Anti Christ Evolution
Evolution has been a hot topic since Darwin's monkey got loose. In all seriousness, there isn't a bigger anti Christ teaching than theistic evolution.
The idea nature evolved from the big bang to amino acids and proteins, into single celled life, and later into male and female.
Theistic evolution as commonly taught is directly anti-Christ.
According to Eugenie Scott, Director of the US National Center for Science Education, "In one form or another, Theistic Evolutionism is the view of creation taught at the majority of mainline Protestant seminaries, and it is the official position of the Catholic church".[2]
Under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the International Theological Commission published a paper accepting the big bang of 15 billion years ago and the evolution of all life including humans from the microorganisms that formed approximately 4 billion years ago.[31]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups
We must understand Jesus, who was there at creation, contradicts the theistic evolution mode in unison with Moses.
Mar 10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Mar 10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
The purpose of the precept was that mankind had hardened their heart against God's original purpose. The precept is very clear however.
Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Man did not become male and female through evolution, but were created male and female from the beginning.
This pretty much shows Catholic and most Protestant theology is directly opposed to Jesus.
We must resist the idea Jesus wouldn't speak of theories hundreds of years in the future, but having foresight he might. Yet, this isn't necessary, for there were theories about creation and man's knowledge (Science) even before Jesus came. So Jesus making this statement had a present purpose and a future purpose.
One atheist convert to deism believed in an Aristolean God, so such theories went back to Aristotle and farther..
Jesus words would be relevant in his life on earth. As well as today in his kingdom
Many would accept Aristotle's (322 B.C.)view of God.
Aristotelian theological concepts were accepted by many later Jewish, Islamic, and Christian philosophers. Key Jewish philosophers included Samuel Ibn Tibbon, Maimonides, and Gersonides, among many others. Their views of God are considered mainstream by many Jews of all denominations even today. Preeminent among Islamic philosophers who were influenced by Aristotelian theology are Avicenna and Averroes. In Christian theology, the key philosopher influenced by Aristotle was undoubtedly Thomas Aquinas.
Jesus statement was useful in correcting the Aristolean Deism view of his day and later developments such as in the Catholic church.
See also: Deism
Deism is belief in a God or first cause based on reason, rather than on faith or revelation. Most deists[who?] believe that God does not interfere with the world or create miracles. Some deists[who?] believe that a Divine Creator initiated a universe in which evolution occurred, by designing the system and the natural laws, although many deists believe that God also created life itself, before allowing it to be subject to evolution. They find it to be undignified and unwieldy for a deity to make constant adjustments rather than letting evolution elegantly adapt organisms to changing environments.
One recent convert to deism was philosopher and professor Antony Flew, who became a deist in December 2004. Professor Flew, a former atheist, later argued that recent research into the origins of life supports the theory that some form of intelligence was involved. Whilst accepting subsequent Darwinian evolution, Flew argued that this cannot explain the complexities of the origins of life. He also stated that the investigation of DNA "has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce [life], that intelligence must have been involved."[34] He subsequently clarified this statement in an interview with Joan Bakewell for BBC Radio 4 in March 2005: "What I was converted to was the existence of an Aristotelian God, and Aristotle's God had no interest in human affairs at all."[35][relevant? – discuss]