bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: JDH on December 11, 2006, 01:16:53 PM
-
One of the founding principles of Evolutionary thought is that good mutations occur frequently enough to cause changes in species. Not only changes in species, but changes enough to eventually mutate organisms similar to pond scum into alligators, elephants, sharks and even man. In order to seriously consider this idea as anything but fanciful mysticism, one must study in depth what this idea entails. First one must look at the idea of creating one “good” mutation. This is quite similar to taking Shakespeare’s “to be are not to be” soliloquy and at some point chosen randomly, randomly typing letters. What are the chances that what you have typed something that actually improves Shakespeare’s soliloquy? What are the chances that you actually typed something that make sense? This can actually be explored using numeric methods. Clearly, the chances of adding errors to any text by randomly typing is high. Now have any of these rare good mutations actually been seen? Research it for yourself, don’t really on just what I’m telling you. If you do, you will find the only good mutation referenced in all that we know about mankind is sickle cell anemia. No one with sickle cell anemia will tell you that it is a good mutation. So we know that idea of good mutations is at the very least rare, if it exists at all.
Now the next stage is taking all of these good mutations together to form something completely different. Now if the simplest single cell organism is like Shakespeare’s soliloquy, the human cell is like the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Evolution uses as its basis, that by randomly typing at various location on Shakespeare’s soliloquy, at some point with solely the process of deleting anything that doesn’t make sense, you will come up with the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Now while as a statistician, I must acknowledge this as a possibility, the question then becomes how likely is it. Some scientists ignore that this is infinitely unlikely. In fact what most scientists know is that order is not created by randomness. Let me give you an example. If you have children, you know that they can get into stuff and break things. Now let’s say you were to tell your children to just throw everything they can pick up randomly around. When you got home, you would expect a big mess. Now if we did an experiment where we had all the children of the world do this, would anyone come home to find that their house is more organized. NO!!! Lets try an experiment, put a whole bunch of monkey to work. Their only job is to create a working well. They are given wood and metal to put together into shovels. They are given all the bricks they could ever need, and they are given rope and a bucket. How many years would it take for say a hundred of them to make a well? The answer is that they would never make a well. More than likely they would put the bucket on their head get it stuck and bang around until it broke off. This is because as everyone knows it takes intelligent planning to create anything useful. Let’s take another example. If you see a mouse trap in the woods, would you wonder how the mouse trap came to be? Everyone with a brain would say that a man created that mouse trap. Now is there metal in the woods? Yes. Is there wood in the woods? DUH. Is it possible that the metal and the wood by some freak tornado came together to form this mouse trap, with of course the little writing on the back that says “Made in china”? Well I guess its possible, but I don’t think I could ever convince an intelligent person that this is what occurred. Very simply, useful things are not created from randomness. This all begs the question “If some of our smartest scientists can figure out how to create a rocket to transport people to the moon, but can not figure out how to create one living cell from nonliving material, then how complicated is it to do such a thing?” Would you believe that something much more complicated than a spaceship was created by random processes, yet not believe my story about how the mouse trap came to be? Would you ever go to Rome and say “its looks like a bunch of monkeys got together and randomly threw around some bricks.”? If so please contact me I have some beautiful swamp land to sell you.
We are not randomly mutated pond scum. Let me say this again, WE ARE NOT RANDOMLY MUTATED POND SCUM. We are the creations of God. You cannot truly argue the scientific merits of evolution because it has none. Scientists only argue this because their only other option is a divine creator. One would only hold on to this idea because one does not want to believe in God. If we are just randomly mutated pond scum, then when I cheated on my history exam I didn’t do anything wrong. The bad things that happen in life are just random events, not God punishing me or just not caring about me.
THIS IS WRONG!!! We have a purpose for life. We are here to learn to love. When God breathed life into us we gained a portion of his nobility. This can be seen everywhere. People risking their lives to save others, firefighters, teachers, military members, police officers, the regular Joe on the street all sacrifice of themselves for others. We have inside of ourselves such nobility that is truly unparalleled by the angels of heaven. There is no greater love than this, that a man gives his life for the life of his friend. Not even the angels in heaven can have the nobility that we all have inside of us.
Claim this birthright! Claim this nobility! Do not deny it because life is hard. Life is hard, but nothing worth having comes easy. Life is our opportunity to truly learn what love is. Should this lesson be learned easily? How valuable to us would it be if it was an easy lesson? How can we demonstrate love without sacrifice? How strong is our love if it cannot withstand trials and tribulations? We say things like “How can God be perfect if there is so much wrong with this world?” Therein lies your answer. This is not a perfect world, but it is a perfect proving ground. We have a limited time so as to compel us to concentrate on what is important. It is extremely difficult so as to strengthen us. There are many tests of our character. We are given time to reflect on what we have done wrong and time to change. Our opportunities to learn from our failures are even more numerous that our successes. You must stay vigilant because you never know when the next test might come. This is truly the perfect proving ground. Yet I tell you one and all that you are all equal to the task. We have in all of us the nobility unmatched by the angels.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself. These are your only true goals. When you fail, as we all do, learn from your failure. Do not get down on yourself or think yourself unworthy, you have some of God’s nobility running through your blood. Get back up and try harder. When life knocks you down, as life knocks all of us down frequently, do not indulge in self-pity. Find that nobility in yourself, use it as an opportunity grow mentally and spiritually.
