“And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”
Genesis 1:11 – Hebrew direct translation in English:
“and·he-is-saying, Elohim, she-shall-cause-to-vegetate, the·land, vegetation, herbage, sowing, seed, tree-of, fruit, making do, fruit, to·species-of·him, which, seed-of·him, in·him, on, the·land, and·he-is-becoming, so.”
Remember, when God says “it was so” this is a new rule. This is the rule of genetics and “evolution”. In this, the third epoch of creation, nucleic acids form and life is possible. In evolutionary terms we need to deal with macro evolution and micro evolution. Charles Darwin stated,
“He who believes that each equine (horse) species was independently created, will, I presume, assert that each species has been created with a tendency to vary, both under nature and under domestication.” This “…makes the works of God a mere mockery and deception.”
In essence, speciation means that a mammal cannot become a fish or a bird or vice versa, no matter how far back in the fossil record one might look. Dogs are a terrific example. Each breed of dog is a change or genetic mutation over time, giving us all the breeds we see today. No amount of breeding or environmental influence would allow for a dog to become, say a flying-bat. Even though both are mammals, dogs will always be dogs. Just as Darwin pointed out that equine speciation still falls within the class of equine, not avian. Pegasus are mythical because they are half equine half avian, everyone can understand this… but biologist are still looking for one in the fossil record to prove macroevolution.
This missing link is missing for all species not just humans, horses, and birds… God created speciation, therefore, macroevolution is not possible. I was hoping to find a non-christian reference paper for this as I wanted to keep all my references as scientifically relevant as possible. That said, I noticed a bias when searching for reference material. The science community, in general, does not differentiate between macro and micro-evolution nor publish much material on the subject. The science community tends to just use evolution as a broad term. Coincidence? In the two previous hyper-links you can see a stark contrast in publication sources and academic affiliation within a Google search on the topics. In this day and age as much as we study all aspects of biology how come there are so few papers on the subject of macro and micro evolution from the science community? Is it possible that there is no evidence to support the idea of macro-evolution, just micro-evolution, so little is published on the topic? Is this a pervasive bias similar to the the Earth once being the center of the universe?
“And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day.”
Genesis 1:12-13 – Hebrew direct translation in English:
“and·she-is-bringing-forth, the·land, vegetation, herbage, sowing, seed, to·species-of·him, and·tree, she making do,fruit, which, seed-of·him, in·him, to·species-of·him, and·he-is-seeing, Elohim, that, good, and·he-is-becoming, evening, and·he-is-becoming, morning, day, third.”
I think Carl Sagan said it best, “The universe is a pretty big place. If it’s just us, seems like an awful waste of space”.
The implication of this passage is that plants (life) can grow on any planetesimal with the right conditions atmosphere, water, and dry land.
“Life on Earth may have started almost instantaneously,” added Harrison, a member of the National Academy of Sciences. “With the right ingredients, life seems to form very quickly.”
I believe it improbable that no other life is found anywhere in the whole of the universe, with the exception of time. Meaning entire worlds similar to earth could have brought forth life and been exterminated through a host of events prior to the human race and our Earth. This belief is not at all in conflict with Christianity as demonstrated here. I would actually say that this topic as a whole is inconsequential or an echo of necessity by comparison to the revelation of Christ, but we have a long way to go before I can demonstrate that idea!
Back to the subject… Seas in general are very important to biology. The oldest life forms currently known to the science of man may be as old as Earth. God’s rules for the universe are consistent and without error. According to the Bible, life began prior to the formation of the sun and stars. This is the big conundrum… life before stars!? It is possible! Furthermore, should we find life elsewhere in our universe it would only give more credence to God the creator in accordance with the book of Genesis. In regard to “life”, plants are a higher order than bacteria genetically. Given this, I believe we can assume that bacteria are present though never specifically mentioned. Food for thought, even if God had tried to express bacteria to early man would we have been able to understand? This is also subjective on what one defines as living? We have enough trouble discerning days and earth as stated in Genesis without getting into micro-organisms…
Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!