Updated 12:47 pm.EST, Sun November 22, 2009

Opinion|Thu, Oct. 09 2008 09:43 AM EDT

The End of Evolution?

By R. Albert Mohler, Jr.|Christian Post Guest Columnist

The evolutionist is locked into an intellectual box from which there is no rescue. Evolutionary theory is naturalistic by necessity - everything must be explained in purely naturalistic terms. Only nature can explain nature, and there is no other source of meaning or truth. Thus, in the end the theory of evolution - and the theory of evolution alone - must explain everything about humanity.

This predicament was made clear in a lecture recently given by geneticist Steve Jones at University College London. Speaking on his chosen topic, "Evolution is Over," Jones argued that human evolution has reached an end because of changes in human health and human behavior.

This argument stands in stark contrast to those offered by other evolutionists, who now call on humanity to use modern reproductive technologies and techniques designed to enhance the species. Some go so far as to argue that humans must employ these technologies and direct evolution in order to save the species from itself.

Jones, known for his 2002 book, Y: The Descent of Men. In that book, Jones argued that males were something of a temporary necessity for the evolutionary process. He minimized the role of the male to that of providing male gametes. The male exists to "fecundate" his partner. That's it. Everything else can be done by females, who are going to live longer anyway.

Now, Jones argues that human evolution is at a standstill because one of the crucial engines of evolutionary change, genetic mutation, is stalled. Jones explained that evolution moves forward by natural selection, mutation, and random change. Mutation is stalled, at least in part, because fewer older men are having babies.

As The Times [London] explains:

This is because cell divisions in males increase with age. “Every time there is a cell division, there is a chance of a mistake, a mutation, an error,” he said. “For a 29-year old father [the mean age of reproduction in the West] there are around 300 divisions between the sperm that made him and the one he passes on – each one with an opportunity to make mistakes.

“For a 50-year-old father, the figure is well over a thousand. A drop in the number of older fathers will thus have a major effect on the rate of mutation.”

Professor Jones added: “In the old days, you would find one powerful man having hundreds of children.” He cites the fecund Moulay Ismail of Morocco, who died in the 18th century, and is reputed to have fathered 888 children.

Jones went on to argue that better health and rates of infant survival have also removed some engines of mutation. Add to that the fact that human populations are now so diverse, with marriage patterns commonly crossing ethnic and racial lines. As Jones explained, "“Small populations which are isolated can evolve at random as genes are accidentally lost. World-wide, all populations are becoming connected and the opportunity for random change is dwindling. History is made in bed, but nowadays the beds are getting closer together. We are mixing into a global mass, and the future is brown.”

Steve Jones offered a public lecture at University College London, but he also offers a larger lesson on the inherent limitations of the evolutionary worldview. Darwinism has to explain everything - even why some people accept evolutionary theory and others do not.

Evolutionary theory cannot possibly explain the totality of human experience, much less the reality of human origins. Evolutionists - if consistent - believe that every human experience, every emotion, every physical attribute, every hope, and every fear is simply a feature developed by means of natural selection.

That's a cold theory, and it just doesn't make sense to the vast majority of Americans - and it shouldn't. The Christian worldview offers a far more satisfying, true, and understandable account of human origins and human existence.

In any event, human evolution is now over. You heard it from Steve Jones.

Adapted from R. Albert Mohler Jr.'s weblog at www.albertmohler.com.
___________________________________________________

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. For more articles and resources by Dr. Mohler, and for information on The Albert Mohler Program, a daily national radio program broadcast on the Salem Radio Network, go to www.albertmohler.com. For information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to www.sbts.edu. Send feedback to mail@albertmohler.com. Original Source: www.albertmohler.com.
Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
  • Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:06 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Another addition to that is that there could not have been as many variations of species. An example is the dog. We know there are at least a hundred different types of dogs and they have been cross bred and cross bred to get there. Well, in that time, there may have been less than 10 and possibly even 1 or 2 variations of a certain animal. Therefore, again it is plausible that each species that God created were represented on this boat. As the the feces of these animals, there could have very well been a section that was used and discarded overboard. As for food, they could have taken the minimal needed to survive. It is very plausible that the story of the ark is indeed true.

  • Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:01 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex,

    First of all, the ark Noah built was no small boat. If you take the measurements from the Bible, then this was quite a large boat, bigger than most cruise liners and such today and we know that thousands of people can have fun on one of those and not be too crowded.

    With the animal kingdom, you have to remember that only 2 of each unclean species came aboard with 7 of every clean. And nowhere does it say that these animals were full grown, so it is possible that many, if not all were smaller than normal. Even the dinosaurs, at a very young age, were small.

  • Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:45 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    Did you visit the website

    www.worldwideflood.com

    and spend anythime there?

  • Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    I do not have the answers to your questions about the number of animals on Noah's Ark, how the food was stored, how the animal and human waste was disposed of, and etc..

    However, I know the God who wrote the Word of God. Jesus said in John 17:17 that the Word of God is truth. I accept that by faith. God's Word says that God had Noah build an Ark of certain dimensions and that God caused the animals to go on the boat when the time came for them to do so. I accept all this by faith.

    God gave us clues in how He created the heavens and the earth in the Word of God. I accept this by faith.

    The Word of God does not allow for macro-evolution. God says in His Word that He created each kind of plant life, fish, birds, land animals, and human life after its own kind. Each creation was unique. I accept this by faith.

    You accept evolution by faith as well. Abiogensisists have no clue on how life came to be. They cannot describe how the inanimate became animate. Abiogeneists nor evolutionists have any evidence/proof that life started out as a single cell organism. Evolutionists cannot explain the process of how this single cell orgainsm, for which you have no proof or evidence that life started out that way, changed over time to become plant life, fish, birds, reptiles, animals, and then people. Those of your persuation only accept by faith that it was so.

    You have no laborartory proof of any of the claims of the abiogensists or evolutionists. Scientists have yet to create life from chemicals that have no life let alone taking that life and showing how it changed to create all the other forms of life. Until you can do that you have nothing more than fanciful ideas about it all and it takes more faith to believe in your ideas than it takes to believe that a supreme being who has infinite knowledge, wisdom, and understanding can create the heavens and the earth and all the forms of life that He created.

    Don't require of me what you yourself cannot not do.

  • Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:02 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    star,

    "When you can describe how the inanimate became animate then I'll tell you how God created life."

    Star, we weren't talking about how God created life, remember? We are on a topic related to species and how on earth they all fit on the Ark, please have the backbone to explain. One topic at a time, explain the issues with 6+ million species fitting on such a small boat and quit the subterfuge and goal post moving.

    I do not appreciate this star, this is most disingenuous and disrepectful on your part, although give our past conversations I can't say I am entirely suprised.

    I ask of you a very simple and straight forward set of questions dealing with the number and volume of species and their waste and rather than retorting in kind you don't even make a single attempt to answer it straight forth. After numerous attempts no less.

    Where is your sense of tact? Why should I even bother replying to your question if you will not due me the respect of honestly replying to mine? Tit for tat star.

  • Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:09 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    When you can describe how the inanimate became animate then I'll tell you how God created life.

  • Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    star2,

    Thanks for the reply Star.

    "God's ways in how He created the heaven and the earth are past finding out. You can never know how He did it."

    Talk about your all time nonstarter answers. Star, if we can't logically ever know how, how exactly does one claim with any certitude who did it in the first place? 'Logical fallacy' sound familiar?

    "Even if He told you how He did it your mind is too finite to comprehend it."

    Well I guess than He should have built the human mind capable of understanding it now shouldn't He? That would after all help to shed some light on the issue of if he did it in the first place and how it was done. Appealing ot ignorance isn't an answer.

    "Noah was 500 yrs old when God..."

    That's nice and all star, but it doesn't matter if he was 100, 500 or 900, the issues related to housing 6 million species (by conservative estimates) and 2 of each) on such a relatively small boat is absurd. You knew you couldn't even begin to explain how on earth Noah managed to do it, so you avoided it all together.

    "Genesis - 300 x 50 x 30 cubits."

    So? Star, I was attempting some satire there with the comment part. Again, with such a relatively small boat it's impossible to cram the 6 million species (and 2 of each) on it and to house ALL their food, water, and to dispose of all the waste daily by a group of 8 people is absurdly impossible.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:53 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    agentorange

    The Word of God says

    Romans 11:33 - "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!"

    God's ways in how He created the heaven and the earth are past finding out. You can never know how He did it. Even if He told you how He did it your mind is too finite to comprehend it.

    Noah was 500 yrs old when God told him to build the ark and God told him how to build it. It took Noah 100 yrs to build it. So he was 600 yrs old when God brought judgment on the earth through a world-wide flood because of the sin of man not 900 yrs old.

    Noah's Ark was not a rickety boat. It was a very stable and sturdy boat.

    This following quote was taken from www.worldwideflood.com. I highly recommend you reveiw the contents of this website.

    "In 1993, research was carried out by naval architects and structural engineers at the world class KRISO ship research facility in Korea, testing the proportions described in Genesis - 300 x 50 x 30 cubits. They concluded that the proportions were near optimal and that the scale was feasible in waves up to 30m."

  • Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:36 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Star,

    "kind = species"

    Yes, thank you, but we already established this based on your interpretation and exhaustive of the KJV bible. Now for the hard part of that conclusion, please explain the species related questions in regard to how on earth 900 year old noah crammed them all (some 6 million by conservative estimates and 2 of each) on such a small boat, and their food and water for nearly a year, and deposing of their waste by 8 people, etc. Maintaining a Zoo is hard work, but you're saying 8 people on a small rickety boat managed to house, feed and clean the some 6 million species for a year? Absurd.

    "No macro-evolution was at play in the creative process.'

    If that is true, why do we find in taxonomy that members of the same genus, order and family are more similar than with respect to other organisms in other phylum? This shouldn't be if they don't share common descent. Why is there a natural nested hierarchy in division of organisms at all?

    "God created the genetics of each species such that mutations within that species can/will mutate over time. This is what man calls micro-evolution."

    Mutations do occur, but their location in the genomes of the species is entirely random. So, one must ask, if species aren't at all related (say 2 species of birds), then why do we find they share many of the same random pseudo genes, (one being the relic trait for teeth development)? Why would God encode them with the genes needed to develop teeth, but that the gene is now atavistic?

    Another pseudo gene is the one related to vitamin C synthesis and how we, and all extant apes have the same defunct one, Why should this be?

    Then why do we find the same genes across many different species? Why can some genes be substituted for interchangeably with entirely different species (rats, mice, humans and yeast) with no different affect to the organism?

    If they're not related, why again the same genes (PAX-6) which spans across many organisms from very diverse phylum? Why the evidence of retro-insertion by archaic viruses (ERV's) which are inactive and yet the insertion sites are identical across many different species? Why the obvious signs of relatedness via SINES, LINES, Pseudo -genes and transposons? Why evidence like Cytocrome C?

    http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.0030166

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytochrome_c

  • Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:42 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex

    kind = species

    When God created life (humans, animals, reptiles, insects, fish, birds, plants) they were created individually. No macro-evolution was at play in the creative process.

    God created the genetics of each species such that mutations within that species can/will mutate over time. This is what man calls micro-evolution.

  • Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:39 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Star2,

    "You can never know how God created anything because His ways are past finding out."

    I am sorry Star, but this statement is essentially an appeal to ignorance., it explains nothing. How can you affirm such certitude in knowledge that God did it (and hypothetically sure it's possible, but details/evidence matter for deducing), if there are no details for it?

    It basically amounts to an empty assertion, as with no details it's impossible to objectively determine if this was the actual method(s) used and how if at all one could demonstrate to support or refute them.

    Think critically on that one...

    No details = impossible to support or refute based on empirical evidence. So why accept it?

    An analogy for this would be finding presents in your house as a child, and they upon asking your parents on the details for how they got there they would appeal to ignorance in the same way you did. 'We can never know how santa did it!' Now, most parents will explain the fantasy details on the character and how the presents magically appear overnight, but even a child can sense that this story isn't logically grounded and not supported by any evidence.

    Star, with all due respect, you will say over and over and over endlessly that God can only do things with respect life in a certain manner (it can't evolve) and with such certitude on your part, but then, when it comes to explaining the details for something for which you adhere to and claim 'God spoke and made this...' you can't offer up any details to support your position. The bible says the God made the Earth to bring forth life, doesn't this at least suggest that God created the foundation of earth and let life develop diversity on its own?

    Still, I think you should try to explain the questions I posed with regards to species and how on earth noah cared for them all. Take care.

  • Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:15 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex

    <<<<< "1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

    How, by what processes and mechanisms? Details please details on how it was done. saying god did it, explains WHO did it, but not HOW.>>>>>

    You can never know how God created anything because His ways are past finding out.

    Romans 11:33 - "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!"

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 6:51 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    star2, Your posts concerning creation are good material for church Sunday school, but not for much else.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:59 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Is that a threat or a promise?

  • igh »
    Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:21 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Your a silly man agentorangex, you talk about things you know nothing about. But for us believers we understand God. He is revealed in his Son Jesus.
    I wipe the dust off my feet. I will go somewhere else.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    star,

    "Yes, kind = species"

    Fair enough Star thanks for the details on your view, fair enough. However, you're stating then that one species of bird can't diverge into another species of bird? OR that one species of fly can't evolve into another species of fly?

    But then how do you explain in other experiments such as these were one species of an organism (flies for instance) evolved to become another species of the same genus? We even have evidence for new Genus' being formed too and by the same processes.

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

    2nd note. If one is to conclude as you do that 'kind = species', and considering there are with a conservative estimate some 6 million species globally, how on Earth did Noah and his family 1) cram all the millions of species on to such a sized boat? 2) Have food/water to feed them all? 3) Be able to clean up all their waste? 4) for nearly a whole year? 5) why do we find exclusive animals located on islands (marsupials on Australia) and how did Noah accomplish this sorting post flood? This is most absurd.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:55 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex - I was not addressing the species = kind question in quoting Pslams 147:5, and Isaiah 40:28.

    Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the King James Bible:

    4327 meen (Hebrew word); from an unused root meaning, to portion out; a sort, i.e., species: - kind.

    Yes, kind = species.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:32 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "Psalm 147:5"

    And this explains the HOW processes in which you posted earlier how again? This explains the 'species = 'kind' question how?

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:31 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Sometimes evidence follows faith"

    Such as when?

    "and sometimes God gives evidence without faith."

    Ditto...

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:24 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex

    Psalm 147:5 - "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite."

    Isaiah 40:28 - "Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding."

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    agentorangex

    Sometimes evidence follows faith and sometimes God gives evidence without faith.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:53 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    "1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

    How, by what processes and mechanisms? Details please details on how it was done. saying god did it, explains WHO did it, but not HOW. If you can't define HOW then it can't be refuted, so it's a waste as it's unfalsifiable. Saying 'god hath done it', doesn't explain how or by what processes were used to accomplish this, unless you're basically saying it was done by supernatural magic.

    "And GOD SAID, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so."

    Hmmmm, this is interesting how it's phrased, don't you agree? It says 'let the earth bring forth', as in perhaps let the earth and its natural processes bring forth the diversity and so on... and not that God poofed them independently. What exactly is a 'beast kind' by the way?

    "animal and plant life was created after its own kind"

    Oh please star, you can't do any better than biblical scholars in attempting to define such a loose and ambiguous term as 'kind'. Is 'kind' = species? Genus? Order? Family? Super Family? Phylum? and how do we objectively know which based on evidence and testing?

    "one kind of fish did not produce a different kind of fish, one bird did not produce an entirely different kind of bird,"

    By this interpretation it would seem you're saying that 'kind' is equivalent to species than, right? As you would be by defacto stating that all birds (all 10,000 species of them) are not evolutionary related at all, but were instead magically created independently. Right so far?

    This sounds nice star, but we have direct evidence for speciations within the birds taxonomic Class already.

    So, if you're equating that 'kind' = species, how on Earth did 900 year old Noah and his family feed, clean up after and shelter all the Earths some 5-6 million (conservative estimate) species on such a small boat for nearly a year?

    "We accept God's account of creation by Faith."

    Yes, apparently. 'Objective independently tested and consistent evidence' need not apply it seems. 'Faith' is the only way one can rationalize such horrid logic.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:32 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Igh,

    You can't even show evidence that it can stop huricanes or grow back amputated limbs...why should I believe it can moves mountains? Again, evidence is required to support a proposition, not faith.

  • igh »
    Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:50 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Agentorangex, read my last post. All you have to do is simply ask. And it will be given unto you. Simple Faith can indeed move mountains.

    Matthew 21:21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.
    Matthew 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

    Try it today Agentorangex, see if God will see your honest, humble heart and move and grant your request. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

  • igh »
    Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:45 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steveh20 , let me check, I think i have a copy somewhere... It happens to be a very good read on mans comprehension of God, and God sitting in Heaven on his Throne shaking his head at our foolishness. If only we would ask why he does what he does, he would surely give the answer.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:36 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    The Word of God says that God spoke everything into existence.

    Genesis 1

    1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    3 And GOD SAID, Let there be light: and there was light.

    5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

    6 And GOD SAID, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

    8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

    9 And GOD SAID, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

    11 And GOD SAID, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

    13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

    14 And GOD SAID, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

    19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

    20 And GOD SAID, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

    21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

    22 And GOD blessed them, SAYING, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

    23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. (continued)

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:35 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    continued

    24 And GOD SAID, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

    25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

    26 And GOD SAID, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    28 And God blessed them, and GOD SAID unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    29 And GOD SAID, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

    30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

    31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

    We accept God's account of creation by Faith.

    Hebrews 11:3 - "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

    The Word of God is very clear that God spoke everything into existence. It is also very clear that macro-evolution is not a part of the created process for every animal and plant life was created after its own kind; one animal did not become a different animal, one plant did not produce an entirely different plant, one kind of fish did not produce a different kind of fish, one bird did not produce an entirely different kind of bird, and animals didn't eventually become a human being.

    If a believer cannot accept by faith God's Word about creation than I rather doubt he accepts much of anything that the Word of God says.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:48 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Viking, I always admire your clear cool headed analysis of such pieces.
    Steve

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:07 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    viking, I believe God alone can explain nature since He is the one ultimately responsible for creating it whether through creationism or evolution.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 11:57 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    I wondered if any one noticed that the article and its author's position start right from the beginning with a false premise and therefore should be disregarded in their entirety as useful discussion. The author states

    Only nature can explain nature, and there is no other source of meaning or truth. Thus, in the end the theory of evolution - and the theory of evolution alone - must explain everything about humanity.

    In fact neither evolution in particular nor science in general make this claim. This is a basic misconception of many individuals who have no familiarity with the fundamental nature of science and its claims. However for an educated person such as the author ignorance can not be presumed. Instead a less innocent explanation must be considered. Since it has been repeatedly and clearly stated in multiple forums and debates that Science in general and evolution in particular make no claims whatsoever to be able to judge the existence or non existence of God and that further evolution does not claim as the author misstates (intentionally we must presume) that it explains "everything about humanity".
    Since the foundational premise of the article is a gross mischarechterization science in general and the theory of evolution in specific the critiques of the theory of evolution based on the premise are by definition also invalid and not deserving of serious discussion.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:34 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    believer, lets call a spade a spade here, the descriptions in Job could refer to any relatively large animal, I've heard that some biblical scholars considered it to be an elephant (I think). But in all honesty, if Igh wants to pretend the bible is valid in knowledge in terms of biology, then he has to explain the other things I mentioned in which the bible in obviously wrong. (efining bats as birds, insects as having 4 legs, and presenting stripped patterns would let to a stripped offspring, refers to shellfish as unclean, a totally ambiguous term like 'kind' and swine as demonic possessed?). You can't pick and choose where it's biologically correct.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    agent, there are some passages in Job that point to the probablity that some dinosaurs lived at the same time as man on the earth.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    igh, what does job have to do with evolutionary evidence again?

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    igh, would you by per chance have a copy of the book of Job about your good self?
    Thanks
    Steve

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:11 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "Agentorangex, what makes you so angry with God?"

    ???? nothing, I am merely trying to have someone here explain their evidence based objections to the evolutionary theory.

  • igh »
    Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Job 38:22 Have you ever visited the storerooms, where I keep the snow and the hail?
    Job 38:23 I keep them ready for times of trouble, for days of battle and war.
    Job 38:24 Have you been to the place where the sun comes up, or the place from which the east wind blows?
    Job 38:25 Who dug a channel for the pouring rain and cleared the way for the thunderstorm?
    Job 38:26 Who makes rain fall where no one lives?
    Job 38:27 Who waters the dry and thirsty land, so that grass springs up?
    Job 38:28 Does either the rain or the dew have a father?
    Job 38:29 Who is the mother of the ice and the frost,
    Job 38:30 which turn the waters to stone and freeze the face of the sea?
    Job 38:31 Can you tie the Pleiades together or loosen the bonds that hold Orion?
    Job 38:32 Can you guide the stars season by season and direct the Big and the Little Dipper?
    Job 38:33 Do you know the laws that govern the skies, and can you make them apply to the earth?
    Job 38:34 Can you shout orders to the clouds and make them drench you with rain?
    Job 38:35 And if you command the lightning to flash, will it come to you and say, "At your service"?
    Job 38:36 Who tells the ibis when the Nile will flood, or who tells the rooster that rain will fall?
    Job 38:37 Who is wise enough to count the clouds and tilt them over to pour out the rain,
    Job 38:38 rain that hardens the dust into lumps?
    Job 38:39 Do you find food for lions to eat, and satisfy hungry young lions
    Job 38:40 when they hide in their caves, or lie in wait in their dens?
    Job 38:41 Who is it that feeds the ravens when they wander about hungry, when their young cry to me for food?

  • igh »
    Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Job 38:1 Then out of the storm the LORD spoke to Job.
    Job 38:2 Who are you to question my wisdom with your ignorant, empty words?
    Job 38:3 Now stand up straight and answer the questions I ask you.
    Job 38:4 Were you there when I made the world? If you know so much, tell me about it.
    Job 38:5 Who decided how large it would be? Who stretched the measuring line over it? Do you know all the answers?
    Job 38:6 What holds up the pillars that support the earth? Who laid the cornerstone of the world?
    Job 38:7 In the dawn of that day the stars sang together, and the heavenly beings shouted for joy.
    Job 38:8 Who closed the gates to hold back the sea when it burst from the womb of the earth?
    Job 38:9 It was I who covered the sea with clouds and wrapped it in darkness.
    Job 38:10 I marked a boundary for the sea and kept it behind bolted gates.
    Job 38:11 I told it, "So far and no farther! Here your powerful waves must stop."
    Job 38:12 Job, have you ever in all your life commanded a day to dawn?
    Job 38:13 Have you ordered the dawn to seize the earth and shake the wicked from their hiding places?
    Job 38:14 Daylight makes the hills and valleys stand out like the folds of a garment, clear as the imprint of a seal on clay.
    Job 38:15 The light of day is too bright for the wicked and restrains them from doing violence.
    Job 38:16 Have you been to the springs in the depths of the sea? Have you walked on the floor of the ocean?
    Job 38:17 Has anyone ever shown you the gates that guard the dark world of the dead?
    Job 38:18 Have you any idea how big the world is? Answer me if you know.
    Job 38:19 Do you know where the light comes from or what the source of darkness is?
    Job 38:20 Can you show them how far to go, or send them back again?
    Job 38:21 I am sure you can, because you're so old and were there when the world was made!

  • igh »
    Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Agentorangex, what makes you so angry with God?

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:52 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "God words have never failed; but yet you do not believe. "

    ...!..., you mean the same one that is defining bats as birds, insects as having 4 legs, and presenting stripped patterns would let to a stripped offspring, refers to shellfish as unclean, a totally ambiguous term like 'kind' and swine as demonic possessed? Yeah, that's a pretty epic fail there, and that's just biology.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    holito,

    "Now theories do fail. "

    (Palsm face) Uggggh, no Holito, they only fail in terms of explaining ALL things all at once, I tried to emphasize this in how evolutionary theory can not be used with its empirical facts in explaining gravitational theory. Particular and applied facts are only explained by particular science theories.

    Holito8, do me a favor, go down a page or so and find the links I refereed to in which I cite ERV's and Human Chromosome 2 fusion. Review them, their sources and citations and become familiar with basic biology. When that's done come back with your objections to this evidence, thanks.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:33 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "You better go ask someone about gravity again. Ask them when the theory about gravity fails."

    It fails (falls apart) when referring or attempting to explain the dynamics of a Black hole, and when trying to explain the the first initial moments of the Universe. As gravity and all other forces were one then, thus it will require a different theory to explain at this point. Enter, M-theory.

    "You argued the 1st Prinicple of Thermodynamics. When does the 1st Principle of Thermodynamics fail?"

    It's actually the first law of thermodynamics, but I get you. When does it fail? Never so far (but I stress again knowledge it particular), every test ever conducted to destroy or create energy/matter have failed, we can only transfer it from one state to another, we can't create either eh nihlo.

    Now theories do fail.
    However, what God has said has never failed.
    1Cor 13: 8Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

    2 Thessalonians 2:3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

    God words have never failed; but yet you do not believe.
    You choose to believe in theories more than God. Therefore, you condemn yourself.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:36 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Holito8,

    "Prevailing theory..."

    Yes, as in subtle details within the theory might change, but these don't affect the validity of the theory, as in the changes in gravitational theory in relation to relativity. It's prevailing, b/c well, it's the current one which explains the most facts consistently, and generally only a paradigm shift causes such a change.

    "Even at best a theory does not explain all events"

    Exactly, a science theory is specific to a related group of facts (say gravitational theory) and explains all the facts in that domain, it can't explain all facts in all domains of knowledge (everything). It is particular to a subset of knowledge. Therefore, contrary to what Ben Stein thinks, evolutionary theory and its facts (obviously to most layman's even) cannot explain the facts of gravity, atomic matter, electromagnetism, etc.

    "You better go ask someone about gravity again. Ask them when the theory about gravity fails."

    It fails (falls apart) when referring or attempting to explain the dynamics of a Black hole, and when trying to explain the the first initial moments of the Universe. As gravity and all other forces were one then, thus it will require a different theory to explain at this point.

    You argued the 1st Prinicple of Thermodynamics. When does the 1st Principle of Thermodynamics fail? "

    "You better go ask someone about gravity again. Ask them when the theory about gravity fails."

    It fails (falls apart) when referring or attempting to explain the dynamics of a Black hole, and when trying to explain the the first initial moments of the Universe. As gravity and all other forces were one then, thus it will require a different theory to explain at this point. Enter, M-theory.

    "You argued the 1st Prinicple of Thermodynamics. When does the 1st Principle of Thermodynamics fail?"

    It's actually the first law of thermodynamics, but I get you. When does it fail? Never so far (but I stress again knowledge it particular), every test ever conducted to destroy or create energy/matter have failed, we can only transfer it from one state to another, we can't create either eh nihlo.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:17 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    CMG,

    "You believe that there was (is) an evolutionary process that accounts for life."

    Evolution doesn't explain life origins, only life's diversity.Is there evolutionary processes? Yes, but you can't even explain in details How or why you object to them from an objective evidence based position.

    "In your mind, your ERV's and human chrosome 2 are evidence of changes related to the evolution process."

    I realize you don't have the foggiest idea, but why don't you challenge yourself, why don't you attempt to review the evidence for them and explain them. The only way they can be there is if common ancestry is true, they fit the predictions of evolutionary theory quite well.

    "In my mind, these kinds of issues are proof that God took His basic building blocks and tweaked them"

    Ok, but why would God tweak them in a way to make it just *appear* as if we shared common ancestry with extant apes? Why would he intentionally leave MORE evidence that evolution is true when God can, hypothetically, poof whole beings any possible way?

    Your position is analogous to inferring as star does, and it basically equates to 'god dun put the fossils in the ground to test our faith' bit.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:09 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    CMG,

    "I meant living cells from non-living cells. I am familiar with your assertation that the origins of life are not the same as evolution."

    It's not my own assertion, this is how evolutionary theory is defined, it has nothing to do with life origins.

    "both yours and mine, to rehash all your pet evolutionary theme"

    My pet theme? Hey, if you can't address the evidence simply for you're ignorant on it, which frankly seems to be the case, then lets see if we can remedy that. You might actually learn something. Again, WHICH processes or evidence do you object to?

    "when the smallpox vaccine came out, but I know that their knowledge at that time was not nearly so sophisticated."

    And your point? Again, you can't/won't discuss the evidence as then you'd have some explaining to do. Small pox was basically eradicated via vaccines, and not all pathogens can be so easily tackled (like say HIV), largely b/c they evolve.

    "God IS the creator of all processes. I've already covered this one, remember?"

    So you're saying God could use evolution as a natural process then, right? If so, then why the objection to it?

    "is that the idea of randomness as a process, with or without anything additional"

    Random? I already described how evolution isn't entirely random though. Can you at least attempt to address the evidence for evolution I gave?

  • igh »
    Wed Oct 15, 2008 7:59 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Ok the Facts are this:
    God made everything that is. :)

    I got the Facts.

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
    John 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 7:24 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Prevailing theory...hmmmm Interesting choice of words when you say there is no "faith" in science.
    What's the definition of theory?

    the·o·ry /ˈθiÉâ„¢ri, ˈθɪÉâ„¢ri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
    –noun, plural -ries. 1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
    2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
    3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
    4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
    5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
    6. contemplation or speculation.
    7. guess or conjecture.

    Even at best a theory does not explain all events, it only can explain things in "certian ideal situations."
    Thus, they are not fool proof.
    In science any and everything is open to future critique and it's all contingent based on supportive evidence. 'gray areas' are only in areas in which there exists inconclusiveness data supporting one hypothesis over another. There is no gray area that gravity is the affect of mass affecting mass, this is a fact, and the theory on it explains the facts of gravity.
    You better go ask someone about gravity again. Ask them when the theory about gravity fails.
    You argued the 1st Prinicple of Thermodynamics. When does the 1st Principle of Thermodynamics fail?

    If it didn't, all these 'whoops' wouldn't result in derived and applied knowledge or technology, but they do and they do b/c science works.

    God gives us wisdom because wisdom and knowledge are His. God created everything to give us a small protion of that understand is nothing for Him.

  • GMG »
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:17 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Uh oh, sorry for the little boxes.

    You believe that there was (is) an evolutionary process that accounts for life. I believe that there is a Creater God that accounts for ALL things, including all origins.

    We will just have to agree to disagree.

    Thanks for the chat.

  • GMG »
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:11 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    >>>Still, the process of immunization can't be done if one ignores or can't comprehend that the principle of how organisms evolve.<<<

    I can’t remember exactly when the smallpox vaccine came out, but I know that their knowledge at that time was not nearly so sophisticated. As a matter of fact, I believe they came up with that vaccine on the basis of discovering that those involved with cattle seemed to have a natural immunity of sorts. Don’t believe they had a real comprehensive understanding of how organisms “evolve” when they made that particular connection.

    >>>So you're willing to accept God can make natural processes to allow for the formation of rainbows, but you reject him from using natural processes like evolution to bring about the diversity of life?<<<

    God IS the creator of all processes. I’ve already covered this one, remember? Genesis says “God SPOKE”, etc, and it was formed. Also, it says he made the cattle to produce “after it’s own kind”. Now, if you go back and read the accounts, you will see that none of it even hints at a process, but rather to a completed creation event.

    >>>"The idea of randomness accounting for diversity of life from non-life"

    I meant living cells from non-living cells. I am familiar with your assertation that the origins of life are not the same as evolution.

    AO, it’s a waste of time, both yours and mine, to rehash all your pet evolutionary themes. I’ve seen the content of your blog dialogs with others. In your mind, your ERV’s and human chrosome 2’s are evidence of changes related to the evolution process. In my mind, these kinds of issues are proof that God took His basic building blocks and “tweaked” them, if you will, to form amazingly different things. We share a surprising 25% of our makeup with bananas, but I think you would agree that we in no way resemble fruit.

    What it truly comes down to, bottom line, is that the idea of randomness as a process, with or without anything additional, to account for a process that changes a non-living structure into a complex living, diverse entity, let alone the sheer number of the variety of separate functioning living entities, is beyond fantastic. It’s impossible, no matter what time frame you use. It truly takes less faith to believe in a Creater God.

    >>>Can't even get the terms right....it's Natural selection, not random selection<<<

    And you didn’t well know what I meant, in spite of my “typo”? Rather a lame rebuttal, don’t ya think!

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Such ordered function in such uncountable forms is untenable with the idea of random selection"

    Can't even get the terms right....it's Natural selection, not random selection...

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    CMG,

    "Ahh, but I did not invoke magic for rainbows. Yes rainbows are formed under very well understood processes; processes set up by God in His natural created order."

    So you're willing to accept God can make natural processes to allow for the formation of rainbows, but you reject him from using natural processes like evolution to bring about the diversity of life?

    "I could apply this same reasoning to the idea of randomness."

    Sure, or God, anything really. Your point?

    "The truth of the matter is that your so-called evolutionary evidence is constantly being revised,"

    Um, yeah, I noticed you haven't even touched on a single piece of evidence for it yet.

    Right, just like how gravitational theory is continually being revised and refined as new evidence comes in (relativity) so we have over time a more realistic view of how gravity works, same difference for evolution.

    This is how science works as it's a progressive process which removes refuted ideas and those would aren't consistent and overtime we're left with a more pure and absolute resolution.

    "and yet each newly discovered "fact" is touted as hard core evidence for this theory"

    After the facts are understood via testing then they are used to support the prevailing theory. Each empirical fact are spokes all supporting the overall model in a consistent manner. How hard is this to comprehend?

    It's analogous to finding more consistent supportive evidence for the murderer of a crime, except in science the body of evidence is far larger, allows for further refutation.

    "The idea of randomness accounting for diversity of life from non-life"

    Mmmmm, nope. Evolution deals with the diversity of life, not the origins of life. it's funny you mention 'randomness' though, b/c peptides and base chain amino acids form quite naturally and are robust enough that we're already testing replicating polymers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

    Evolutionary theory doesn't encompass the theory of life origins,as for evolution to work requires DNA, inheritance and varied replication, which non-life doesn't do. I notice how you jump around a lot, and never get down to the evidence, nor do you explain (can you?) why evolutionary processes can't work.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Gifts
  • Health
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links