Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

Do You Believe in Evolution?

Posted by Bob on April 11th, 2005 under History


When somebody asks me, “Do you believe in evolution?” it always reminds me of an old Bible Belt joke.

Somebody asked a man, “Do you believe in baptism?”

He replied, “BELIEVE in it? Hell, man, I’ve seen it DONE!”

Not only does everybody believe in evolution, everybody has seen it. The reason free enterprise works is because most businesses fail. The strong and efficient businesses tend to survive.

That’s evolution.

Any experienced person looking at a litter of puppies knows which ones are most likely to survive.

BELIEVE in evolution? Hell, we’ve seen it done!

The question is not, “Do you believe in evolution? The question is how much of the development of life does Darwin’s particular theory of evolution explain?

And, just as important, if you have a better explanation than evolution, then what is your evidence for your particular alternative? A Japanese who follows the Shinto religion would explain that the alternative explanation of life has to do with the Goddess Who Invites.

I don’t NEED to believe that evolution explains everything. I don’t NEED for evolution NOT to explain things. Some people are terrified that their version of God will not fit into a Darwinian world.

I know very well that Darwin was dead wrong about a lot of things. I also know you cannot explain many things in life by simple evolution. But nothing in my world revolves around what evolution explains.

Before you discuss any subject, you should first ask yourself what your stake in the answer may be.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
  1. #1 by H.S. on 04/11/2005 - 2:56 pm

    It’s wonderful that one can still be free to at least think, and that in reality there is, thankfully, no such thing as “a Darwinian” world – for lack of a better term in a PC-educated world. The stakes *are* high. What you believe makes all the difference. The word “evolution” (deliberately) doesn’t mean at all today to most folks what it meant before he wrote his opinions (vs. his science notes).

    Evolution: “The process of working out or developing; one of a set of prescribed movements; a process of change in a certain direction; the action or an instance of forming and giving something off; a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic change; something (any number of kinds of things) “evolved.”

    People need to DEFINE TERMS prior to any “deliberately confused” debate, as highly charged as this was forced to become. When one of the parties refuses to do that, or tries to ostrasize others by saying that is preposterous and unnecessary or not doable, then you’ve identified the one who has the “agenda” who has some “stake.” Ignorant, unthinking people are sitting ducks to be shot of the water from anywhere.

    You say it all: I know very well that Darwin was dead wrong about a lot of things. I also know you cannot explain many things in life by simple evolution. But nothing in my world revolves around what evolution explains.

    I can only guess what you might mean by using the word “evolution” in all those different contexts.

  2. #2 by Jim Baxter on 04/11/2005 - 6:53 pm

    The HUMAN PARADIGM

    Consider:
    The way we define ‘human’ determines our view of self, others, relationships, institutions, life, and future. Important? Only the Creator who made us in His own image is qualified to define us accurately. Choose wisely… there are results.

    In an effort to diminish the multiple and persistent dangers and abuses which have characterized the affairs of man in his every Age, and to assist in the requisite search for human identity, it is essential to perceive and specify that distinction which naturally and most uniquely defines the human being. Because definitions rule in the minds, behaviors, and institutions of men, we can be confident that delineating and communicating that quality will assist the process of resolution and the courageous ascension to which man is called. As Americans of the 21st Century, we are obliged and privileged to join our forebears and participate in this continuing paradigm proclamation.

    “WHAT IS MAN…?” God asks – and answers:
    HUMAN DEFINED: EARTH’S CHOICEMAKER
    by JAMES FLETCHER BAXTER (c) 2005

    Many problems in human experience are the result of false and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised in man-made religions and humanistic philosophies.

    Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe. The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human reason cannot fully function in such a void; thus, the intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values.

    Humanism makes man his own standard of measure. However, as with all measuring systems, a standard must be greater than the value measured. Based on preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appetites, desires, feelings, emotions, and glands.

    Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament, cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist lacks a predictive capability. Without instinct or transcendent criteria, humanism cannot evaluate options with foresight and vision for progression and survival. Lacking foresight, man is blind to potential consequence and is unwittingly committed to mediocrity, averages, and regression – and worse. Humanism is an unworthy worship.

    The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the foot-dragging growth of human knowledge and behavior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcendent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philosophies and religions are man-made, humanism, and thereby lack what only the Bible has:

    1. Transcendent Criteria and
    2. Fulfilled Prophetic Validation.

    The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival equipment for today and the future.

    Human is earth’s Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by nature and nature’s God a creature of Choice – and of Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural foundation of his environments, institutions, and respectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is oriented to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the universe.

