Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Evolution is a myth? Please explain:

What is FAITH.?

Oops,page bounce. Reply to

That is a very general and very superficial definition...

Karl Marx said "Religion is the opium of the people".[1] Marx also stated: "Communism begins from the outset (Owen) with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism; indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."[2]

Vladimir Lenin similarly wrote regarding atheism and Communism: "A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could."[3]

Friedrich Engels wrote of atheistic evolutionism and Communism: "Just as Darwin discovered the law of development of organic nature, so Marx discovered law of development of human history."[4]

In 1955, Chinese Communist leader Zhou Enlai declared, "We Communists are atheists".[5] In 2014, the Communist Party of China reaffirmed that members of their party must be atheists.[6] See also: China and atheism

In 2016, the International Business Times reported:

“ A senior Chinese advisor on religious affairs has said the country should promote atheism throughout society, in remarks that appear to reflect a deepening campaign to reinforce traditional Marxist values in China — and could add to concern about official attitudes among believers in the country’s five officially recognized religions.[7] ”
In 2014, the New American website indicated:

“ The Communist Party of China (CPC) is letting its members know that the party’s official adherence to militant atheism has not changed; Party members are not allowed to be Christians, or to hold any other religious beliefs. That is the clear message sent by a top Party official in an editorial published on November 14 in the Global Times, the international version of People’s Daily, the official newspaper and mouthpiece of the CPC.[8]


1. Marx, Karl. 1976. Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Marx-Engels Collected Works, vol. 3. New York.
2. Marx, Karl. Private Property and Communism, 1844.
3. Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich. The Attitude of the Workers' Party to Religion, 1909.
4. Engels, Friedrich. "Karl Marx's Funeral", Marx-Engels Collected Works, vol. 24, p. 467.
5. Noebel, David, The Battle for Truth, Harvest House, 2001.
6. China’s Communist Party Reaffirms Marxism, Maoism, Atheism, New American, 2014
7. China's Communist Party Bans Believers, Doubles Down On Atheism
8. Senior Chinese Religious Advisor Calls For Promotion Of Atheism In Society, International Business Times

First of all, Russell Humphreys (you spelled it wrong) is not a real scientist. He is employed by the Creation Science Institute. I cannot find any peer reviewed research paper he has ever published. Nor any legitimate cientist not employed by the same bunch who agrees with thim. He's a quack.

Second, his theories have been refuted by legitimate scientists. You would not understand the basic reasons, except possibly the one easily refuted by JPL. You can read that one in Wikipedia.

JPL has real scientists. They don't believe in talking snakes either.

How would illiterate superstitious Middle East peasants from thousands of years ago view faith as being defined by?

you know before hyper convoluted Catholic theologians got into the game?

How complex -and in-depth does faith have to be?

Your post is primarily about communism and atheism. Atheism and evolution are not exclusive except for those limited to a literal interpretation of the Bible.

You think "JPL" is a quack?

You're telling me his credentials are not real? What school did he get his degrees from, then? As for JPL, I think he is a quack. We are now even.

Oops,page bounce. Reply to

That is a very general and very superficial definition. I would say belief without epistemological proof. That does not exclude evidence but merely indicates the insufficiency of evidence to constitute a proof.

And there's probably a few like me wondering what the fuss is about, finding evolution and religion not incompatible,

And there's probably a few like me wondering what the fuss is about, finding evolution and religion not incompatible,

If life merges from complex chemical interaction and energy input under the right conditions and evolves thereafter, what need is the for religion as an explanation?

Wrong question, ace. "Religion" is 100% man-made. I believe you meant to say "what need is there for a creator."

But I could be wrong.