Creation Page Three
Creation page 1
, page 2
Page Three Index:
- Species according to their kind
- Human abilities versus God's
- Why are many similar genes found in a variety of animals?
- How did God create each kind? Personal opinion
Species according to their kind
Human abilities versus God's
On this next HP there was quite an eye-opening discussion about genetics.
Primer on Ethics and Crossing Species Boundaries
(By Françoise Baylis and Jason Scott Robert)
Since the above is copyrighted, I'll briefly state what was relevant in connection with the Bible's creation account. Under the very first subheading, the above gentlemen state something potentially astonishing to lay men. It is now possible to intermix, transfer, genes from man to just about any animal, and vice versa. Thus the ancient stories about animals with human parts have now become reality depending only upon implementation. If human genes may be inserted into an animal ovum, the reverse is also possible. Thus the species barrier is down. Science knows no longer a species barrier.
Again, amazement sets in. All of a sudden evolutionists, scientists, educated men world wide have no trouble understanding how an animal may be changed artificially by adding genetically desired traits from some other species! Their evolution has become intelligent design! These highly intelligent men have no trouble accepting intelligent design as long as it is originating in a human lab.
Where it concerns God, they become totally enraged and blind. God is dumber than a jackass and can not emulate even the doings of his own infinitesimal ants walking on two legs that possess but a pinprick of a brain. Thus when the Bible states that God created the species according to their kind, these highly intelligent ants have not sufficient imagination to see that God also can manipulate genes according to his desires and create new and exciting species.
If God could use the virgin Mary or Maria to be the carrier of a modified human embryo genetically enhanced to be born both perfect and male artificially, doesn't that mean that he could use both the direct from dirt creation method, the IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) method, or whatever other method he desired to bring about new and different species? Indeed, it does.
Why are many similar genes found in a variety of animals?
Once the concept of intelligent design is examined logically.
Please feel free to disagree and tell me why my logic is wrong!
The above question becomes somewhat unimportant. After all, an intelligent designer usually uses the plug and play approach – what works well in one machine works well in another
, what biological program works well in one species works just as well in another.
Once we realize that scripturally the amount of time allocated per creative day is unknown – permitting creative days of up to deca-million years, or hecto-million years in length, an important evolutionist's objection - that seems to be a cornerstone in their attack - evaporates. Next, if Bible students accord God the right to implement the final resulting number of species that we see today in several ways rather than rigidly demanding he creates from dirt every animal – then another of evolution's counter arguments fall by the wayside.
God could start by creating a base of life-forms, microscopic or macroscopic, into which he gradually brings about changes in an animal so that from one base species you end up having several divergent species that now no longer can sexually produce together – all done according to the needs of the times and God's own time plan. I am not saying this is how things were done! I am saying, in the face of the scant information we have, in the face of the fossil record – there is no reason for us to categorically state how God did things when we don't really know how he did them.
All we know is that he made the animals according to their kind, that they reproduce according to their kind, and that is how things are today ; thus the present observed reality complies with the statement of Genesis in which each kind reproduces its own kind.
If we take a look at electronics today and the engineering of such, we see in various electronic apparatus the incorporation of standard common circuits common to a wide range of applications -- even computer software use such a plug and play approach. Is it really amazing to find this same type of plug and play software in regard to the DNA of any number of species? I don't think so.
The creation account in Genesis has a least one highly appealing quality !
It is highly ordered and logical, totally out of character for the type of writings about gods and creation accounts of the ancient times.
Its logic is even following the order of how things came to be according to scientists. The fact that the earth is shown to be totally moon-like in barrenness except enshrouded in water vapor before God's terraforming began surely demonstrates the account's divine origin.
Gen 1:2-8 And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
3And God said, Let there be light. And there was light. 4And God saw the light that it was good; and God divided between the light and the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening, and there was morning--the first day.
6And God said, Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it be a division between waters and waters. 7And God made the expanse, and divided between the waters that are under the expanse and the waters that are above the expanse; and it was so. 8And God called the expanse Heavens. And there was evening, and there was morning--a second day. (Darby)
How did God create?
Have you ever wondered how fortunate we are to have automated machinery producing cloth for our needs, clothes, suits, shirts, slacks, dresses, bed sheets, etc! The pattern, type of tread, and color must be controlled quite easily in fairly automated processes to be able to provide the billions living with the amount of cloth they consume.
Does the Biblical Genesis account give this same sense of automation? Did God create each of the now living billions directly or is the process of multiplying quite automated and unavoidable?! Now pay attention to what this next sentence states.
Gen 1:20, And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21And God created the great sea-monsters, and every living creature that moveth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind: and God saw that it was good. 22And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth. 23And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. 24And God said, Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind: and it was so. (ASV)"Let the earth bring forth," "let the waters swarm" – this sure sounds as if a process has been started in some kind of automated system
. That the inventor of the automated system makes it bring forth specific kinds that obey the next scripture is what is observed today. However, how did this system "bring forth" and "let waters swarm" ? is it explained in detail? or is it simply stated as is and left for us to fight over as dogs fight over a juicy, marrow-filled bone with bits of meat still attached !
It is my intention to give the Bible as much latitude as the text demands, and in this case, the latitude is available by the wording for the following explanation given in this singular conclusion.
Stick to the wording
In Genesis it states this:
" 24And God saith, `Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind
:' and it is so."
Obverse the world around us and the fossil record and what do we see? Dogs with heads of alligators? Lions with wings? Elephants with the necks of Giraffes? Animals producing offspring with random body parts of other species? Of course not. Then we can agree that the earth has brought forth each living creature according to its kind, no matter the manner that caused this! That is what is observed around us in our world today and in our past.
In regard to the first human couple we are given an account that I am grateful for. Namely, that God didn't use a female of e.g. cows, horses, buffalo, gorillas, or some other large animal to carry the embryo of these first humans. Instead, he shows deep respect for our feelings and brings the bodies of Adam and Eve about directly. This permits us to make us feel special, privileged.
Does the Bible say that this 1st class engineer, scientist - that God is, didn't use prior existing DNA routines to create us? No, it doesn't. And the evidence is that as any good engineer, God wouldn't refrain from using already available bioware. That the end result was a different model, a new model, was a certainty.
When we then think about how God created the animals, does it say that each was created in this way? No, it doesn't do that either. Instead, we are told that each kind was made to exist and bring about others of its own kind. Clearly, God's will came to pass, but how did God create each kind? Did he cause the differences gradually and separate the animals until they were so genetically incompatible that they became another kind? Nothing is said, nothing is known – except that, in the case of dry land life-forms, "the earth brought forth" Nothing about each life-form having been formed from dust or directly as humans were.
Proof for Evolution?! or Creation !
So when this most excellent video clip fighting for evolution (link to) Proof of Evolution - Part 2 (Summation)
shows charts claiming to show how organized evolution is and how the proof demonstrates the direct sequence of animals as they came to be in the earth's timeline and their relationship to each other, it only proves creation so much more to me. God is a god of order not disorder. The lineup makes so much sense from a Creationist viewpoint, demonstrating God as the greatest and first inventor of Lego technology. God does use, as genetic science has demonstrated, the plug and play method.
What genetic programme works in one species may well be used in the next, or in other species. When DonExodus
(video clip author's avatar name) claims that the bones of the 'hand ' in various species shows how interrelated these animals are, I totally agree
. Indeed God repeatedly used and re-used a large number of identical bioware routines in a great variety of animals. Exact same programmes are seen used with different variables so that size and shape would fit the animal species they were inserted into. This is no proof of unintelligent self-propelled automatic evolution; nay, indeed not! This is the cornerstone of good engineering. Thus, it is very much the proof of guided intelligence in which the engineer uses pre-existing tools and apparatus already on hand for the job
How does God manipulate genes? I don't know, but could the different kinds of virus we see around us be part of the tool kit being used for changing and inserting new genes into a species for the sake of eventually getting a new kind of animal? (Just a layman's speculation)
Thus the only main difference I see between evolution and creation is that evolution claims to be unguided, unintelligent while still supposedly producing astounding complex intelligent results, managing to produce eyes fully functional upon demand, livers upon demand – which is absurdly against all rules known to function in nature – while creation is God and his pre-human son, Christ Jesus, with possible angelic assistance, actively controlling and dictating the gradual creation of new species of all life until the job was done.
The programming of this earthly ecosystem is probably still going on in what I consider a control and maintenance function.
Let me state that a program "Forbidden Archaeology
," YouTube, has shown that there are things being kept out of the classrooms, out of the public eye. Things such as fossilized remains of giant humans, the co-existence of dinosaur and human since their footprints occur side by side, the fact that many of the ancient mega-structures were built with para-modern equipment capable of feats that our present-day equipment cannot emulate. The lifting of weights so heavy that today it would be considered ridiculous to build with structures than enormous, the cutting of stone in manners and extend not possible today. This video clip, YouTube - pyramids, pre-Egypt, ancient civilization, transformer
, is about the technology needed to create many of the ancient physical remains, large as well as small.
Thus we have to be aware that a lot of archaeological discovery has been buried intentionally – a Christian would not necessarily find this strange since we know that Satan rules this world and it does not serve this ruler to have the world be aware of all these things. Neither would the theory of evolution benefit from the claim that it looks as if humanity has gone in reverse evolution for the last thousands of years.
True, the above is a personal opinion, but so is the belief in a great many things. The question is - is this opinion unwarranted or not ?
The gentleman who makes himself known as DonExodus in the above program, and the one just previous to it, uses Neanderthal man as an example of how incomplete the Bible is because it doesn't mention this kind of humanoid. Of course, the word is of recent origin, so the question is – does the Bible mention two kinds of humanoids? The answer is aggressively, YES !
What is astounding is the fact that a few years ago, I read an article about the Neanderthals claiming that there was evidence to claim that they lived around and among, or vice versa, ordinary human beings, Homo sapiens. This now forgotten (by me) author also claimed that there was evidence the Neanderthals were extremely violent. I have a feeling that the article perhaps was in National Geographic. (? 5 - 20 years ago)
Ironically, the Bible describes this other extremely violent and separate class of humans as being in fact a genetically different race of humanoids, superior in force and violence, perhaps even superior in intelligence. It shows them as being a hybrid human race. That the science of archaeology and genetics should claim that they are genetically different according to DonExodus is then no surprise to the Christian; rather, it re-confirms the Biblical account. The Bible also talks about giants, perhaps referring to humans only, but again the wording could permit both animal and human types. The wording is inconclusive. What is conclusive is the fact that such giant humanoids have been found, though blatantly ignored by current archaeology – the data doesn't fit their evolutionary claims.
It should be stated that the Bible's information is scant and that speculation is at large. Thus many claims have been made regarding this. Some claim that these were sterile, I make no such claim ; it would be going beyond what is written. However, in regard to DonExodus, the fact is then that the Bible may exactly be mentioning the Neanderthals.
Perspective is the question and the answer.
The problem between the choice of evolution or creation boils down to perspective, cultural background, personal identity, and private goals.
When studying conic sections, it is obvious how much perspective affects the viewer. From one lateral side a cone may simply look like a triangle if there is no depth perception. In other cases we can draw a straight line from top to bottom. Then when we cut the cone and view the cut, our perspective may provide the view of a circle, a hyperbole, an ellipse, or a parabola. It is all in the perspective and with the purpose of the cut.
This cut's purpose is also evident in our convictions about creation or evolution. But what benefit gives the 'truth ' of evolution?! The fact that we are about to self-destroy in a hail of problems, global warming, dwindling resources, and evil regimes – is that supposed to gentle me out of this miasma of despair, this chasm, this fissure of terror coming upon us, and this malaise of never ending despondency of human science and rule, the pervasive lies that surround us as a cloak of loathsome darkness obscuring truth and veritable and verifiable science ?
Or is the cut's purpose demonstrating that the unceasing problems assailing earth and humanity is a fulfilment of prophecy that is to happen before the glorious paradise of God gives us peace for the righteous and reward the wicked, evil men with what they deserve.
It is therefore unclear what the Evolutionist is fighting against the Creationist for?! What new world order does he promise? hell on earth? a sterile new Mars, or Moon?! He is fighting for ' truth ' ! How noble! What purpose does it serve at all?
When we then look at the facts, they do not even support this 'truth of evolution ' ; they support the plug and play engineer, the scientist who create complex systems. That these systems are so complex that a new science has been created simply to harvest technology from biology is simply being brushed aside, dismissed with 'but evolution has had so long to create that it is bound to have solved more complex problems than we ourselves." How blind these people are! They give honour to even the smallest inventor, but dismiss God's wondrous creations simply because they are too wonderful to be understood by humans.
They take small mutations that in 99+ probability are harmful, and from this they get our glorious self-sustaining ecologies of the world. It makes no sense at all, and this is what is pushed at all higher centres d'études. (Il faut rire)
Check your Facts!
This place is dedicated to another homepage totally unrelated to this one.
So much cover up and lying is going on by the scientific establishment and by those in power of archaeology and the teaching of evolution that few voices ever get above the glamour of Nazi like imposed silence.
Here is someone who is doing what he can to be heard. There is an enourmous amount of material on his page. I have not gone through all his material because of the volume, but a lot of it is very thought provoking. Much that he shows about the past is undeniably true and well backed up with facts. In particular I like the things that give us a clear view of how much cover up is being done and the speculation on why it is being done.
So, if you are interested in a fun site with lots of things to see and check out, go here. The first link is his main page. However, the specific ones are the ones I recommend first.
Ooparts main page
Ooparts - the boneyards
Ooparts - what's wrong with science?
Ooparts - true suppressions
This site is of particular interest to me since it demonstrates with proof what has become evident over the years ; namely, that the archaeological truth is being withheld and hid. It also examines why this might be so.
The site has an enourmous amount of material that is bound to appeal more to some than to others. Nonetheless, it is a fun site that has put a lot of work into proving its points.
Link to: Wikipedia: Verbatum Copying -- A copy of the initial and third paragraphs on that page:
Version 1.2, November 2002
- Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
- 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
- Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
- of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
2. VERBATIM COPYING
You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License. You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute. However, you may accept compensation in exchange for copies. If you distribute a large enough number of copies you must also follow the conditions in section 3.
Link to Wikipedia Copyright Info:
First subheading Important Note, second paragraph:
"This principle is known as copy left. . . . (a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement)