Quote du Jour

"When prosperity comes, do not use all of it."
-Confucius

Creation vs. Evolution

This is in response to a blog posting at: http://blog.jalenack.com/archives/creation-vs-evolution

Non-fiction Documents (books, certificates, and letters) of knowledge of our best and brightest is our source for our current understanding.

A few things we get from the documents, which we generally believe at the current time: Genealogy, Laws, Land Titles, County Details (name, location, population, and maps).

The Bible is a source of many writings meant for the exact same purposes. I think a lot of people get blinded from seeing the forest by the trees when it comes to the Bible.

Do those that denounce God, and thus the Bible, denounce all of it? Do they denounce the very detailed, and very typical of the era, genealogy starting with Adam and Eve? What about the details of the Bible that are "of" the time, such as Counties, persons (Christian and not), landmarks, etc?

Actually, I think there is a very promising outcome via the dissecting the Bible with the same diligence that Christians believe it; but with an objective eye. Do people really not believe anything in the Bible? Do people realize that the Bible is akin to a set of encyclopedia of the time respective of God AND his creation? Moreover, the information in that Biblical-encyclopedia is repeated in other texts of opposing points of view.

Additionally, we also have to sensitize ourselves to the era, where people did not denounce the foundations of the Bible. It is not like all the facts in the Bible just appeared relatively recently in time; the old testament of the Bible is the basis of Judaism.

And yes, you read that correctly, there is more than just the Bible to say we came from God, or even that Jesus existed. Moreover, the Bible goes back to the beginning of time and has the genealogy of every person from Adam and Eve.

Did you know that Muslims believe that their Mohamed was a relative of Jesus, and both descended from Abraham? (Note: Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet, not the son of God). Judaism is based on the teachings of Abraham.

Finally, there is not one opposing record of Jesus’ works on earth; not one.

Now, on to evolution.

If life was evolved from a single instance of "immaculate conception", then why would there have been a fear of survival? If the opportunity to exist was present for billions of years before and after this Immaculate Conception, then would the original cell have had a "favorable" mutation? Oh, I've already gone too far.

I think evolution is the inability to understand how ignorant we are. All of us. Think of this way; and please stay objective (challenged ignorance triggers defense mechanisms). What, possibly, could have been birthed by happenchance at that very point in the beginning of life's time in this theory of evolution?

Whatever was immaculately conceived on that day way back when, would have had to first) have the ability to mutate through further reproduction, secondly) be capable of consuming for the energy required to replicated, and thirdly) and most importantly be capable of understanding a favorable vs. unfavorable mutation when "one" of anything was all that existed.

On the first point; I think it is plausible to have an electrical event charge a precisely arranged set of elements to produce a completely independent, compilation of various elements that are exactly identical to a fundamental portion of earth's life forms. However, that is an amazing distance from alive. A good example of this is the computer; we, as humans, have been able to compile a set of systems and processes that can mimic some of our fundamental actions that are seemingly "close" to life-like. But even if we're able to generate a system to mimic everything we do, including mimicking love, hate, pain, and procreation, it would still be a mimic of something. We are not that simple, nor is life. Now, if evolution did come from a single event as proposed, then how would that "thing" know how to reproduce, and if it was so simple, wouldn't the mathematics for the possibility of mutation be then wrong? The possibility of mutation is due to the math of extraordinarily large numbers via the immense complexity of our "current" sum of parts. There is zero chance for mutation without reproduction, and reproduction of a complex instance; a simple instance of something doesn't have the possibility of variation via slight differences of the parts which make up its sum due to the fact that the singularity of the simple instance.

On the second point, on that stormy day that the evolutionary engine began, whatever was created would have had to "know" to consume to continue to exist. We're actually saying that "life" began? It is easy to say that evolution is possible when looking at very small coincidences in very controlled situations; but that is not life. Also, not only would the "thing" have had to be able to consume, but it would also have had to been "sparked to life" in a position that a consumable was immediately available. Otherwise, a means of propulsion would have also been required to be able to move to a consumable.

Finally, on the third point; the theory of evolution is flawed in the implied vanity of natural selection which is a human trait, not a significantly shared trait amongst other living beings on earth. The choosing of a favorable vs. unfavorable mutation requires the ability to understand the mutation, weight the mutation, and cognitively make the choice to select the mutation. In an even more simple approach, if in the beginning there was one, very simple life form, then why would it mutate into something else trillions and trillions of times and then start eating its own kind, albeit selectively, and mate with others, selectively. And don't forget this includes plants; but that is another day.

In conclusion; Evolution is a religion where each living thing is worthless and of no consequence to any other thing or existence. If Evolution is true, then there is no room for rule, morals, or values, because we are only a simple mutation, of many, which are random. People ask for proof of God; it is the most simple to see, we have a conscience and we have a choice to believe in him. Moreover, life is above and beyond our individual existences. If there ever was a ghost, a single instance of clairvoyance, telepathy, or other "phenomenon", then there is your proof; as there is absolutely no possible way for randomness to exist, or even evolve to exist, in other realms, nor see into the future of randomness, nor act upon something outside of its own existence.

We are ignorant, and as God says: "Lean not on your own understanding."

God bless us all.

Quote du Jour

"The most difficult thing about how to love is understanding how simple it is."

Quote du Jour

"Have you ever looked into opportunity and seen the mirror?"

Quote du Jour

"The fear of dieing is not of death itself,
it is of the feeling that the scales of your life are tipping towards worthless."

Quote du Jour

"We are all striving for the same thing; to not have to."

Thought 'O the Day

The theory of evolution is the over simplification of the incomprehensibly unfathomable complexity in our creator's brilliance.

So, just because some majority of those in the mass of the bell have evolved an utter ignorance to the existence of something more advanced than that which we can observe, does that mean that the rest of us need to fight through the fog of that ignorance as the only way to not live in proliferation of their inherent vainness?

Life is simple; live as though you neither might nor may ever have, nor continue to, without the explicit will of that whom's will is the existence of existence.