YOU ARE NOT MUTATED POND SCUM!!! YOU ARE THE CREATION OF THE ALMIGHTY AND YOU HAVE THE NOBILITY GREATER THAN THAT OF THE ANGELS. LOVE GOD FIRST. LOVE OTHERS. LOVE YOURSELF.
-
JDH,
This was a great post. I am wondering what would you think about evolution with Intelligent Design. God has guided us in our lives, why could he not guide the evolutionary process? Is evolution with Intelligent Design possible? This is one of the areas that I am learning. I do not believe in blind evolution but am leaning to evolution that was guided by a loving God. I do not know if I am far off in the mark or not.
Evolution only makes sense with God guiding it. What is your feedback on this? I would really like to know.
[This is not meant to begin a debate. Just to gather information.]
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
That's a very good question. I don't really know. You could be right or God could have done it another way. But then again I don't think we really have to know. Its kind of like knowing exactly how a VCR works. Its interesting trivia maybe, but I can work a VCR with no knowledge of its inner working. In much the same way, all people know our purpose for life, that is to learn to love. The happiest people in life are not those with the most money or the most popular. They are people who have love in their heart. People on their deathbed wish they would have shown more forgiveness and love, not worked more hours or made more money. Our purpose on this Earth is so apparent. People who are athiest or choose to except this evolution with no cause and no God, choose to do so for selfish reasons not scientifc reasons.
As long as you can work towards your purpose in life, knowing how it all came to be is like learning the inner working of the VCR so you can record your favorite show. Know that God created you and loves you. More so than you could ever love him back. He put you on this Earth to strengthen your love not to harm you. We are all noble and can come through this arduous test stronger in love.
-
JDH,
I really like your reply and it exhorted me to attain a more noble purpose in my life. It is good that God created all things and us. Someday we will know how that is done. As for now, it is certainly an interesting premise to consider whether God used evolution or not. Yet, I need not be distracted by this in my pursuit of higher things such as the wonderful truths that are posted on this site everyday.
You are absoultely right about people choosing to be atheists. I was one for a long time and very bitter to Christains and others of religious thinking. I did not realize how much of I was believing in that was not pure science - if there is such a thing as that term -. I was only doing that becuase I loved the idea that I did not have to be held accountable to anyone for my actions and could use others to attain my idea. Wow, I have had a long and ardorous journey from there to this point. I am so glad that I am now in the truth. I realize that I know a whole let less than I "knew" when I was an athiest.
Thanks for your reply.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
My question is if faith would require scientific proof?
That said, this is a great site.
http://www.trueorigin.org/
-
Phazel,
Yeah I scanned that website. It's going to take a few days to read through everything on that site. Looks to be good. I am impresed by some of the topics that are on there. I was glad that I saw some Intelligent Design websites.
Thanks for posting this.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuie
-
Here is another good one.
http://www.naturalselection.0catch.com/
Yeah, there is alot of material on both sites. Trust me, you will miss alot of information there if you try to just glance over the articles. Most information there is not alot of rambling, but well researched facts within the scientific community that do not get much exposure, unfortunatly.
-
"You cannot truly argue the scientific merits of evolution because it has none."
AMEN!!!
Thanks for the post.
Another thought: It has taken intelligent human beings (not monkeys with typewriters) years to decode the genetic code. How pray tell did it get encoded in the first place? No atheist/evolutionist can give a logical scientific answer to this question.
God bless you all.
Andrevan.
-
It takes more faith to believe in Evolution that it would to believe in a Soveriegn God. How in the world do millions of species of organisms evolve into millions of others, which would suggest millions of transitional through millions of years and yet escape from the fossil record? MILLIONS! Where is that elusive transitional fossil? The evolutionist would go crazy to find one! when in fact they should have in their possession at least a few thousand.
-
JDH,
This was a great post. I am wondering what would you think about evolution with Intelligent Design. God has guided us in our lives, why could he not guide the evolutionary process? Is evolution with Intelligent Design possible? This is one of the areas that I am learning. I do not believe in blind evolution but am leaning to evolution that was guided by a loving God. I do not know if I am far off in the mark or not.
Evolution only makes sense with God guiding it. What is your feedback on this? I would really like to know.
[This is not meant to begin a debate. Just to gather information.]
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
Dear Anne,
here’s the thing: evolution is a myth (just like free will). Evolution does not scientifically work and cannot scientifically work. God does not need evolution to create anything, He does not need a myth.
