Featured is Darwinism compatible With Bilbical Christianity?

OldRegular · Oct 10, 2012

timf said: ↑

Darwin held two theories. The first was that "unfit" species that could not adapt to their environment would die off. The second was that mutations would add favorable genetic information such that new species would arise to take their turn at adaptation. He felt that these two theories worked together to explain the natural world he observed.

It is true that we lose genetic information (species become extinct). Also there is selection, for example, as humans live with cockroaches, the slower ones are killed off such that it appears that cockroaches get faster when it is just that the genetic information for slow cockroaches is not passed on to subsequent generations.

The theory that new genetic information is introduced through mutation has not proven valid. There are millions of mutations every day. Most produce cancers as it only takes one thing to go wrong. To obtain a favorable mutation, one would need thousands or millions of things to go "right" all at the same time.

Most universities could be called temples to the religion of secularism (the worship of man in general and self in particular). These institutions hold religious like doctrines and they have taken to Darwin as a patron saint.

There are countless declarations from people who call themselves scientists who declare the Biblical record to be inaccurate. However, when you investigate their claims, it is usually based on their claims of expertise (we should trust them), data that has been processed to produce results that substantiate their claims (fudge factors), or the old "everyone says that it is true".

In summary, evolution states that nothing existed and then it blew up. Then it clumped together and became planets. Then minerals started to become people. There are several problems with this;

1. To make a single cell (something that can reproduce) requires an alignment of atoms that is statistically unimaginable.

2. In the last 150 years no one has ever observed a single favorable mutation. There are mutations every day. Cancer is a commonly observed mutation. An unfavorable mutation only requires a single failure. A favorable mutation may require as many as 100,000 simultaneous mutations. (also statistically unimaginable).

3. There are no transition life forms in the fossil record.

4. The dust on the moon is only 1/2" deep.

If you consider that before the flood people lived longer, it may not be unreasonable to surmise that reptiles also lived longer. The longer reptiles live (unlike mammals), the larger they get. It might be reasonable to expect that some reptiles got very large. Man was not allowed to eat meat until after the flood. One might assume that the mammoth was a little slower than the elephant.

Science has value as long as it searches for truth. When it becomes an enforcement arm of political and social engineers, it has no value. Consider those who did not agree with the "science" of phrenology (reading the bumps on your head) in the 1930s in Germany.

To those who would declare the Bible as unreliable, I would urge caution. The Bible says "woe" to those that call good bad and bad good.

To those who feel bullied by so-called declarers of "science", I say hold firm.

Jesus said of those who were undermining faith that a millstone would be a better fate.

There is no point in disputation or being drawn into a "tar baby" arguments. However, we need periodically to hear someone stand for the truth of God's word.
Click to expand...

Young man! The above is an excellent position paper. I would say to you and to all "Hold Firm to the Word of Truth"!

Gregory Perry Sr. · Oct 10, 2012

Welcome...and WOW!!!

timf said: ↑

Darwin held two theories. The first was that "unfit" species that could not adapt to their environment would die off. The second was that mutations would add favorable genetic information such that new species would arise to take their turn at adaptation. He felt that these two theories worked together to explain the natural world he observed.

It is true that we lose genetic information (species become extinct). Also there is selection, for example, as humans live with cockroaches, the slower ones are killed off such that it appears that cockroaches get faster when it is just that the genetic information for slow cockroaches is not passed on to subsequent generations.

The theory that new genetic information is introduced through mutation has not proven valid. There are millions of mutations every day. Most produce cancers as it only takes one thing to go wrong. To obtain a favorable mutation, one would need thousands or millions of things to go "right" all at the same time.

Most universities could be called temples to the religion of secularism (the worship of man in general and self in particular). These institutions hold religious like doctrines and they have taken to Darwin as a patron saint.

There are countless declarations from people who call themselves scientists who declare the Biblical record to be inaccurate. However, when you investigate their claims, it is usually based on their claims of expertise (we should trust them), data that has been processed to produce results that substantiate their claims (fudge factors), or the old "everyone says that it is true".

In summary, evolution states that nothing existed and then it blew up. Then it clumped together and became planets. Then minerals started to become people. There are several problems with this;

1. To make a single cell (something that can reproduce) requires an alignment of atoms that is statistically unimaginable.

2. In the last 150 years no one has ever observed a single favorable mutation. There are mutations every day. Cancer is a commonly observed mutation. An unfavorable mutation only requires a single failure. A favorable mutation may require as many as 100,000 simultaneous mutations. (also statistically unimaginable).

3. There are no transition life forms in the fossil record.

4. The dust on the moon is only 1/2" deep.

If you consider that before the flood people lived longer, it may not be unreasonable to surmise that reptiles also lived longer. The longer reptiles live (unlike mammals), the larger they get. It might be reasonable to expect that some reptiles got very large. Man was not allowed to eat meat until after the flood. One might assume that the mammoth was a little slower than the elephant.

Science has value as long as it searches for truth. When it becomes an enforcement arm of political and social engineers, it has no value. Consider those who did not agree with the "science" of phrenology (reading the bumps on your head) in the 1930s in Germany.

To those who would declare the Bible as unreliable, I would urge caution. The Bible says "woe" to those that call good bad and bad good.

To those who feel bullied by so-called declarers of "science", I say hold firm.

Jesus said of those who were undermining faith that a millstone would be a better fate.

There is no point in disputation or being drawn into a "tar baby" arguments. However, we need periodically to hear someone stand for the truth of God's word.
Click to expand...

Bro.Tim....I, like Brldtimer and others would like to welcome you to this board and I can only add...wow...post #2 and you really hit the ground running....I hope you won't mind that I C&P'ed your post and sent it to a few friends of mine who aren't members here. That was excellent and I'll look forward to reading many more from you. You really started off with a Big Bang!! (pun intended):smilewinkgrin:

While I'm at it...thanks to you Oldtimes for your very lucid posts on this topic as well! Always a blessing to see/hear truth shining forth out of the present darkness and ignorance.:thumbsup:

Bro.Greg:type:

OldRegular · Oct 11, 2012

A Message for All Those Enamored by Evolution!

I posted the following on another thread but thought it would be educational for some on this thread!
*****************************************************************
John Gill in his A Body of Divinity [page 5, chapter 1] presents the following example of General Revelation. Gill takes the passage from Crantz’s History of Greenland:

Most admirable was the reasoning of a wild Greenlander, which he declared to a missionary to be the reasoning of his mind before his conversion; he said to him,

“It is true we were ignorant heathens, and knew nothing of God, or a Saviour; and, indeed, who should tell us of him till you come? but thou must not imagine that no Greenlander thinks about these things. I myself have often thought: a ‘kajak’ (a boat) with all its tackle and implements, does not grow into existence of itself; but must be made by the labour and ingenuity of man; and one that does not understand it would directly spoil it. Now the meanest bird has far more skill displayed in its structure, than the best ‘kajak’; and no man can make a bird: but there is still a far greater art shown in the formation of a man, than of any other creature. Who was it that made him? I thought myself that he proceeded from his parents, and they from their parents; but some must have been the first parents; whence did they come? common report informs me, they grew out of the earth: but if so, why does it not still happen that men grow out of the earth? and from whence did this same earth itself, the sea, the sun, the moon, and stars, arise into existence? Certainly there must be some Being who made all these things; a Being that always was, and can never cease to be. He must be inexpressibly more mighty, knowing, and wise, than the wisest man. He must be very good too, because that everything that he has made is good, useful, and necessary for us. Ah, did I but know him, how would I love him and honour him! But who has seen him? who has ever conversed with him? None of us poor men. Yet there may be men too that know something of him. O that I could but speak with such! therefore,” said he, “as soon as ever I heard you speak of this great Being, I believed it directly, with all my heart; because I had so long desired to hear it.'”
Click to expand...

John Gill notes about the above testimony: “A glaring proof this, that a supreme Being, the first cause of all things, is to be concluded from the works of creation.”

mont974x4 · Oct 11, 2012

I need the proponents of evolution to help me understand why I should agree with them.

Evolution is a theory of men. Men are imperfect. We create imperfect machines. We invent imperfect processes. Then we test samples. Then these same imperfect men, with imperfect machines and imperfect processes, determine for themselves what the results mean.

Then, somehow, I am expected to take their word for it over God's?

In Genesis God inspired Moses to record a literal 6 day creation event. A man comes along with his imperfections and tests a rock and tells me it was formed over a million years. I either believe God or I believe the man. I cannot believe both.

OldRegular · Oct 11, 2012

mont974x4 said: ↑

I need the proponents of evolution to help me understand why I should agree with them.

Evolution is a theory of men. Men are imperfect. We create imperfect machines. We invent imperfect processes. Then we test samples. Then these same imperfect men, with imperfect machines and imperfect processes, determine for themselves what the results mean.

Then, somehow, I am expected to take their word for it over God's?

In Genesis God inspired Moses to record a literal 6 day creation event. A man comes along with his imperfections and tests a rock and tells me it was formed over a million years. I either believe God or I believe the man. I cannot believe both.
Click to expand...

Remarkable that this unlearned Greenlander would reject evolution in favor of creation while some "learned" men reject creation in favor of evolution. Sadly some professing Christians do the same!

Featured is Darwinism compatible With Bilbical Christianity?

OldRegular Well-Known Member

Gregory Perry Sr. Active Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member

mont974x4 New Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member

Useful Searches

Featured is Darwinism compatible With Bilbical Christianity?

OldRegular Well-Known Member

Gregory Perry Sr. Active Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member

mont974x4 New Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member