Comment on The Heroic Crusade Redux by Lydian.
I’ve been following this cite almost from it’s beginning and, since I know practically nothing about evolution and the science behind it (my college courses were along entirely different lines) I sometimes hesitate to make comments at times.
But I would like for someone to explain some things for me.
If you and I were walking through a lush field of corn and I suddenly discovered a small mouse trap on the ground at my feet what would your reaction be if I picked it up and exclaimed, “Isn’t evolution wonderful–look at this perfect mouse trap that evolved out here in this corn field!†I may be wrong, but I suspect you would, at best, question my intelligence. Obviously that simple little trap had a mind behind it somewhere. So why do you consider it “scientifically reasonable†to believe that something as complicated as the human eye just “evolved†through eons of time with absolutely no intelligent mind behind it? I have a hard time following that kind of reasoning.
Yes, parts of humans and apes do have some similarities–but so what? How does that “prove†that man evolved from apes?
I have been a seamstress for many years. Until recently I made practically every outfit I owned since I was in grade school and almost everything my daughters wore during their growing up years. While I did have many patterns to go by I also had some that were my favorites and, by “tweaking†things here and there at times could come up with outfits that looked very different. My point is, why does the fact that because different species have some things somewhat in common “prove†that one descended from the other? Is it unreasonable to believe the Creator might do something similar when making different creatures?
Recently a friend sent me some pictures of a truly magnificent garden where every shrub and bush had been trimmed to look like a flower, a bird, a cat, or some other creature. Whoever worked in that garden had amazing skills and I wished I could actually go there and see it for myself.
While looking at and enjoying all of the wonderful things that were done to the plants I began to wonder what would happen if I could actually be there. Suppose I walked up to a group of folks who were also enjoying the beauties of the place and started commenting about how wonderful it was that evolution could produce such an outstanding place. What would the reaction of the other viewers have been (even an ardent evolutionist)? I suspect even any believers in evolution would have questioned my sanity. But those same evolutionists expect us to believe that this glorious world simply “evolved†out of nothing with absolutely no Intelligent guidance involved?
My question is: Whatever happened to common sense? If evolution is unable to produce even a simple inanimate mouse trap or bush clipped to shape like some animal,bird or other creature, what makes us think it can produce a whole world filled with the wonders this world is full of?
Real facts are one thing. They cannot be disputed. But the interpretations of facts is a whole different thing. These can vary according to our backgrounds our training or experience.
I grew up in the south and when I married a California GI who was stationed in my home town in WWII and, after we were married and ended up in California, Maryland, Washington DC, Tennessee, and Georgia I had a lot of “relearning†to do and some of my ardently held “facts†did some rapid changing!!
So I’ve learned (sort of) that while real facts cannot be changed the INTERPRETATION of them can change according to our backgrounds, our training and our experiences. So as we go through life we need to be careful to separate “beliefs†or theories(scientific or otherwise) from actual “facts†(scientific or otherwise). Theories or beliefs may help us arrive at truth but we should be careful that we don’t confuse them with truth itself.
So–why is it stupid to believe a simple mouse trap “evolved†and yet still believe that all the wonders of nature–including man–came about by random chance with no intelligent mind behind it? I just do not understand that kind of reasoning. Does anybody?
Where is our “common sense?â€
Table of Contents
Lydian Also Commented
The Heroic Crusade Redux
“From Elijah’s experience during those days of discouragement and apparent defeat there are many lessons to be drawn, lessons invaluable to the servants of God in this age, marked as it is by general departure from right. The apostasy prevailing today is similar to that which in the prophet’s day overspread Israel. In the exaltation of the human above the divine, in the praise of popular leaders, in the worship of mammon, and in the placing of the teachings of science above the truths of revelation, multitudes today are following after Baal. Doubt and unbelief are exercising their baleful influence over mind and heart, and many are substituting for the theories of men. It is publicly taught that we have reached a time when human reason should be exalted above the teachings of the Word. The law of God, the divine standard of righteousness, is declared to be of none effect. The enemy of all truth is working with deceptive power to cause men and women to place human institutions where God should be, and to forget that which was ordained for the happiness and salvation of mankind†Prophets and Kings, pgs.170-171
The Heroic Crusade Redux
Sean, you must remember that many,many of us are NOT scientist–and that definitely includes me. That doesn’t mean we are stupid for we are not-our interests, calling and thought processes simply run along different lines. We have other talents and interests and, life being what it is, it is difficult, if not impossible, for us to spend a lot of time searching for the kind of evidence you seem to find necessary in order for us have an “intelligent faith.”
