The BIBLE vs. EVOLUTION. To Believe in Evolution is to Believe in Folly

The Bible and the theory of evolution are both based on faith. Faith in the Bible can be proved true and faith in the theory of evolution can be proved folly.

If one seeks the God of the Bible and walks by faith, the Bible will prove itself to the seeker. But because God is invisible (except when He chooses to reveal Himself in the earthly realm), the physical proof of God is not available to those who are “of this world”. The reason being is those who are “of this world” operate in a way that is diametrically opposed to the kingdom of God. The people “of this world” want to see first and then they’ll believe. In the kingdom of God, it is the exact opposite. Believe first and then you’ll see. And so that is the roadblock for the people “of this world” when it comes to proving the Bible. But for those willing to take the step of faith, the Bible can be proved.

The point of contact between God in heaven and men on earth is through a person’s spirit. But for those who are “of this world”, they are spiritually dead. So they cannot receive revelation from God, for the line of communication is not working. So when the people who are “of this world” try to understand the supernatural world, they are using only their natural minds and it makes no sense to them. They cannot see, nor can they hear. But once a person takes the step of faith and believes on Jesus, they become born again and their spirit comes alive and the line of communication between them and God starts working. So then God, who is Spirit, is able to communicate with that person’s spirit and gives revelation to that spirit. The spirit of such a man then is able to infuse the soul (mind+will+emotions) with the revelation it has received. Such a person is able to see God and hear from God because his spirit has been quickened and made alive in Christ. The kingdom of God belongs to such as these.

But for those who are “of this world”, they can look and look but never see. They can listen and listen but never hear. So unless they are willing to take the step of faith, the Bible cannot be proved to them, for the proof deals with an invisible God that must be sought out by faith.

However, when it comes to the theory of evolution, we are dealing strictly with the physical realm, things we can see. And so we can examine the physical evidence and the lack thereof and the faith that goes along with the theory of evolution. And when examined under the microscope of common sense and logic and science, that faith in the theory of evolution proves to be faith that is pure folly.

Faith is required for the theory of evolution because the fossil record lacks empirical evidence for it. For example, there is no physical evidence from the fossil record of anteaters with shorter and progressively longer snouts. The theory of evolution would have it that the anteater evolved its long snout gradually over millions of years. So at one point, according to the theory of evolution, there had to be an evolutionary ancestor to the modern anteater with a short snout, let’s say a 1 inch snout for arguments sake. And gradually over the years, there would have been an anteater with a 2 inch snout, an anteater with a 3 inch snout, and so forth up to the modern day anteater with its long snout. So does the fossil record shows such a progression? Nope

Neither does the fossil record show a progression or sequence of giraffes with shorter and progressively longer necks.

Neither is there a sequence in the fossil record showing one species or kind of animal changing into another species or kind of animal. Darwin himself acknowledged that his theory implied that the number of transitional links between all species must be great in number. The excuse for the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record during Darwin’s time was that much of the fossil record was yet to be uncovered. Well, since then we have uncovered quite a bit and no intermediate fossils have turned up in the fossil record.

What we do see in the fossil record are things which appear abruptly and fully formed. Let’s examine how the model of the theory of evolution fits the reality of the fossil record, shall we? And let us put aside for now the “Frankenstein type” story of how the first cell came to life by being zapped with electricity—it’s alive!—and just start with the infamous single cell starting point for evolution. The model of evolution would have it that from that one single cell evolved all the various life forms we see on earth today. So the model of evolution is basically a triangle. It starts at a single point on top and expands downward to a wide base on the bottom producing the various higher life forms we see on the planet today.

That model however, does not fit the fossil record. In the Cambrian explosion, we see a vast multitude of higher life forms appearing fully formed in the fossil record without any precursor forms, like the model of evolution requires. And the number of classifications, called phyla, that existed then is greater than the number of phyla on earth today. So while the theory of evolution requires things to start with one life form and expand ever-so gradually with the number of life forms increasing, what we actually see in the physical fossil record is a multitude and vast spectrum of life forms appearing fully formed without any precursors, as evolution would require.

Not only is the model of the theory of evolution a poor excuse to explain how the various life forms on the planet today came into being, but evolution requires humongous leaps of faith and is a downright silly theory that stretches the fabric of believability even beyond the outer most limits of absurdity!

Cases in point:

EXHIBIT A:

What if I told you that evolutionists believe that soft tissue from a dinosaur bone they dug up is 68 million years old? That’s right, I kid you not:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html

If you want to know what supposed 68 million year old soft tissue looks like, how it is flexible and pliable and returns to its original shape when stretched, you can see it at about the 9:00 mark of this video from 60 Minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJOQiyLFMNY

Isn’t it ironic that evolutionists make fun of the beliefs of Bible believers and yet, here is science making the ludicrous claim that 68 million year old soft tissue is flexible, resilient, and stretchy?

