If Jim Darwin was a monk?
600756
If he was a monk, the world of monetsries would be very sad.\n\nI dont think he changes the eco systems. No, the rivers wouldnt run rampant.
332140
We would not have ever come into existence. If Eve and later Adam had not partaken of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they would have never become mortal, they would have lived forever (alone) in the Garden of Eden, and mankind would have never come about.  The entire plan of our Heavenly Father to allow his children to come to earth and gain mortal bodies would have been frustrated.  Adam fell that men might be, and men are that they might have joy.
81036
Charles Darwin\n\nIssac Newton
1122327
Charles Darwin died for our sins that you and I may be able to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
1111102
Just commenting on Darwin's deathbed:\n\n< Shortly after his death, Lady Hope addressed a gathering of young men and women at the educational establishment founded by the evangelist Dwight Lyman Moody at Northfield, Massachusetts. She had, she maintained, visited Darwin on his deathbed. He had been reading the Epistle to the Hebrews, had asked for the local Sunday school to sing in a summerhouse on the grounds, and had confessed: "How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done." He went on, she said, to say that he would like her to gather a congregation since he "would like to speak to them of Christ Jesus and His salvation, being in a state where he was eagerly savouring the heavenly anticipation of bliss."\n\nWith Moody's encouragement, Lady Hope's story was printed in the Boston Watchman Examiner. The story spread, and the claims were republished as late as October 1955 in the Reformation Review and in the Monthly Record of the Free Church of Scotland in February 1957. These attempts to fudge Darwin's story had already been exposed for what they were, first by his daughter Henrietta after they had been revived in 1922. "I was present at his deathbed," she wrote in the Christian for February 23, 1922. "Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. . . . The whole story has no foundation whatever." >\n\n(I call that bearing false witness. For shame.)\n\nThe research I've done on pro-creationist "scientists" indicate that most of them are associated with religious schools. No surprise there.
400610
I'd be a Mahayana, a "greater vehicle".\n\n\n\nYeah, Yeah, find my meds.
488517
First you would have to find an evolutionist, whatever that is. And second you need to prove the existance of some alleged temporal hell.
1155306
Hello brother (see my icon)!\n\nAgree for the most part.  Except for maybe the Dalai Lama.\n\nLaypeople especially.  The more that they seek the truth and comfort in the teachings (that should be dogma) the further they really are from knowing "god" or the source.\n\nKeep the unfaith brother!
707081
wasn't it Darwin... hmmm
577786
Hmm. Tough one in principle. One has a big head, a giant beard, obstinate refusal to consider other opinions, and the other is Jim Darwin...
483449
LOL.....I dont believe in that but if I did it would probably be a chihuaha.If of course you mean a spiritual guide.
1072242
I don't believe in Darwin's theory because that would be against my religion, Catholic. I believe God created all in one way and each individual is different, not a copy of another that has been changed by "Evolution".
464385
It depends, I guess. In some religions, for example, if you are wicked in this life time, you would be reborn into a lesser organism, like an insect.\nIf you were good in this life time, you would be reborn into a higher life. A more 'fortunate' life.\n  Some monks refuse to eat meat, and are incredibly good to animals because they believe that those animals are their ancestors(you wouldn't want to eat your dad's reincarnation, would you?)\n    A great example is the Rat Temple in Deshnoke, India.
518487
think about this. if we were all monkeys how come some evolved to be black, white, chinese etc. darwin is full of sh**
118746
Um, no that would be a pretty ridiculous reduction of the grand theologies of Aquinas, Augustine, and Athanasius.\n\nI'll only deal with one of these ridiculous items - the first.  \n\n"An almighty God decided he was either bored or lonely so he creates a universe of immense size..."\n\nThe Christian sense of cosmology was first expressed by Augustine in Book 11 of Confessions, essentially agreeing with modern scientific cosmology that time is a physical property of the universe, and has no applicability beyond it. \n\nThat is why the Nicene creed speaks of Christ as "eternally begotten" - since God is not passing through time, or even really old (also a temporal concept), his actions aren't really the result of "getting bored" or anything temporal like that. The anthropomorphisms of that kind may abound in scripture, but only because of our limited ability to conceive of literal timelessness.\n\nSince you basically blew the first premise, the rest, which reside on them, fail. So I'll leave it alone (other than to snicker a little at "whose purpose is to make him feel better" - I can't decide whether that is banal or actually funny. :-)
34920
Darwin never said man evolved from monkeys.  He said man and monkeys share a common ancestor.
648659
its the spawn of sexy_jim_darwin