    At the sub-atomic level of the physical universe quantum physics indicates a multifarious gap or division in the causal chain; particles to which position cannot be assigned at all times, systems that pass from one energy state to another without manifestation in intermediate states, entities without mass, fields whose substance is as insubstantial as “a probability.”

    Only statistical conglomerates pay tribute to deterministic forces. Singularities do not and are therefore random, unpredictable, mutant, and in this sense, uncaused. The finest contribution inanimate reality is capable of making toward choice, without its own selective agencies, is this continuing manifestation of opportunity as the pre-condition to choice it defers to the natural action of living forms.

    Biological science affirms that each level of life, single-cell to man himself, possesses attributes of sensitivity, discrimination, and selectivity, and in the exclusive and unique nature of each diversified life form.

    The survival and progression of life forms has all too often been dependent upon the ever-present undeterminative potential and appearance of one unique individual organism within the whole spectrum of a given life-form. Only the uniquely equipped individual organism is, like The Golden Wedge of Ophir, capable of traversing the causal gap to survival and progression. Mere reproductive determinacy would have rendered life forms incapable of such potential.

    Only a moving universe of opportunity plus choice enables the present reality.

    Each individual human being possesses a unique, highly developed, and sensitive perception of diversity. Thus aware, man is endowed with a natural capability for enacting internal mental and external physical selectivity. Quantitative and qualitative choice-making thus lends itself as the superior basis of an active intelligence.

    Man is earth’s Choicemaker. His title describes his definitive and typifying characteristic. Recall that his other features are but vehicles of experience intent on the development of perceptive awareness and the following acts of decision. Note that the products of man cannot define him for they are the fruit of the discerning choice-making process and include the cognition of self, the utility of experience, the development of value-measuring systems and language, and the acculturation of civilization.

    The arts and the sciences of man, as with his habits, customs, and traditions, are the creative harvest of his perceptive and selective powers. Creativity, the creative process, is a choice-making process. His articles, constructs, and commodities, however marvelous to behold, deserve neither awe nor idolatry, for man, not his contrivance, is earth’s own highest expression of the creative process.

    Man is earth’s Choicemaker. The sublime and significant act of choosing is, itself, the Archimedean fulcrum upon which man levers and redirects the forces of cause and effect to an elected level of quality and diversity. Further, it orients him toward a natural environmental opportunity, freedom, and bestows earth’s title, The Choicemaker, on his singular and plural brow.

    Deterministic systems, ideological symbols of abdication by man from his natural role as earth’s Choicemaker, inevitably degenerate into collectivism; the negation of singularity, they become a conglomerate plural-based system of measuring human value. Blunting an awareness of diversity, blurring alternatives, and limiting the selective creative process, they are self-relegated to a passive and circular regression.

    Tampering with man’s selective nature endangers his survival for it would render him impotent and obsolete by denying the tools of diversity, individuality, perception, criteria, selectivity, and progress. Coercive attempts produce revulsion, for such acts are contrary to an indeterminate nature and nature’s indeterminate off-spring, man the Choicemaker.

    Until the oppressors discover that wisdom only just begins with a respectful acknowledgment of The Creator, The Creation, and The Choicemaker, they will be ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. The rejection of Creator-initiated standards relegates the mind of man to its own primitive, empirical, and delimited devices. It is thus that the human intellect cannot ascend and function at any level higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values.

    Additionally, such rejection of transcendent criteria self-denies man the vision and foresight essential to decision-making for survival and progression. He is left, instead, with the redundant wreckage of expensive hind-sight, including human institutions characterized by averages, mediocrity, and regression.

    Humanism, mired in the circular and mundane egocentric predicament, is ill-equipped to produce transcendent criteria. Evidenced by those who do not perceive superiority and thus find themselves beset by the shifting winds of the carnal-ego; i.e., moods, feelings, desires, appetites, etc., the mind becomes subordinate: a mere device for excuse-making and rationalizing self-justification.

    The carnal-ego rejects criteria and self-discipline for such instruments are tools of the mind and the attitude. The appetites of the flesh have no need of standards for at the point of contention standards are perceived as alien, restrictive, and inhibiting. Yet, the very survival of our physical nature itself depends upon a maintained sovereignty of the mind and of the spirit.

    It remained, therefore, to the initiative of a personal and living Creator to traverse the human horizon and fill the vast void of human ignorance with an intelligent and definitive faith. Man is thus afforded the prime tool of the intellect – a Transcendent Standard by which he may measure values in experience, anticipate results, and make enlightened and visionary choices.

    Only the unique and superior God-man Person can deservedly displace the ego-person from his predicament and free the individual to measure values and choose in a more excellent way. That sublime Person was indicated in the words of the prophet Amos, “…said the Lord, Behold, I will set a plumbline in the midst of my people Israel.” Y’shua Mashiyach Jesus said, “If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto myself.”

    As long as some choose to abdicate their personal realityand submit to the delusions of humanism, determinism, and collectivism, just so long will they be subject and reacting only, to be tossed by every impulse emanating from others. Those who abdicate such reality may, in perfect justice, find themselves weighed in the balances of their own choosing.

    That human institution which is structured on the principle, “…all men are endowed by their Creator with …Liberty…,” is a system with its roots in the natural Order of the universe. The opponents of such a system are necessarily engaged in a losing contest with nature and nature’s God. Biblical principles are still today the foundation under Western Civilization and the American way of life. To the advent of a new season we commend the present generation and the “multitudes in the valley of decision.”

    Let us proclaim it. Behold!

    The Season of Generation-Choicemaker Joel 3:14 KJV

    CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS

    “I should think that if there is one thing that man has learned about himself it is that he is a creature of choice.”
    Richard M. Weaver

    “Man is a being capable of subduing his emotions and impulses; he can rationalize his behavior. He arranges his wishes into a scale, he chooses; in short, he acts. What distinguishes man from beasts is precisely that he adjusts his behavior deliberately.”
    Ludwig von Mises

    “To make any sense of the idea of morality, it must be presumed that the human being is responsible for his actions and responsibility cannot be understood apart from the presumption of freedom of choice.”
    John Chamberlain

    “The advocate of liberty believes that it is complementary of the orderly laws of cause and effect, of probability and of chance, of which man is not completely informed. It is complementary of them because it rests in part upon the faith that each individual is endowed by his Creator with the power of individual choice.”
    Wendell J. Brown

    “These examples demonstrate a basic truth — that human dignity is embodied in the free choice of individuals.”
    Condoleeza Rice

    “Our Founding Fathers believed that we live in an ordered universe. They believed themselves to be a part of the universal order of things. Stated another way, they believed in God. They believed that every man must find his own place in a world where a place has been made for him. They sought independence for their nation but, more importantly, they sought freedom for individuals to think and act for themselves. They established a republic dedicated to one purpose above all others – the preservation of individual liberty…”
    Ralph W. Husted

    “We have the gift of an inner liberty so far-reaching that we can choose either to accept or reject the God who gave it to us, and it would seem to follow that the Author of a liberty so radical wills that we should be equally free in our relationships with other men. Spiritual liberty logically demands conditions of outer and social freedom for its completion.”
    Edmund A. Opitz

    “Above all I see an ability to choose the better from the worse that has made possible life’s progress.”
    Charles Lindbergh

    “Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibility of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.”
    Thomas Jefferson

    THE QUESTION AND THE ANSWER

    Q: “What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You visit him?” Psalm 8:4
    A: “I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live.” Deuteronomy 30:19

    Q: “Lord, what is man, that You take knowledge of him? Or the son of man, that you are mindful of him?” Psalm 144:3
    A: “And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the river, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” Joshua 24:15

    Q: “What is man, that he could be pure? And he who is born of a woman, that he could be righteous?” Job 15:14
    A: “Who is the man that fears the Lord? Him shall He teach in the way he chooses.” Psalm 25:12

    Q: “What is man, that You should magnify him, that You should set Your heart on him?” Job 7:17
    A: “Do not envy the oppressor and choose none of his ways.” Proverbs 3:31

    Q: “What is man that You are mindful of him, or the son of man that You take care of him?” Hebrews 2:6
    A: “I have chosen the way of truth; your judgments I have laid before me.” Psalm 119:30 “Let Your hand become my help, for I have chosen Your precepts.” Psalm 119:173

    References:
    Genesis 3:3, 6 Deuteronomy 11:26-28; 30:19; Job 5:23; Isaiah 7:14-15; 13:12; 61:1; Amos 7:8; Joel 3:14
    Ecclesiastes 3:1-8; Psalm 119:1-176

    DEDICATION

    Sir Isaac Newton
    The greatest scientist in human history
    a Bible-Believing Christian
    an authority on the Bible’s Book of Daniel
    committed to individual value and individual liberty

    Daniel 9:25-26 Habakkuk 2:2-3 KJV selah

    “What is man…?” Earth’s Choicemaker Psalm 25:12 KJV
    http://www.choicemaker.net/
    jbaxter@choicemaker.net

    An old/new paradigm – Mr. Jefferson would agree!
    (There is no alternative!)

