reason based on a flawed assumption to create his own basis, finishing by making this flawed reasoning his version of ‘correct’ reality:“Cebes offers a more difficult objection: what if the body is like a garment worn by the soul? Even though I continue toexist longer than any single article of my clothing does, there will come a time when I die, and some of my clothes willprobably continue to exist. In the same way, even if the argument from opposites has shown that the soul can in principleoutlast the life of any particular human body, there might come a time when the soul itself ceases to exist." Even if there islife after death, Cebes suggests, that the soul may not be truly immortal. Biblically this is the correct argument.In response to this criticism, Plato significantly revises the argument from opposities by incorporating an additionalconcept of the role of the Forms. "Each Form, he now maintains, is the cause of all of every particular instance that bearsits name: the form of Beauty causes the beauty of any beautiful thing; the form of Equality causes the equality of any pairof equal things; etc. But then, since the soul is living, it must participate in the Form of Life, and thus it cannot ever die.(
105d) The soul is perfectly and certainly imperishable, not only for this life, but forever.”(http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/2f.htm)This idea of an eternal soul became the foundation for the
. Plato’s idea of forms also dictates that what’sabove is also beneath. A lot of his ideas were fashioned into real world social systems. This man has single handedly helpedlead a revolution against Gods truth via his educational abominable ignorance. Modern people rather choose his ignorant blind stance to that of Gods spoken Word. Believing in such lies was/is just the first step to national or worldly corruption.
Against Traditional Family
This next excerpt shows that plato desired to destroy the small family and make us into one large family based on ahierarchical system. God made a father and mother and children, while Plato made the society to fulfill these roles andfunctions:“The best city is described as if its unity makes it a large family. The city is the family writ large. Is the family the soul writlarge? It is surely the case that in the Republic the constituent parts of the city are individual artisans or classes of artisans,not families. The city can be the soul writ large because the souls of the just city have been liberated from the confines of the family. Finding the soul in the expanse of the city require that the soul break the narrow bounds of thefamily.” (Education and the Family in Plato’s Republic Christopher A. Colmo:http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/8/6/6/0/pages86601/p86601-1.php)So we see that Plato was living quite sinfully. His assumptions have been proven unacceptable, and his philosophy is thatof evil, (this fruit deems the tree grotesque). He is one reason why our modern day society is corrupted.
Many people know Darwin for his fanciful tales of bacteria becoming humanity. Butmany don’t know about his history with religion. It is plain to see that many of thesemen who end up going against Yahwey have themselves given up on maintaining asteadfast mind, or fail to develop a real living faith before their fall. These men are thefailures that Christ speaks about when he says “walk not as other Gentiles [who] walk,in the vanity of their mind, Having their understanding darkened, being alienated fromthe life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of theirheart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.” ( Eph 4:17-19). After these men reject God they aretaken by sat*n, and from thence they do his bidding unknowingly. Darwin lived in painall of his life, this is due to his sinful deeds.
About his conversion
From his bio:During these two years (i.e. October 1836 to January 1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the
I was quite orthodox, and
I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (thoughthemselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality
. Isuppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, to see that the OldTestament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rainbow as a sign, etc., etc., and fromits attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos,or the beliefs of any
. (Proof of the tower of babel) The question then continually rose before my mind and would not be banished,—is it credible that if God were now to make a revelation to the Hindoos, would he permit it to beconnected with the belief in Vishnu, Siva, &c., as Christianity is connected with the Old Testament. This appeared to meutterly incredible. (http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/Charles_Darwin_quotes.html) (more on tower of babel)
So we see that he doubted Gods word, from here he falls into the world of imagination lead by hiscarnal conscience fed by evil nature.