Paul Mitchell’s Book of Religious Quotations,
2002 edition

Letter E

To search inside this page use your "Find" function to go directly to it.
CTRL +F KEYS


*ECONOMICS

*ECUMENICALISM

*EGYPT, GHOSTS & EXORCISMS

*EGYPT, RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS

*ELECTION

*EPISCOPALIAN, AUTHORITY

*ETHICS, PAGAN

*EVIDENCE OF GOD

*EVOLUTION, ATTACKS FAITH

*EVOLUTION, AS A FAITH

*EVOLUTION, EARLY CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS

*EVOLUTION, DINOSAURS?

*EVOLUTION, DOGMA

*EVOLUTION, EFFECTS ON LAW

*EVOLUTION, MORALITY OF

*EVOLUTION, ORIGINS

*EVOLUTION, PLURALITY OF

*EVOLUTION, PROBLEMS WITH

*EVOLUTION, RACISM OF

*EVOLUTION, STATEMENTS ON RELIGION

*EVOLUTION, THEISTIC

*EVOLUTION, THERMODYNAMICS

*EVOLUTION, WEAKNESS ADMITTED


*ECONOMICS

PAUL MITCHELL: Consider that Judaic/Christian scripture has largely led man away from situations whereby religion becomes big business. Except for the Temple, no other situation was created whereby man could cash in on religion. No localized franchises of the Temple, no tokens, no idols, magic charms or amulets, as we see in Acts 19. Only perhaps in sacrificial animals could money be made, and Jesus condemned profiteering schemes.

Yet Christianity is not without hucksters. Is God pleased to see His Name used to sell pencils and other junk in "Christian" bookstores and fairs? Is the gospel made of sending your money in to televangelists?

EGYPTIAN CLERICAL MONOPOLY: "The practice of offering mummified animals at a shrine of the god became a successful business for the temples, which maintained large breeding pens for the animals. When they reached a certain age (for cats this was about ten months) the creatures were killed and mummified, and the mummies were sold to pilgrims. The practice was evidently very lucrative: the ibis catacombs of North Saqqara are believed to hold the mummified remains of around four million birds, and the cemetery at Bubastis, cult centre of the cat goddess Bast, contains many thousands of cat mummies." (Picture caption): "A decoratively wrapped mummy of a young crocodile (1st century CE); thousands of of such mummies were buried in honour of the crocodile god Sobek." (Ancient Egypt, DP SIlverman, Ed, Oxford Univ Press, 1997, 163)

GARY NORTH: "Can men legitimately have confidence in the law of God in economic affairs? Yes. Why is this confidence justified? Because the same God who delivered Israel from the Egyptians also established the laws of economics. This means that the basis of these economic laws is not man, or random chance, or historical cycles, or the impersonal forces of history, but instead is the SUSTAINING PROVIDENCE OF GOD. The guarantor of the reliability of economic law is a personal Being who delivers His people from those who defy His law."

--Gary North, The Sinai Strategy, pg 21, Institute for Christian Economics, Tyler, TX.

PM: Liberation and the Law of God go together. God set the Hebrews free from Egypt, from false gods, from oppressive law, stagnant Egyptian govt, false health concepts, and gave them liberation thru truth in religion, govt, law, sanitation.

CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT AND THE BIBLE: "So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who had asked of him a king. And he said, "This will be the procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots. And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and some to do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers. And he will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves, and give them to his servants. And he will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards, and give to his officers and to his servants. He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys, and use them for his work. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants. Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." 1 Sam 8:10-18

PAUL MITCHELL: Is not 1 Samuel 8:10-18 a description (and proscription) of ANY highly centralized government? Does this not define socialism and tell us what God thinks of it? The essential problem with centralized government is it takes away the self-responsibility God wants man to have. It instills covetousness in its place, where everyone runs to the public trough to "soak the rich." Samuel precisely describes the covetous seizing of wealth for redistribution to whomever the government deems worthy....socialism! It is my opinion that when God told the Hebrews:

"If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee" (Ex 15:26)

...He was not just speaking of physical diseases. Bad government is a disease on man! God brought them out from Egypt, a highly centralized government which seized goods and labor for the Pharaoh’s idiotic and unproductive monuments to the dead. God gave in place of this government a system of no standing army, no central government, no professional police force, no taxes, but He did give enormous self-responsibilities in all categories.

*ECUMENICALISM (SEE RELATIVISM)

BILLY GRAHAM AND CATHOLICISM, MORMONISM:
Larry King: "What do you think of Mormonism, Catholicism, other faiths within the Christian concept?"
Billy Graham: "Well I think I am in wonder fellowship with all of them."
Larry King: "You’re comfortable with Salt Lake City. You’re comfortable with the Vatican?"
Billy Graham: "I am very comfortable with the Vatican."
Larry King: "You were preaching in his church (Pope) the day he was made pope."
Billy Graham: "That is correct."
Larry King: You like the Clintons.
Billy Graham: I like the Clintons very much.
Larry King: "You are a democrat"
Billy Graham: "Yes."
(On Larry King Live, January 22, 1997)

CHAD SYCHTYSZ (PREACHER): "Are you familiar with "ecumenism"? It means "brotherhood" or "universal," but is being applied to a modern movement to unite all kinds of religions and denominations together. Of course, the only way one can unite such a diverse array of beliefs and doctrines is to find the lowest common denominator, and use that as a "common bond" or "common ground" upon which we can all "come together" and have "fellowship." Usually, this "common ground" is "faith in Jesus"--a phrase or tenet never very clearly defined, purposely left ambiguous and vague. Nobody wants to offend anybody else, and certainly no one wants to pretend that his "faith in Jesus" is better than someone else's. The problem is, there is no authority for these groups to "come together" in the name of Jesus under those terms [refusing to hold firm for the gospel even at the expense of offending]."

Symmachus (pagan) to emperor Valentinian II: "We ask for peace and for our native indigenous gods. We cultivate the same soil, we are one in thought, we behold the same stars, the same heaven and the same world surrounding. Why should not each, according to his own purpose, seek the truth? The Great Mystery cannot be approached by one road. The divine mind distributed various thoughts and guardians in the cities; as various spirits in youth, so the fatal Genii are divided among nations." (This when paganism struggled for survival) (Relatio de ara Victoriae, cited by Stephen Benko, "Pagan Rome and the Early Christians," BT Batsford Ltd, London, 1984, p 59)

BILLY GRAHAM: "Many are the routes that lead to God . . . Every one goes his own way from God and then every one must find his own way back." (Billy Graham, My Answer, 3/9/54)

STEPHEN BENKO: "The real objection against Christianity for the pagans was... that they made doctrinal statements concerning divine matters. This is the point at which Caecilius really draws the line. He calls the claim of the Christians to exclusive possession of the truth 'arrogant and irresponsible' behavior. A contemporary of Fronto, and another famous critic of Christianity, Celsus raised the same criticism. In True Word he wrote: "They regularly discuss fundamental principles and make arrogant pronouncements about matters of which they know nothing." ...The Romans tolerated a remarkable degree of religious liberty, and they, therefore, found the Christians' exclusive claims to truth disconcerting. The statement by Caecilius, that no human being should claim to pass final judgment on divine matters, is quite consistent with the Roman mentality. The Romans believed that when Christians claimed exclusive possession of divine knowledge, they were capable of anything. This attitude encouraged the Romans to give credence to the most outrageous rumors about Christians. An irreconcilable difference existed between pagans and Christians on this issue. The pagan took the position that matters pertaining to the divine mystery were obscure and so should be left open to debate. The Christian, however, was convinced that he was in possession of the truth, because Jesus Christ embodied the ultimate revelation about God. The two great Christian thinkers of the second century, Irenaeus (died c. 190) and Tertullian (c. 150-220) eloquently pleaded for the superiority of Christianity precisely on this principle. Veritas meaning "Truth," is the word Tertullian used most frequently in his polemics with pagans and heretics, and he consider all his opponents victims of false belief." (Stephen Benko, Pagan Rome and the Early Christians, BT Batsford Ltd, London, 1984, p 58)

*EGYPT, GHOSTS & EXORCISMS

PRAYING TO THE EGYPTIAN DEAD: "If the blessed dead became the recipients of cult and correspondence, less favoured spirits were widely feared for their potential destructive wrath. Medical spells frequently cite the unholy dead as the enemy afflicting the patient, the source of illness and disease. As is evident from the 'Letters to the Dead', even favoured spirits might inflict injury when angered, and petitioners were quick to beg for leniency and favour. Threatening to all -both pharaoh and commoner alike- the danger that these malignant spirits posed required some form of response, and a series of rituals was devised for their suppression.