I, for one, find searching my Bible and studying the prophecies and accepting what God teaches us through them is strong support for believing everything else God tells us. And I do not consider this “blind faith!” After all, God bases His claim to BE God on His ability to do that very thing–His ability to foretell the future–which no one else an do.
And Ellen White tells us that unless we have a clear understanding of Daniel and the Revelation we will not go through the end times successfully.
I make no claims of being a Bible expert (or any other kind of an expert) for I definitely am not–but I’m trying to devote a lot more of my time to learning more about the prophecies–and other Bible truths. (I do have an advantage here because at 87 I am freed from most of the heavier responsibilities I carried for so many years.)
I don’t mean this to be critical of you or anyone else–this is just the way I see it–and I suspect there are a lot of others like me “out there somewhere.”
Sincerely,
Lydian
The Heroic Crusade Redux
I don’t have a problem telling you why I believe my God is trustworthy, and I’ve said it over and over again (but nobody even seem to even “hear out of that earâ€â€“at least I’ve never seen anyone else even mention the idea.) But to this very old lady it is all of the evidence I’ll ever need–and that’s BIBLE PROPHECY! Show me one evolutionist or one “anybody else†dead or alive who has ever done that–regardless of how many letters they may have following their names! Oh, there have been times when some one has made an “educated guess†that turned out reasonably well but God (alone) has many times told in advance–sometimes centuries in advance–what will ultimately happen to different nations and peoples and when their time has come the prophecy has been (or will be) correct down to slightest detail. As far as I am concerned any One who can do that can be trusted to give an accurate picture of what has happened in the past–even though the current majority of scientists don’t agree with me.
There are many prophecies–especially in the Revelation which apply especially to the “end times†and anyone who closely follows current events recognizes that many are in the process of being fulfilled right before our eyes–and he who is wise can recognize them and be prepared for the trouble-filled days that are just before us.
Someday those who scoff at Him now and try to “prove†He doesn’t exist–or at least that “science†is more trustworthy than He is–will–and I believe a lot sooner than we think–) have to stand before the judgement seat of that God and have to try to explain why he/she lived the way he/she did and why they led so many gullible people (especially our youth) astray. I don’t think there will be any laughing or joking then.
Please don’t misunderstand me. There are many excellent scientists out there who have made many valuable contributions to our life. We owe them a lot! (Believe it or not, many of them are Bible believing men and women!)
I have absolutely no desire to judge, criticize or “run any individual down.†Only God can read the hearts and motives of anyone but I absolutely disagree with anyone who believes and teaches evolution in any form. And I do NOT believe they should be allowed to teach in any of our Adventist institutions or preach in any of our churches.
And I totally disagree with anyone who calls that “BLIND faith.” that is INTELLIGENT faith based on rock-solid evidence!
Recent Comments by Lydian
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
So here I sit–a “very old lady”–totally confused and not having a clue as to whether to donate or not–or where to donate if I should.
As things stand now I think I will just continue putting my own little amount to my current “missionary out reach” of buying “Steps to Christ” and “Who Do You Think You Are?” and passing them on to the clerks in the stores where I shop or other people I meet that I think would like them.
If and when you folks decide on what, how and where to help in this very worthy project let me know and I’ll do what I can then.
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
I just noticed that there is such a program in place in northern California but I would want one that is nation wide. After all, if our kids aren’t already in danger here in the southern union also (as well the rest of the US) it’s most likely only a short matter of time till they will be.
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
I am far from a wealthy person who could and gladly would donate large sums of money to such a program but I could and would gladly donate some if such assurances were solidly in place. I’m sure there are many “old folks” like me “out there” who feel the same way. (Is there already such a program in place? If so please post all needed information.)
The God of the Gaps
While browsing my rather voluminous file of articles to “save” I ran across this jewel—I think it is worth saving and thinking about–especially the last statement by Darwin himself:
**************************
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
While Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy — a plausible mechanism called “natural selection.” Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.
\
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution – Slowly But Surely…
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, “…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps.” [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an “irreducibly complex system”. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called “the hammer,” a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we’ve made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist
Michael Denton wrote, “Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world.” [5]
And we don’t need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin’s day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” [6]
Footnotes:
1. Charles Darwin, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” 1859, p. 162.
2. Ibid. p. 158.
3. Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box,” 1996.
4. “Unlocking the Mystery of Life,” documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.
5. Michael Denton, “Evolution: A Theory in Crisis,” 1986, p. 250.
6. Charles Darwin, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” 1859, p. 155.
****************
I don’t think Sean could have said it better himself!
Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation
Sean, I guess I “bit off more than I can chew” when I subscribed to some of your other options.
All I can handle is the ^way it used to be”–like this column still is. Please put me back to this mode of information and I will be very happy. Thanks.