As Christians we can have complete faith that God (through His Son) did perform the instant creation of all life. God spoke everything into existence. Therefore we can throw away evolution with confidence, we don’t need it. Only atheists need it.
I’m always reminded of how Jesus instantly created fish for the disciples in Luke 5:1-10 & John 21:1-11. He did not require millions of years or evolution to do it.
May God continue to guide you into all truth. :)
Andrevan.
-
Andrevan,
Yep you are right. And it is a good thing that he did not need a million years to do so, or else the multitudes would have died. I got a sick sense of humor.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
It is quite interesting what falls under behavior condoned on this board and what is condemned as outside the bounds of the allowable discussion, but I digress....
I believe that belief in God and acknowledgement of science is not only possible, but a requirement for the modern believer.
Peace
-
I believe that belief in God and acknowledgement of science is not only possible, but a requirement for the modern believer.
Peace
I tend to agree with your statement in a way. We live by faith not by sight, we don't necessarily require physical evidence for everything. "Now faith is an assumption of what is being expected, a conviction concerning matters which are not being observed;" Hebrews 11:1[clv].
For a Christian to believe in evolution would require them to accept philosophical and mythological ideas that contradict what real world experimental science shows. Christianity is rational and grounded in history, evolution is grounded in philosophy and pseudoscience. Experimental science is on the side of Christians, however, they've been falsely lead to believe otherwise. Just some of my observations from the real world.
God bless.
Andrevan.
-
Therefore we can throw away evolution with confidence, we don’t need it. Only atheists need it.
Here is the larger problem with that and Michael Behe sums it up better that I can in this article.
http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_ksnytb81399.htm
-
Hello Pax
You wrote : It is quite interesting what falls under behavior condoned on this board and what is condemned as outside the bounds of the allowable discussion, but I digress....
I believe that belief in God and acknowledgement of science is not only possible, but a requirement for the modern believer.
Peace
I have seen web pages and alternate teachings get posed on the Forum with dire consequences. For me our like-mindedness is found in the fact that we agree with the teachings as presented through Ray Smith. Those who are not able to understand, find in the Forum a place where they can be encouraged and counselled and edified to assist them find meaning and understanding in the Ray Smith teachings. This opens up the opportunity for us all to encourage and fellowship and share what we have been taught. With Modification, we are then able to walk peacefully together in companionship with the truth.
Also, the report to Moderator item in each post section, allows us to assist the Mods where we may see interference or off sided approaches which the Mods then can umpire. This way we can alert the Mods who may not have caught up yet to the fact that a thread is going sour or is in need of some supportive authority to keep things on the up and up.
Also, I have found that these interferences are also opportunities to exercise our discernment. Is the error in innocence, from a teachable spirit or is it in deliberation to cause strife and division? It is an interesting learning curve to see how the Mods respond to having to deliver an error correction or simple reminder of Forum rules of participation and how it is received, rejected or contested sometimes vigorously right into the PM section!... Which ever way….
"God works all things together for those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose." Rom 8 : 28 :)
I find Rays response to this subject helpful in demystifying the deviancy and myth as Andrevan also notes.
Here is how Ray responds to an e-mail. Quote…
October 15, 2006-12-12
Hi Ray
What do you think of Darwinism and how do you refute it, in a few words? Thanks.
Tom from CT
Dear Tom:
Charles Darwin did not himself believe in Darwinism Evolution. He admitted that his theories were not plausible.
How is that for a few words?
God be with you,
Ray.
Peace be with you
Arcturus :)
-
Hello JDH
You wrote : We have a purpose for life. We are here to learn to love. When God breathed life into us we gained a portion of his nobility. This can be seen everywhere. People risking their lives to save others, firefighters, teachers, military members, police officers, the regular Joe on the street all sacrifice of themselves for others. We have inside of ourselves such nobility that is truly unparalleled by the angels of heaven. There is no greater love than this, that a man gives his life for the life of his friend. Not even the angels in heaven can have the nobility that we all have inside of us.
Claim this birthright! Claim this nobility! Do not deny it because life is hard. Life is hard, but nothing worth having comes easy. Life is our opportunity to truly learn what love is. Should this lesson be learned easily? How valuable to us would it be if it was an easy lesson? How can we demonstrate love without sacrifice? How strong is our love if it cannot withstand trials and tribulations? We say things like “How can God be perfect if there is so much wrong with this world?” Therein lies your answer. This is not a perfect world, but it is a perfect proving ground. We have a limited time so as to compel us to concentrate on what is important. It is extremely difficult so as to strengthen us. There are many tests of our character. We are given time to reflect on what we have done wrong and time to change. Our opportunities to learn from our failures are even more numerous that our successes. You must stay vigilant because you never know when the next test might come. This is truly the perfect proving ground. Yet I tell you one and all that you are all equal to the task. We have in all of us the nobility unmatched by the angels.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself. These are your only true goals. When you fail, as we all do, learn from your failure. Do not get down on yourself or think yourself unworthy, you have some of God’s nobility running through your blood. Get back up and try harder. When life knocks you down, as life knocks all of us down frequently, do not indulge in self-pity. Find that nobility in yourself, use it as an opportunity grow mentally and spiritually.
