Who wrote this?

[rogue06]

You wouldn't want to end up like poor old Rogue , would you?

Apparently you aspire to Rogue's level.

I do believe that I've gotten under his skin. Time to make room for another trophy on the mantle.

[rogue06]

Not to mention his arguments against the God of the Bible calling Him a "revengeful Tyrant".

Darwin, regretfully, became very disillusioned with religion after the death of his beloved young daughter Annie from scarlet fever (or tuberculosis) when she was but 10 years old. The event turned Darwin's world upside-down. Darwin was so overcome with grief that he could not go to her burial.

He would write: "We have lost the joy of the Household, and the solace of our old age:— she must have known how we loved her; oh that she could now know how deeply, how tenderly we do still & shall ever love her dear joyous face. Blessings on her"

Interestingly after Benjamin Warfield (who I cite in post #114) reviewed “The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin,” he was deeply moved by Darwin's tragic loss of faith and began to painstakingly examine Darwin concluding that his departure from a biblical world view was born out of a literalistic reading of Genesis and that "Darwin displayed a 'total misapprehension of divine providence, and... a very crude notion of final cause.'"

[Cerebrum123]

Darwin, regretfully, became very disillusioned with religion after the death of his beloved young daughter Annie from scarlet fever (or tuberculosis) when she was but 10 years old. The event turned Darwin's world upside-down. Darwin was so overcome with grief that he could not go to her burial.

He would write: "We have lost the joy of the Household, and the solace of our old age:— she must have known how we loved her; oh that she could now know how deeply, how tenderly we do still & shall ever love her dear joyous face. Blessings on her"

Interestingly after Benjamin Warfield (who I cite in post #114) reviewed “The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin,” he was deeply moved by Darwin's tragic loss of faith and began to painstakingly examine Darwin concluding that his departure from a biblical world view was born out of a literalistic reading of Genesis and that "Darwin displayed a 'total misapprehension of divine providence, and... a very crude notion of final cause.'"

Darwin seems to have lost his faith years before she died, but it probably just pushed him further from God. Darwin wrote in his autobiography‘I had gradually come by this time, i.e. 1836 to 1839, to see that the Old Testament was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos or the beliefs of any barbarian’. This was before she died, which was in 1851. Also something he wrote to Joseph Hooker was this, ‘I am almost convinced … that species are not (it is like confessing a murder) immutable’(even though he was correct that species aren't immutable he still understood his work as an attack on God). Ian Taylor wrote about this "murder", and this is what he said. ‘Many commentators have pointed out that the "murder" he spoke of was in effect the murder of God’.
Darwin also wrote “I never gave up Christianity until I was forty years of age.”. This happened in 1849, 2 years BEFORE his daughter's death. Not to mention the effect that his father and grandfather had on him. Do these things sound like someone who was just trying to explain what he saw around him? He also suffered from what appears to be debilitating stress, and called Origin "my accursed book".

[Wally]

Do these things sound like someone who was just trying to explain what he saw around him?

Yes, without question.

Just because you discover something about objective reality that conflicts with one interpretaion of the Bible, does not mean you set out to "murder God". Believe it or not, most people don't consider the religious implications of every observation they make.

His loss of religion was the result of his discoveries, not the motivation. Unlike fundies, the motivation for most people is pure knowledge and the joy of the pursute of that.

And besides all that, the validity of his discoveries has NOTHING to do with the motivation. It's only an ad hominem attack.

[Roy]

The above quote is from the same guy that unashamedly has this in his sig :

"Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional."

By the way, I've corrected you on that yet, not surprisingly, you have
not changed or deleted it. Tell me, Roy, do you have ANY integrity at all?

It's an authentic quote, taken directly from the source, with no unmarked omissions, and not lacking relevant context.

Since your own 'quotes' are often out-of-context, or from secondary sources, or lacking text that was in the original, or even entirely fictional - and I can produce examples of each of these if you want everyone to be reminded how sleazy and unreliable you are - your complaint shows that I have more integrity than you.

Roy

P.S. Cerebrum123, I'll reply when I have time to compose something more in depth and lacking in typos.

[Roy]

That's an amusing viewpoint, but not one I find biologists, or even Ruse supporting. C, what you need to watch for is creationist sources quote-mining and supporting dishonest behavior. The "[sic]" behind the reference to Gish as "Mr." is a giveaway. No one outside creationism views Gish's diploma mill doctorate as any more meaningful than $2595's.

I do.

Are you confusing Dr. Gish with Mr. Hovind? I know there are several older-generation creationists with dubious doctorates - Burdick, Hovind, Baugh, for instance - but I think Gish's is genuine (and so does wikipedia, referencing UC Berkeley).