    + + +

    “Man cannot make or invent or contrive principles. He can only discover them and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.”
    — Thomas Paine 1797

  3. #3 by willing on 04/11/2005 - 11:38 pm

    Businesses are created, not evolved out of nothing.

  4. #4 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 7:10 am

    While we are discussing the intricacies of evolution and creation, let me ask this.
    A barber in a small town cuts the hair of everyone except those who cut their own hair.
    Who cuts the barber’s hair?

  5. #5 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 7:41 am

    r + evolution = revolution

  6. #6 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 7:44 am

    Has there ever been a creature born who was a cross between a human and a non-human?

  7. #7 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 7:49 am

    Is the question of evolution vs creation a matter of who gets the credit or who gets the blame?

  8. #8 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 7:55 am

    I may not know how life began, but I do know the difference between an African Aborigine and a Swede.

  9. #9 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 9:19 am

    From George Washington to George Bush. Is this what is meant by devolution?

  10. #10 by Don on 04/12/2005 - 9:55 am

    For those who quote the Bible, let me make an observation. Presumably you are just trying to sway the opinion of those who already regard the Bible as a special book. For the skeptics, “The Bible Says” does not carry any weight.

    For myself, I judge a religion by how it affects the behavior of its adherents. If it causes them to do foolish things, like engage in miscegenation, it is bad.

  11. #11 by Bob on 04/12/2005 - 4:52 pm

    Jim Baxter,

    Hold it! You just danced past the point:

    “Until the oppressors discover that wisdom only just begins with a respectful acknowledgment of The Creator, The Creation, and The Choicemaker, they will be ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. The rejection of Creator-initiated standards relegates the mind of man to its own primitive, empirical, and delimited devices. It is thus that the human intellect cannot ascend and function at any level higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values.”

    WHICH Creator?

    Einstein spent all of the intellectual effort of the latter part of his life trying to refute Heisenberg (?) and the Quantum Theory, the randomness you refer to.

    Like you, Einstein looked to the Old Testament to explain reality, “God does not play dice with the universe.”

    Like every outdated philosophy, Einstein was looking for solid ground where there is no solid ground.

    It sounds mystical, but the quantum theory tells us that we are ourselves a point of view. You and we perceive the part of the universe that lies within our probability matrix. Within that matrix, and only within that matrix, are we the choice-makers.

    The rest of the universe exists in other matrices.

    The Old Testament and the Koran and the Shinto Goddess Who Invites All offer us solid ground, a solid ground that does not exist.

    Jesus starts with us, with our souls. “My kingdom is not of THIS world.”

    We are discovering there are many other worlds we cannot perceive. There is no solid ground.

    So Jesus came to tell us what WE should do. He did not tell us how to run this world.

    As for the Old Testament and Baal and JHWH and the Koran and all the rest, they tell us all about Reality. They could never imagine that there is no One Reality.

    If you are fixated on the Old Testament or the Koran this world obsesses you. Your God can’t fit into a world where the world was not created in seven days. The world of the Tower of Babel is totally destroyed when man goes to the moon.

    But Christ kept telling us that none of that is the point. You and I are a point of view. The whole universe is beyond the reality we perceive, and that is not a mystical concept, that is a scientific fact into which Einstein’s Old Testament approach simply did not fit.

    Our universe matrix may be the only one into which sentience and personal decision-making fit. If there are others, there is nothing we can do about it.

    For the time being.

    In the meantime, don’t worship any book. Do good. Be good. Jesus will lead us there.

  12. #12 by Peter on 04/13/2005 - 1:36 pm

    The greatest writer that ever lived once said something to the effect that the real question in biology is just how much does one believe that Darwin’s special theory of evolution explains? I think Plato or Goethe or Shakespeare said that (so far ahed of their times!) — or was is it a greater man?

    Evolution = growth.

    Thank God He didn’t leave me as a fat bald baby. I am a lot better looking now.

    Life is dynamic. Death is static. God didn’t make a static universe. The universe is full of life and it grows. Just what all the details are is up to the Logos.

    If Christ is making me into a new man, then I haven’t stayed the same. Something grew. So it is with life itself.

    Yes, life produces itself after its kind, and that kind blossoms, it becomes something better than it was before. And God is glorified.

  13. #13 by Peter on 04/13/2005 - 2:01 pm

    God can change the recipe.

  14. #14 by Peter on 04/13/2005 - 3:08 pm

    Actually, the whole problem resolves through a proper understanding of the Logos. I don’t have time to elaborate, but I will tease you all instead.

    The concept of the Logos was developed by the philosopher Herakleitos, who the primitive church said foreshadowed Christianity and provided the philosophical basis of advanced Christian theology. His corpus has sadly been lost, but shadows of his thought can be found in early Christian writings, and the occasional quoted snippet from Herakleitos himself.

    In John’s gospel, the world was created through the Logos: through the thought, the mind, the word, the creative faculty, the rede of God. The Logos is present in creation. The Logos is God’s imminence (whereas the Holy Ghost proceeds from God transcendent). The Logos is the life-principle. The Logos is God.

    Another inferior mind, Philo, twisted the Logos back to its opposite — to the static. He redefined the Logos into the physical utterances of God. Thus, to him, the world was created through a once-and-for-all verbalization; thus, to him, the Logos was just God’s magical words uttered at the time of creation.

    Philo was not a Christian. A Christian believes that God the Father is transcendent, and as such it is laughable to insist that He has a finite, physical body whence physical words emanate.

    However, Philo has been made influential on some Christians, who implicitly believe him that the Logos is but God’s uttered words. From this comes worship of the words in scripture, especially the Old Testament. (And most especially of the Masoretic text which through textual changes the Masoretes hoped no Christian would notice, hides the prophecies of Christ’s coming, and hides the ascendency of the Lord over the Old Testament god of storms and floods, chaos and genocide.)

    It is Philo’s complete misunderstanding of the Logos that has in part led to the misunderstanding of the nature of creation. The brief account in Genesis says very little specific about creation; it’s just a quick summary of what was already believed by the ancients as a preface to the rise of old Judaism. More recently, what Genesis does not say has been filled in by people dependent on Philo.

    Christians believe that Christ is the Logos made flesh. Indeed, Christ is far more than the mere verbal utterances of God. John’s gospel tells us that the creation was made by means of Him. This does not compare with Philo’s strange system wherein the Logos was a magician-god’s uttered words causing creation in stasis.

    If Philo’s misunderstanding of the Logos were at last rejected, then I think much of the tension between creation and “evolution” would vanish. The eastern Churches understand the Logos much better than we in the West do. They don’t have the same verbal traps we have adopted — which confuse so many of us in regard to creation. I think a proper and thorough study of the Logos — liberated from Philo’s verbal traps — would end Christianity’s competition with science.

  15. #15 by Peter on 04/13/2005 - 3:40 pm

    Philo was a Jew.

  16. #16 by Bob on 04/14/2005 - 1:23 pm

    Don asks,

    “Has there ever been a creature born who was a cross between a human and a non-human?”

    I can tell you never worked on Capitol Hill.

  17. #17 by Peter on 04/14/2005 - 6:30 pm

    I am sure Don is laughing like I am…

  18. #18 by Don on 04/15/2005 - 10:22 am

    I have not read this thru completely, but it looks like it has some interesting ideas.

    http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/evolution.htm

  19. #19 by Richard L. Hardison on 04/15/2005 - 9:59 pm

    Most of the latter half of Einstein’s professional life was spent chasing dead ends. He produced a “Unified Field Theory,” or a theory that is supposed to subsume everything else, but was forced to cast it aside as utterly unworkable. One of the major problems was the reconciliation of Relativity, Quantum and Classical Mechanics, each of which work in its own sphere, but almost totally exclude the other two. Over the last 50 years work to create a unified field theory has pretty much stopped and the use of each area accepted as for what it is.

    Personally, I can’t accept evolution because it is, at best, junk science. Another name for it would Religion. Science requires observation and repeatability, neither of which is possible with Darwinian evolution. We can observe a limited type of evolution within species, but the actual cause of it is beyond us. Mutation is not viable as mutation is caused by a loss of genetic information. The few mutants capable of breeding also breed true – or back to the population mean.

    While I firmly accept the creation story of Genesis 1, that does not exclude the possibility of finding how God did what he did. Science, real, hard science, is not opposed by scripture. Science, in its best a purest form was expressed by Kepler – to think God’s thoughts after him. Science does not rely on miracles, it seeks to explain without resort to such things. Evolutionists rely strongly on miracles in an attempt to explain what happened, but they keep coming back to their original bamboozled position. AT present they have been reduced to saying evolution is a fact because we say it’s a fact and to oppose us is to oppose everything in Biology which must have evolution to explain it. The entire situation reminds me of the classless ignoramuses that oppose David Irving. The facts threaten, and they simply can’t live with that fact.

    Bob, I’ll go you one more – Don has never worked in government at any level. The creatures reach their lowest “evolutionary” level on the hill. You know how it works – the scums rises to the top.

You must be logged in to post a comment.