YOU ARE NOT MUTATED POND SCUM!!! YOU ARE THE CREATION OF THE ALMIGHTY AND YOU HAVE THE NOBILITY GREATER THAN THAT OF THE ANGELS. LOVE GOD FIRST. LOVE OTHERS. LOVE YOURSELF.
This section of your presentation I treat separately because it appears as separate from the topic of Evolution that began your discussion.
In the above section of your teaching or belief that you present the only parts I can agree with are …”God breathed life into us….” And
There is no greater love than this, that a man gives his life for the life of his friend. and… Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and love your neighbour as yourself.
I disagree with the teaching or belief that we should love ourselves. For me self-esteem is the most undetected anti-Christ heresy of our times that has wide support in the worldly systems of psychology, school education, business competition and carnal life teachings of which there are many books in the New York best sellers list that have come from TBN preachers. The wisdom of the world is to God foolishness.
For those who are curious and have the time I’d like to suggest that you do a little exercise. This may help you see what I am seeing if you are interested. JDH, if you re-read what you have presented in your post with the following amendments…. Where the word love comes up, put the word God in its place AND where you see the word God, put the word Love in ITS place…. you may be astounded at what you see! What I hope it shows you is that we can do nothing without God and to believe we can or should try or to teach others to try is absurd because it is God who is Love NOT us.
For me, Gods plan is that we experience being UN-like Him first until we come through painful experience to the understanding that we can do nothing without Him. As for “learning to love”… Relatively speaking, sure, we can learn but in the Absolute sense, it is God alone who makes it happen and is doing just that via His plan and His purposes in accordance to the council of His will! We are here to learn to love, for me is like saying we are here to learn to God…... Yes….many are trying that one!
As for our purpose, LOF has taught me that we are here because God is creating Sons and Daughters. As and when we do love, for me, is a consequence and direct result of Gods work in us, not any nobility in us, but His work in us.
1 John 4 : 4 Little children, you are of God, you belong to Him and have already defeated and overcome them, the agents of the anti-Christ, because He Who lives in you is greater, mightier than he who is in the word.
HE Who lives in us is NOT subject TO us or ever will or EVER can be. Can you see that to teach that HE who lives in us is subject to us is heresy? We have NO claim on God nor EVER will have. God IS Sovereign. We cannot use Him. To think we can or should is to share in the cup held in the hand of Mystery Babylon who’s errors are subtle, and who’s teachings sound good, plausible, defensible and acceptable. They are not any of these things and that takes some getting used to. I have found the teaching on Bible Truths and the LOF series to be of great assistance. :)
Peace to you all
Arcturus :)
-
To all,
I was a little disturbed to see Phazel's remark on he is surprised to see what behvior or discussion is condoned in being allowed to be discuess the forum.
To the Moderators out there, is this an unacceptable topic? If so, I will refrain from posting any more in the topic. It is not my purpose to unsettle or debate and I would not want to post if it would cause any to go astray.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
That wasn't my comment. That was Pax.
-
Therefore we can throw away evolution with confidence, we don’t need it. Only atheists need it.
Here is the larger problem with that and Michael Behe sums it up better that I can in this article.
http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_ksnytb81399.htm
Hi Phazel, thanks for the link.
I could have been clearer in my statement, which was in reference to Christians believing in evolution, not about it being taught or not. What I was implying was that we don’t need evolution in Christian theology/doctrine (especially those of us who’ve found the hidden truth revealed by Ray et al), as it doesn’t even scientifically work. Christians need not compromise their faith with it; it’s just not worth it.
Behe makes some good points. Natural selection only works on pre-existing creatures, it doesn’t create new ones and is actually a mechanism that works against the evolution of all life from a primordial cell(s). Just another nail in the evolutionary coffin.
God bless.
Andrevan.
-
To Phaezal,
I am sorry that I quoted you as saying something, I meant Pax. I just got the names mixed up. Please accept my humble apologies.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
I was happy to see this topic posted, as well as the links.
It couldn't have come at a better time.
My wife and I had jsut watched a show on TV about evolution.
Actually, the only reason that we watched it was that the title
of the show was missleading. It was " was Darwin wrong".
We thought that finally some one was going to show scientific
proof to the world that Darwin's theory was a fallacy. Instead, the entire
show went out of it's way to prove that Darwin was correct.
After the show, my wife felt down, and said that she did not want
to watch that kind of show ever again. She is new to the faith and is
growing in her faith, so is easily sidetracked and confused. I wanted to watch it to see Darwinism rebuked
but that didn't happen. Although I could see loopholes in all of their conclusions.
This thread came the next morning, and the links offered good clear scientific
proof that the entire theory of Darwin is all wet. I shared this with my wife just to show
her that all scientific reasoning did not agree with the writers of that rediculous
" documentary".
Maybe this forum is not the right place for this kind of post,
but I think that God presented it for me at just the right time.
I do not believe in coincedences.
Thanks to the Mods for not deleeting it.
Tim
-
To all,
Here is that link to the Evolution vs. Creationism website. You can view the topics as a guest but have to become a member to post anything.
(Sorry but linking to debate Forums is outside the parameters of this Forum, I hope no offense is taken. Joe)
To Timothy,
I am glad that this thread served a purpose. That's good. I hope that all your questions get answered.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
Am I compelled to make a few comments here or am I being compelled? But I guess the free will discussion is elsewhere....
This is indeed a lively discussion of the topic. Personally, I enjoy any discussion as long as the arguments are respectful, authentic and honest.
First, LRS is quoted as saying that Darwin himself did not think his theories were plausible. I wish he would have included a citation, but as close as I can tell he may be referring to the close of Chapter 14 in the Origin of the Species a book written in 1859! Darwin admits that some of his conclusions are unsupported. Now unsupported and not plausible are not interchangeable terms in this context. If this is the basis for LRS's comments, then perhaps we can approach this from a different perspective.
Have you actually ever read any of Darwin?
Darwin's theories were merely a launching point. We have 150 years of scientific knowledge that has plenty to say on this subject. True, if one's launch point is flawed one's conclusion are likely flawed, but this is also one of the major problems with creationism (which has evolved its argument to intelligent design!).
Now we get to Paley's "watch and the watchmaker" type analogies. His famous treatise has mutated into the dollar coins standing on-edge, mousetrap in the forest, and the monkey typing Hamlet's famous soliloquy by chance (this poor monkey has been said to have tried the Declaration of Independence also!). Clever, yet flawed (especially the monkey typist -- or should we evolve that to word processor?!). Biology doesn't claim to work that way, but there's not enough time for that now.
To say that genes don't mutate is a flat-Earth argument. Genes mutate. So rather than try to deny that they mutate, let's find out why and how. Whether entire organisms mutate is still unsupported, but is pausible based on the evidence. So, did you get your flu shot? I did. Why? Because H. flu mutates and I don't want to get this year's flu! Ask my wife, a breast cancer survivor, if genes mutate. Ask a person of European decent with hemochromotosis or a person of African decent about sickle cell anemia. How about the Jew with Tay-Sachs? List list is sadly impressive. Get the flu shot, please.
The biggest flaw of this whole discussion (not just here, but worldwide) is that disproving the Theory of Evolution does not make Intelligent Design Theory any "right-er!!"
Two people are looking at what we call a grapefruit. One person claims it is an orange (Mr. O)and the other claims it is a lemon (Ms. L). Mr. O makes big talk about how it looks like an orange, grows where oranges grow, looks like an orange, grows on a tree like an orange, looks like an orange, feels like an orange, and finally, looks like an orange. Ms. L acknowledges that this fruit meets many of Mr. O's criteria, but maintains that it is not an orange (a completely different argument than it is a lemon: It does not smell like an orange, it does not grow on orange trees, it does not taste like an orange, therefore, it must be a lemon. Mr. O counters in much the same way concluding that only a fool would call it a lemon. They are both correct only as far as disproving the other! Mr. O is correct saying that the fruit is not a lemon and Ms. L is correct concluding that the fruit is not an orange. Moreso, they are both incorrect because they are not presenting an argument, they are promoting an agenda! This puts their entire argument (even the "correct" parts) into doubt.
Conviction is a psychological state often presented as "truth."
(Deep Breathe....)
It pains me when I read of the poor wife whose faith was rattled by a television show which presented something other than what she believed. I am sure that the people who produced the show were just as convinced that they were correct. Don't hang your faith on esoterica, dear woman. Stick to the glorious Good News of God's presence in our lives!
Along those lines, the wisest thing I have read in this thread was from Andrevan who said, "[w]e don’t need evolution in Christian theology/doctrine..." It is not necessary to the faith or the promise. Nicely put.
In short, some day we will all know which parts of Scientism were correct and which sections of Creationism were correct. In the mean time, let's have fun trying to figure out this Gordian Knot -- knowing that we never will understand it all.
Peace
-
There is no doubt that genes mutate, but the mutation degenerates the cell or creature. Show me a birth mutation that is not a birth defect. Has anyone witnessed a birth mutation where the creature is born improved over the relative condition or potential of the parents? It is true that a one legged man and a woman who had been partially paralyzed from polio can have "normal" healthy children (I am the result of a union such as this) but are we to believe that an uncaused or uninfluenced series of mutations results in an improved species? Where else in any observable form does this happen in life, what about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, the Law of Entropy? Things that are not positively influenced or maintained tend to degenerate, this is true of inanimate objects as well as living creatures.
Would cancer or sickle cell be considered a positive or negative situation? I think we know the answer to that.
His Peace and Wisdom to you,
Joe
-
I knew I should have stuck with the NT!