Individuals who were thought to harass the living after death could be overcome by attacking their tomb, images or name." (Ancient Egypt, DP SIlverman, Ed, Oxford Univ Press, 1997, 144)

COMPARE TO CATHOLIC PRAYER TO SAINTS: "By virtue of their justification in the underworld tribunal of Osiris, the beatified dead were believed to serve as intermediaries between their surviving relatives and the court of the gods. Now equipped with divine powers themselves, the spirits (akhs) retained their personal interests, allegiances and family bonds, and could be swayed by petitions and prayers." (Ancient Egypt, DP SIlverman, Ed, Oxford Univ Press, 1997, p142)

*EGYPT, RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS

HILARY WILSON: "Religion was not a way of life for the Egyptians, life was their religion. Their deities were very different from the distant, abstract beings of other civilizations. They lived amongst their followers in temples which were conceived not as places of communal worship but rather as palatial homes for the most affluent and influential members of Egyptian society. The gods were the first citizens of Egypts." --Hilary Wilson, People of the Pharaohs, Michael O'Mara Books Ltd, London, UK, p10)

GARY NORTH: "That God should bring frogs to curse Egypt as the second plague was fitting. The frog was an important fertility deity in Egypt. The frog-goddess Heqet at Abydos was pictured as sitting at the bier of Osirus, a god of death and rebirth. Frog amulets were popular as symbols of new life and new birth. 'The 'matlametlo,' a great frog over five inches long, hides in the root of a bush as long as there is a drought, and when rain falls, it rushes out. It comes with the rain as the beetle with the rising of the Nile; both are symbolic of a new life and growth.(1) Just as the Nile, Egypt's life-bringer, became the death-bringer, so did the frogs become a plague." --Gary North, Moses & Pharaoh, Institute for Christian Economics, Tyler, TX, pg 105) (1:"Osiris," E.A.Wallis Budge, University Books, p.vii Introduction, 1961)

ETERNAL CYCLES: "A permanent tension existed between cosmic opposites, such as good and bad, light and dark, barrenness and fertility, and, above all, between cosmos, or harmonious order (ma'at) and chaos (isfet). The universe itself participated in cycles of repeated patterns: the daily rising and setting of the sun, the round of the seasons, the annual flooding and the recession of the Nile. When ma'at broke down isfet ensued: when the Nile flood failed to materialize, the country suffered from famine. It followed in the Egyptian mind that mortals should seek to ensure, through their rituals, the continuation of cosmic order and the benevolence of the gods and goddesses who controlled the universe.

...[Repetitive] Ritual gave structure to the past, which the Egyptians viewed with profound reverence. The state of the world was considered to have been perfect at its creation; change was not necessarily viewed as progress, but more likely as an undesirable deviation. As unchanging reenactments of ancient events, actions and utterances, rituals contributed to the preservation of the ideal condition of the universe."

--DP Silverman, Ed, Ancient Egypt, Oxford Univ Press, 1997, 148.

ELECTION

JUSTIN MARTYR: "In order that we do not remain children of necessity and ignorance but become children by free choice and insight and gain forgiveness of our former sins, there is pronounced in the water, over the one who longs for the new birth and who has repented of his misdeeds, the name of God, the father of all, and the Lord." (First Aplogy 61; cited by Eberhard Arnold, "The Early Christians," Plough Publishing, 1997, pg 245)

TERTULLIAN: "Men are made, not born Christians." (Apology 18)

TERTULLIAN: "The Christian soul is always made, never naturally born." (Testimony of the Soul 1) (cited by (Eberhard Arnold, "The Early Christians," Plough Publishing, 1997, pg 49-50)

*EPISCOPALIAN, AUTHORITY

THE GOSPEL AND: "Former presiding Lutheran Bishop David Preus will visit Tacoma next weekend to speak out against a Lutheran agreement with the Episcopal Church.

Preus contends that the accord, titled "Called to Common Mission," goes against Lutheran tradition by requiring acceptance of the "historic episcopate."

The historic episcopate refers to the belief that bishops are ordained into an unbroken line of religious leadership going back to Jesus' apostles. The Lutheran-Episcopal agreement would require all new clergy to be ordained by a bishop, and each new bishop to be ordained or installed by three bishops from the his-toric episcopate.

The Episcopal Church historically has accepted this understanding of ordination. Lutherans have not, believing instead "that it is enough to agree on the gospel and administer the sacraments," Preus said. "Now, we’re being required to include the historic episcopate as a necessary item." ("Opponent of Lutheran-Episcopal Pact to Speak," The News Tribune, Tacoma, WA, 5-13-2000, p.B6)

--------------------------------------

The Ratification of The Book of Common Prayer (1789) -- (recertified and in force for Episcopalians in the 1977 edition)

"By the Bishops, the Clergy, and the Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, in Convention, this Sixteenth Day of October, in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty-Nine.

This Convention having, in their present session, set forth "A Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church," do hereby establish the said Book: And they declare it to be the Liturgy of this Church: And require that it be received as such by all the members of the same: And this Book shall be in use from and after the First Day of October, in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety."

Preface [to the Book of Common Prayer]:

". . .And now, this important work being brought to a conclusion, it is hoped the whole will be received and examined by every true member of our Church. . ." --Philadelphia, October, 1789

(The Book of Common Prayer, 1977, Kingsport Press, Kingsport TN, pg 8-10,)

*ETHICS, PAGAN

EP SANDERS: "In the Graeco-Roman world ethics were discussed by philosophers but were not, as a rule, thought to have divine sanction, while Jews thought that the rules governing treatment of 'the neighbour' and 'the stranger' were given by God to Moses. They corresponded to God's own nature: 'You shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy... You shall love your neighbour ... You shall love [the stranger]' (Lev. 19.2-34)." (E.P.Sanders, "Judaism, Practice & Belief, 63BCE - 66 CE," Trinity Press Int'l, pg 50)

*EVIDENCE OF GOD

“A wasp catches the spider, stings it to paralyze it, and glues an egg to the abdomen of the spider. The spider wakes up after a while and goes about its normal life of catching insects. After a week or more, the spider will suddenly change its behavior and, instead of making a normal web, it starts making a strangely shaped web--shaped more like a cocoon than a normal spider web. When the oddly shaped structure was built, the spider went to the center of the structure and died. The larva in the egg then emerges, eats the spider's body, and finishes spinning the cocoon the spider started. In a few days, the baby wasp emerges from the cocoon and flies away to repeat the process.”  (John Clayton, “The Puppet Spider,” Does God Exist?, http://doesgodexist.org/JulAug01/ThePuppetSpider.html)

*EVOLUTION, ATTACKS FAITH

Professor W. R. Thompson, R. F. S., formerly Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada: "As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of the evolutionists show that they think this unreasonable. This situation, where scientific men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigour, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science." ("Introduction to Darwin's Theory," in Darwin, Origin of Species, Everyman's Library (London: Dent, 1967, p. xxii.)

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: "I see no reason for attributing to man a significant difference in kind from that which belongs to a baboon or a grain of sand. I believe that our personality is a cosmic ganglion, just as when certain rays meet and cross there is a white light at the meeting point, but the rays go on after the meeting as they did before, so, when certain other streams of energy cross at the meeting point, the cosmic ganglion can frame a syllogism or wag its tail." (Richard Hertz, "Chance and Symbol," p.107, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 52, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

*EVOLUTION, AS A FAITH

BLIND FAITH: "You may think that a person in an attempt to disprove Darwin's theory has a formidable task, but in that respect you would be wrong. Creationists, evolutionists, and other scientists have been shooting holes in the theory for a long time and most recently, cell biologists have all but completed the job: it doesn't work. But proving a theory wrong is one thing, the convincing of true believers, or the Media, is quite another." --Anonymous, from "Evolution an entirely different view"

REQUIRES FAITH: "The truth is that Creation and macroevolution [life from dead matter] each demand a certain degree of faith. And neither theory fits the Darwinists' own definition of 'science' because neither theory is repeatable nor observable. That is, neither is 'science' in the empirical sense, but both are 'science' in the forensic sense. As a result, both theories should be tested by the rigors of forensic science and judged by the forensic evidence." [Like a crime scene is examined by forensic criminologists --PM]. (Geisler & Turik, "Legislating Morality," Bethany House Publ., Minn., MN, 55438, pg 72)

HAROLD C. UREY, NOBEL LAUREATE: "All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel that it is too complex to have evolved anywhere. We all believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that its complexity is so great it is hard for us to imagine that it did." (cited by Geisler & Turik, "Legislating Morality," Bethany House Publ., Minn., MN, 55438, pg 69)

ROBERT JASTROW, EVOLUTIONIST PHYSICIST: "Either life was created on the earth by the will of a being outside the group of scientific understanding; or it evolved on our planet spontaneously through chemical reactions occurring in nonliving matter lying on the surface of the planet. The first theory is a statement of faith in the power of a Supreme Being not subject to the laws of science. The second theory is also an act of faith. The act of faith consists in assuming that the scientific view is correct, without having concrete evidence to support that belief." (cited by Geisler & Turik, "Legislating Morality," Bethany House Publ., Minn., MN, 55438, pg 72)

*EVOLUTION, EARLY CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS

170-215 AD MARK FELIX: "Some men deny the existence of any Divine power. Others inquire daily as to whether or not one exists. Still others would construct the whole fabric of the universe by chance accidents and by random collision, fashioning it by the movement of atoms of different shapes." (M. Felix Octavius chap. 30 [Notice the term "atom" isn't a twentieth century invention, but a term coined by Greek philosophers.])

181 AD Theophilus of Antioch: "On the fourth day the luminaries came into existence. Since God has foreknowledge, he understood the nonsense of the foolish philosophers who were going to say that the things produced on earth come from the stars, so that they might set God aside. In order therefore that the truth might be demonstrated, plants and seeds came into existence before the stars. For what comes into existence later cannot cause what is prior to it" (To Autolycus 2:15).

181 AD Theophilus of Antioch:"All the years from the creation of the world [to Theophilus's day] amount to a total of 5,698 years and the odd months and days. . . . [I]f even a chronological error has been committed by us, for example, of 50 or 100 or even 200 years, yet [there have] not [been] the thousands and tens of thousands, as Plato and Apollonius and other mendacious authors have hitherto written. And perhaps our knowledge of the whole number of the years is not quite accurate, because the odd months and days are not set down in the sacred books" (To Autolycus, 3:28-29).

234 AD Origen: "The text said that `there was evening and there was morning'; it did not say `the first day,' but said `one day.' It is because there was not yet time before the world existed. But time begins to exist with the following days" (Homilies on Genesis).

234 AD Origen: "And since he [the pagan Celsus] makes the statements about the `days of creation' ground of accusation--as if he understood them clearly and correctly, some of which elapsed before the creation of light and heaven, the sun and moon and stars, and some of them after the creation of these we shall only make this observation, that Moses must have forgotten that he had said a little before `that in six days the creation of the world had been finished' and that in consequence of this act of forgetfulness he subjoins to these words the following: `This is the book of the creation of man in the day when God made the heaven and the earth [Gen. 2:4]'" (Against Celsus 6:51).

234 AD Origen: "And with regard to the creation of the light upon the first day . . . and of the [great] lights and stars upon the fourth . . . we have treated to the best of our ability in our notes upon Genesis, as well as in the foregoing pages, when we found fault with those who, taking the words in their apparent signification, said that the time of six days was occupied in the creation of the world" (ibid., 6:60).

260-330 AD LACTANTIUS: "Some people teach that the first men lived nomadic lives among the woods and plains. They were not united by any bond of speech or laws. Instead, they lived in caves and grottos, using leaves and grass for their beds. They were prey to the beasts and stronger animals. Eventually, those who had escaped, having been torn [by wild beasts] ... sought out the company of other men for protection. At first they communicated to each other by nods; then they tried elementary forms of speech. By attaching names to various objects, they little by little developed a system of speech." (Lactantius Institutes bk. 6, chap. 10)

370 AD Ambrose of Milan: "Scripture established a law that twenty-four hours, including both day and night, should be given the name of day only, as if one were to say the length of one day is twenty-four hours in extent. . . . The nights in this reckoning are considered to be component parts of the days that are counted. Therefore, just as there is a single revolution of time, so there is but one day. There are many who call even a week one day, because it returns to itself, just as one day does, and one might say seven times revolves back on itself. Hence, Scripture appeals at times of an age of the world" (The Six Days Work 1:1-2).

408 AD AUGUSTINE: "With the Scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the Scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 2:9).

408 AD AUGUSTINE: "Seven days by our reckoning, after the model of the days of creation, make up a week. By the passage of such weeks time rolls on, and in these weeks one day is constituted by the course of the sun from its rising to its setting; but we must bear in mind that these days indeed recall the days of creation, but without in any way being really similar to them" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 4:27).

AD Augustine "They [pagans] are deceived, too, by those highly mendacious documents which profess to give the history of [man as] many thousands of years, though reckoning by the sacred writings we find that not 6,000 years have yet passed" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 12:10).

*EVOLUTION, DINOSAURS?

Job 40:15: "Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as you; he eats grass like an ox. Look, his strength is in his loins. And his force is in the muscles of his belly. He moves his tail like a cedar: The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are as tubes of brass; his limbs are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: only He who made him gives him his sword." Surely the mountains bring forth food for him – where all the beasts of the field do play. He lies under the lotus-trees, in the covert of the reeds and the marsh. The lotus trees cover him with their shade; the willows of the brook surround him. Behold, if a river overflows, he does not tremble; he is confident, though a Jordan [swift river] swell even to his mouth. Shall any take him when he is on the watch, or pierce through his nose with a snare?"

*EVOLUTION, DOGMA

ENFORCED DOGMA: "Professor Dean Kenyon's "intelligent design" theory of origins of human beings has been censured by his colleagues at San Francisco State University. A 27-5 vote of the biology faculty in February declared the senior department member's theory unworthy because "there is no scientific evidence to support the concept." In the 1970's, Kenyon was a leading advocate of the chemical evolutionary theory, the idea that life arose from a "primordial soup." He since has changed his mind as a result of examining studies that show that complex genetic information does not "self-organize" from simple chemicals. Kenyon said he believes his recent censure is the first of its kind to be passed anywhere in higher education. February's resolution did not recommend any action to be taken against Kenyon, but resulted in a charged academic atmosphere. Colleagues in other academic disciplines reportedly have asked whether other non-traditional theories will be subject to censure." (National & International Religion Report, 3/21/94; as quoted in The American Family Association Journal, May, 1994, p.11)

*EVOLUTION, EFFECTS ON LAW (See also: Law,Higher; Law, US SupremeCourt)

JULIAN HUXLEY: Concerning a shift in law due the influence of Darwinism, Julian Huxley once noted that the evolutionary belief system encompasses the disciplines such as "law and religion. . .until we are enabled to see evolution as a universal, all-pervading process. . .Our present knowledge indeed forces us to the view that the world of reality is evolution - a single process of self-transformation." (Julian Huxley's Evolution and Genetics, "What is Science?", pp. 272-78, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pg. 46, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA: "There proceeded during the 19th Century, under the influence of the evolutionary concept, a thoroughgoing transformation of older studies like History, Law and Political Economy; and the creation of new ones like Anthropology, Social Psychology, Comparative Religion, Criminology, Social Geography." (Encyclopedia Brittanica, Vol.20, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pg. 46, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

FRED CAHILL: "The shift in law education to Darwinian thought began in the 1870's by Christopher Langdell, Harvard Law School dean. According to Professor Fred Cahill, "The appearance in the mid-nineteenth century of the concept of evolution was an event of transcending importance to the development of American jurisprudence. . .This involved. . .a shift. . .from the rationalistic, deductive pattern, characteristic of the pre-Darwinian period, to the empirical, evolutionary approach that is followed. . .today." (Yale professor of political science Fred Cahill, 1952, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pg. 46, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co))

