Hi there,
So there is actually a scriptural verse that deals with Evolution pretty neatly, actually. It proposes that there is a law, that affects serpents (in much the same way Evolution claims to affect creatures in general). This law can be preempted (the snake can bite before the charming takes effect; and we may imagine that there is an adaptation that leads to survival, before Evolution identifies what the pros and cons were). As such, someone who knows the law, but is too late to do anything about it (by charming the serpent; or alternatively enlarging the scope of what Evolution applies to): has no reason to be called/interred?
The verse, is Ecc 10:11.
This is the point: if Evolution mutates before it knows what for, why trust the Evolutionist to interpret the mutation correctly?
You can claim you know Evolution works all you like, but if you fundamentally have to refer to a chart for what will Evolve and what will not, how are you different from a Creationist? Just this: that you do not stop referring to a chart for a particular species? The serpent will eat your lunch!
At some point you have to admit: the chart is all there is, links of any kind from one to another, do not happen in the real world, on their own accord.
The fact that you assume that the scientist will know what to do, will be your downfall!
So there is actually a scriptural verse that deals with Evolution pretty neatly, actually. It proposes that there is a law, that affects serpents (in much the same way Evolution claims to affect creatures in general). This law can be preempted (the snake can bite before the charming takes effect; and we may imagine that there is an adaptation that leads to survival, before Evolution identifies what the pros and cons were). As such, someone who knows the law, but is too late to do anything about it (by charming the serpent; or alternatively enlarging the scope of what Evolution applies to): has no reason to be called/interred?
The verse, is Ecc 10:11.
This is the point: if Evolution mutates before it knows what for, why trust the Evolutionist to interpret the mutation correctly?
You can claim you know Evolution works all you like, but if you fundamentally have to refer to a chart for what will Evolve and what will not, how are you different from a Creationist? Just this: that you do not stop referring to a chart for a particular species? The serpent will eat your lunch!
At some point you have to admit: the chart is all there is, links of any kind from one to another, do not happen in the real world, on their own accord.
The fact that you assume that the scientist will know what to do, will be your downfall!