Re: [asa] Of motes and beams

Vernon,

On the hottest night of the year I don't have the energy to argue any
further, and in any case it appears to be a lost cause. I give up.

But I would very much like to know if you actually read the Francis Collins
article that I pointed you to, and attempted to assess the evidence he
presented. If you did not make any attempt to do so, then you have little
business complaining that people on the list don't assess your numerical
findings on Genesis 1:1.

As you well know, I have spent considerable time assessing that evidence,
and came to the conclusion that you were definitely on to something, but
that you would have your work cut out persuading people on the list. I
attempted to support you by arguing from what I felt were principled
probabilistic arguments. You have responded (off list) by accusing me of
not shouting the odds of it being a "miracle" and asked me to withdraw the
analysis (with regard to Kolmogorov complexity theory) that I was using to
try and show that what you had found was a valid phenomenon.

This I decline to do. I certainly believe you are on to something, and that
the evidence of the numerical patterns you found deserves attention. But
equally I say to you that the evidence from Francis Collins's article
deserves a fair hearing from you rather than just brushing it aside.

Until you are prepared to do this, rather than rehashing standard
creationist propaganda (blaming Darwin for Hitler and Stalin for instance; a
ploy AiG are always making, and quite unjustifiable IMO), then you can't
expect any more support from me.

