By the Numbers

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Ape-man or God-man?

Ape-man or God-man?

#Science   #Naturalism   #God-man
Two opposing worldviews compete for the lives and souls of men. One is naturalistic science. Evolutionists claim man is purely a product of nature, claimed up from the clime, is dispensable, and will become food for worms. The other is biblical Christianity. Bible believers affirm Jesus is the God-man who taught God created us and we’re responsible to choose eternal life with God.     
Darwin’s followers, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, believed God a hindrance and man only a more evolved animal. They murdered their countrymen and millions of others they claimed inferior or who disagreed with them. Their ‘survival of the fittest mentality’ justified their actions.   
Evolutionists destroy everything Christians uphold. Evolutionists kill human dignity and human rights saying we’re just dispensable animals. Evolutionists deny the world has meaning and life ultimate purpose. Evolutionists disaffirm absolute truth and ethics. Evolutionists bury hope of life beyond the grave. Secular humanist countries demonstrate this: “those who hate him (God), love death”. Proverbs 8:36.
Christians uphold Creation and Christ as our loving Lord and Savior. This inspires us to found great universities, create great literature and art, established science on an experimental basis, build hospitals, and establish humane organizations. Believing the world created by a rational God who loves us, we’re assured it’s a rational world to be nurtured and developed. The Christian church is imperfect, yet provides the basis for everything good evolution destroys.
To decide which worldview is the truth two questions require our utmost attention. One, is Darwin right that we evolved from the apes or something lower? The other question, could Jesus be the God-man and only hope of the world?  
First, Question: Is Man Just an Animal Ascended from Slime?      
 Consider these three lines of argument. First, in science observable, repeatable experiments are what establish a theory as fact. And it’s believed that given enough time unconscious nature can arrange mindless molecules into men.
Evolutionists made this experiment with fruit flies. Since they have a short lifespan, many generations can be examined. Radiation experiments conducted on multiple generations showed they can develop long or short legs or wings and various deformities. As England became industrialized, black smoke covered the trees. People noticed black moths replaced white moths birds could see to eat. Darwin observed birds called Finches had longer beaks in the dry season.

