â„–102073[Quote]
SInce this is the serious board, i thought ill write a contradiction in my head that is kinda making me leave religion and kinda not.
Darwinism vs Christianity, this isnt just a surface level "evolution debunks religion" thing, these 2 beliefs are distinct and kinda opposite ways of looking at the world.
When i mean darwinism i dont mean the scientific meaning, i mean the ideological meaning. Life and the world are dictated by the survival of the fittest, resources are scarce and its a fierce competition for those resources and strength meaning the ability to attain those resources is strength, and strength is the ultimate virtue
Nordics for example, are genetically the most beautiful race, as an analogy the brightest peacocks among the human race and the best at attracting mates, are the most intelligent and inteligent is whats behind human strength to thrive in this darwinian world, other races are genetically inferior and they must die. It is simply nature, just as the genetically less brighter peacocks, less intelligent creature dies out.
I mean the pure essence of racism, not "cultural racism". I would define cultural racism as basically any normal opinion called racist by insane leftists, in a cultural sense racist has become a meaningless buzzword, but behind all of this fog, the word racist is fundamentally darwinian.
Christianity says life and the world are to be lived with love, forgiveness and empathy. We are made in god's image, we are one in jesus. That we have free will and souls. Even the weak must be given love. But also that the world and everything is god's creation and god is omnipotent.
Then why is the world so harsh and darwinistic? Darwinism isnt an invented ideology or belief, which is what makes it unique. Darwinism is based off of what is observed in reality, making it the most realistic and practical ideology.
Race is an example, if men are all created in god's image and we are all one in jesus, then does that a mean a somali is equal to a swede? Or is the world darwinistic, and down to a genetic unchangeable level with no god or choice involved. Even the goodness of a superior race isnt from any choice or effort, its from genetics. And the inferior races cannot change, and theres no inherent soul but we're just animals who are slightly smarter but still live according to the harsh jungle conditions.
Ive spent years reading and thinking about the ideas here, and darwinism vs christianity is the most noticeable and common contradiction, those 2 ideas are spread here often and i dont know why people dont bring them up. But i notice the tension.
â„–102074[Quote]
Wnat i mean by kinda not is that, maybe these 2 ways of looking at the world doesnt need to always clash. During the most darwinistic periods of the west with sterilization and even extermination of the genetically weak, Christianity still dominated the west.
The bible does have verses about slavery, and saying slaves shall obey their masters.
Slavery was a needed mechanism for survival and competition back in the day. And this importantly acknowledges that there is a difference between the weak and strong, and some people are just born weak, while some are born strong and the weak ones should be submissive to the strong ones.
Ive heard science as studying the mechanism and patterns designed by god. And this can be approached by this way of thinking as well, that its simply the direct design of god, and god intended and even commands the weak slaves to obey their strong masters.
â„–102075[Quote]
Wasn't darwinism and christianity compatible? I'm not an expert when it comes to theology, but i believe you could make them compatible when you take genesis to be a purely subjective story where the main idea lies that man was created in god's image. How man came to be can be interpreted in a darwinistic way, where god uses evolution as a way to form man.
â„–102076[Quote]
>>102074i think a problem here lies in the way which "weak" can be interpreted. Physically weak? Mentally weak? Culturally weak? Morally weak? I do believe genetics play a huge role in how strong people are in those aspects, but this is not straightforwadly divided between different races of people.
â„–102077[Quote]
The source of evolution and natural selection comes from scarce resources.
Scarce resources is the feature implemented by god onto the world to allow and enforce the very very important good vs bad to exist.
If there is an all powerful, all knowing, omnipotent god, why is there bad in this world?
Visualize living in a world of only light, just brightest lights possible shining everywhere. Then could you even conceive of what darkness is? The only thing you know is light, and to fully grasp the goodness of light, one would need to experience darkness
In a world of no bad, there is no good. God is the ultimate creator, god created bad, god planned all along for humans to eat the fruit of knowledge.
To fully feel the happiness and joy of life, one must taste suffering and conflict.
And conflicting with evil, solving problems, pursuing goals and purpose, such beauty and advancement, the finest human pursuits such as science, math and arts come from.
Just try writing any story, video game, movie with no villians, no problems, no suffering.
But how can that existance of suffering and bad be enforced? Scarce resources. Make the world with scarce resource so we evolve to kill, steal, and rape because simply not everyone could eat, survive and reproduce. Thats how our mechanisms of sin come, remember, the source of evil is scarce resource and our primal urges to behave following this instinct. Satan is only the tempter.
Name most evils, and they come because of the fundamental scarce resources of the world
A country invades another country, killing and causing mass suffering because the invaded country has lots of resources. Theres not finite resources and land, so only the means of sin and suffering is that resource attained
â„–102078[Quote]
>>102075Do you think a somali is equal to a swede? Some ugly aboriginal is also made in god's image.
Also genetics have shown certain races to be dumber and more violent than others.
So why did god create those people more violent and more dumb?
Why did god create niggers so violent and stupid?
Make one race, europeans intelligent, beautiful and mascuiline than all others. Why?
>i think a problem here lies in the way which "weak" can be interpretedWeak and strong meaning, ability to attain resources and needs. Reproduction,food,safety,shelter,water, the basics then the driver of history, wealth.
One of the defining things about white people is their objective conquest of the world, meaning they attained the resources of the rest of the world, like how the strongest animal in the jungle gets the food and mates of the weaker beta animals.
But dont interpret this as, europe stole from the whole world, but europe was already the strongest and wealthiest civilization, and they wanted to get stronger and wealthier so europe colonized
â„–102079[Quote]
My theory is that when God created all creatures in the beginning of the bible they were very simple and not like anything we have today. Every person from the beginning of Genesis to the events of Noah's Ark and later on with Shem and Terah lived for hundreds of years, sometimes even thousands (Genesis 5:1-32 for example), so we can assume that during Noah's time animals were either fully evolved or weren't as evolved as they were now, since during all these years animals could have adapted to their environment.
This is a really simple answer, but it's one that makes the most sense. As Darwinism states, animals evolve over hundreds or thousands of years, and this lines up with the events of the old testament.
â„–102080[Quote]
>>102079read my original post
>his isnt just a surface level "evolution debunks religion" thingThis goes into race, history and anthropology.
Race is a big theme here
Ive always thought about race, and ill question racism here in this reply. Racism could only be rationally justified with darwinism. It makes sense, but any other justification like collective punishment or moral reasons is nonsense.
To be racist, i mean in the literal anthropological definition, to judge a human being by his race and by deduction, through genetics and not the soul, not the free will, is also implying materialism(that we're just only material really, nothing deep, just robots commanded by our genes) and determinism that, a man is already determined by his race thus genes to be whatever man he is and not the soul or morality or free will, things christianity argues for
Lack of choice and free will regards to race and why racism morally is bad, in a question ive yet to see a response to is
No one chooses their race. No one worked harder to be born a beautiful aryan than an ugly brown, or was intrinsically better to be born white. No, it was due to complete chance. In that way, instrinsically i think we're no better than each other.
No one chooses to be born poor, sick, or to be born at all
Imagine being mean to people over something they have no control over, no one chooses to be born indian for example
â„–102081[Quote]
>>102080Imagine if you were minding your business doing nothing, then the cops arrested you for a crime you didnt committ. Could you call this justice? This is what collective punishment is, and i notice this is one of the driving factors of racism.
Like in the united states, some italian criminals killed an innocent person or something, then the angry mob thirsty for revenge, killed innocent italian people who had nothing to do with the killing. This goes against all logic
Collective punishment is the same as being punished for a crime you didnt do.
So collective punishment being nonsensical, and moral judgement placed on an uncontrollable feature, making it not moral because morality is choices we make.
The only real reason for racism is, ignoring morality, and objectively analyzing the darwinism behind racism. That objectively some people are genetically dumber and more violent than others. Thats why i say only darwinism drives racism. Yes it sucks that people were born into an inferior race they didnt choose to be born into, but thats just the cold hard world of being born a victim of natural selection, it goes for all animals and is just natural, think about how many outshined peacocks, weak animals who have gone extinct are there
But the difference is, the depth to experience suffering exists for humanity's case of victims of natural selection
â„–102085[Quote]
>>102080>>this isnt just a surface level "evolution debunks religion" thingI wasn't trying to debunk one or the other, I just wanted to show evidence that they can both coexist alongside each other in a meaningful way.
