Do the Rocks Lie? and What does Gender have to do with it? By: Jay Antonic
Do the Rocks Lie?
Geologists have long stood by the accuracy of their claims that rocks on the earth date back as far as 4 billion years ago.
Creationists, and intelligent design proponents alike, point to errors in radiometric rock dating and the innacuracies involved with even dating carbon-based life forms with c-14, Potassium-Argon, and U238 dating methods citing estimations, wide variations in poly-striate specimens, and assumptions as to both the mathematics of half-life and of source amounts of the control substance (c14 for example).
In a recent article on http://www.icr.org Dr. John Morris discusses how that the study of modern volcanism truly undermines the theories widely accepted by many geologists. He states:
"Keep in mind that most of the damage done by the eruption (of Mount St. Helens) was water related. Mount St. Helens had been glacier-covered, and when it got hot, water raced down the mountain as a mighty flood, eroding soil, rocks, trees -- everything in its path -- eventually redepositing them at the foot of the mountain. Volcanic episodes added to the fury. When the eruption calmed, up to 600 feet of sediments had been deposited, full of plant and animal remains. Now the sediments have hardened into sedimentary rock and the dead things have fossilized. Furthermore, wood is petrifying. Peat (the precursor to coal) has formed. A deep canyon has been gouged out. Many features which geologists are taught take long ages to form, were seen to happen rapidly. Igneous rocks which formed since 1980 yield radioisotope dates of millions of years, but are obviously much younger in age.
A catchy slogan helps illustrate this. To form geologic features, it either takes a little bit of water and a long time, or a lot of water and a short time. Even though we didn't witness the Flood, we do see modern catastrophes, and they rapidly accomplish things the Flood did on a grander scale. In a short, Biblically compatible time scale, such a Flood can account for the features we see on earth, features which many geologists mistake for evidence of great age. Earth doesn't really look old, it looks flooded."
What Does Gender Have to do With it?
If evolution is true, then how did gender and reproduction arise?
Single cell mitosis/meiosis or asexual reproduction is the basic form of microbial or monoclete reproduction, however how can the evolutionist explain the rise of gender and of sexual reproduction? There is no advantage biolgically for a simple organism, which depends on its own genetics to recapitulate, to suddenly produce a like organism that only carries half of the genetic codes required. It would be mathematically self defeating and would result in the extinction of the life form.
Let's ask evolutionism why is reproduction even a facet of life at all?
The evolutionist cannot explain death and the purpose of reproduction in species preservation despite death. Once an early organism would have died, its existence would cease. Thereby that newly "mutated and evolved organism", if it could not reproduce, would never fully exist again.
For the existence of life to re-emerge, the same unlikely probability of spontaneous life generation would have to recur thousands and millions of times for there to be enough probability of there to be another single cell bacteria or monoclete who could "evolve" into either a multi-celled organism or one that reproduces sexually reflecting gender.
There would have been NO more life were it not for the possibility of continual spontaneous generation of life from the fabled "primordial soup" proposed by Stanley Miller. And if that were true, what force maintained that generation?
Stanley Miller proved quite successfully that attempts to artificially create life or even ONE protein building block is not possible. That is, not without the right conditions and a highly intelligent designer. Certainly one more intelligent than Darwin, Miller, De Vries, Leakey, Sagan, Einstein...all combined. For, in the history of intelligence in the human race, none has been able to create life from inorganic matter.
The entirety of all of the collective genius of all mankind has YET to produce or even understand the processes at work in a single living cell.
We can look at the inorganic and understand it down to the atomic and sub-atomic level, yet living and functioning organisms are perpetually complex and without explanation.
Another problem evolution faces is that when gender variations "start to exist" in the biological timescale no explanation is given for the sudden rise in the new structures necessary to facilitate the exchange of DNA between gendered organisms?
Mutation does not solve this puzzle because in the lifetime of the gendered organism, once the first halving of DNA begins and is divided between the sexes and without the instant presence of delivery structures, BOTH newly gendered organisms would die and the end of the biological strain would be certain.
Wikipedia even asks the question: "A major question is why sexual reproduction persists when parthenogenesis appears in some ways to be a superior form of reproduction."
Parthenogenesis? Here's a very interesting word. From the Greek Parthenos + Genesis It literally means "virgin creation" (Jesus' birth is another topic). Basically a fancy term for asexual reproduction meaning self-reproduction.
It all fits together.
With sexual reproduction there necessitates the presence of the complimentary developed reproductive organs for the recapitulation of that species to occur. The problem is that once one organism "evolves" a sexual organ that contains only 1/2 of the genetic material, there must be another existant organism that will concurrently "evolve" a complimentary sexual organ with PRECISELY the other half.
Applying probability to this equation ensures the death of all species who "mutate" to become sexually dimorphic relative to reproductive structures.
"An Object at Rest..."
Also, applying the Second Law of Thermodynamics ( which IS a proven fact) with all matter having a tendency toward entropy, there is no reason or mechanism for a successful monocyte that can reproduce by budding or asexual reproduction/self cloning would in fact become more organized into a sexually dimorphic organism.
