[gbrutt]

Perhaps they seem ridiculous, as they are lifted out of context without any backround or explanation. A tenent of basic Bible study is that, “A text without a context is a pretext.” The Bible is never meant to be taken as some pretty, sanitized look at what we want life to be. It is life and death and war and love. There are songs and psalms, history, battle accounts, science and every other imaginable detail that God wants us to know. That is why it resonates with such force. Lewis Sperry Chafer said this about the Bible, “It is not such a book as man would write if he could, because it condemns him, or could write if he would, because it surpasses him.” There are details in it that are disturbing and difficult to explain, but they are hardly ridiculous. Read the Scriptures yet again, my friend.

As to your comments on the issue of prebiological evolution, there is still too much- perhaps, maybe, kinda- in the pro-evolutionist posts to even pretend that it is rooted in science. The sticking point of this is the fact that there has never been a way for Darwinists to explain how life got started in the first place. It is one thing to say that this is what could have happened, given the right conditions. It is quite another to show that it did happen, let alone how it happened. That is precisely what evolution cannot do; prove any of its claims. The Miller-Urey experiment of the 50’s showed all too well the fact that even under controlled conditions, all you end up with is a dirty glass beaker, not life.

The software analogy doesn’t work, not because I do not understand programming, but because the analogy is faulty. Even if it is a simulation of evolution it is not evolution. First, because it is only a simulation of what someone thinks might have occurred, given the properly staged conditions. Second, evolution is at best a philosophy. In desperation, some cling to this old and unproven theory and look in vain for anything to support their hope of random order derived from nothingness. Lacking this, as all evolutionists do, they go to any and every concievable extreme to cling to their beloved “faith”. Such are men like Eldredge and his admission that, “We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports the story of gradual adaptive change, all the while really knowing that it does not.” Better still is Francis Crick and his “directional Pan-spermia” theory. He believed that aliens seeded our planet. Isn’t this the humanist equivalent of a miracle? At its worst it all smacks of a bizarre form of pseudo-religion, with all the trappings and none of the content.

Consider this for a moment. If what you and others believe is true, that we are nothing more than accidental groupings of molecules, what is the purpose to life? What ultimate meaning and reason do you have for your existence? Does your faith in nothingness and chance give you comfort at the end of the day? Does it lead you to strive for excellence in all that you do? That’s not the answer given in the Bible. Man is made in the image and likeness of God. Each and every man has great worth in God’s eyes. We can choose to ignore the truth, or look into it for ourselves and see if these things are not so. I leave you with the words of the Apostle Paul.

“Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” Romans 1:19, 20