Now, for what you actually wanted to debate…
>Ive always thought about race, and ill question racism here in this reply. Racism could only be rationally justified with darwinism. It makes sense, but any other justification like collective punishment or moral reasons is nonsense.How? We recognize that things like pedophilia are immoral because of how they impact children. That's why when we see shitskins in the news for child rape we're mad about it.
>To be racist, i mean in the literal anthropological definition, to judge a human being by his race and by deduction, through genetics and not the soul, not the free will, is also implying materialism(that we're just only material really, nothing deep, just robots commanded by our genes) and determinism that, a man is already determined by his race thus genes to be whatever man he is and not the soul or morality or free will, things christianity argues forIn the literal definition, this would be true, but the reality is that culture and morality are also crucial in racism. Let me put it this way, Darwinism supplies scientific data about the average IQ of each country to justify racism, and Christianity uses morality and cultural differences to argue for it. It is true that not everyone chose to be this way (and I'll come to this later), but when you're an active nuisance for everyone and you don't understand accountability, then all this talk about soul and free will goes out the window. Christianity argues that fighting for yourself is important, but that those fights must be equal and, preferably, non-violent. That's what the "turn the other cheek" verse meant by the way. It was about rejecting an insult and being treated as an equal instead of a lesser being.
>No one chooses their race. No one worked harder to be born a beautiful aryan than an ugly brown, or was intrinsically better to be born white. No, it was due to complete chance. In that way, instrinsically i think we're no better than each other.Whether instinctively or not, there is an evolutionary preference for creatures considered "better" in their respective traits. Women must be pretty while men must be strong and attractive. This is why most arabs and indians are into white, blonde women for example. They represent a type of "beauty" that we, as human beings, find attractive. Yes, this may be subjective, but the elements of choosing a partner to procreate are still there. So yes, there is at least a collective understanding of what's better and worse.
>Imagine being mean to people over something they have no control over, no one chooses to be born indian for exampleYes, but Indians choose to pollute rivers, shit on the streets and do everything with dirty hands, even in places that are against such behavior. Morality is also part of racism, because tolerating certain behaviors changes nothing and makes things worse. The reason why racism is so prevalent now is that modern society has continuously allowed people to disrespect their culture and rules to not get a "bad" label. No one is born equal, but you can improve yourself instead of following a herd and ruining everything for everyone.
â„–102215[Quote]
>I wasn't trying to debunk one or the other, I just wanted to show evidence that they can both coexist alongside each other in a meaningful way.
Really? Darwinism as an ideology seems like the opposite of christianity, embracing the brutality of the world vs love
>How? We recognize that things like pedophilia are immoral because of how they impact children. That's why when we see shitskins in the news for child rape we're mad about it.
Collective thinking is nonsensical and immoral, its the perfect example of the dumb and violent being the most dangerous.
I dont know what your definition of morality and justice is, mine is that a man is responsible for his own actions only. Punishing a person for something they didnt to is just immoral and not justice. Its on the same degree as false framing or a forced confession. Collective punishment fundamentally is punishing people for something they didnt do. Bloodfeuds and collective punishment are all things idiots do, look at the 3rd world, their low iq populations just cant comprehend that people are complex individuals and instead they dont think but go primal "muh tribe vs your tribe" ooga booga mindset.
So the pedophile shitskins are in fault, but what about the shitskins who arent pedophiles, who didnt harm children? You're gonna punish them for doing nothing?
I get that statistically, importing poor violent idiotic muslims does increase crime and violence so i agree that immigration shouldnt be a thing, on a mass scale this is just the realistic effect, violence and crime. But what im saying is, from a mass statistical perspective, not bringing them over and even deporting is good, but as individuals they still shouldnt be hated for something they didnt do.
>but the reality is that culture and morality are also crucial in racism.
No, racists constantly say its never culture and its all about race. But i guess this is a disagreement of definitions.
>Darwinism supplies scientific data about the average IQ of each country to justify racism, and Christianity uses morality and cultural differences to argue for it. It is true that not everyone chose to be this way (and I'll come to this later), but when you're an active nuisance for everyone and you don't understand accountability, then all this talk about soul and free will goes out the window. Christianity argues that fighting for yourself is important, but that those fights must be equal and, preferably, non-violent.
â„–102216[Quote]
>>102215Accidently pressed enter.
>Darwinism supplies scientific data about the average IQ of each country to justify racism, and Christianity uses morality and cultural differences to argue for it. It is true that not everyone chose to be this way (and I'll come to this later), but when you're an active nuisance for everyone and you don't understand accountability, then all this talk about soul and free will goes out the window. Christianity argues that fighting for yourself is important, but that those fights must be equal and, preferably, non-violent.Christianity says there is an omnipotent all powerful loving god who created the world. Why did he make the world like this is the question im asking. Im not talking about christianity its in social and cultural effects but the abstract idea of christianity.
Life is just too brutal, unequal and full of shit like this. Why did god create certain people low iq?
Remember, the people you hate, the low iq ugly niggers or shitskins are god's creations. Dont blame the nigger for being born a nigger, its not his fault, but its god's fault. For creating niggers in the first place because he is the creator of everything and humanity. Remember, god created humanity in his image.
And why is it so unequal?
Why does god create indians ugly and stupid, to be born into sickness, poverty and suffering. Does he truly love everyone? The bible says so but race science says not. Why does god create someone a beautiful nordic, someone else a slant eyed chink? Or is this god thing just not real and what dictates all of this is uncaring evolution. The world is too cold,unequal and bleak to be a creation of a loving god.
>Whether instinctively or not, there is an evolutionary preference for creatures considered "better" in their respective traits. Women must be pretty while men must be strong and attractive. This is why most arabs and indians are into white, blonde women for example. They represent a type of "beauty" that we, as human beings, find attractive. Yes, this may be subjective, but the elements of choosing a partner to procreate are still there. So yes, there is at least a collective understanding of what's better and worse.Man this entire point reinforces the argument ive made above.
>Yes, but Indians choose to pollute rivers, shit on the streets and do everything with dirty hands, even in places that are against such behavior.Ive been hearing stories of indian kids out there cleaning rivers and trash. What about them? But I guess it doesnt matter 1.4 billion people behaving like trash and the rest forced to live them by birth, something they didnt have any control over.
You have to be a severe delusional narccicistic egomaniac to believe as an indian or whatever hated group you alone as an individual can overshadow the hundreds of millions of people of your race, so the individual has no real choice in this. The only thing he experiences is suffering, hate and abuse from both sides, belonging to no one if he wants to change his culture, from both the foreigners who hate him, and his own people for wanting to destroy their traditions and culture.
â„–102217[Quote]
>>102073 (OP)All humans are descendants of an single race with no sexual characteristics.
This race are Aryans. Among other differences between humans and Aryans is no immune system, digestive system, mitochondria, respiratory breathing, or hormone system with hormone secretion implants. There is no need to reproduce if you are immortal. Cloning technology was the only method that was used.
USE YOUR MIND what is evil in reality is DEATH, BIRTH, AGING, PAIN. Microbes were used as genetic bioweapons in the form of bacteria, fungus, and other parasitic micro-organisms (read parasite pill 2.0). Which caused mutation of DNA and erasing of genetic memory. It wasn't always like this. The good news is that reversal to Aryan DNA is possible. It will not stay this way forever.
â„–102218[Quote]
>>102217interesting, but i thought we originated in east africa. But i guess the aryans were in east africa? And i thought we wuz monkey and slowly became homo sapien
â„–102380[Quote]
>>102216bump so people can reply to this
â„–102486[Quote]
>>102073 (OP)my main points are in this post and ive been seing contradictions and fallacies in christianity
I find christianity great in its practical and ideological effects on the individual and collective, but as an idea and religion itself, its hard to believe in it, its seems its just false
Idk im in a vague state, im leaning it towards being false but ive had experiences in life that could be spiritual but were they just coincidences and my brain interpreting it as spiritual, or am i gonna go to hell? Its hard to make a decision
â„–102492[Quote]
we are all fucking retards that should hold no beliefs