Where does the ability to love come from?
Perhaps a silly and too basic a question, but I wonder if you have sat and thought about the question: "Where does the ability to love come from?" There is a new film out about Charles Darwin's life and of course his theory of evolution. The theory (and that is all it is!) describes a dog eat dog existence - where only the fittest survive. In all this the theory fails to address the existence of love. I'm thinking about the type of sacrifical love that we see clearly in the life of Jesus Christ. The type of love that on a good day we might manage to emulate. The Bible of course is absolutely clear about the source of love. Dear friends (says John) let us love one another, for love comes from God. And more clearly goes on to say: God is love! In the New Testament there are 3 words for love: Philia (family loyalty) Eros: (physical intimate love) And Agape: (sacrificial, life transforming, Christ like love) All these are gift from God but it is the th
Comments
"we have never observed, repeated, or been able to test animal kind A turning into animal kind B"
So, AiG claims that evolution doesn't work in a way that no evolutionary biologist claims that it works. That's just amazing.
/sarcasm
This is like saying that the Bible isn't true because "Jesus" isn't a jewish name. That's a pretty silly statement, right?
Neil, it's been at least two years since my first comment on your blog, and you appear to be just as willfully ignorant about the *actual claims* of the theory of evolution now as you were back then.
That's not an insult; it's just a point of fascination for me.
AiG contains no "truth about evolution" because they appear to be just as willfully ignorant about the actual claims as you seem to be.
Let me clarify: I have no problems with anyone trying to tear apart the theory, or show that it's wrong. What I see as absurdity is people like yourself, and AiG, attacking something when it's abundantly clear that you HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS YOU'RE ATTACKING.
No idea.
It's like saying, "The Bible isn't true because Jesus was never made of caramel, and we've checked all of the empty tombs in Great Britain and none of them belongs to Judas."
Silly, right? Completely absurd, correct?
That's how you sound. Seriously. With all due respect. You sound like that.
“The Bible provides an eyewitness account of how the universe and all life came to be. There’s no speculation or strange interpretation needed. You can just read how God created everything in six days a few thousand years ago. Simple. Factual.”
Questions:
1) Which ‘eyewitness’ account are we to believe Gen 1:1-31 or 2: 4-25? And who was there to be an eyewitness if there was no one around if we take the ‘six days’ myth as literal truth?
2) Why is it that the further one digs down in sedimentary layers the fossils found there get ‘simpler’ as the rocks get older?
3) Why do humans have an appendix – an ancient remainder of our guts from when we were animals that had a purely vegetarian diet..?
Or do you expect humanity to ignore these awkward little questions just so that Christians such as yourself can have a place and power in society that you long for? Yet the sad thing is, the more ‘Christian’ and particularly the ‘Fundamentalist’ societies become the more they suffer from the very problems they claim would be overcome by Christian adherence. The hotspots of Creationism are also the hotspots, in the Western world, for lone-parent families, teenage pregnancy, violent crime, divorce – and oddly enough obesity, poor health and a raft of other social problems. Hence it would seem ‘creationism’ fulfils a useful role – it is a means of saying you are a card carrying, conservative Christian... Easy or cheap ‘faith’ that doesn’t cost much or seem to translate into more wholesome societies... You might be interested in the following post on my blog: http://faithisnotthesameasreligion1.blogspot.com/2011/08/uk-riots-where-are-fathers-we-must.html which looks at some of the strange anomalies of overtly Christian societies...
Regards:
P