Roy

[rogue06]

Darwin seems to have lost his faith years before she died, but it probably just pushed him further from God. Darwin wrote in his autobiography‘I had gradually come by this time, i.e. 1836 to 1839, to see that the Old Testament was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos or the beliefs of any barbarian’. This was before she died, which was in 1851. Also something he wrote to Joseph Hooker was this, ‘I am almost convinced … that species are not (it is like confessing a murder) immutable’(even though he was correct that species aren't immutable he still understood his work as an attack on God). Ian Taylor wrote about this "murder", and this is what he said. ‘Many commentators have pointed out that the "murder" he spoke of was in effect the murder of God’.
Darwin also wrote “I never gave up Christianity until I was forty years of age.”. This happened in 1849, 2 years BEFORE his daughter's death. Not to mention the effect that his father and grandfather had on him. Do these things sound like someone who was just trying to explain what he saw around him? He also suffered from what appears to be debilitating stress, and called Origin "my accursed book".

His faith had been dwindling before Annie's death but to say that he "lost his faith" may be a bit strong here in that, though usually very reticent about his personal beliefs, Darwin took pains to point out that he was not an atheist.

In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. — I think that generally (and more and more so as I grow older), but not always, — that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind.

In the same letter he also noted in the opening sentence that "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist & an evolutionist."

Shortly after publishing On the Origin of Species he told his friend Asa Gray (a devout Christian) that he had doubts about the teleological argument (which claimed nature as evidence of god), though he was still inclined to vaguely believe in an impersonal God as first cause.

Even in his autobiography where he voiced his doubts the strongest he reiterated that he was an agnostic when he wrote that "I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic."

It sounds that he was more of an agnostic deist than anything.

As for "confessing a murder" statement, I disagree with Taylor's interpretation and tend to agree with John van Wyhe of Christ College in Cambridge and his assessment based on an analysis of his works that "every single instance" where Darwin uses terms like murder, suicide, torture... in a non-literal sense it "is humorously melodramatic. Darwin's almost constant good-natured self-effacing humour in his letters very often took the form of hyperbolic witticisms."

And like his remark about how OOS was "my accursed book" it seems that he could have just as easily been talking about his anxiety over the cultural and political effects his works would have. He wrote about concerns over both and some think one reason he delayed publishing was the political climate (IIRC, there had been violent demonstrations in Britain during the early 1850s and Darwin was concerned that he would fan the flames).

Also, while his father and one of his grandfathers were "free-thinkers," not all of his relatives were by a long shot. His other grandfather, Josiah Wedgwood, who's dislike of slavery profoundly influenced Darwin, was an ardent Unitarian as was, AFAICT, his daughter Susannah -- Darwin's mom.

Finally, and most importantly none of this, not one itty bitty specks worth, has anything to do with the validity of evolution. It's like claiming that the credibility of geometry depends on whether Euclid beat his wife. It's all part of a rather pathetic "shoot the messenger" strategy.

[wattsr1]

Attachment 76469

Gee. I'm convinced MOTL.

[lao tzu]

I do.

Are you confusing Dr. Gish with Mr. Hovind? I know there are several older-generation creationists with dubious doctorates - Burdick, Hovind, Baugh, for instance - but I think Gish's is genuine (and so does wikipedia, referencing UC Berkeley).

Roy

Thank you, Roy. They do all seem to look alike after awhile.

[DuraGizer]

I wish Darwin had remained a Christian throughout his life. It would have been harder for the anti-evolutionists to plot their character assassinations against him.

[KingsGambit]

I wish Darwin had remained a Christian throughout his life. It would have been harder for the anti-evolutionists to plot their character assassinations against him.

A way would have been found.

[rogue06]

I wish Darwin had remained a Christian throughout his life. It would have been harder for the anti-evolutionists to plot their character assassinations against him.

Perhaps why they act like Wallace didn't exist. Then again, it seems most everyone acts like he didn't exist.

[Cerebrum123]

I haven't been feeling all that great lately, and feel that I need to step back from some of the more serious debates I have been in. I will do some research, and once I feel better, I will either jump back on this thread, or perhaps start a new one. I hope you guys understand.

[wattsr1]

I haven't been feeling all that great lately, and feel that I need to step back from some of the more serious debates I have been in. I will do some research, and once I feel better, I will either jump back on this thread, or perhaps start a new one. I hope you guys understand.

No problems. Hope you feel better in a few days. (Too busy chasing wild women? Heh, just kidding.)

[rogue06]

No problems. Hope you feel better in a few days. (Too busy chasing wild women? Heh, just kidding.)

Usually trouble begins when you catch one