Comments on: Charles Darwin Doubts about His Theory

By: Rafael

Rafael — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:51:58 +0000

Darwin never set out to prove that God didn’t exist, he really set out to question the process of the origin of things. And science actually has not come any closer to proving his theory, they really continue to prove the Law of Adaptation. Darwin’s theory does support this law, and it IS compatible with a faith-based world view.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:00:24 +0000

from an anonymous review of Origin and it can be read at Amazon.com

“I started reading this book expecting to find offensive, disrespectful, and vicious material throughout it. What I came to realize instead, was that people have criticized this book based on offensive, disrespectful and vicious accusations. I can’t identify how people have linked this work to God and blasphemy. It has nothing to do with religion, faith, or creation. This is a work of observation, logic, and adaptability. It makes perfect sense, and trust me, it is in no way offensive.

To think that for a century people have been debating, fighting, and cursing Charles Darwin over this work seems comical once you read his book. The book is written in easy to understand common language, allowing the not so biologically or anthropologically astute to understand it as well. Even if you are not convinced by Darwin’s observations, you will be convinced that there is no threat to anyone’s beliefs from this book.

I found this work to be very convincing and highly compatible with my faith in God. It does not threaten God, and it certainly does not require me to abandon any beliefs even though I fully understand and agree with Mr. Darwin.

Read this book, it is worthy of consideration and it is only fair to hold judgment until after you have read it.
(October 1, 1998) ”

I hope that people that read X-Evolutionist’s review take the time to look at that one and maybe even pick up a copy of the book themselves. It’s free to download from Amazon and may other places.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:13:53 +0000

You said “Actually, you might be surprised to know that there is nothing in this book that is any threat to somebody’s faith in God as creator.” and on this you are absolutely correct. My father believe in god as a creator but also he believed in Evolution. In fact the vast majority of true Christians do the same as my father. They do this by not taking the Bible to literally. It’s a real pity that you have forced yourself into lying in order to defend your disbelief in Evolution when you really don’t need to.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:24:56 +0000

You said “Darwin Expected Innumerable Transitional Forms, but they Do not Exist”. Darwin was wrong to believe that we would find innumerable amount of fossils but as you have said “It has been about 150 years since he wrote that book” and we have found a huge amount of fossils. Each one could be call a transitional form but even a huge amount of what you would consider transitional fossils. The fossils from the Whale linage has been amazing. In Darwin’s day there were only a few hominid (our direct ancestors) fossils. Not even enough to cover a pool table. Now you would need a pool to hold all of them. I could list them here but I’m sure I would run out of space.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 21:00:19 +0000

You said that “Darwin Admitted it is Absurd to Believe that the Eye Could have been Formed by Natural Selection” then you give a quote from this book. The rest of the quote is as follows “Reason tells me, that if numerous graduations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to it’s possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited [note we have since found how it's called genetics], as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, the the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory”. Now my question to you is did you read the Origin before quote mining it and are therefore deliberately lying for Jesus or are you just coping what some other liar is has said?