Iain

On 7/19/06, Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> Iain,
>
> I'm afraid we shall have to agree to disagree on the points you make. You
> appear to be claiming that there is no alternative explanation for these
> things. Do you and others really believe you've refuted _special creation_
> when you catalogue such observations?
>
> I prefer to take my lead from the One who undoubtedly knows the truth
> concerning these things, Jesus Christ - our Creator and Lord. You will, by
> now, be familiar with the biblical quotations I have in mind , viz Mt.7:15-20,
> 6:24, 7:24-27. Clearly, in the Lord's eyes, the kind of 'fruit'
> which accompanies a philosophy or doctrine should determine whether or
> not that philosophy or doctrine provides suitable nourishment for those who
> believe on him. Accordingly, I am disappointed by your somewhat flippant
> response to my serious request for one or more examples of the _merits_ of
> evolution. Personally, I can think of none. On the other hand, its demerits
> are legion.
>
> Some years ago (having given this matter much thought) I put together the
> following:
>
>
> *An evil fruit*
>
> * *
>
> One of the great mysteries of life is the high regard in which evolution
> is held among those who claim to be committed to Christ. How can it be
> that these can so lightly ignore the clear warnings of the Master? :-
>
>
>
> "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but
> inwardly they are ravening wolves. *Ye shall know them by their fruits*.
> Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree
> bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A
> good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring
> forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn
> down, and cast into the fire. *Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know
> them*." (Mt.7:15-20)
>
> * *
>
> Let me list some of the more obvious fruits of the tree, Evolution :-
>
>
>
> 1) Claiming to be a branch of science, it has progressively undermined
> faith in the word of God - specifically in challenging the literal truth of
> the early chapters of Genesis; it has thereby stripped the Gospel of its
> logical foundations, and provided a plank for biblical criticism, liberal
> theology, and radical ecumenism.
>
>
>
> 2) It has provided an excuse for atrocious human behaviour - evolution's
> driving principle being *survival of the fittest *; this has now passed
> into man's hands for its ultimate fulfilment (eg Nazi philosophy and Soviet
> communism).
>
>
>
> 3) It provides essential support for the growing belief in reincarnation
> and the notion that man's destiny lies in his own hands.
>
>
>
> 4) It has led directly to the expectation that other and higher forms of
> life exist elsewhere in the universe, capable of delivering man from his
> increasingly desperate circumstances; this has clouded the Gospel message
> and diverted man's attention from his one true source of salvation.
>
>
>
> 5) It provides an essential 'scientific' prop for secular humanism, the
> religion of the age, with its emphasis on permissiveness and the denial of
> all absolutes; inevitably this has led to the progressive loosening of the
> fabric of human society and to many of the excesses and evils we now witness
> about us.
>
>
>
> 6) Its adherents vigorously resist the teaching of biblical creation as an
> alternative explanation of origins on the grounds that, unlike evolution, it
> is not science but a matter of religious belief.
>
>
>
> The Lord Jesus came to bring truth to the world (Jn.18:37). We
> demonstrate that we are his followers by our love of truth. If we accept a
> doctrine that is so patently antagonistic to the gospel of love without
> rigorously testing its credentials, then it is doubtful that we are numbered
> among his true followers. He clearly believed all that Moses had written (
> Lk.16:29), including what is so destructive of evolution and the notion of
> an old earth, viz the universality of the flood, and its outcome (Mt.24
> :36-39, Lk.17:26,27).
>
>
>
> The battle between God's people and Baal, and his prophets, is not new; it
> is one that has been fought in every generation since Adam. We find an
> example described in 1Ki.18 where the prophet Elijah challenges the people
> with the words, "...How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be
> God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him."
>
>
>
> Many Christians are attempting to serve two masters - masters with
> opposing agendas! Dominant is the god, Evolution. He is to be continually
> placated by insisting that we 'interpret' the Scriptures to conform with his
> dictates. In submitting to this pressure, we so often find it necessary
> to deny the clear words of Christ and the Apostles - hardly a solid basis
> upon which to live out one's Christian life!
>
>
>
> Vernon Jenkins
>
> 28th July, 1998
>
>
>
> Iain, if you dispute any of the above - or uncover any _real_ merits of
> evolution - I shall be happy to discuss these further with you. And, of
> course, this offer extends to all members of the forum.
>
>
>
> Vernon
>
>
>
> * *
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com>
> *To:* Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
> *Cc:* George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> ; Don Nield<d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>;
> asa@calvin.edu
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 19, 2006 12:46 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Of motes and beams
>
>
>
> On 7/18/06, Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net> wrote:
> >
> > Iain,
> >
> > You say, "...in the case of the immune system, God has used evolutionary
> > processes to defend your body against disease." But is this not an example
> > of *micro evolution*, so-called? It is hardly the _real thing_ . Indeed,
> > where - except in the *minds* of its protagonists - are we to find even
> > one clear-cut example of *macro* evolution?
> >
>
>
> Vernon,
>
> I suggest you take a good look at Francis Collins's lecture "Faith and the
> Human Genome", at
>
> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf
>
> Francis Collins was head of the Human Genome project, an extremely high
> profile scientist, who is also a highly committed evangelical Christian. He
> was converted in his 20's from being self-admittedly a highly obnoxious
> atheist whom you wouldn't want to go to lunch with, to a Christian, by
> reading C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity", and being forced to accept that
> it was perfectly rational to be a Christian.
>
> Collins also says that as a scientist he finds the evidence in favour of
> (macro) evolution overwhelming. The talk he gives in the above link gives
> very compelling evidence that macro-evolution has occurred, notably in the
> following quotation. Everything we see is in line with the predictions of
> the theory. The following is a key excerpt from his talk. I think it's a
> pretty clear cut example of how macro evolution has occurred, by looking at
> real data, not by some mental delusion as you suggest.
>
>
> It is not just a human/mouse comparison
> one can do. Eric Green at the Genome Institute
> has looked at this same region in many
> other species and, in fact, you can find this
> same CAPZA2 gene in everything from
> chimps down to zebra fishes and a lot of
> things in between (see Figure 4). Notice the
> pattern. The chimpanzee is almost 100% identical
> to the human, except the chimp has a
> deletion just before exon 2 that we do not
> have. Otherwise the match-up, as in most
> cases of human and chimp comparison, is
> about 98.5% to 99%. You can see that the
> baboon is starting to diverge. The cat and the
> dog and the cow all look a lot alike, and
> again if you look at the CAPZA2 exons, you
> will see that every one of those species has a
> nice conserved little segment there. But as
> you get further away to rats, mouse, chicken,
> two different kinds of pufferfish and then a
> zebra fish, about the only thing you see is the
> protein encoding regions, while the rest of
> the scattered noise goes away. Again, this is
> a very compelling kind of pattern in terms of
> what one would expect from evolution.
>
>
> Collins also accepts, just like you and me, that miracles can occur. He
> has just brought out a book called "The Language of God", about the genome
> project, and about his own faith, which I have on order from Amazon, and am
> looking forward to reading. No doubt I'll be reporting back to the list on
> what he has to say, if someone else doesn't beat me to it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Knowing you to be attentive to the Lord's words, I gather you
> > accept evolution as a 'tree' that yields *good fruit**.* Possibly
> > you are able to defend that view by suggesting a few of its merits.
> >
>
>
> How about: it brought forth you and me; intelligent beings who are able
> to sense and worship their creator. Not a bad start.
>
> If you read Genesis Ch 1 carefully, you will see that it says "Let the
> earth bring forth ... plants , seed-bearing fruit etc etc". God endowed
> earth with the properties that it could bring forth all this amazing
> creation. To me that is the most mind boggling miracle of all. That the
> earth did the bringing forth according to the marvellous properties with
> which God endowed it.
>
> We should recall that in Colossians Ch 1 it says that Christ is before all
> things, and in him all things hold together. If we hold true to that, we
> should be able to look unflinchingly at scientific evidence, and find out
> just how all things hold together. The elegance and subtlety of God's
> creation is truly amazing if you allow yourself to look into the science,
> and not just give up and say "That must have been a miracle".
>
> Iain
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
-----------
After the game, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.
- Italian Proverb
-----------
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.