One question I have is, when an evolutionist finds a dinosaur bone with soft tissue that is 68 million years old, do they straight away put it into a zip-lock plastic bag in order to prevent spoilage? ‘tis a silly theory indeed!

Another more important question is this: why wouldn’t the dating calculations be questioned when someone says soft tissue from a dinosaur bone is 68 million years old?

Here is why: Because a dinosaur bone that is not millions of years old would contradict the millions of years old paradigm that the evolutionary model requires and evolutionists won’t let that happen to their religion o no! They’d rather look like fools claiming soft tissue is millions of years old rather than give up their ridiculous theories and admit the truth.

Here are some more ridiculous examples of the foolish beliefs of evolutionists, who will jump through hoops and twist themselves around like pretzels trying to explain these things:

“The mystery of soft tissue fossils 500 million years in Canada”

http://en.wikinoticia.com/culture-science/Science/10709-the-mystery-of-soft-tissue-fossils-500-million-years-in-canada

“The feathers preserved in a 150-million-year-old fossil of Archaeopteryx ….“People have been looking at these [feathers] a long time and thought they were just impressions, but there’s actually remains of soft tissue there,” says Roy Wogelius, a geochemist at the University of Manchester in England.”

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/archaeopteryx-fossil-seen-new-light

“Proteins, Soft Tissue from 80 Million-Year-Old Hadrosaur Add Weight to Theory that Molecules Preserve Over Time”

http://www.physorg.com/news160320581.html

“Infrared mapping resolves soft tissue preservation in 50 million year-old reptile skin”

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/03/12/rspb.2011.0135

“Soft-Tissue Preservation in a 95 Million Year Old Marine Lizard …”

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4524795?uid=3739832&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103882100083

“Ancient Fossils with Preserved Soft Tissues and DNA”

http://www.detectingdesign.com/fossilizeddna.html

“525 Million-Year-Old Fossil Discovered in China”

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/news-525-million-year-old-fossil-feathered-helmet-beyond-clouds-1

EXHIBIT B:

If one cell evolved into more complex organisms in primordial soup over millions of years and developed complex organs through random mutations—the engine of change for the theory of evolution—how then did male organisms evolve at the same time in parallel with female organisms with all their male and female organs intact, peaking at the right time after millions and millions of years of successfully evolving through the various forms of evolution (micro/macro/badda bing/badda boom) and culminate  in an orgasmic explosion/breakthrough of life in the womb? Huh?

In other words, just how did we evolve from pond scum into human beings through random mutations? Mutations are more stuff from second-rate budget horror movies than they are agents of positive change. Random chance mutations do not produce increased information in the genome and higher organisms.

Here is how the Pope of evolution, the chief fool himself, Richard Dawkins, explained this mystery of his religion whereby random mutations increase the genetic information:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g

Make sure you have your speakers turned up from the :10 mark to the :30 mark, you don’t want to miss his answer!

EXHIBIT C:

The theory of evolution is a theory that requires one to replace logic and common sense with folly. Consider the laughably absurd idea that natural selection and mutations—the engine of change for this ridiculous theory—can account for how speech came about.

Consider some of the components necessary for speech to take place. First, there is the FOXP2 gene. It’s not a stretch of the imagination to see how mutations can account for a FOXP2 gene popping up in a monkey at some point. However, consider the following other components necessary for speech:

“What makes humans different from all other animals? There are few better answers than the ability to produce and recognize speech. Speech is so much a part of being human that people with IQ scores as low as 50 or brains as small as 400 grams can fully comprehend and speak at a competent level [11]. The human head and brain are uniquely evolved to produce speech [4, 11]. Compared to other primates, humans have remarkably well-developed and controllable muscles around the lips and cheeks. Indeed, more of the motor cortex (particularly Broca’s area) is devoted to vocalization than any other function (see Figure 1) 1, in sharp contrast to every other animal, including primates. Only homo sapiens can use the tongue, cheeks, and lips, together with the teeth, to produce 14 phonemes per second [11]; even Neanderthal man could not sustain speech because of the structure of their breathing apparatus [4]. Humans are also exquisitely tuned for speech recognition. Infants as young as one day old show relatively greater left hemisphere electrical activity to speech sounds, and relatively greater right hemisphere activity to non-speech sounds”

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.93.6514

Here is where we are asked to suspend logic and common sense and accept folly. You have this mutated monkey with a useless FOXP2 gene in him. There would be no reason for natural selection to amplify or advance the FOXP2 gene in the species since the monkey with the FOXP2 gene could not communicate any more effectively with other monkeys than he could without the FOXP2 gene. So what happened, did the monkey with the useless FOXP2 gene but lacking the other components for speech suddenly mutate remarkably well-developed and controllable muscles around the lips and cheeks necessary for speech and also mutate his motor cortex (particularly Broca’s area) so it had speech functionality and so everything fell into place perfectly one fine day and the monkey-man-wannabe was then able to speak and said, “well I’ll be a monkey’s uncle”?

EXHIBIT D:

“Scientific Age of the Young Earth – Dr. Don Patton”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1GJjHXX0Ic

At the 30:25 mark of the above video, you will see a fossil of a beautifully formed Wolf Spider, a big hairy spider. Riddle me this if you will: what if you saw a dead one of these spiders in the forest or jungle, how long do you think the body of that spider would last laying there on the ground, with its body intact? Would it get eaten? How long would it be before the body turns to mush and disintegrates into dust? Ten years? A hundred years? Well, according to evolutionists, sedimentary rock slowly built up around this dead spider at a rate of 2 inches per one million years. So let’s say for arguments sake that the Wolf Spider is 1 inch in height. So if the age of the earth as claimed by evolutionists is true, then the body of that Wolf Spider would have had to remain intact—fully formed—without disintegrating into dust, for 500,000 years before it turned into a perfectly formed fossil.  Does that make sense? At all? Absurd is it not? It is in fact beyond absurd. It is utter folly and foolishness to think that the body of a spider would not rot away for half a million years!

That is just the tip of an iceberg. At the 32:32 mark of the video, you will see a perfectly formed fossil of a shrimp. Hmmm, how long will a shrimp last after it dies? Long enough so that sedimentary rock gets formed over it at a rate of one inch every 500,000 years? And then at the 33:49 mark of the video, you will see a fossil of a fish eating another smaller fish. Did this snapshot in time get recorded in the fossil record over hundreds of thousands of years or rapidly, in an instant (think catastrophic flood)? At the 34:34 mark of the video, a perfectly formed fossil of a fern is shown. How long will a fern last before it wilts? Will it last hundreds of thousands of years after it dies without wilting so that sedimentary rock can build up around it at a rate of one inch every 500,000 years? To believe in evolution is to believe in some very foolish things indeed. At the 36:58 mark of the video, there are fossils of jelly fish with even the mouth parts preserved. We’re talking jelly fish here. Will their bodies remain intact for hundreds of thousands of years while rock slowly forms around them? The answer to that is “yes” according to evolutionists. ‘tis a silly theory indeed. At the 40:15 mark of the video, you will see Willo, a fossil of a dinosaur with the heart intact—yes, the heart intact! Fully visible. How does something like that stay intact millions of years before forming a rock? Answer: it doesn’t.

All in all, the theory of evolution is a theory lacking evidence and is full of fraud and folly. The fossil record doesn’t support it. And yet, our kids today in school are being indoctrinated and brainwashed with this nonsense. What the fossil record does support is like begets like, as the Book of Genesis tells us. The fossil record does not record things happening incredibly slowly over millions and billions of years, the fossil record records things happening quickly in a catastrophic event, in a “little” something called the flood of Noah. The Genesis account fits the evidence:

• Genesis tells us that one kind of animal cannot mate with another kind, each kind only produces its own kind. And that is exactly what we see.

• Genesis speaks of giants on the earth during the days of Noah and also afterwards (see GEN 6:1-4). Virtually all civilizations on earth have legends of giants. Skeletons of giants have been found in the mounds of middle America.

• Genesis speaks of Noah’s flood. Virtually all civilizations on earth speak of a worldwide flood. And fossils of clams and other marine creatures appear on the tops of all the mountain ranges on earth.

• We have discovered the continents were at one time one super continent (Pangaea) and then divided. GEN 10:25 speaks of this division of the continents.

• Man is a special, unique creature that is different from the animals, just as Genesis indicates.

• Regarding the classic “chicken vs. the egg” question, Genesis tells us that God created the chicken first. And while it has taken mankind thousands of years to do so, lo and behold, modern science has confirmed that the chicken came before the egg:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38238685/ns/technology_and_science-science/

So if you want rock solid unchanging truth to stand upon and you want to know how everything came into existence, then seek out the Book of Genesis and the Word of God.

And while the dating calculations of science are wrong (68 MYO soft, flexible soft tissue cmon!) you shouldn’t hold your breath waiting for many scientists to admit it but nevertheless, the theory of evolution is DOA in the halls of modern science, where this foolish and fraudulent theory of evolution is exposed by the wonders of nanotechnology and the complexities of the human cell. The theory of evolution will be relinquished to the dustbin of history, marginalized as the great farce that it is, perpetrated upon mankind, keeping parts of science in the dark ages, for about a century and a half now.

Here is the bottom line: If you want rock solid unchanging truth to stand upon and you want to know how everything came into existence, seek out the Book of Genesis and the rest of the Word of God, which has withstood the test of time and it will stand forever. Seek after Jesus (to see how read my profile) and the truth will set you free. But if you want conjecture on where we came from along with fruitless and laughable theories, then seek out monkey-men-wannabes and they will spin you laughable yarns and fanciful tales!