit to than all other forms of idolatry.

It doesn’t believe that we who are reformed don’t have our struggles with the authority of God. It just means that we can grow in grace in the security of God’s nesting principle.

When one divorces from God with children of works of his or her own, then it’s virtually impossible to rebuild a nest suitable for the next possible birdy to stay, when following other unreformed theologies.
May we never leave the high class family secret of God’s predestination.

I don't see how any of those sentences are connected with the main idea, such as it is, of the OP
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
The whole thing needs editing. That’s what editors are for. But pretty much nothing in it is original.
And I’m not smart enough to be publish worthy. This is a message board. I appreciate the feedback.
Iron sharpens iron. That implies friction and heat sometimes.
 

Susan777

Puritan Board Sophomore
When one divorces from God with children of works of his or her own, then it’s virtually impossible to rebuild a nest suitable for the next possible birdy to stay, when following other unreformed theologies.
May we never leave the high class family secret of God’s predestination.
Either I’m having a real bad day and need to go take a nap, or this is just stream-of-consciousness stuff and I don’t need to really try to figure it all out.
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
That was something I was just working out and really the two subjects may not work right there, especially without understanding the human levels of attractiveness for male and female.
The female is moreso two-fold in her attraction to the male. Many introductions to psychology and some biology books may point this out.

The female, in general, is attracted to the male for the ability to provide for offspring. She is attracted to the best possible mate in this and she also is attracted to physical appearance, symmetrical features (possibly healthier genes), etc.

The male may be a 6 on the level of 1-10 in the level of physical attractiveness. We see this all the time. The man with the ability to provide better is more able to increase his level of attractiveness for the perceived 8-10 female. The female really doesn’t have the same nature here in human sexuality.
We see out of shape bald guys that are with centerfold type wives: see Donald Trump.

These are things that Christian men can reflect in when the older men teach the younger men. I don’t think it’s a stretch in format found in Timothy to suggest such things.
Maybe our young men wouldn’t worry so much about looking in the mirror and some are starving themselves all worried about looks?

But anyway, I see everything connected together. It all fits somehow.
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
It’s more than just read your Bible all the time and the woman of God will see you and love you for you. God uses all these means though. He’s given different gifts to men. We are holistic and all of life encompassing.

We aren’t against general revelation in all of creation. I’m just trying to work this out with like minded believers.
If I just used questions and the Socratic method, then that could be seen as teaching as well. Luther makes a point about not using questioning too much in Bondage or the Will, for instance.
 

jwithnell

Moderator
Staff member
The whole thing needs editing. That’s what editors are for. But pretty much nothing in it is original.
And I’m not smart enough to be publish worthy. This is a message board. I appreciate the feedback.
Iron sharpens iron. That implies friction and heat sometimes.
Friend, editing is your responsibility. This board is built around carefully constructed and edited posts so that others may discuss a point or be built up in their faith.
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
I happen to have voted for the president. But he’s hardly a man after God’s own heart reading his Bible. He can afford to jump from one to another and has. And he isn’t that handsome.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Amanuensis
I happen to have voted for the president. But he’s hardly a man after God’s own heart reading his Bible. He can afford to jump from one to another and has. And he isn’t that handsome.

I teach English composition. This might help. I teach my students to form their thoughts, usually a paragraph, around the following model:

Point
Evidence
Explain
Link/analysis
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
That’s fine. I aim to do better. I can’t afford a laptop and am posting from a cellphone. That’s part of the problem.
 

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
I’m not trolling anyone.
Greg Bahnsen put forth the transcendental argument using the preexistence of the laws of logic.
I watched Douglas Wilson use the moral transcendental argument.
I simply added music.
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
I’m not trolling anyone.
Greg Bahnsen put forth the transcendental argument using the preexistence of the laws of logic.
I watched Douglas Wilson use the moral transcendental argument.
I simply added music.
Like virtually everything you have posted, this makes absolutely no sense. Random sentences from a machine are more coherent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top