But since I am in this deep...
I absolutely agree that entropy is the biggest hurdle in the Scientists' way.
Also, I would say that the viral/bacterial adaptations which allow for survival of the species is a positive. How about the darkness of the skin for those in harsh sunlight (or lightening of the skin for those in middle climes -- I am not sure which is the "mutation"? How about the camel conserving water?
AND....
If Evolution Theory is wrong, what makes Intelligent Design the correct alternative? It has as many (if not more) hurdles to jump.
My only gripe here is the strong rhetoric of the arguments. My personal position is that they are both woefully wrong, if that wasn't clear.
Peace
-
Joe, you beat me to that very post. ;D
Quote by Pax. "In short, some day we will all know which parts of Scientism were correct and which sections of Creationism were correct. In the mean time, let's have fun trying to figure out this Gordian Knot -- knowing that we never will understand it all."
Oh, but I think you are wrong. With the armour of God we can slice through the false science of micro evolution just like Alexander the Great sliced through the Gordian knot. I don't think that there is any room for believers to agree with any micro evolution unless they are believing that God caused it. Which I have to agree could be possible, but I can't imagine God taking the long way around to get to his objective of creating man.
This can't become an argument about specific beliefs or we will put the moderators on the spot and they will end up having to close this thread. And as I stated earlier, the links in this thread have already helped me to ease my wife's mind. So it was a good thing. ;D
Tim
-
Just to lighten things up, how 'bout a little Dilbert?
Dilbert writes a poem and presents it to Dogbert:
DOGBERT: I once read that given infinite time, a thousand monkeys with typewriters would eventually write the complete works of Shakespeare.
DILBERT: But what about my poem?
DOGBERT: Three monkeys, ten minutes.
(Scott Adams, Dilbert comic strip, 15 May 1989.)
Just be sure to get your flu shot!
Peace
-
If Evolution Theory is wrong, what makes Intelligent Design the correct alternative? It has as many (if not more) hurdles to jump.
My only gripe here is the strong rhetoric of the arguments. My personal position is that they are both woefully wrong, if that wasn't clear.
Peace
Hi Pax,
I can agree with that, the way Intelligent Design is postulated I do not see as being an absolute of any kind.
Science has produced many beneficial things but always keep in perspective that science is constantly changing, yesterdays facts are todays follies. It is an idol of the heart for many.
I am not embarressed to admit I do not know how God created the earth and everything in it, but I know He did. Ray gave a very good presentation on how the literal 7 (our 24 hour) day theory just doesn't fit at the Mobile Conference last September.
His Peace and Wisdom to you,
Joe
-
Hello again Pax,
I do not see how flu shots prove evolution, it appears that they work in conjunction with our God given immune systems, the following is from MayoClinic.com
The flu vaccine changes annually. Production begins with public health authorities working together to make a highly educated guess as to what strain of influenza will strike next. This is based on analysis of samples from people with respiratory illnesses worldwide.
Next, three strains of influenza virus are grown in the lab, which are then killed in order to produce the vaccine. Once the vaccine is injected into a person, the immune system reacts by producing antibodies programmed to attack the dead virus. If the person is then exposed to the flu, his or her immune system recognizes the virus and destroys it, preventing disease.
However, vaccines are not foolproof. There's still a chance of getting the flu. If you do, there are drugs to help decrease the symptoms and the duration of the illness.
His Peace and Wisdom to you,
Joe
-
Another issue is that science education nowdays doesn't like the separation of "micro" vs "Macro" evolution.
On the true origin site I linked to previously, look up an article entitled "talk origins deception by omission"
The statement heard alot "evolution happens" is an undisputable fact and observable.
But, descent through modification is really where the issue is.
The problem is that science education is so watered down the average proponent of evolution claims that there is no distinction between the two.
Mosquitoes evolving to a different species of mosquito and the possibility that all the small changes observed in our genome will eventually change that mosquito into something outside what we would call a mosquito is virtually the same.
I haven't read it for a while, but I think the article I cited above goes into much more detail about this.
-
Joe,
Got a question is there any written notes about Ray's Mobil COnference given in September. I would like to read those if they are available. Can you post the link in the window if it is available?
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Anne C. McGuire
-
Hi Anne,
Craig has posted the audio from the Conference but the written notes were more of an outline than anything else. Ray would veer off in many different directions as one topic or verse would dovetail into another train of thought. This is why I wouldn't miss the chance of attending a Conference, the treasures are piling up from start to finish, leaving all those who were there wanting more.
Have you tried downloading any of the audios yet?
His Peace and Wisdom to you,
Joe
-
Lucy, my chicken who sleeps on the front porch on a pillow of hay next to my two cats, survived an attack from an angry and hungry raccoon last night, so all is good and well here in east Teaxas, as far as the the evolution crap goes, we here at the farm could care less.
