Replies

Hello fellow soldier. Two essential objections to TOE. My primary reason is not based on a scientific argument. This goes to the heart of Christian faith and deserves some study by any serious Christian. Although faith is not generated by intellect, it should be, and is, sustained by the use of our intellect. Once obtained faith must be watered and attended.

Central to the theme of redemption from sin is the idea that sin came from one man (Adam). Therefor Christ (one man) could remove ALL the sin of humanity. You must understand that in some way God looks at the human race as ONE thing, ONE entity. Yes he sees us as individuals, but he can, and does, treat us almost as a single organism. So Biblically sin must have arisen from one single source, it can be erased by a single remover.

Now God IS God, in part, because He does not violate His own laws, even to do miracles. A miracle is simply the application of a higher law or principle. Much like men can use pressure differentials induced by motion and the shape of a wing to gain flight. Has gravity been revoked? No! We just applied a different law to overcome gravity.

I say this to point out that the redemption of mankind is not magic, nor capricious. It must come about through spiritual laws God has established. Thus sin can only be forgiven by the shedding of blood. During the American Civil war, Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying, "There must be a corresponding shedding of blood in this great war for all the blood shed by the lash." He knew for America to be forgiven for the sin of slavery...blood would have to be shed.

It is for this primary reason that I reject TOE. Man could NOT have descended from many sources (various tribes of apes). He must have descended from one set of parents. Otherwise Christ would have to have been Crucified for each line, perhaps even for EACH of us individually. A ridiculous proposition. The fact that we date history from the Birth of Christ (unbeliever or believer) is a sure indication that history was hinged on this ONE man...Christ.

Second reason is that TOE is a miserable unsupportable plastic theory. It will bend itself into any shape, explain any evidence. It is simply a tautology. The fossil record shows NO indication of the millions of transitory species that this theory says MUST have occurred. It cannot explain the Precambrian explosion of almost every form of life. It implies organic from the inorganic by existing physical laws. (a mathematical impossibility!

And there is no coordinated mathematical scaffolding for this theory. What is the driving force? What is the rate of change? Why do some species change and evolve, and other stay the same for millions of years? If competition for resources was so fierce that life went through agonizing changes...how did the smaller females of almost all species survive? Why are the necks of female giraffes two feet shorter than the males? How can anyone explain the existence of symbiotic life forms without smuggling in teleology? How can two, (or more) separate species anticipate each other's forms, needs, chemistry...before they come together in TOTAL interdependence?

TOE has all these problems and more, because it was proposed and accepted by those that were looking for a reason to reject God as the creator...before science knew things like DNA, the irreducible complexity of living cells etc... They are stuck with this, let them explain it!

I really agree with a lot of what you say, but my position stands:

whether or not God used evolution or not is secondary to the need for salvation. I proved earlier in the thread that God must exist via logic (see post #126). So given that that is true the position of the atheist is incredibly shaky.

Even if the theory of evolution is correct the question that remains is the following: What created the original bacteria from which we "allegedly" evolved? My answer is since that For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, that bacteria (if it existed,) must have been created by God.

Still I don't support the TOE, I'm just saying that If it is true, it does not contradict creationism.

Now you said:"It is for this primary reason that I reject TOE. Man could NOT have descended from many sources (various tribes of apes). He must have descended from one set of parents. Otherwise Christ would have to have been Crucified for each line, perhaps even for EACH of us individually. "

Now my point is that the Apes are not humans. Even if we are evolved from them, they are not *Homo Sapien* they are *Hominidae* and other such races. Christ did not die for these, because they are not guilty of sin as humans are, Christ died for the *Homo Sapiens.*

I don't guarantee my position, and when I walk through the gates of Heaven Saint Peter may point and laugh at me, but the point remains, The TOE does not necessarily contradict creationism.

P.S. I do not believe in the TOE in matters theological or scientific. I am literally playing the part of the Devil's Advocate.