Ten two and one

The following may not seem to follow any form of logic, but to find an answer; we are told that it all depends on how one defines is. which will it be: religion or evolution, creaton or eveolution?  Look and then ask the question does not eveolution rely on a form of creation ? And creation teaches us, tells us, about natural selection. With very simple words; each after its own kind. so" is" must now play its part.

 

Evolution: by its definition is (remember things always depend how you define is) any process of formation or growth, a product of development,

A change in the gene pool : marked by a mutation, natural selection, or genetic drift, IS  a process of gradual change(selective breeding)

Now  Selection is defined :as an act or instance of selecting, by a choice , of any natural or artificial process that results in differential reproduction among members of a social group or a type; so  that only certain genes are passed along' 

(selective breeding again for a certain trait)

 

In these two words (evelution , selection) with slight deviations in their definations convey  the same idea; (is); is used to separate and to elaborate. Thus one can find many interesting UN noted fact or meanings.  if one opens their eyes ,applies common sense; discerns;  instead of flights of fancy, what the scientific community calls theory, what religionist calls insight; well then one may see that not all things are as they appear.

A theory is based on an assumption, it relies on assumed facts: you have heard that when one assumes ; well they make an ass out of you and me.. Just concider the following and choose, who you are,where you stand, there are only two sides.

So what If we step aside and ask the following questions: remember simple reveals large;

 

      What is a dog?  Does having the varied number of breeds prove evolution or does it prove selection, look at the many types of cats; now they have even bread a green cat , or did it evolve or was it a form of selection? If we hold to Darwin’s theory it evolved through natural selection thus evolving so as to take advantage of the green house effects and the greening of its environment. But then what of cows, chickens, horses, have the variations evolved or have they been bread for certain traits. We have taken animals bread them for certain traits we found desirable, needless to say ;once we turn them back to the wild those traits melt away over time as the animal adapts to its environment.  This same holds for all animals, each after its own kind, as they enter new and varied environments changes take place. Larger smaller differing colors beaks of varied sizes all normal differences but the animal is still a dog a cat a horse, after its own kind. So as each creature encounters a change in their foods in their migrations one area to another one can show and see changes. But they are always dog’s cat’s horse’s chickens and so on.    

 

    Many a naturalist speaks of their spirit and or spiritual ties or being cousins near relatives closely related to monkeys, others say pigs are a closer relative. In all honesty looking and seeing what I do; I have got to agree, A monkey will defecate in its hands and toss it at an offending creature, a pig no matter how much you clean it up enjoys it wallow. Even dogs are said to be on an equal par with man, yes and as dogs return to their vomit so do many a man.  Men no matter how you present an idea will not accept but will sling all they can at it. then accept what tickles their ears and self centered superiority.  They will fight and argue all the while professing to be peace loving. These same men and women will wallow in self pity or self grandeur as they present their idea of truth. And yes this plays to both sides of the argument.

 

     Monkeys take after monkeys and pigs after pigs,.

Now if one chooses to think they are related to a monkey and they have a relative swinging from the trees ,well fine but if not prove it show me a viable link, do not insult me if I choose to reject your assumption; since there is no solid proof ; only conjecture of  morality rejecting men; remember it is called a theory, theory means an idea not proven based on a few facts or a suposition; perhaps if we called it the theory of creation?  Still fanciful theories ideas assumptions made by men with other men seeking to disprove another accepted theory.  But as much as they try, they can not find or prove their man ape. They have been seeking this missing link for almost one hundred and thirty years.  Their argument is that if I choose to accept the theory of creation that I am divinely created, the slingers of the mud say; I am foolish and superstitious; Really but does not the person who holds to evolution or their order of selection have the same problem buy there very definition, and for the same reason?  True I can not show you G-d just as you can not show me the link.  Yet we both can see selection every day in our dogs cats cows and horses. So in reality both ideas that of evolution and creation are taken on faith, Faith is the accepting of the unseen it needs not proof.  Some only wish to see the physical world and want so badly to explain it that they will believe anything that seems to explain how they came to be; so being. It is thus their faith or even for some a greater part of them selves and their future expansion.

 

Then you have those who have chosen to believe just as strongly in this that ,G-d created and that G-d said. again perhaps if we had called it the Theory of creation. Who knows  but  For the naturalist their god or holy prophet is Darwin they worship self , they quote him as I quote my G-d from my gospels The Torah and other books.

For thus says Charles Darwin is loudly heard, well  is it no different than saying thus says the lord. So who is right who is wrong? It still all comes down to ones choice of a faith. So choose how you define Faith and see if you define it as they do: it is defined in the dictionaries as confidence in a person, a thing. Or a belief not based on proof, the belief in a doctrine or set of doctrines or teachings, and is called a ritual system of belief.         

Odd is it not that central to the definition is the belief in a person a.k.a .Charles Darwin, a thing his theory, his doctrine of evolution, his doctrine all things evolved from lower creatures his idea is not based on proof but on conjecture. Well he and it seem to be a religion. they worship Darwin raise up monuments to him they dig up relics of the natural world and display them so as to bring glory to their chosen god. Yes, worshipers of the natural man and world.

 

Whether you believe in Darwin or G-d you have a chosen your religion, your faith no matter how you choose to show it both systems rely on the same assumptions both have the same evidences except one is true the other a lie. They have their books containing the writing and prediction of their respective prophets for proof. I have my books holding the words of my prophets telling me all I need to know.

Two ideas using the same information two divergent paths, one feeds the mans ego the other his soul.

That is the biggest difference

 

Until those who hold to evolution can admit honestly that what they think is taken on faith, there can be no meeting of minds, but just as they claim their evidence proves their ideal so it proves also creation, for the fossil records show sudden appearance and sudden change just as it is written, all the digging has also brought to light that persons places and things that were once touted as religious myth in recent years have been proven.

 

But all of that aside if they want to rest and be happy with their idol Darwin and his book of faith so be it; if they wish to choose the atheist ideal of man as his own creator and maker of his own destiny so be it. Parts of which the later groups tout as feel hold true.

 

Even in them one can see what is written in the faith they reject for one of the men they deny wrote of them, saying that the men put off(rejected) the natural order; and (went) chasing after their own lust men with men, even their women do like wise, (leading to) social decay and disorder, he goes on to say many other things but allows that G-d has given them over to a reprobate mind a spirit of self deception, so they can be happy and take true pleasure with in their chosen way or as we say sin.  So if we look closely they are doing what they are suppose to do. 

Who are we to argue, we who believe in the word must pray for these poor sad persons who spend their days at being happy and productive in self grandeur,self pleasure self indulgance instead of simply living life.

The following will mean one thing to one, something else to another, to still others something else; it all depends on what you have chosen... or what you refused to see and hear

Now the word says expressly, that in the latter times(if you talk to theologians that is now) some shall turn from the truth by what or how:  listening to seducing spirits, and doctrines of evil men; who Speaking lies bring in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared like or as with a hot iron; Forbidding some to marry, and commanding some to abstain from meats, which G-d has created to be received with thanksgiving from them who believe and know the truth.

 

For every creature of G-d is good, and nothing is to be refused, if received with prayers of thanksgiving:

May I also add that one should abstain from a practice if in the keeping it will cause your brother to falter.

For even though all may be allowed and sanctified by prayer it may not be good for the body as a whole.

For it is sanctified by the word of G-d and prayer.

If you remind the followers of these things, you shall be a good minister of Jesus the Messiah, nourished  in the words of faith and of good doctrine, that you have attained.

But refuse the profane and old wives' fables, and exercise your self rather to godliness.

For exercise of the body profits little: but godliness is profitable to all things, having with it the promise of the life that is now, and of that which is to come.

This is a faithful saying and worthy of all accepting.

 For the promise we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe.

 

I enjoy burgers with cheese, fish and chicken. 

Along with the many and varied dairy products, some have expressly told me; that if ;

"I were as holy as they, I would not eat as I do".

"That to be holy one can not eat any meats or cheese." And they quote a chapter a verse but not in context.,  for Abraham feeds to the Angels  a fat yearling bull and cheese, So do they judge Abraham?  For the discoples it is writen that Jesus cooked some fish at the side of the sea of Galilee, so do the holy judge he whom they claim? Why do they reject what he told them to do?  a line one finds in what is called the gospel of Luke do as I did so you also do. So what is it that this one called Jesus did? the answer he obeyed he did the will of G-d. He kept the Ten so then What will you now Do?

The Federalist Patriot
Founders' Quote Daily

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and
pursuit of Happiness: that to secure these rights, governments
are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed."

Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776
The following is a great resource and reference:
Reference: Jefferson: Writings, Peterson ed., Library of America
(19) http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/

 

Link to the Founders'
Almanac at the address below:
http://cf.Heritage.org/almanac/quotations.cfm