Because to assume this is to imply that cells have information, that they have code, & they can become increasingly ordered rather then entropic. And if cells have code, order, information...there must be a source to that order. Darwinian evolution is completely diminished by the mere presence of gender.
Halfsies? Once gender "evolves", and the genetic code is halved and assigned to one gender-based individual, it kills the species because it forces that there must be an analagous formation to compliment. Again, in the precise order that matches the other half. This probability which not only virtualy ends the recapitulation of that organism, also forces that the origin of life must begin all over again to re-create those individuals who could "mutate" all over again.
Again, all of this implies code, design, intelligence.
Even in the face of this, secular humanist scientists, hold fast although they cannot prove the origin of life, the successful mutations of individuals, or the mechanism for living organisms' violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, the overcoming of probability and causation, etc
In the Darwinian progression of species there is the assumption that single celled organisms (whose existential causation is unknown) which reproduce asexually, have evolved via mutation or other causation into organized multi-cellular organisms with the capability for sexual reproduction.
It is materially impossible to substantiate the existence of gender based on evolutionist theory in light of the proliferation of species biodiversity and genderization.
It all goes back to the discussion of the chicken and the egg. Which came first?
The Creationist says the Chicken. This can be substantiated by observed science.
The Evolutionist says the Bacteria.This cannot.
Even if the egg came first, the protein information had to be organized into DNA in order to form the chicken and then that chicken would have grown up into either a rooster or a hen.
So, if you have one gender arising from an egg or DNA strand, that that necessitates another gender arising spontaneously from another egg or DNA strand. The likelyhood that these would occur independantly, let alone in the same timeframe in the geological time scale for them to reach parallel maturity to mate would be so astronomically and infinitesimally small that the only way that science could explain it actually happening would be to refer to it as what Christians call, "a miracle".
It would be far more likely that an asexual chicken would arise. that could simply lay an egg and clone itself.
Evolutionary theory is in essence a mathematical proponent of automatic self cloning rather than gender-based sexual reproduction. This however, would lead to lack of variation and susceptibility to mutation, disease, and more leading to the demise of life.
The very fact that there is rich biodiversity, gender, and sustained reproduction is a testament NOT to evolution, but to intelligent design.
Evolution has no answers for these questions. One cannot substantiate untruth with truth. If a theory cannot be tested, verified, and reproduced... it remains a theory. Not a fact.
Declaration of Independance: Jefferson got it right!
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of natureand of nature's Godentitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." God isthe Creator of Gender.
The fact is, that GOD our Creator created gender. He created it to preserve species, to create variation and strength in the genetics, and to insure against disease, mutation, and extinction.
These things that did not exist before the fall (the curse). Notice that Adam and Eve did not actually have children until after the fall. That is another discussion entirely, but one to mull over.
The Bible has this to say about gender:
Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 6: 19And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Matthew 19: 4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mark 10: 6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
The concept of "apparent maturity"
As with rocks, God made Adam and the earth with "apparant maturity". Meaning that he instantly created a mature structure. Adam was not a baby devoid of speech and function. He was made as a Man that was fully aware, sentient, communication, working, walking, speaking, breathing. He had hands, ribs, lungs, eyes, mouth, everything that a man has today.
So why the female gender?
Man was created as a complete genetic structure, but God saw it was not good for him to be alone. This is not because he needed help doing the dishes as chauvanists may have it. The Bible calls the woman a helpmate or "help meet for him" meaning both a mate and an appropriate physical partner.
The genetics for woman were taken from Adam's DNA and from it God made woman. Adam himself called her Eve "the mother of all living". But why?
Because without Eve, Adam would not have multiplied being created inherently gendered as male. He would either have had to live forever as male, or if he were to die in order for his race to continue he needed a conduit of genetic recapitulation. Since he was a highly developed complex organic multi-cellular, multi-systemic creature with a highly functioning brain..asexual budding or self cloning was not a possibility.
Adam, as made in the image of God (Christ) would not be able to produce Christ throughout time were it not for Eve. God, looking down through time saw that if Adam were to fall, or die, he would utterly die and that would make God's Creation of none effect and imperfect. Since God by definition is Absolute and Perfect, he created the answer for Adam's possible future in death by making Eve a conduit of life.
Thereby, God intervened in the biology of men and species to create males and females.
This is a theory that we can verify, reproduce, and test today. That is why it is called a fact.
Creationism is a scientific fact.
1 Timothy 6 20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings,
and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Darwinian Evolution is not Fact. It is not even theory.
It is Willfully Ignorant Secular Materialism.
The Second Adam: Jesus Christ and his genetic role in redemption.
The Bible calls Jesus the "Second Adam". The genetics of Adam were present in Jesus Christ just as they are in all of us. This is one reason why that the man Jesus Christ was so important to mankind in its redemption. His flesh, connected by genetics to Adam, bore the penalty for transgressions for all humanity.
1 Corinthians 15:45And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Once fully redeemed, men will become like angels. In immortality, reproduction is unneeded:
Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
Luke 20:34-36 (King James Version). 34And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
So how does one attain to this?
You must be Born again of the Spirit (Acts 2:38)
John 3 (King James Version) 3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of waterand of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Acts 2 (King James Version)
1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance...
...36Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.
40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
If you appreciate the content published here please "Like" us below: