A new weed
species—does it prove creation wrong?
“A new weed species has been identified in Britain. The
new species is actually a hybrid of two existing species. The fact that new
species of plants can form as a result of the mixing of existing genes is not
evidence for evolution in the molecules-to-man sense—there is no new information
generated. It does, however, confirm the creation model that says plants were
created to reproduce after their kind. The fact that these plants can interbreed
makes it clear that they are a part of the same original kind. Even though these
weeds are raised up in the media as examples of evolution in action, they fail
to show how dramatic changes—like the algae-to-plant story from the evolutionary
past—can take place. Extrapolating the small, information-losing mutations to
explain major, information-gaining changes is bad science.” Evolution Exposed,
Second Ed., A new weed species—does it prove creation wrong? Bell, Creation
25(3):27, 2003.
http://creation.com/a-new-weed-species-does-it-prove-creation-wrong-253
Response to comment [from a Catholic]: "God does creation in ways..."
What ways? Ways he did not say which conform to your
naturalistic worldview?
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such as hypothesis is
excluded from science because it is not naturalistic."
Dr. Scott Todd, Kansas State University, Nature 401 (6752):423, Sept. 30, 1999.
Only in the humanistic worldview is it controversial to say:
God is the creator of all things (By God.
Ge 1:1;
2:4,5;
Pr 26:10 By Christ. Joh
1:3,10;
Col 1:16 By the Holy
Spirit.
Job 26:13;
Ps 104:30).
He formed the heavens and the earth and its inhabitants (Gen. 1:24-25;
2:19; Jer. 27:5) which had no previous existence (Ro 4:17; Heb 11:3).
Creation took place in six normal days (Ex
20:11;
31:17).
God created man in his own image (Ge
1:26,27;
1Co 11:7) and likeness (Ge
1:26;
Jas 3:9) from the
beginning (Ge
1:1;
Mt 24:21,
Mk 10:6).
God created them male and female (Ge
1:26-27;
5:2,
Mt 19:4).
By faith we understand this (Heb
11:3) which leads to confidence (Ps
124:8;
146:5,6).
See:
War of Worldviews
What is a Biblical Worldview?
Since there are not known transitional fossils for major plant groups, how can
scientists accurately describe their evolution?
"...[S]erpent doesn't like."
Ad hominem.
Truth is true independent from me.
Response to comment [from an atheist]: [SD doesn't
like] "How on earth is that an ad hominem?"
I had hoped to discuss weeds but you'll notice, we
don't talk about the facts.
Barbarian, Gamera aka PlastikBuddah, etc. have a habit of trying to make the
discussion about me
--or about Ken Ham or Jason Jason--or anyone else who disagrees with their
humanistic worldview. I point out their fallacious arguments and sometimes we
get to the issue.
Response to comment [from a Catholic]: "Your religious beliefs, for
example are contradicted by His word in Genesis."
My beliefs are based on God's word:
God is the creator of all things (By God.
Ge 1:1;
2:4,5;
Pr 26:10 By Christ. Joh
1:3,10;
Col 1:16 By the Holy
Spirit.
Job 26:13;
Ps 104:30).
He formed the heavens and the earth and its inhabitants (Gen. 1:24-25;
2:19; Jer. 27:5) which had no previous existence (Ro 4:17; Heb 11:3).
Creation took place in six normal days (Ex
20:11;
31:17).
God created man in his own image (Ge
1:26,27;
1Co 11:7) and likeness (Ge
1:26;
Jas 3:9) from the
beginning (Ge
1:1;
Mt 24:21,
Mk 10:6).
God created them male and female (Ge
1:26-27;
5:2,
Mt 19:4).
By faith we understand this (Heb
11:3) which leads to confidence (Ps
124:8;
146:5,6).
Do you trust God's word (revelation) or mans' opinion
(speculation)? How do you spiritualize these verses?
A Bible verse cannot mean what it never meant.
Each passage of scripture means exactly one thing--what the author intended it
to mean. What hermeneutic do you use?
See:
Hermeneutics
http://vananne.com/applesofgold/#Hermeneutics
"YE creationism is contradicted by this...Gen. 1:24...No way to slither out
of that one."
We never get to talk about weeds?
What reason does scripture give to spiritualize Ge
1:24?
"Day six was Creation’s climax for
it included mankind. Though man
was the last creature mentioned in the account, he did
not evolve; he was created.
Human life was created
in
(lit.,
“as,” meaning “in essence as”)
the image of God
(v.
27). This image
was imparted only to humans (2:7). “Image” (ṣelem)
is used figuratively here, for God
does not have a human form. Being in God’s image means
that humans share, though imperfectly and finitely, in God’s nature, that
is, in His communicable attributes (life, personality, truth, wisdom, love,
holiness, justice), and so have the capacity for spiritual fellowship with
Him.
God’s purpose in creating human
life in His image was functional: man is to
rule or have dominion (1:26, 28). God’s
dominion was presented by a “representative.” (Egyptian kings later, in
idolatry, did a similar kind of thing: they represented their rule or
dominion by making representative statues of themselves.) However, because
of sin all things are not under man’s dominion (Heb. 2:8). But Jesus Christ
will establish dominion over all the earth (Heb. 2:5-8) at His second
coming.
God pronounced His blessing on the
male and the
female: they were
to be fruitful and increase in number.
In Genesis, to be blessed was to be enriched and fertile. Such marvelous
decrees of God
would be significant for Israel, that was God’s representative on earth. She
would enter the land of promise and would expect God’s continued blessing."
Walvoord, John
F. ; Zuck, Roy B. ; Dallas Theological Seminary: The Bible
Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton,
IL : Victor Books, 1983-c1985, S. 1:29
Genesis 1:24, 25
"After the creation of
animal life, and its impartation to air and water creatures on
the fifth day, only one day of divine work remained. Animals
must be formed for the land surfaces—the lithosphere and
biosphere.
It is noteworthy that
the record says that God “made” (Hebrew
asah)
these land animals; whereas He was said to have “created” (bara)
the air and sea animals. It would seem, if anything, that the
land animals were of a higher order than the others and
therefore they should have taken a higher category of divine
activity.
The reason for this
apparent anomaly undoubtedly is that the act of
creation (verse
21) was that of “every living soul,” not only of sea and air
creatures. Since this “soul” principle was created on the fifth
day, there was no need to mention it again on the sixth day. The
formation of land creatures merely involved new types of
organization of materials already in existence, including the
nephesh as well as the physical
elements. There was no intrinsic difference in the actual
“making” of land animals from that of the marine animals or, for
that matter, of the making of plants. All involved the same
fundamental biochemical structure and reproductive mechanisms.
The land animals made
during the early part of the sixth day are categorized as
“cattle, creeping things, and beasts of the earth.” This
description is evidently intended to be comprehensive, in so far
as land animals are concerned. Very likely, the term “cattle”
refers to domesticable animals, “beasts of the earth” refers to
large wild animals, and “creeping things” refers to all animals
that crawl or creep close to the surface of the ground.
This classification has
no correlation with the arbitrary system of man-made taxonomy
(amphibians, reptiles, mammals, insects), but is a more natural
system based on the relation of the animals to man’s interests.
Thus the term “beasts of the earth” includes the large mammals
such as lions and elephants, and probably also the large extinct
reptiles known as dinosaurs. “Creeping things” includes the
insects and smaller reptiles, and probably also most amphibians
and many small mammals (e.g., moles, rats; note Leviticus
11:29–31).
All three categories of
land animals were made simultaneously, as is evident from the
inverted order of listing in verses 24 and 25. Once again, it is
obvious that there is not the slightest correlation with the
imaginary evolutionary order (that is, insects, then amphibians,
then reptiles, then all mammals). As a matter of fact, evolution
places insects, amphibians, and land reptiles all before the
birds that Genesis says were made the day before.
There was no
evolutionary struggle for existence among these animals either,
for “God saw that it was good.” Neither could one kind evolve
into a different kind, because God made each category “after his
kind.”
All these land animals
were said to have been “brought forth” from the earth, or
ground. That is, their bodies were composed of the same elements
as the earth; and when they died, they would go back to the
earth. They also all had “souls,” because they were said to be
“living creatures” (nephesh
again). In this respect, they were like air and water animals
(Genesis 1:21) and also like man (Genesis 2:7).
The Completed
Creation
The world was now fully
prepared for its human inhabitants, who would be given dominion
over it. God did not need five billion years to prepare for man,
as theistic evolutionists seem to think. In fact, He did not
even need the six days that He took! The reasons for taking six
days apparently were, first, to stress the orderly and logical
relationships between the different components of the creation
and, second, to provide a divine pattern for man’s six-day work
week. A regular day of rest and special fellowship with God
would be essential for man’s good, and God’s example would be
the best pattern and incentive for man to keep such a day.
Actually the formation
of the land animals must have taken only a small portion of the
sixth day. The second chapter of Genesis describes in fuller
detail the rest of the events of the sixth day, events which are
only briefly outlined here in the first chapter."
Morris, Henry M.: The Genesis Record : A Scientific
and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings.
Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Books, 1976, S. 70
A new weed species—does
it prove creation wrong?