|
"...Shepherd the flock of God which is among
you, serving as overseers..." (1 Peter 5:2)
Elders
Morris Bass, Rick Holt , Joe
Price |
"...let them serve as deacons,
being found blameless..." (1 Tim. 3:10)
Deacons
Aaron Bass, Rich Brooks, Mike Finn
John Hague, Dan Head |
"And take...the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God" (Eph. 6:17)
In this issue:
“In the Beginning God”
or “In the Beginning Dirt” (by Dr. David M. Bonner)
“In the Beginning God” or “In the Beginning
Dirt”
(by Dr. David M. Bonner)
There are only two choices for the origin
of the universe. Either, 1) Somebody made the world, or 2) The world made
itself. Humanists (not to be confused with humanitarians) believe, “…the
universe as self-existing and not created.”[1]
The Bible teaches, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the
earth.”2 Most evolutionists do not offer an explanation for
“first cause.” They do not typically try to explain how the first matter
came into being, you have to give them that. Evolutionary thinking is a
belief system on origins for those who choose not to believe in God and His
creation. Therefore, when considering origins we essentially have tow
options: “In the beginning God” or “In the beginning Dirt” and you
have to give them the dirt. Many among the media, politicians, educators,
and religious leaders preach evolutionary doctrine and refer to creation as
a fairy tale. They are the “spin doctors” who have joined forces to promote
an evolutionary, humanistic, naturalistic World View. They do not tell you
the concept of evolution is self-destructing. They do not tell you it has
never been well supported by the evidence and there are many scientists
coming forward to point out the weaknesses of this theory. Instead they
prey upon the faith of our young people indicating that “all educated
people believe in evolution.”
When engaging in debate it is best to
start by defining the terms of the proposition. This is especially true
when discussing evolution because it helps uncover the trickery used by
evolutionists.
When we use the term “evolution” in this
series of articles we are discussing the theories that say all living
things have arisen by a materialistic, naturalistic evolutionary process
from a single source, which itself arose by a similar process from a dead,
inanimate world. This theory may also be called the “Molecule to Man
theory of evolution.” Other terms for this theory include the “Atom
to Adam” or “Goo to You” theory of evolution.
The
concept of evolution actually involves several theories,
which include:
1) Cosmic Evolution — the origin
of time, space, and matter. This is also known as the “Big Bang.”
2) Chemical Evolution — the origin of all of the chemical elements on the
periodic table from hydrogen, the simplest of all the elements.
3)
Stellar and planetary evolution — the origin of the stars, planets, and the
other celestial objects.
4) Organic Evolution — the origin of life itself from dead
inanimate elements and molecules (“the primordial soup”) into living cells.
5) Macro-Evolution — the origin of every kind of life from the
original single cell beginning.
6)
Micro-Evolution —
horizontal variation or adaptation within a genetically compatible kind.
This sixth theory is also called “the special theory” of evolution.
Theories
#1
through #5 listed above comprise the “General Theory of Organic
Evolution.” When I use the word “evolution” in this series, unless
stated otherwise, we will be referring to and refuting the “General Theory
of Organic
Evolution,” which is this “Atom to Adam,” theory of evolution. (Theories #4
and #5 together can also be referred to as the “Goo to You” theory of
evolution.)
The
first five theories are not scientific at all. Not every idea that any
scientist has is necessarily a “scientific theory.” For a theory to be
scientific, it must be subjected to the scientific method which involves
observation, experimentation, and verification. These theories have not
been observed and have not been supported by evidence or processes which
have been observed. They have not been verified through experimentation.
Therefore, they are not “scientific theories,” even though a large number of
scientists believe in them.
Of the
six
theories listed above, only that of Micro-Evolution has been observed.
Typically when evolutionists try to say evolution is amenable to the
scientific method they have shifted into a discussion of theory #6. Do not
be fooled. Evolutionists typically are quick to lump theory #6 in with the
rest and use it as “proof” for the other five theories. Biology text books
are full of this kind of methodology.
The
first five theories should not be confused with nor commingled with the
sixth concept which is often called Micro-Evolution.
This
concept
is not really a theory, but is a fact. It identifies the fact that there is
genetic capacity for horizontal variation and adaptability within
genetically compatible kinds. This is why we have demographic differences
within human populations. It also explains why there are so many variations
within animal kinds, such as among dogs, cats, toads, cattle, etc. No
one disagrees with this. Everyone knows you can cross a Cocker Spaniel
with a Poodle and get a Cock-a-Poo or a Pekinese with a Poodle and get a
Peek-a-Poo. When you are through with this process you have bred dogs and
ended up with just dogs. The same principle is true in the plant kingdom
where plants such as corn can be developed to be more disease and pest
resistant. When you are through you still have corn and have not turned corn
plants into oak trees. It has been said there are some 1300 variations of
roses, but “a rose by any other name is still a rose.” “Micro-Evolution” or
“Selective Breeding” does not prove you can begin with a single cell such
as an amoeba, and end up with a human being. However, it is with this
information many evolutionists play a con game upon unsuspecting students.
It is the old con
game
known as
“Bait & Switch.” You may have had a telemarketer try to pull this con
game on you. For example, a credit card company calls your home during the
dinner hour assuring you that you have been “pre-qualified” for 2.9% percent
interest on their card. When you get the card it actually carries 13.9%
interest. That is “Bait & Switch!” They allure you with one thing and give
you something else. It is an illegal business tactic, so why should it be
allowed in the classrooms of public schools?
Evolutionists
pull this con by discussing an example of adaptation within a genetically
compatible kind (micro-evolution) and assert this is a case of evolution
(macro-evolution) in progress. The classic example of this con game is
the Peppered Moth story. If you have studied biology, you have probably
heard the story, since it is in almost every text book The Peppered Moth
(Biston betularia) has a light colored variation and a dark colored
variation. To the human eye, it appears camouflaged when the light moth is
with a light background and when the dark moth is with a dark background.
It is said the light moth was the predominant variation in England before
the industrial revolution where the trees were light colored. After the
industrial revolution, the trees were predominantly darkened by pollution
and it is said the predominant variation became the dark moth. After laws
were enacted to clean up the environment and the trees began to show their
natural lighter colors, it is said the demographics of light moths versus
dark moths began to reverse again.
This
story is told over and over again as proof of evolution in action. First,
without even criticizing the elements of the evolutionists’ story, ask
yourself if this proves or gives any credence to the “Amoeba to Man” theory
of evolution. If the story started out with absolutely no dark moths at the
beginning and ended up with some dark and light colored moths it would only
demonstrate Micro-Evolution or the genetic capacity within a kind. It would
be similar to a blonde-headed woman marrying a black-headed man and having
four black-headed children and one red-headed child. Everyone knows this is
possible and everyone should know this does not demonstrate that the moth is
undergoing Macro-Evolution and will eventually evolve into a bird or some
other genetically incompatible organism.
It is
fascinating, however, to see that this story may not even be
demonstrating Micro-Evolution. If both colors were present at the
beginning, it only represents a demographic change in the population of
moths. Think about it. The story is of a community of predominantly white
moths becoming a community of predominantly dark moths, which later became a
community of predominantly light moths again. We see this happen all the
time with communities of people. Yet no one thinks it proves that man is
evolving into another kind of being. This has to be the most successful
“bait and switch con game” ever pulled off. The evolutionists describe a
demographic change in the population, claim that it illustrates
Micro-Evolution, and then jump over the huge crater of missing evidence to
claim that it proves Macro-Evolution!
If there was
any actual scientific evidence for the General Theory of Organic Evolution
the evolutionists would present it. The fact that evolutionists are always
using examples of Micro-Evolution or Horizontal Variation as “evidence” for
the first five theories is pretty strong evidence, in and of itself, there
has never been any observation of evidence for the General Theory of Organic
Evolution.
There
are only
two choices for the origin of the universe. Evolutionists do not have
scientific evidence for their theories. They would have you accept their
belief system, simply based on their word that we came from the “Big Bang.”
They would seem to rewrite the Bible to say, “In the beginning Dirt.”
On the other hand
the Bible asserts,
“By
the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of
them by the breath of His mouth. He gathereth the waters of the sea
together as an heap: He layeth up the depth in storehouses. Let all the
earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of
Him. For He spake, and it was done;
He commanded,
and it
stood fast.”3
The
Bible claims the origin of the universe to be from the “Big Word,” if
you will. Jesus Christ was the Word and provided the “Big Word”
of creation. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made
that was made…And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we
beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of
grace and truth.4
As this
series progresses we will put various facets of the evolutionary theories
under the microscope. As we do, we will continue to see the overwhelming
evidence against evolution and the scientific and biblical evidence for
creation. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
-------------------------------------------------------------
1
First Article of Human Manifesto I
2, 5
Genesis 1:1
3
Psalms 33:6-9
4
John 1:1-3, 14
“When I consider
Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You
have ordained, What is man that You are mindful of him, And the son of man
that You visit him?”
(Psalms 8:3-4)
Top
|