Now fruit flies were the only experiment and it clearly showed they don’t evolve into anything else. The moths and Finches were observations, but not experiments. And they proved only that creatures can adapt to their environments. No experiments establish evolution.
 We know various kinds of dogs, horses, monkeys, and men exist. But we don’t know that dogs can change into horses or monkeys evolve into men. That’s theory, not fact. Furthermore, we know animals and plants have a genetically programmed limit that they cannot pass. The fossil record confirms the Bible that plants and animals reproduce only their own kind (Gen.1:21-25). And God made man in his image--a rational, moral, immortal person like himself (Gen. 1:27; Psalm 8:5; Ephesians 4:23-24).
Second, evolutionists argue transitional forms or bones called fossils can demonstrate evolution to be fact. Fossils showing transitional steps from ameba to Adam would without doubt show evolution is fact. Museums overflow with fossils. Some show unusual characteristics of animals that died out such as the duckbilled platypus. But no bones discovered show one animal evolved into another.
Paleontologists dig up bones and announce to the world they have found the missing link. So we’ve told about the missing link called Piltdown Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Lucy and Nebraska Man.  Neanderthal Man was a real robust person who may have had a much longer lifespan than people today. All supposed extinct races of people that turn out to be hoaxes, just lies.
The famous Tennessee Scopes trial convinced America science discovered the missing link, Nebraska Man. Science proved man evolved from the monkey. Science then is fact, religion mere faith. Textbooks should teach science, not religion. Scientists are learned authorities, Christian’s ignorant dummies. Nebraska Man, however, turned out to be an extinct pig’s tooth. Who then is the real dummies?
Don’t believe the sensational artist’s drawings, journalist’s articles and cave man models shown in newspapers and science textbooks. All are reconstructions not based upon proof but upon evolutionist bias.
Third, evolutionists argue that similarities between man and animals prove evolution. Both man and animals have similar limb structure, organs, bodily fluids, and DNA. They classify animal complexity in an ascending order then say this confirms man and the animals evolved from a common ancestor.
But there’s no rule God has to make life forms of entirely different patterns. Life and mobility require similar legs, arms, organs, fluids, DNA. The differences are more significant. Besides, creatures can’t live with partially developed digestive or reproductive systems or heart, eyes, ears, legs, arms. Built-in genetic limitations allow varieties within kinds but not change to a different kind of creature. Similarities don’t prove a common ancestor—more likely, they show a Common Designer. But couldn’t the Bible account of man’s creation be myth or fable to allow for evolution as naturalistic science claims?
No! The text is clear that God created animals to reproduce after their own kinds. But God made man directly from the ground in his image and dominant over animals. With no suitable helpmate among animals, God made Eve (mother of all living) from Adam. These first people had intelligent speech, named the animals, kept sheep, farmed the ground, make offerings to God, and build cities.
Further, the Bible always assumes the creation account is literal history. Jesus affirmed God made man beginning at creation (Mark 10:6). Paul said God made man’s flesh different from animals, that Adam  was made direct from dirt and formed before Eve (1 Cor. 15:39, 48; 1Tim. 2:13). All this precludes both naturalistic evolution and theistic evolution as God’s means of creation. Moreover, unless the Fall is literal, the Bible becomes nonsense and there’s no need of a Savior (Gen. 3; John 3:16; Rom. 5:12-21). It all boils down to belief or unbelief in the Bible’s God.
The sacred writer’s intent was not an imaginative entertaining story but a historical account to show our origin in God’s image. Moreover, because archaeologists have no collaborative data and aren’t likely to find any doesn’t mean it can’t be true. Critics are wrong multiple times.
Second question: Could Jesus be the God-man and Only Way to Heaven?
Do we know God is required to have many ways to heaven? Could there be something about God or about us that we haven’t considered? Do we know God must follow our thinking and we can’t be wrong? How can we even know there is a heaven or what it’s like?
Would the mere word of Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, Hindus, Mohammad, or Jesus prove their religion to be true? Don’t crazy persons claim to be God or talk with God? How can we know God is more than just a thought in their head, their imagination, invention, or philosophy? What would demonstrate their God is real and acts in our material world?
As we mentioned, true science confirms or discredits their theories by repeated empirical tests and observations. So which of the just mentioned religions exceeds mere words with repeatable public proofs?
Consider this. I announce that this year the snow will melt off Mt Everest and the volcano in Yellowstone National Park will erupt and it occurred. Wouldn’t that get attention and suggest I have super human knowledge? And what if I could do incredible things like walk on water, heal open sores immediately, and ascend into the sky? Wouldn’t that suggest I have greater knowledge than men ordinarily have?
Well, Jewish prophets made hundreds of specific predictions about their Messiah that only Jesus Christ could fulfil. Consider these: claimed  be God, virgin born, in Bethlehem, live without sin, fulfill prophecies, perform miracles, die for people’s sins and rise from the dead. Also, over three years before astonished disciples and hostile critics in open daylight wherever he went, Jesus performed miracles, probably hundreds. Moreover, Jesus’ life doesn’t need repeating for every generation since greater historical evidence exists for Jesus than for Aristotle or Julius Caesar. Check it out -The Historical Jesus by Gary R. Habermas.
What can we conclude with regard to world religions? Jesus gave us repeated, public, eyewitness, evidences confirming his claims to be God. Founders of non-Christian religions give only teachings, no objective visible evidence of God. Can’t we then conclude, based upon good evidence, that Jesus is God?
What can we conclude with regard to the naturalist’s claim that mindless molecules arranged themselves into men? No experiment has shown this. A Common Designer explains arguments of similarities better than a common ancestor does. Bones showing each transitional step would conclusively demonstrate evolution. But all we have are a few supposed missing links exposed as hoaxes. Can’t we also conclude that the repeated, eyewitness evidence Jesus gave to show he is God is far more scientific than all the missing links and hoaxes that fail to demonstrate evolution? Aren’t we wise to trust Jesus to save us sinners when our eternal well-being is at stake? A naturalist assumption may send us to the eternal darkness, torment and weeping of Hell.

1 comment:

  1. Some suggested books for honest skeptics.
    Ron Rhodes, "10 Things You Should Know About the Creation VS. Evolution Debate".
    Geoffrey Simmons, M.D. "What Darwin Didn't Know"
    Phillip E. Johnson, "Darwin On Trial".
    Charles Colson, Tough Questions about God, Faith, and Life".
    Dan Story, "Christianity On The Offense".


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.