Content
-
Evolution leads man into nonsense;
- The European Union's
position on evolution
- What are the facts of evolution?
1,
Fundamentally subjective attitude
2., It cannot account for the
origin of its own abilities
3, Manipulates the genetic program
of the dns
4, Cannot answer the origin of mutation scopy
5,
Bases its doctrine of biological evolution on random mutations and
recombinations.
6, Manipulation of natural selection
7,
Evolution's lie about selection
8., Manipulation of the
formation of new species
Summary
Fleshing out the Christian
message
Of the messianic kingdom
God's actual program in
the present time
Academic science's rigid, God-denying view is that the world can be explained without God: physics-chemistry-evolution-natural selection... And the result? An utterly meaningless, purposeless process creates a secular society of planet Earth-destroyers who refuse to accept any moral control over themselves.
“This is now our planet, run by humankind for humankind. We’ve not just ruined it. We’ve destroyed it.” – Sir David Attenborough - https://www.theceomagazine.com/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/attenborough-witness-statement/
And why do they deny it instead of facing the facts? Because science teaches them to find the meaning of their lives in various readily available substitutes, because existence is fundamentally meaningless, the material manifestation of life itself is the qualitative result of a random mechanical chemical process, a mixture of stardusts that natural biological processes have picked up and polished out of necessity driven by the need to survive.
The average man / who has been taught to deny God in biology class since childhood/ believes that a totally meaningless mechanistic process has produced the intelligence that makes the process that led to the emergence of intelligence utterly meaningless on the basis of the self-assigned intelligence he believes he possesses.
This notion is testimony to the atheist's use of reason to consciously deny the biological meaning of his own existence. I have reason by which I assert that existence itself is meaningless. See:
"The more intelligent you are, the more you see life and in it the meaninglessness of yourself." /Berkesi András András/.
"What is the meaning of life? Nothing at all. Why should it have any meaning? What do they mean by meaning anything at all?" /Georg Klein/
"Life is meaningless, (...) man's existence has no purpose, (...) we are but grains of dust in the wind of time, in the storm of space." - /Dean Ray Koontz/
All this is proof that secular society is incapable of rational thought because it has developed in its heart an aversion to its Creator and, driven by the impulse of its fundamentally corrupt nature, wants to live according to its own moral liberalism in order to indulge in its own chosen pleasures. Which then the ever louder secular mouthpieces of the age (Dawkins, etc.) are not failing to support and promote, so that the genie out of the bottle becomes more and more widespread and popular. This is the essence of human history, the essence of six thousand years.
But written history does not even go back six thousand years!
"Scholars generally agree that the earliest form of writing appeared almost 5,500 years ago in Mesopotamia (in what is now Iraq)." https://www.bl.uk/history-of-writing/articles/where-did-writing-begin
"The earliest civilisations emerged between 4000 and 3000 BC, ... first in Mesopotamia (in what is now Iraq) and then in Egypt." https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/key-components-civilization/
This world began to come into being because Adam and Eve denied their Creator, embarking on a path of their own choosing, that they would succeed that way. However, the Bible declares that man cannot lead himself successfully apart from God because he is created in such a way that without Him, fueled by his own feeble instincts, overwhelmed by the insatiable burden of lust that lives within him, his self-directed actions result in chaos at various levels of daily life. Were it not for his God-given conscience, his inglorious earthly career would have ended long ago.
Jeremiah 10:23 I know, O Lord, that man has no power over his own way, and no passerby can direct his steps!
He has failed in his enterprise, for an abnormal world has been created, see: the money of the world is poured into total destruction in front of the people, while they lie according to their interests, killing on the assembly line in glorification of war. And these rulers in power run the world.
Of course, they have the certainty of Darwinian evolution subconsciously nestled in their brains, which absolves them of any higher level of responsibility. At least that's what they believe, and this system of thinking is reflected in their life principles.
European Union Resolution on Evolution
"The whole genetic programme is at the service of DNA, not of humans themselves. We are merely temporary containers of life-bearing molecules. In this case the packaging, ourselves, is merely there to be discarded." /Rudi Westendorp, Dutch professor of genetics/
Man, notice that materialism identifies you as an accidental bean pod for throwing away! This is what official science says. In the report written for the EU it says:
"Science provides irreplaceable training in intellectual rigour. It does not seek to explain 'why things are', but to understand how they work... our genes, from which the word 'genetic' derives, carry information about the characteristics of a living organism, be it a simple bacterium or a human being. A gene is a "piece" of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). DNA carries the genetic information of all living things...
Populations form when individuals with certain characteristics (such as length) have more descendants than other individuals. Traits inherited from many descendants become more common in subsequent generations... Biological evolution is the change in genetic characteristics over time within a group of organisms or a population."
So, it explains scientifically why humans are a throwaway package for biological evolution. The paper goes on to say:
"Adaptation refers to the characteristics of an organism that enhance its ability to survive and reproduce in full harmony with its natural environment. Adaptation is the result of natural selection.... There is a danger that serious confusion may be introduced into the minds of our children between what has to do with beliefs, beliefs, ideas of all kinds, and what has to do with science, ...
The idea of 'intelligent design', the latest, more sophisticated version of creationism, does not deny some degree of evolution, but claims that it is the work of a higher intelligence. Although the doctrine of intelligent design is more subtle, it is no less dangerous...
The theory of evolution has nothing to do with divine revelation, but is based on facts...Pope Benedict XVI, for example, like his predecessor Pope John Paul II, today praises the role of science in the evolution of mankind and admits that the theory of evolution is "more than a hypothesis." /The dangers of creationism in education - Report - Committee on Culture, Science and Education Rapporteur: Anne BRASSEUR, Luxembourg, ALDE; 17 September 2007/ https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewHTML.asp?FileID=11751&lang=EN
So it does not explain why things are the way they are, but how they work. However, when he talks about the emergence of populations, it is not an answer to how things work, but to their origin.
Mona Lisa's smile comes from stardust. On closer inspection, from paint molecules. Why she smiles is not a response to the origin, but to the formation. Because they left Leonardo da Vinci out of it.
Man is derived in the same way from star molecules. Perhaps the Greater Leonardo da Vinci should not be left out? You can smile, but you should cry!
What are the facts of evolution?
1, FUNDAMENTALLY SUBJECTIVE ATTITUDE
Darwinian theory is explicitly rooted in an atheistic worldview that refuses to consider other origins.
Proponents of evolution are committed before understanding, their commitment dictates their understanding, so they are completely biased and non-objective in their conclusions, but explain things from a specific perspective specific to them.
"Evolution is not proven and cannot be proven, we only believe in it because otherwise we would have to believe in creation, which is unthinkable." /Sir Arthur Keith, anthropologist - in the introduction to the 100th edition of Darwin's Origin of Species/
Evolutionists want to prove after the fact what they have previously accepted as a worldview and from then on explain everything by subordinating it to that worldview. To state in advance something they want to prove afterwards, shouldn't it be the other way round?!
2, IT CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR THE ORIGIN OF ITS OWN ABILITIES
The mechanisms of evolution cannot account for the whole set of biological apparatus with which evolution is carried out in retrospect, but pre-programmed.
The cause of evolution does not exist in evolution. Evolution as a cause does not contain a response to the cause that makes it consequent. It does not give an account of itself, why is evolution possible in the first place? It is merely a programmed biological process on an assembly line.
"Evolutionary units must know the "trick" of reproducing, they must have heredity, hereditary variation... The basic problem is that the first evolutionary units could not have evolved in an evolutionary way, because they did not have the necessary properties at that time." (Evolutionary biologist Eőrs Szathmáry/.
Where did they get this "knack" - they have no idea!
A pre-existing ability cannot be developed afterwards, and if the ability to evolve /reproduction, mutation, variation, natural selection, heredity/ is not there in the first place, the evolutionary process cannot even start. Evolution can only work if all its components are present and working simultaneously. Where do we get these capabilities by which the alleged evolution takes place?
From where does the evolutionary process initially derive the possibility of mutational divergence /sequential changes in genetic letters/ occurring, which it later uses as a tool? So evolution requires organisms capable of evolution first before evolution can even start. And the mutation would first have to create the base in which to carry out the mutation, i.e. the working program base that it is intended to mutate. In both, the ability to run evolution after the fact is required in advance.
3., MANIPULATE THE GENETIC PROGRAM OF DNS
Darwinian evolution, with the mechanisms Darwin concocted, is completely inoperable, since it owes its functionality to the program recorded in DNA [the origin and evolution of which is, by the way, a universal mystery of biology - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293468/ ] in which there is coding for microevolution, such as the diversity of traits that promote variation within species, but not for the transformation of species into new species. Any concrete evidence of evolution is exhausted in micro-evolutionary changes in the adaptation of organisms over a lifetime, because that is what all organisms are genetically programmed to do.
This pre-existing capacity cannot be developed afterwards, and if the capacity for evolution is not there, the evolutionary process cannot begin. So evolution fails when organisms with the capacity to evolve from the start are created by an evolutionary process derived from some ancestral cell./In theory at least./In practice, evolution has nothing to do with the capacity to reproduce.
In the Darwinian view, the original genetic, flawless base /intelligent DNA code base/ was insufficient to create species populations, but from the accumulation of their mutational errors, unintelligent natural forces were able to create them. To put it simply, this means that the head chef of the five-star restaurant was unable to prepare a multi-course meal, but the unskilled kitchen staff, who were also poor at peeling potatoes, created it. If that's not scientific schizophrenia, what is!?
4, YOU CANNOT ANSWER THE ORIGIN OF MUTANSCOPY
Any subsequent mutation cannot create the genetic base in which the mutation first occurs, which would be the imaginary engine of such evolution. /Where does the evolutionary process get the possibility of mutational divergence / imprecise inheritance/ from, which it subsequently uses as a tool?
The mutational, random advantages of copy errors in the DNA program, selected after the fact, would provide the basis for evolution, since without mutation evolution cannot exist! However, mutation is not applicable to the creation of the DNA program in which the mutation occurs. Any subsequent mutation /sudden change in the heritable material/ cannot create the genetic base in which the mutation first takes place, which would be the imaginary engine of such evolution, the raw material for which it would provide. Therefore, the living world does not have an evolutionary basis, but a created DNA basis, in which the mutation takes place afterwards.
The genetic program is the DNA serving system. If DNA, by regulating protein synthesis, had incredibly precise instructions in the complex molecules/nucleotides that carry life for the reproductive evolution, function and flexible adaptation to the environment of all known living organisms, then there would be genetic instructions for the emergence of entirely new species populations, rather than being left to the vagaries of random change.
[Moreover, there is now evidence that genetically programmed, specifically targeted mutations exist!
"DNA mutations are not random, as previously thought."- https://www.ucdavis.edu/food/news/study-challenges-evolutionary-theory-dna-mutations-are-random
"The random occurrence of mutations in terms of their consequences is an axiom on which much of biology and evolutionary theory rests... However, new discoveries in genome biology are inspiring a rethinking of classical views." - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04269-6 ]
So even the way it happens is uncertain, let alone its origin.
5,
BUILDS ITS DOCTRINE OF BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION ON RANDOM MUTATIONS AND
RECOMBINATION.
This is immediately refuted by the
principle of artificial selection, which cannot be based on random
mutations and recombinations, because then the breeding goal would
not be achieved, no qualitative change would occur. Therefore, the
subjects for breeding must be selected consciously and the process
/improvement of the value-measuring characteristics of the breed/
must be started and continued until the objective is achieved. This
is guaranteed by the conscious, artificial selection of the breeder.
In evolution, by contrast, all qualitative changes are
due to random mutations and recombinations. So there is absolutely no
consciousness in the process, yet it produces the same result as a
biological manipulation. [At least that is the dogma.]
"If there are atoms, and there is a way, there will be
molecules; and if the molecules are in a warm, humid place, sooner or
later they will become elephants." /P.W. Atkins, Genesis,
p. 17.
Would the intelligence behind the unheard-of
complexity of the genetic program of life-organizing DNA /life's
blueprint/ design strategy have been replaced by the gamble of
evolutionary biology, the "as it rains it puffs"? Will the
molecules camping in a warm place create the elephant colony over
time?
Perhaps the lukewarm medium also turns letters into
sentences? Then what is the DNA program for, or the man who puts his
message into selected words? If everything evolves into what it
wants? Or not what it wants, but what it manages to do.
Man
needs consciousness, nature needs chance, and yet the result is the
same?
"Breeding is the
permanent activity of mating and then mating excellent breeding
individuals with the aim of obtaining offspring with even better
internal and external qualities than the parents... The aim of dog
breeding is to produce a more beautiful, better breed than the
existing stock. To achieve this, two basic conditions are necessary:
1. dogs of good quality; 2. dedicated and competent professionals. Of
course, the lion's share of the work in managed breeding is done by
dog breeders." /Arcanum.com - The concept of
breeding/
Same requirement for elephants, keep atoms,
molecules in a warm place and the elephant will evolve on its own.
And the district heating is provided. The rest will take care of
itself. The Darwinian genius is really obvious, at least in terms of
the popularity of the philosophy. In this his success is undoubtedly
unbroken.
6, MANIPULATION OF NATURAL SELECTION
"As long as the forces of selection are constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in a surprisingly short time." https://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/faq.shtml
Natural selection could
not have occurred before the alleged appearance of the first cell,
because selection can only occur in organisms that are capable of
dividing, in cells with DNA that can pass on genetic changes to their
offspring. Without DNA there is no division, without division there
is no mutation, without mutation there is no natural selection. If
one wants to explain the appearance of DNA by selection or mutation,
one presupposes the existence of the thing whose origin one wants to
explain.
Natural selection is supposed to have crushed the
design argument. Darwin clearly showed that a small series of
improbable, small blind steps could lead to apparent design without
design guidance - this could only happen with selection pressure
constantly in one direction, but what if the direction of selection
pressure changed? If the selection pressure changes [changes in wet
and dry weather, etc.], then the organism could easily recoil, as we
saw with the finch beak.
Contrary
to the necessary unidirectionality of evolution, natural conditions
are constantly changing, hence the directions and strengths of
selection pressures in the workings of nature are also changing,
whereas the success of artificial selection depends on the very fact
that it cannot change, because then the artificial breeding of
something is not achieved, the qualitative change does not
occur.
So, the first insurmountable obstacle is to
maintain the specific selection pressure on the organism for an
extremely long time /the necessary time/ in the face of constant
changes in natural conditions. /This is ensured in artificial
selection by conscious, artificial human intervention, by the
constant one-way maintenance of external selection pressure./
The
other huge problem is that not only the complete evolution of a
particular organism is attributed to natural selection, but the
complete evolution of millions of different organisms from a given
initial organism. This implies that as many different kinds of
organisms begin to evolve, selection pressures must be applied to
that organism, focusing on the appropriate subject, intensity and
direction, and maintained until the organism capable of independent
life, reproduction and adaptation to the given organic and inorganic
living conditions has evolved in a manner characteristic of that
species.
Since organisms are different, the selection
pressures must also be different, which means that what is good for
one is not necessarily good for the other /in artificial selection
this is quite obvious, since different organisms are not bred for the
same sample, but the pairings are determined by separate objectives:
favourable weight, speed, productivity, etc./ which is quite obvious
and evident!
So, if we contrast the millions of variations
in selection pressures with the millions of alleged branching
evolutions of organisms that require a particular line of evolution,
what do we get?
The living world is made up of millions of
different organisms, all of which fit into their environment with
absolute precision, how does the extremely diverse, conflicting,
uncoordinated environmental selection pressures create that, since
each organism must be individually paired with its own corresponding
selection pressure?! For a million different organisms to evolve, as
many different kinds of directed selection pressures are needed to
ensure successful evolution. What controls the direction of selection
pressure to the extent necessary - chance?
According to
Darwin, spontaneously acting selection pressures have evolved
everything as necessary /to support the creation of the strongest adaptable living things/ by slow, continuous, stepwise adaptation over an
extremely long period of time. You might say, by targeted breeding
without any purpose or plan [Designer].
And what about
head-on collisions? When an evolving organism is confronted with
selection forces that are completely opposite to the effects it had
previously been subjected to, how did it continue its evolutionary
line towards becoming more complex along its spontaneously initiated,
otherwise purposeless path?
In artificial selection, an
intelligently controlled strategic process is supervised by breeders,
whereas in natural selection, a random process is generated by
absolutely unsupervised alternating natural forces and directions.
And in both, the result is supposedly the same, a creature with
qualitatively superior anatomy and characteristics. Of which there
are millions, and millions more, with completely different functions
of life and reproduction.
In
an ever-changing environment, where will the necessary environmental
selection pressures come from for the millions of organisms not yet
fully evolved to reach full maturity? So it is not a matter of
inheriting the more favourable traits of one organism, but of
developing all the favourable traits of millions of organisms that
did not exist before!
The principle of artificial
selection could not have been copied by natural selection without
intelligence to exert a constant unidirectional selection pressure to
ensure the complex structure of millions of organisms. It even
thwarted it with constant environmental changes. So that this
continuous perfectionism on the imaginary evolutionary tree is just
pseudoscientific fantasy.
Regardless,
the miniature dinosaur from who knows where is said to have crept
forward from the ancestor to man, as if pulled by a string. Except
that this is not the merit of natural selection, but of evolutionists
catching the end of the string.
Natural selection
essentially facilitates a purification process in a given cycle,
while the subjects involved in the process adapt to changing natural
conditions by exploiting their particular gene sequence. This is the
end of its assigned task.
The Galapagos finch's beak
has changed back and forth over a short period of time, adapting to a
baseline situation. There was no one-way, millions of years of
selection pressure that would have transformed the finch into a
different species through the creative power of natural selection.
Their beaks reverted to the baseline after the climate changed, and
there was no one-way millions of years of evolutionary
macroevolutionary change.So they could not have evolved in this way.
The cycle of cyclical change prevents such an idea.
Historical
events past and present bear this out. Henceforth, any
macroevolutionary /trans-species/ change has no legitimacy in the
life of populations, because there is no special selection pressure
behind it! What there was, the population has solved by
microevolution /intra-lifetime variability/.
- As a king,
take that ugly frog, put selection pressure on it: kiss it around
long enough, it's sure to become a queen!
So what
disproves the macroevolutionary hypothesis of Darwinian evolution is
that there is no constant, unidirectional selection pressure behind
the imaginary process that precipitates macroevolution, species
structures programmed with entirely new genetic information. There
never was and never will be.
Because if there is a very
high selection pressure /need for survival/, say if the environment
becomes extremely cold, and the population cannot solve it within its
lifetime by fur breeding /or some related change/, it will go
extinct. /See for example mammoths./
Therefore, all
evolutionary change falls into the category of microevolution within
a lifetime. In short: selection pressure + adaptation within lifetime
= survival. Furthermore, all Darwinian speculation belongs to the
realm of fantasy and has no validity in real science.
This
hypothesis of blind evolution without any biological strategy [called
evolutionary theory] is not science, but is explicitly a hoax, a
speculative expression of delusion masquerading as science. Natural
selection will solve it, sort it out, evolve it. The woman who picks
the tickets is also famous for filling the theatre auditorium by
picking the tickets. And the jury creates the excellent productions,
not just judges them. In Darwinism, that's just the way things
are.
And it succeeds with the lay masses only because it
produces moral license. And scientists make their living from it,
that's what they get the financial and moral support for, to maintain
this materialistic world view.
7,
EVOLUTION'S LIE ABOUT SELECTION
"Selective
pressure gives organisms with certain phenotypes an advantage in
survival and reproduction. Over time, this leads to evolution."
https://catherinephamevolution.weebly.com/selection-pressure.html
This is a huge hoax, because the same selection that
retains preferred variation also selects out the same variation as
soon as the direction of selection pressure changes. So the same
positive selection and negative selection as a function of changing
selection pressure!!!
Selection shuffles back and forth,
once it books something as an advantage, then it books the same thing
as a disadvantage. All this happens within a species, so you can't
stack imaginary advantages on top of each other to create an
imaginary new species, because new anatomical and character changes
can easily become disadvantages!
How is it taught? They
only count the advantages [what they call evolutionary development],
which is pseudo-scientific Darwinian philosophy! It is equally
delusional to claim: - One once stole, which in time leads to
becoming a criminal, whose specialty is theft. Only that over time he
changed and did not become a criminal! /Selective pressure did not
lead to evolution!/
Darwinism is a series of subtle
deceptions and deliberate slips dressed up in scientific garb! A
godless doctrine that leads to moral self-righteousness. But that is
why it was invented, to give atheists free rein for moral
perversions.
The English biologist Sir Julian Huxley
stated, "The reason we jumped to Darwin's
book was that the idea of God interfered with our sexual habits."
From here on, the moral motive for this biological
manipulation is quite obviously given.
8, MANIPULATION OF
THE FORMATION OF NEW SPECIES
Darwin indicated that
species can evolve by a species splitting into two, or a population
diverging from its existing ancestor to the point of becoming a new
species. Darwin's insights into evolution were brilliant... https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/speciation-the-origin-of-new-species-26230527/
In
contrast, in his manuscript on Natural Selection, he writes: "No
wonder that it is difficult to determine the difference between
species and kind; - there is no
essential, only arbitrary difference" (Darwin 1975,
p. 98). In The Origin of Species he writes: 'I regard the term
species as being arbitrarily given for convenience to a set of very
similar individuals, and as being essentially no different from the
term variety' (Darwin, 1859 [1964, p. 52]). Darwin writes in a letter
to Hooker that the word "race"
is "indefinable" (24
December 1856); and in The Origin he writes that the meaning of the
term "race" is
"undiscoverable".
For
Darwin, 'species' is indefinable because there is no distinction
between species and varieties.
Many biologists reject
Darwin's scepticism about the species category, especially those who
support the biological concept of species. For example, Mayr writes:
'Darwin failed to solve the problem indicated in the title of his
work... I have examined the reasons for this failure (Mayr 1959a) and
have found that among them is Darwin's
failure to understand the nature of species' (Mayr) 1963,
p. 12.
What have we read above? "Darwin indicated
that species can evolve by a species splitting into two, or by a
population diverging from its existing ancestor until it becomes a
new species. Darwin's evolutionary insights were brilliant
..."
So the genius Darwin did not understand the
nature of species, regardless Darwin's work is still resulting in new
species today, because evolution is based on the proposition that new
species are formed from the stem cell.
How else did they
evolve 25 million years ago? And where did they get their entire
anatomical gene pool? Where did they get their reproductive
mechanism? Their need to adapt to a wetland environment? /All
evolutionary experiments seem to work on nature's field table, but
get stuck at the basic DNA program. Because already there it is
necessary to determine what is to become what. It is not decided on
the waterfront, nor on the treetops.
True, Darwin
apparently decided the question without knowing on which tree DNA
grows. He knew about evolution, that it grows on trees. On the trunk
tree, I mean. Because he believed that DNA grew out of the tree
trunk. Did anyone find a program in the DNA for the phylogenetic
tree? Not really.
The DNA similarities between different
creatures is evidence of common engineering design, and the fact that
the differences in these DNA sequences are inexplicable by the
alleged evolutionary processes is also strong evidence of design.
Let's leave it at that.
Summary
Evolution is
only an apparently natural process, in reality it is a causal system
that is an intelligent event. If evolution is an evolution in itself,
why did the theory of evolution not develop on its own, why did it
need Darwin to develop it? If the theoretical process required
intelligence, why did the physical process not require
intelligence?
The essence of Darwinian evolution is the
benefit of mutations under selection pressure, which natural
selection incorporates into the species that evolve bit by bit over
the long term, the stacking of life forms that emerge in this way
over millions of years.
This sounds like a good
hypothesis, but countless factors prove that the reality is quite
different!
1, Selection pressure is constantly changing in
response to a changing environment.
2, The benefits of
mutations do not ensure long term stacked unidirectional evolution
because they do not accumulate in a population.
[The unidirectional accumulation of traits requires an associated unidirectionally accumulating environment with associated unidirectionally accumulating selection pressure. And what causes this to accumulate? Is it blind luck ordered by Darwinism? Because the ordering of Darwinism is unidirectionally cumulative, no doubt. Otherwise the whole belief system makes no sense! According to them, everything accumulates as it is written in the evolutionist Big Book. What Darwin wrote, they confirmed. They order it and it happens. In Grimm's most beautiful fairy tales, surely.
The hereditary immunity of
bacteria still results in bacteria. Show the evolutionists an
accumulation that creates another, completely different species. If
this worked, there would be no bacteria by now.]
3, Species do not evolve, but those that already exist change by exploiting the adaptive variability programmed into them.
4,
Transition states do not exist between species, but species that
appear to be transitional are stable species designed for two
habitats.
When the Elizabeth Bridge was built [in
Hungary], and it was in a state of transition, no one travelled on it
because it did not have the capacity to perform the original function
for which it was designed. If, according to the philosophy of
evolution, all living things were in a state of transition, none of
them could perform the original function for which they were
designed, because they would not be able to survive. Survival is
ensured by exiting the transition state, but you cannot cross the
bridge until this happens. The fact that the creatures survive
smoothly proves that they are not in a transient state, they never
were, they never had to exit this state!
5. Humanity is
not part of the natural ecosystem, but a separate creation.
There
is a good slip of the tongue in an article on ecosystems that goes
like this:
"In order to protect natural ecosystems, it would be important for humanity to stay out of nature's business as much as possible and have as little influence as possible on the natural functioning of living communities." /https://xforest.hu/okoszisztema/
This
is a key sentence of immense import, proving that Darwinian
evolutionary phylogeny cannot be applied to the origin of man, for if
it could be applied, man would be an integral part of the natural
ecosystem - as he has a key position as so many others - but it is
precisely that without man that it functions truly properly, man only
disrupts it. Because he is directly and deliberately disobedient to
the Creator of the original ecosystem.
[The ecosystem
cannot create itself, because it needs to be able to see the whole
process through to fit the necessary parts into place at the right
place and time. This requires intelligence and
programming!
Creatures live in constant struggle and
compulsively eat each other alive to survive, but in the beginning,
the evolution of survival was not necessary. Creation started with
perfect harmony and will return to the same. Darwinian evolutionary
theory questions both by making transition an idea.
Christ
also went through the path of suffering in order to bring the
believer in him back to the intimate closeness of God through
redemption, but this path became necessary because of the fall into
sin. In the same way, evolution belongs to the present world order;
in Christ's kingdom the forced practice of evolutionary adaptation
will no longer be necessary.]
After all, humans do not
need to become another species to survive, so why should other
animals? Evolution does not explain the evolution of living beings,
but forcibly subordinates to accepted doctrine the facts of events,
which it establishes according to a materialistic worldview,
according to its own arbitrary resolution.
The Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, like the scientific academies of 67 countries,
including the Royal Society, which was one of the first to speak out,
distances itself from "non-scientific ideas" that attack,
distort or criticise the scientifically established claims of
Darwinism with pseudo-scientific arguments. "The
Darwinian theory of evolution is, as is common in the evolutionary
sciences, not completely closed, but it is scientifically sound and
adequately describes the origin and transformation of species."
/MTA Bureau. 2008/ "Evolutionary theory is
stronger than ever. It is accepted the world over, and there is
nothing yet on the horizon to shake it." /Skeptical
Society/
The inevitable consequence of this is that the
majority of secular society is unable to hear the biblical gospel
message of a Christian kingdom over mankind and to conform to its
requirements. For the youth in particular (growing up in the public
education system) are totally confused and do not know what to
believe!
Fulfilling the Christian message
To
counterbalance this is the message that the community of Christians
has been called to proclaim for two thousand years now, at the
beginning of the age of grace:
2 Corinthians 5:18-21 Now
all this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Jesus
Christ, and who gave us the ministry of reconciliation; for it was
God who in Christ reconciled the world to himself, not imputing their
sins to them, and entrusted to us the word of reconciliation.
Therefore, walking as ambassadors for Christ, as though God were
pleading through us: We ask for Christ's sake, be reconciled to God.
For he made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be
the righteousness of God in him.
Man's true destiny
is to be a reflection of God's righteousness, the purpose and meaning
of his life to be fulfilled in works of love, the good fruits of
which the peoples of the world will enjoy in undisturbed peace,
security and complete unity for an eternity to the glory of
YHVH/YAHUVEH/YHWH God.
2Peter 3:17-18 Knowing this beforehand, my beloved, take heed lest, being led astray by the error of the ungodly, you fall from your own strength; but grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory, both now and for ever and ever. Amen.
ABOUT THE MESSIANIC KINGDOM
"A shoot shall spring up from the trunk of Jesse, and a shoot shall spring up from his roots. The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the Spirit of wisdom and the Spirit of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and the Spirit of might, the Spirit of knowledge and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord; and he shall be filled with the fear of the Lord. He will not judge according to what the eye sees, nor will he judge according to what the ear hears, but he will judge the weak justly, and will judge righteously for the poor of the earth; he will smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked. Justice shall be the girdle of his waist, and the binder of the loyal hip. Then the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with his whelp; the calf and the lion's whelp shall feed together, and the young child shall lead them in his herd. Cow and bear graze together, their young lie down together, and the lion eats straw like the cow. The baby plays at the viper's nest, and the weaned child puts its hand into the cavity of the apsis snake. They shall not hurt nor destroy anywhere on my holy mountain, for the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters fill the sea." (Isaiah 11:1-9)
GOD'S ACTUAL PROGRAM IN THE PRESENT TIME
"This is what will happen in the last days: the mountain of the house of the LORD /JEHOVAH/ will stand strong above the mountains, it will be higher than the hills, and all nations will flow to it. Many nations will come and say, 'Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may teach us his ways, that we may walk in his paths. For out of spiritual Zion comes the teaching, and out of spiritual Jerusalem the word of the LORD. He judgeth among the nations, and judgeth many peoples. They shall make their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; and nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. House of Jacob /Blessed followers of Christ/! Come, let us walk in the light of the Lord." (Isaiah 2:2-5)
[The original language of the study is Hungarian.]