Love in Christ
Longhorn
-
Hey Lonhorn
Happy to hear about Lucy. :D The chickens walk the streets quite freely here in my part of the world unless they just disappear because they become someone's dinner! :o
As for the evolution crap goes,, ......can't say I am not interested.....would be good for the dinner pot to see a chicken become a Turkey ;D.....What's that about speaking as a fool ;D :o
Peace to you
Arcturus :)
-
Dear Tim, my heart rejoices at hearing that this thread helped you. We should never underestimate the methods God uses to call us out of the dark and into the light (the Truth!). I hope this thread (and links) helps your wife with her new faith, I pray it helps her seperate scientific fact from science fiction ;D.
There have been many good points made on this thread, they were a benefit to me. The subject of mutations is interesting, as Joe correctly stated, mutations do occur. We know that speciation also occurs, as does natural selection and adaptation. What these mechanism do not do is create new, different & previously non-existent life forms, not even gradually.
Bacteria have very fast generation cycles, the cycles may be as short as 15 minutes (they multiply real quick). After scientists subject bacteria to huge amounts of genetic mutations over long periods of time, what is their status after all these mutations? They were still bacteria, they did not mutate into anything else. More importantly they have not gained any new ex nihilo genetic code. Better get some more nails for that evolutionary coffin ;). This is the most necessary requirement for the evolution of all life from a primordial cell(s) to work. This one scientific fact destoys the half-baked story of biological evolution.
Think of how many breeds of dogs or cats we have today. How was this done? Through breeding by selection, similar to natural (in the wild) selection. The 'purer' the breed, the less genetic variation that breed contains, compared to a mixed breed. A small dog breed has no more genetic code for large size, it has been lost. This is opposite to what the evolution of life demands.
What I observe from nature: creatures always reproduce after themselves, just as God ordained it in Genesis 1.
Some time ago when I read through Darwin's "The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", I was drawn to the part in bold, it still makes me feel sick today. Just recently Richard Dawkins, the high priest of atheism, alluded to this type of thing, namely eugenics, in his letter to Scotland's Sunday Herald. Eugenics is something Hitler used to promote his genocide. Darwin's theory of natural selection has a dark side to it when it comes to mankind.
As for intelligent design, how many of their leaders give God our Father and His Son the credit for the amazing life and universe around us?
For me personally, I believe 1 Timothy 4:10 and Exodus 20:11, 31:17 and Mark 10:6 by faith. I believe God's Word, not man's (scientist's) assumptions :).
Love to you all.
Andrevan.
-
This has been an interesting disussion, but it is all beyond me, so I have stayed out of it :)
But I did want to bring forward what Ray has said on this topic, from his letter to John Hagee.
http://bible-truths.com/hagee1.htm ----------------------------------
When you boast, Mr. Hagee, saying that you found Christ all by yourself, you are telling your international audience that everyone else is, therefore, responsible for finding Christ "all by themselves." Charles Darwin taught "survival of the fittest," and you teach "salvation of the wisest." According to you, one must be wise enough to find Christ, accept Christ, and then qualify on his own to be saved.
This "bootstrap" mentality of self-qualification for salvation is nonsense, Mr. Hagee. But let me be more Scripturally "exact." Paul said he had many more reasons to have "confidence in his own flesh" than anyone. But when Christ called Paul (yes, Mr. Hagee, Christ called Paul - Paul did not find Christ "all by himself"), he said:
"Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but DUNG, that I may win Christ" (Phil. 3:8), King James Version.
There is a parallel between your teachings and the teachings of atheistic evolutionists. Those learned men who promulgate the hypothesis of evolution (I say "hypothesis," because there isn't any scientific proof that would elevate it to a "theory"), use the same authoritative language in their writings to prove the unprovable as you do. Surely (non-thinking people reason) since hundreds and thousands of learned scientists point to nature and science for their proof, then what they teach concerning evolution, must be true. And, surely (non-thinking Christians reason) since hundreds and thousands of learned clergymen point to the Holy Scriptures for their proof, then what they teach concerning Christ, must be true.
Mr. Hagee, you have about as much Scriptural proof that man must find God and qualify for salvation all on his own, as evolutionists have scientific proof that all the species evolved from the same ancestor, all on their own-NONE! You have about as much Scriptural proof that God is going to torture most of His children in the fires of a Hell for eternity, as evolutionists have scientific proof that life spontaneously generated itself from dead sea slime - NONE!
"Proof" is evidence that something is true. Just saying something isn't proof of its validity. One can say that since outdoor dogs grow longer hair during extended periods of cold weather, that they are "evolving long hair." Is that true? No. The ingenious mechanism that enables a dog to grow long hair in cold weather is already built into the dog's physiology - it is "evolving" nowhere.
One can say that animals "reproduce by evolving through thousands of stages of mutations." But, is that true? No. The laws of science prove and have proven, millions and billions of times, that animals reproduce just as the Scripture states: "after their kind." Yet millions believe these intellectual falsehoods, just as millions believe the theological falsehoods I have countered in this letter.
And just like evolutionists, Mr. Hagee, you say things that you claim are Scriptural, but are not. You teach that a man's soul has immortality. But is that true? No. There is NO scientific proof that man has an immortal soul. And the Scriptures plainly tell us that "Christ ONLY has immortality," and that "man is MORTAL."
You teach that "the dead" are actually "alive" in a different geographical location. Is that true? No. There is NO scientific evidence that dead people or dead animals are alive at a different geographical location. And the Scriptures plainly tell us that "death is sleep," with "no knowledge, no thoughts, not anything." This is in full agreement with what science knows about death. And yet, millions believe these theological lies So who are we to believe? Evolutionists or True Science? John Hagee or the Word of God?
Evolutionists deny the very scientific evidence that they study to supposedly prove their hypothesis. And you, Mr. Hagee, deny the very Scriptures you preach from in trying to persuade others of your theories. Most people do not know, actually, factually, and scientifically, what the hypothesis of evolution is based on, and most people have little knowledge of the Scriptures or how to study the Hebrew and Greek from which they were translated.
Give me just ninety minutes with any open-mined person of normal intelligence, and I will prove to him (scientifically), the fallacy of both spontaneous generation and evolution of the species from common ancestors. Give me ninety minutes with that same person and I will prove to him (Scripturally), the fallacy of your theories on Hell and all your false expressions that go with it.
Colin Patterson, a senior paleontologist at the British Natural History Museum, asked his audience of evolution experts a most telling question. He later posed the same question to the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History, and again to The Evolutionary Morphology Seminar at the University of Chicago. All evolution experts. Here was his question:
"Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, ANY ONE THING. . . that is TRUE?"
All he got was silence!
So, I likewise, Mr. Hagee, after going into the Hebrew and Greek meanings of many words, plus a mountain of Scriptural references, including the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, will now ask you: "Can you tell me anything about God's failure to save all humanity, or about most of God's children being tortured in a Hell fire for all eternity, that is TRUE? ... I'm waiting.
You teach a Godless Hell for the majority of mankind for all eternity. Do you even begin to understand the damage you cause by such unscriptural (not to mention anti Scriptural) teachings? This doctrine of eternal torment is now and has been, blaspheming the very name of God among the nations for hundreds of years!
Everywhere one turns today, he finds atheistic, Godless, evolution being taught. In the finest magazines like National Geographic. On all scientific and educational channels. The Learning Channel, the Discovery Channel. In virtually all public schools in America, Europe, and around the world. All major colleges and universities. Not as a theory, but as the FACT of evolution it is taught. Why? Where did this teaching come from? Who is condoning it?
Charles Darwin is the "father of evolution." Little improvement or changes have been made to his original premises regarding survival of the fittest or the origin of species. Darwin is the main man when it comes to evolution. Now, why did Charles Darwin reject God and start this global rebellion against God and His Word which continues unabated to this very day? Was it really "God" that Mr. Darwin was rebelling against, or the "Godless doctrines" of depraved men?
According to Gertrude Himmelfarb's biography of Darwin, "One of the passages which was deleted from the autobiography explained why Charles not only could not believe in Christianity but would not wish to believe in it. Citing the 'DAMNABLE DOCTRINE' that would condemn ALL DISBELIEVERS TO ETERNAL PUNISHMENT, he protested that 'this would include my Father, Brother, and almost ALL MY BEST FRIENDS' - which made it an unthinkable, to say nothing of thoroughly IMMORAL, idea. There may be more sophisticated reasons for disbelief, but there could hardly have been a more persuasive emotional one." (p. 22) (Emphasis mine).
The damnable unscriptural teaching of eternal torment (which you enthusiastically shout from your pulpit) has probably done more to cause the name of God to be blasphemed among the nations than any other false teaching on Earth, including the teaching of evolution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Anne,
You ask if there was any written notes from the conference,
well there is a transcript of the first session, but that is all there is written out.
Here is the link to it :)
http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,1948.0.html
mercy, peace, and love
Kat
-
Excellent Kat,
Another "well done" on your stat sheet. ;)
His Love and Peace to you,
Joe
-
Dear Arc,
I am sorry that I must disagree with you. You suggest that we should not love ourselves. I don't think this is the teaching of God at all. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself" If we are not to love ourselves then I guess we don't have to love our neighbors either. Perhaps it should have just been love the Lord your God. Don't you know that those that think less of themselves actually behave more immorally. I'm not suggesting you love yourself more than others and certainly you should love God more than anything or anybody. But the idea that you should not love yourself is purely wrong. God loves me. Jesus loves me. Am I to believe that they are wrong? Or am I to not be like them? In any case I love you and hope this will help you to love yourself.
Joel
-
I was thinking about the term “evolutionary”. What is evolutionary about being marred in the hands of the creator.
What is evolutionary about the source of love and of the ten commandments?
What is evolutionary about the spiritual.
What is evolutionary about being changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye?