Skip to main content

Hi to all my Forum Friends,

In the Religion Forum discussion titled "Removing The 'Smoke Screen' From Alleged Bible Discrepancies" begun by me two weeks ago, and which has long since become way too long -- our avowed atheist and Darwinian Evolutionist Friend, Robust, tells me, "To biologists, the distinction between 'macroevolution' and 'microevolution' is utterly arbitrary.  Macroevolution is just cumulative  microevolution."

If workers dig a hole deep, even several miles deep -- that is equivalent to Micro Evolution.  If workers dig a hole completely through the earth, coming out on the other side -- that is equivalent to Macro Evolution.

Now, we know that those drilling for oil, etc., have drilled down several miles.  That is a fact, i.e. Micro Evolution..

Yet, when have you heard of anyone drilling through the earth and coming out in China?   That is fiction, i.e., Macro Evolution.

You tell us, "All species of organisms on earth have descended from a common ancestor.  When scientists say that two species of apes, for example, such as humans and bonobos have evolved from a common ancestor -- it means that there have been successive and inherited changes/modifications in those two populations since becoming genetically isolated from one another.

To say that humans are related to bonobos does not mean that they are our ancestors or that humans evolved from bonobos.  Our common human/bonobo ancestor, from which we evolved, is extinct.  Every species living today is fully modern.  No living species today is the ancestor to another living species."

First, let's define "species."


1:   http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/species

Biology:  the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.

2.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species

 

In biology, a species is one of the basic units of biological classification and a taxonomic rank.  A species is often defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring.  While in many cases this  definition is adequate, more precise or differing measures are often used, such as similarity of DNA, morphology or  ecological niche.  Presence of specific locally adapted traits may further subdivide species into subspecies.


A fish cannot breed with a horse or a dog.  A fish cannot breed with a bird.  A bird cannot breed with a dinosaur.  An ape cannot breed with a human (although, at times our atheist Friends have made me wonder).  You get the point.

But, Robust, then you state, "Our common human/bonobo ancestor, from which we evolved, is extinct.  Every species living today is fully modern.  No living species today is the ancestor to another living species."

Not so.  If you take the definitions above: (1)  Resemble one another.  We humans do resemble Adam and Eve; although we may be taller, with lighter or darker skin coloring, and have a few other physical difference -- we are all still in the spiritual image of God and in the physical image of our first ancestors, Adam and Eve.

(2)  Capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring.  Most certainly true -- as long as we stay within the Traditional Marriage ordained by God - One  Man and One Woman.  Yet, except in fairy tales, I have seen no indication of any half fish/half humans, nor any half horse/half  humans, not even a half ape/half humans.

(3)  Adapted traits may further subdivide species into subspecies.   This is a perfect definition of evolutionary adaptation, i.e., Micro Evolution -- a species, i.e., man, adapting to environmental, dietary, and location changes.

So, Robust, I descended from Adam and Eve.  But, over a period of thousands of years -- my physical features and attributes have changed due to my family migrating to the Western Hemisphere, and due to the change in diet, etc.   That is Micro Evolution.

You, according to you, descended from an ape.  So be it!  Over millions of years, once again, according to you -- your ancestors migrated from the jungle, stopped eating fleas from one another, learned to walk upright, and lost your body hair (well, at least, most  of you did).  That is Macro Evolution.  Good luck!

Now, you tell us, "Modern fish don't become chickens or horses, but since life evolved from the seas, today's chickens, horses and fish (and humans, giraffes, shrews, etc.) have a common and extinct ancestor that was a sea-dwelling vertebrate (like a fish) hundreds of millions of years ago.  If any one reading this can't grasp this concept and how it's different from a fish becoming a horse -- then it's incumbent upon you to ask questions and/or do some research online or somewhere."

And, you wonder why I sometimes slip and mistake you for our old atheist Forum Friend, Fish?  Well, maybe there are a couple of reasons; but, this one has catapulted to the top of the heap.

Once again, I descended from Adam and Eve.  But, over a period of thousands of years -- my physical features and attributes have changed due to my family migrating to the Western Hemisphere, and due to the change in diet, etc.   That is Micro Evolution.

But, now, instead of your ancestors evolving from an ape -- you now claim a Fish, or sea-dwelling, ancestor?  Wow!  You, my Friend, are very confused.  First, you are an ape!  And, now, you are a Fish!  What will you be tomorrow?

Then, you continue, "Darwin's research and conclusions were the beginning of our understanding and yet they have withstood heavy scientific scrutiny for over 150 years (...not 200 years) and they still manage to accommodate the latest modern findings.  Nothing can top it.  Why not?  Because it's true.

How do we know it's true?  Because Darwin's central ideas have generated testable predictions that have been borne out by mountains (of) evidence and discoveries accumulated over a wide spectrum of sciences for a very, very long time.  And to this day, every new discovery and surprise finding in any of the life sciences supports and gives more validation to Darwin's theory, while continuing to extend our understanding of all life on earth."

Yet, in over 150 years since Darwin wrote his atheist/secularist bible, "On the Origin of Species" -- not even one transitional fossil has been discovered -- by science, or by anyone else.  This is the "missing link" we always ask about -- and which no one has been able to provide. 

 

Why?  If all those species did evolve into others -- there should be at least one transitory fossil -- somewhere.  Obviously,  if we accept Darwinian Evolution, i.e., Macro Evolution -- even science will tell us that a bird did not just change immediately into a dinosaur; an ape did not just suddenly become a man. 

 

No, the transition process, again, according to what evolutionary science tells us -- took took millions, or billions, of years to complete.  So, there had to be a lot of in-between species as the ape was moving toward becoming Bill Gates.  And, there would have been millions, or billions, of these transitory creatures -- leaving millions, or billions, of transition fossils, i.e., the "missing links."

In our museums around the world -- there are millions of fossils.   Yet, not even one of those transitory fossils is to be found.  Now, how can that be -- that man found millions of fossils -- but, lost all those billions of transitory fossils?  How can any rational person believe this?

Robust, regarding the "200 since Darwin's book" comment -- that was one of "your" people who wrote that.  Yes, I noticed the error -- but, then, I am accustomed to so many erroneous statements from atheists -- so, I just walked on past it.

I have often quoted Charles Darwin with the paraphrase, "If modern science does not find the "missing link" fossils, at least one --  then Darwinian Evolution is dead."  And, I have always concluded, "RIP Darwinian Evolution!"

But, to be more specific, so that I do not confuse our atheist and secularist Friends, I submit this from Charles Darwin:

 

+++++++++++++++++++
Transitional Fossil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil


In 1859, when Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species was first published, the fossil record was poorly known, and Darwin described the lack of transitional fossils as "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory," but explained it by the extreme imperfection of the geological record.  He noted the limited collections available at that time, but described the available information as showing patterns which followed from his theory of descent with modification through natural  selection.

 

+++++++++++++++++++

 

"RIP Darwinian Evolution!"

You continue, "As has been demonstrated on this forum so often, those who reject the scientific fact of Evolution always reference a severe misunderstanding (or purposeful misinformation) of what Evolution actually is.  They can't deny something that is actually explainable, demonstrable, and testable -- so instead they resort to illogical and unscientific straw-man caricatures to attack  
(and look ridiculous in the process)."

So far, we have seen no "missing link" transitional fossils which are "explainable, demonstrable, and testable."   Therefore, Robust, the rest of your statement is merely atheist huffing and puffing.

You quote, "Is man an ape or an angel?  I, my lord, I am on the side of the angels.  I repudiate with indignation and abhorrence those newfangled theories." -- Benjamin Disraeli, 1864 (or Bill Gray, 2011)

Well, we know, from common sense, that man is not an APE!   And, we know, from the Bible, that man is not an angel.

God created both angels and man for different purposes.  We both were created to have a love relationship with God and to worship God.  Yet, man was created just a wee bit higher -- to have a personal love relationship with God, to be His special children.  And, all who, by the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ -- believe and receive Him as Lord and Savior -- have this special love  relationship as children of God.

One major difference between man and angels is that man was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27) -- but, the Bible does not say this about angels.

Another major difference is that mankind can marry and bear children; angels cannot (Matthew 22:30).

And, yet another: Man can be forgiven by God through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ; angels cannot (2 Corinthians 5:21, Matthew 25:41).

Angels, besides worshiping and serving God -- also bear special revelations from God to humans (Hebrews 2:2, 13:2) -- and as the angel, Gabriel, did for Joseph and Mary (Matthew 1:20,21, Luke 1:11-13).

And, we read in Hebrews 1:14, "Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?"   Who is to inherit salvation?  Those humans who, by grace, through faith in Jesus Christ -- have become children of God.

So, Robust, man is not an ape -- nor is he an angel.  He is the special creation of God, created in His image, created to be His very Personal Friend.  Praise the Lord!

And, finally, Robust, you quote, "...ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."  -- Charles Darwin, 1871.

Charles Darwin described the lack of transitional fossils as "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."   In other words, to paraphrase Darwin, "If modern science does not find the 'missing link' fossils, at least one -- then Darwinian Evolution is dead."

And, I have always concluded, "RIP Darwinian Evolution!"

Robust, this has been an interesting dialogue and I thank you for giving me the platform from which to explain the most obvious, Biblical, view of man and Creation vs Darwinian Evolution.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bil

CREATION-Timeline-1

Attachments

Images (1)
  • CREATION-Timeline-1
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I am amused that Bill takes so much time to write so much malarkey in error.  He is wrong, of course.  Evolution is a scientifically demonstrated fact.
If you cannot bring yourself to accept this fact, it will not change the fact.

All of evolution is "micro" evolution.  Regard the fact that all mammals have four limbs, one head in which sensory organs are accumulated, and similar metabolic systems.  It does not take a rocket surgeon to imagine that all mammals are related.  Evolution explains this perfectly.
I encourage Bill to continue to write lengthy essays on his superstition.  No one reads them, and the time he spends writing this filth is time he's not polluting the minds of innocent children, which he would happily do.

 

DF

Hi all,

Actually, I saw a couple of typos in my post above -- but, they were minor and did not affect the message I had written -- so, I left  them alone.  Normally, if I catch the typo before the TD Forum Clock times out, I will make corrections.  But, in cases such as this  when I did not catch it in time, I leave it as is.  Why?  Well, a number of times my adoring fans have accused me of editing my  messages AFTER they have commented -- and I do not want to give them cause for such concern.

The main reason I sometimes do not catch the typo is that, when I am typing the message to be posted here -- I am also, in parallel,  preparing the same message to be sent to my Friends Ministry mail list.  And, I sometimes get distracted.

Let me share with you the intro I put on this message for those in my Friends Ministry:


++++++++++++++++++++++++


Hi to all my Friends,

While I realize that many of my Friends Ministry eNewsletters tend to be rather long -- I present them to you in the hopes that  possibly you will find one or two "golden nuggets" which will be useful the next time you find yourself defending your faith among atheists and other non-believers.  If you do not have time to read the whole e-mail; not a problem.  Maybe you can just pan for a few nuggets.

These writings come from my daily apologetic discussions on the TimesDaily Religion Forum with atheists, secularists, and other non-believers.  I select from among the many posts I write each day and try to offer you a few each week which might be most useful to you in your personal sharing of God's Word and in your personal ministry of being His witness to the lost and confused of the  world.

If you find this useful, please feel free to share it with your Friends, Relatives, Associates, and Neighbors -- all your FRANs.   Let us  all be ready to: "sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence"  (1 Peter 3:15).  That hope that is in us is the knowledge that we KNOW He is coming again to gather His church, His body of believers, to Himself.  And, we want to invite as many of our FRANs as possible -- before He comes again.


++++++++++++++++++++++++


So, my Religion Forum Friends, do you see how helpful you are in helping me generate messages to share with other Friends all over the world?  Thank you for being my ministry partners.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Micro evolution vs macro evolution is the fundamentalist admitting that evolution takes place, because they can see what they call "micro evolution" with their own eyes.  They can't admit to evolution out-and-out because it destroys their take on the Bible - that it is inerrant and should be interpreted literally.  Just as the fact that the earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old, these ideas destroy their belief system, and they just can't have it.  Instead of embracing the spiritual message of the Bible, they have to try to fit a square peg into a round hole.  Every bit of "science" that the fundamentalists sponsor is required to keep their distorted, and quite limited view, of God's place in the whole scheme of things to their liking. 

 

The fundamentalists are modern day Inquisitors, protecting lies, and attempting to stifle those who are participating in real scientific inquiry. 

 

And what the hell do angels have to do with evolution?  Ridiculous nonsense.

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

I am amused that Bill takes so much time to write so much malarkey in error.  He is wrong, of course.  Evolution is a scientifically demonstrated fact.
If you cannot bring yourself to accept this fact, it will not change the fact.

All of evolution is "micro" evolution.  Regard the fact that all mammals have four limbs, one head in which sensory organs are accumulated, and similar metabolic systems.  It does not take a rocket surgeon to imagine that all mammals are related.  Evolution explains this perfectly.
I encourage Bill to continue to write lengthy essays on his superstition.  No one reads them, and the time he spends writing this filth is time he's not polluting the minds of innocent children, which he would happily do.

 

DF

===================

Of course we are all related, we have a common cause with reason for being here.

I'ts not darwin evolution from a common ancestor. If you must insist God out of the picture do so with some other theory that has evidence. To claim all this evidence exists, I believe you always say: "demonstrable, testable with mountains of it" is actually not demonstrable, testable and certainly does not have mountains of evidence. your claim DF is not an axiom and Darwin evolution is certainly not a prerequisite for being an atheist if that is your comfort zone.

 

Lets face facts DF Darwin evolution is old timey fairy tales. Welcome to the quantum world DF wherein lieth the fingerprint if one must insist on trying to track down the God everyone else is satisfied existed as the architect by faith and dead reckoning.

.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Magpie may be the most ignorant person here. There is definitely a lack of education. To call Darwinian evolution a fairy tale is a great example of willful ignorance. One who says this cannot be taken seriously.

 

 

How many more "most ignorant person here" are you going to nominate for "most ignorant person here"?

You're already at 9...

Learn a new phrase.

 

 

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Magpie:

How rude jimi

Maybe rude, but also true. Get a little education before you act a fool in public. Being ignorant is nothing to be ashamed of, unless you choose to not do anything about it. It is when you choose to remain that way that you have a problem.

 

 

 

The champion of "acting a fool in public".

Hi Magpie,

 

Keep in mind that Jimi is only doing what you and I do.  We read and quote from our Bible, the Written Word of God.

 

And, Jimi quotes from his bibles -- the writings of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, et al.  And, in their bibles, the only retort they have is:  "You are stupid!  You are ignorant!  You are uneducated!  You are (or, they fill in other adjectives which might enter their confused brains)"

 

So, we mustn't be too hard on them.  That is their religious training showing through -- just as our Christian beliefs show through for us.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Originally Posted by Bill Gray:

Hi Magpie,

 

Keep in mind that Jimi is only doing what you and I do.  We read and quote from our Bible, the Written Word of God.

 

And, Jimi quotes from his bibles -- the writings of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, et al.  And, in their bibles, the only retort they have is:  "You are stupid!  You are ignorant!  You are uneducated!  You are (or, they fill in other adjectives which might enter their confused brains)"

 

So, we mustn't be too hard on them.  That is their religious training showing through -- just as our Christian beliefs show through for us.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Call Bill a fool, and he will prove it every time.

Originally Posted by Magpie:

jimii Bill is much smarter than you will ever be. He fears God. You don't.

I wonder if you realize that you are an atheist. There are hundreds of Gods that you don't believe in. Perhaps you are fearing the wrong one. How can you be sure? If you had been born in Iraq you would surely be a Muslim and be telling the Christians that they are going to hell. The only difference between you and me is that I fear one less God than you do. How silly is that?

Jimbo, you are not an atheist and you cannot prove you do not believe in GOD.

You are in a confused state. In your mind you can never be sure. When you look out and see that “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament shows His handy-work” you allow some probability for GOD in your mind. You for sure can’t explain other than by faith in something else these alternate theories. You didn’t even know about the equivalence of mass and energy. FCOL

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×