True Age of the Universe - Biblical Fact - From Age 0 to Jesus

[The_Child]

---

To continue: Today we will look into the origins of the "Theory of Evolution". The pagan root of Hinduism(Babylon) that spread all over the world.

The Sankhya philosophy (literally, "enumeration" philosophy) is a theory of evolution of humans and it was proposed by Kapila in 7th-6th century BC, passed down for about a thousand year before it was recorded as Ishvarachandra"s Karika (3rd century AD).

"...The mythical view has grown that evolution is the product of great intelligence and high scientific skill and that it took a scientific genius (Darwin) to unravel it, but the truth is that the concept is very, very old and first developed among the pagans. All that is required is a highly-enquiring mind and a complete lack of knowledge of the true, Monotheist God, or, a determination to rebelliously turn one's back on Him; interestingly, in this regard, Darwin turned his back on God after initially commencing a theology degree and planning to be a vicar."

Big Bang is represented by Symbol OM.

Hindu Samkhya System Negates Creation Out of Nothing

The concepts of Narayana, Lila, Sankalpa are attempts by Upanishad Seers to simplify the complex Bing Bang Theory.


Hinduism: Sankhya System & Guna Theory - V
Hinduism and Big Bang Theory: The Cosmic Event in Upanishads and other Hindu Scriptures ~ Hindu Blog
Evolution; Not as Recent as You Might Think!

I don't refer to these outside sources as inerrant, only scripture is inerrant. Pero pwedi man pud ta mo basa/research to help us convince that the Bible is perfectly sound and infallible.

The theory of evolution is not only an atheist religion, but with pagan roots as well.

yes it is evolution but that is not the same kind of evolution that Darwin and Lamarck had in mind. in the same way as the ancient greeks, particularly, democritus and leucippus hypothesize the atom. they were the early atomist. It does not mean however that the basis of modern atomism, niels bohr et al. is identical to that of democritus and leucippus. they are called atoms and thats that. in the same way as Kapila may have considered an evolutionary view of reality, does not mean however that Darwin and Lamarck followed Kapila's line of thought. Or for that instance, hegel.

[The_Child]

golem ba oi? that kind of thinking was dominant in the renaissance, when one cannot differentiate between magic, science, religion and philosophy from each other. karon lahi na ang kalibutan.

[Saga]

how can creationism explain scientific methods of calculating age of certain matters that proves to be accurate. these methods are very effective and is being used today even by vatican. one example is carbon dating.

[Kenshiro]

golem ba oi? that kind of thinking was dominant in the renaissance, when one cannot differentiate between magic, science, religion and philosophy from each other. karon lahi na ang kalibutan.

Yes it is an ancient occult religion hidden under scientific veil. It has no scientific validity whatsoever. It is a philosophy of denying God. It desperately failed to find connecting evidences even resorting to fraud.

Like the catholic as a pagan religion masked as Christianity.

The theory of evolution that lifeless matter could produce life is scientifically impossible a concept that can only be attributed to the kabbalic concept of Golem.

[machinecult]

Just to make things clear here. There are many categories in Creationism not just Young Earth creationism. There's Gap-theory creationism, progressive creationism, and evolutionary creationism which are more in line with mainstream science. The difference is that all these imply the involvement of Intelligent Design not merely Natural Selection.

how can creationism explain scientific methods of calculating age of certain matters that proves to be accurate. these methods are very effective and is being used today even by vatican. one example is carbon dating.

[biano]

Yes it is an ancient occult religion hidden under scientific veil. It has no scientific validity whatsoever. It is a philosophy of denying God. It desperately failed to find connecting evidences even resorting to fraud.

Like the catholic as a pagan religion masked as Christianity.

The theory of evolution that lifeless matter could produce life is scientifically impossible a concept that can only be attributed to the kabbalic concept of Golem.

I agree, sad to say daghan na nag practice ug occult diri sa cebu.

how can creationism explain scientific methods of calculating age of certain matters that proves to be accurate. these methods are very effective and is being used today even by vatican. one example is carbon dating.

Bro, are you here to really ask that question or just merely defending the theory of evolution?

Kay kung gusto gyd nimo maka balo sa tino-od.. Tan-awa ni tanan debates to hear the other side pud..

Kay bombarded na kaayo ta everyday sa false doctrine sa theory of evolution through mainstream media(National Pornographic, aw Kent said Geographic diay)

Dara ang link: Pili-a ang Titles nag sugod ug Debates...

Free Bible Resources: 1000+ videos, audio, books, articles

[biano]

There are only two possibilities as to how life arose; one is spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation; that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a creative act of God.
I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible.

-Dr. George Wald.



The idea that lifeless matter spontaneously generates life is actually found in an ancient kabbalic concept called Golem.

Salamat sa pag post ani bro.. Nice.. Naka gamot gyd diay sa babylonian-pagan religion ang theory of evolution, ni branch out nalng ang atheism.

Here's another link from RC Sproul:

The Christian and Science (pt. 3) by R.C. Sproul | Ligonier Ministries Blog

Nag himo na sila ug bag-o bro.. dili na spontaneous generation.. "Gradual Spontaneous Generation" na daw..

How illogical.. Tsk..



"Recently I read an essay by a well-known Nobel Prize winning physicist (whose name will remain unstated so as not to embarrass him) who argued that the idea of “spontaneous generation” be abandoned in science once and for all. Spontaneous generation means that something comes into being with no cause. It comes from nothing. So far, so good. I was pleased to see a scientist debunk the myth of all myths, that something can come from nothing. This myth is still pervasive in the scientific community with respect to “chance.” Chance is given credit for creating the universe. However, such a prodigious feat is beyond the capabilities of chance. Why? Chance can do nothing because it is nothing. Chance is merely a word we use to explain mathematical possibilities. It is no thing. It has no power. It cannot produce, manage, or cause anything because it is nothing. It is spontaneous generation by another name.

I was glad the physicist repudiated spontaneous generation. My gladness abruptly turned to astonishment when the scientist said, “We must have a new model. We must speak in terms of gradual spontaneous generation.” I couldn’t believe what I was reading. “Gradual spontaneous generation”? How can something gradual be spontaneous? How can something spontaneous be gradual?

Our scientist wanted to debunk the myth that something can come suddenly from nothing and replace it with a better myth that something can come gradually from nothing." - RC Sproul

[The_Child]

Yes it is an ancient occult religion hidden under scientific veil. It has no scientific validity whatsoever. It is a philosophy of denying God. It desperately failed to find connecting evidences even resorting to fraud.

Like the catholic as a pagan religion masked as Christianity.

The theory of evolution that lifeless matter could produce life is scientifically impossible a concept that can only be attributed to the kabbalic concept of Golem.

I think you have to differentiate between the different kinds of Evolution. kay sa akong pagsabot nimo, imong gisagol sila tanan under one heading.

[sevmik]

All concepts, so far, in this thread have been mostly discussed during the Second Vatican Council. The resolutions that resulted from that council were largely accepted not just by catholics but by those in the scientific community as well.

Tell me TS, do you know about the Second Vatican Council? If yes, why then would you base your arguments from a proven fraudster like Kent Hovind and not on the Vatican's official stand? Would'nt that be more persuasive?

Do you even know what the Vatican's stand on young earth creationism is?

Spoiler! 

"Today's spiritual agitation and the changing conditions of life are part of a broader and deeper revolution. As a result of the latter, intellectual formation is ever increasingly based on the mathematical and natural sciences and on those dealing with man himself, while in the practical order the technology which stems from these sciences takes on mounting importance.

This scientific spirit has a new kind of impact on the cultural sphere and on modes of thought. Technology is now transforming the face of the earth, and is already trying to master outer space. To a certain extent, the human intellect is also broadening its dominion over time: over the past by means of historical knowledge; over the future, by the art of projecting and by planning.

Advances in biology, psychology, and the social sciences not only bring men hope of improved self-knowledge; in conjunction with technical methods, they are helping men exert direct influence on the life of social groups.

At the same time, the human race is giving steadily-increasing thought to forecasting and regulating its own population growth. History itself speeds along on so rapid a course that an individual person can scarcely keep abreast of it. The destiny of the human community has become all of a piece, where once the various groups of men had a kind of private history of their own.

Thus, the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as numerous as can be, calling for efforts of analysis and synthesis."

TS, guess from what official document the above statement came from?

[sevmik]

BTW, for your convenience, here are the documents.

- PASTORAL CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH IN THE MODERN WORLD GAUDIUM ET SPES PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS, POPE PAUL VION DECEMBER 7, 1965 (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern Word-Gaudium et Spes)

- Documents of the II Vatican Council (The Holy See - Archive - Documents of the II Vatican Council)

Please go over them carefully, as you will find support for some of your claims. In fairness to you TS I did read all your post starting from the first one, but I did not find anything in it about young earth creationism that is acceptable to my scientific belief and catholic faith. Are you perhaps preaching a different religion?