CHRISTOPHER LANGDELL, Harvard Law School dean, introduced the 'case method' of teaching law in the 1870's, but his ". . .real impact on law education was his belief that the basic principles and doctrines of the law were the products of an evolving and growing process over many years. Langdell believed that this evolution was taking place in the opinions written by judges. This meant that what a judge said was law, and not what the Constitution said." (The Second American Revolution, pg. 46, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "[Christopher] Langdell's system was effective in attacking [18th century English jurist William] Blacksone's belief that the judges' opinions in appellate cases were not sources of law, but merely "evidence" of law. The fact that Blackstone is not studied in law schools today most likely stems from his presuppositional differences with the predominant relativistic, evolutionary approach taught in contemporary legal education. Modern legal scholars have rejected the views of Blackstone because they have rejected his faith in God and his reliance upon the Genesis account of creation and the origin of man and the universe." (The Second American Revolution, pg. 47, JW Whitehead, 1982, David

C. Cook Publishing Co)

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL DEAN ROSCOE POUND: "No current [legal] hypothesis is reliable, as ideas and legal philosophies change radically and frequently from time to time." (Rene Wormser, The Story of the Law, 1962, p.484, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pg. 48, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL DEAN ROSCOE POUND: "I am skeptical as to the possibility of an absolute judgment." (Rene Wormser, The Story of the Law, 1962, p.485, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pg. 48, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

DEFINING JURISPRUDENCE: "As [18th century English jurist William] Blackstone admonished in his Commentaries, the laws of nature and of nature's God are expounded upon and clarified by the Bible. In terms of the judge, he is to exercise a jurisprudential application of man's law in relation to the higher law." (The Second American Revolution, pp. 48-49, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

REDEFINING JURISPRUDENCE: "[Harvard law school dean] Roscoe Pound is credited with initiating a movement toward 'sociological jurisprudence'. . .Sociological law presupposes that no absolutes exist upon which law or laws can be based. Law is seen as evolutionary in character, and it is based upon a system of arbitrary absolutes." (The Second American Revolution, pp. 48-49, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER AND SURGEON GENERAL C. EVERETT KOOP: "Law is only what most of the people think at that moment of history, and there is no higher law. It follows, of course, that the law can be changed at any moment to reflect what the majority currently thinks. More accurately, the law becomes what a few people in some branch of the government think will promote the present sociological and economic good. In reality the will and moral judgment of the majority are now influenced by or even

overruled by the opinions of a small group of men and women. This means that vast changes can be made in the whole concept of what should and what should not be done. Values can be altered overnight and at almost unbelievable speed." (What Ever Happened to the Human Race?, p.25, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 49-50, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "The idea that God endows man with absolute rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are lost within the [Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell] Holmes frameswork of sociological law. The implications of sociological law are disturbing when executed by someone with despotic power, such as an Adolf Hitler or a Joseph Stalin. Whether thjat power emanates from an individual or a majoritarian vote, the substituion of sociological law for law based upon biblical absolutes is alarming." (The Second American Revolution, pp. 50-51, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES: "I see no reason for attributing to man a

significance different in kind from that which belongs to a baboon or a grain of sand. I believe that our personality is a cosmic ganglion, just as when certain rays meet and cross there is a white light at the meeting point, but the rays go on after the meeting as they did before, so, when certain other streams of energy cross at the meeting point, the cosmic ganglion can frame a syllogism or wag its tail." (Richard

Hertz, "Chance and Symbol," p.107, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 52, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co) (Thus Roe v. Wade found its logic. -Ed.)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "Having rejected the Judeo-Christian heritage, the courts have replaced law with

politics. The only absolute that remains in the system of sociological law is the insistence that there is no absolute. The Christian base has been eliminated because of its insistence on absolutes." (The Second American Revolution, p.52, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

ABRAHAM LINCOLN, 1861, in response to the Dred Scott decision: "The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court . . .the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal." (James D. Richardson, "Messages and Papers of the Presidents," 6:9-10, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 56, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "The students of Christopher Langdell's thesis that basic law is made through court decisions now sit on the courts of our land. Instead of waiting patiently for the natural flow of [legal] evolution, the courts have become active in their development of the law. Judicial activism is now a recognized fact. The courts make law. The written Constitution has little value except as a shibboleth used by the courts to justify their intrusions into the lives of the people." (The Second American Revolution, pp. 56, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co) (Ed. note: intrusions such as abortion, IRS, school prayer and Bible readings)

U.S. SENATOR GORDON HUMPHREY (N.H.) on Patricia Wald, during Senate confirmation hearings: "Wald, who belongs to that activist band known as "child advocates" and who terms herself a "fierce" civil libertarian, wants to fundamentally change the American family. . .the Wald nomination is a case which is outrageous. Here is a nominee who would radically alter the traditional family structure by virtually abolishing parental authority and who would empower a child to formally challenge his parents whenever in the child's opinion the parents were violating his civil rights. Here is a nominee who would give political

power to mere children. . .Sweden recently passed a law prohibiting parents from spanking their children or even scolding them. Indeed, the Government has prepared television spots to inform children of their right to disobey their parents. Is that what we want in our country?" (U.S., Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, pt. 2, "Selection and Confirmation of Federal Judges," pp.140, 142; as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 63, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JUDGE PATRICIA WALD, a [President Jimmy] Carter appointee-for-life to the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (considered the second most important court in the U.S.): "In situations where the interests of the child and parents are likely to conflict and a serious adverse impact on the child is likely to be the consequence of unilateral parental actions, the child's interests deserve representation by and independent advocate before a neutral decision maker. . .A child should have access to free or paid legal

services on a confidential basis to discuss his personal grievances." (Patricia Wald, "Making Sense Out of the Rights of Youth," pp.382, 387, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 62, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JUDGE PATRICIA WALD, a [President Jimmy] Carter appointee-for-life to the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (considered the second most important court in the U.S.): "From the age of seven on, a youth should be able to exercise increasing control over his choice of school and work or, at the very least, to participate fully in making decisions affecting this vital area of life. . ." (Patricia Wald, "Making Sense Out of the Rights of Youth," p.386, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 62, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JUDGE PATRICIA WALD, a [President Jimmy] Carter appointee-for-life to the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (considered the second most important court in the U.S.): "In some instances (contraception, abortion, drugs, VD, psychiatric help) disclosure may spell disastrous consequences for the child within his family and thus deter him from ever seeking help. Incest, a psychotic parent, or even a FRANTICALLY MORALISTIC ONE, (emphasis added) are cases in point." (Patricia Wald, "Making Sense Out of the Rights of Youth," p.387, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 62, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

GEORGE ORWELL: "The family could not actually be abolished, and indeed, people were encouraged to be fond of their children. . .The children, on the other hand, were systematically turned against their parents and taught to spy on them and report their deviation. The family had become in effect an extention of the Thought Police. It was a device by means of which everyone could be surrounded night and day by informers who knew him intimately." (Nineteen Eighty-Four, pp.136-137)

U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG: "Key items on the feminist agenda [must be] generally available quality child care facilities. . ."Models presently exist in the Soviet Union. . ." ("Women and the Law -A Symposium," 25 Rutgers Law Review 1, 10, (1970); as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 218, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG: "We can admire the tremendous strides since 1949 through organizing the People's Republic of China's masses, while appreciating that marked limitations on individual liberties prized in our own country attend that organization." (American Bar Association Journal 1525, Oct., 1978; as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 218, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR ABRAM CHAYES: "Its [the American judiciary] chief function now is as a catalyst oif social change with judges acting as planners of large scale." ("The New Judiciary," p.24, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 66, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

PROFESSOR WM. FORRESTER, DEAN OF THE CORNELL LAW SCHOOL: "The [Supreme] Court has assumed, gradually, the role of deciding the problems on its own and . . .the American people and their selected officials gradually have accepted the Court as the political instrument for lawmaking." ("Are We Ready For Truth In Judging?", p.1213, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 66, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

PROFESSOR WM. FORRESTER, DEAN OF THE

CORNELL LAW SCHOOL: "We have failed to see that the Supreme Court has evolved into a new institution - one that is even more unique and unprecedented than commonly supposed. Indeed, the institution can no longer be described with accuracy as a court, in the customary sense. Unlike a court, ITS PRIMARY FUNCTION IS NOT JUDICIAL BUT LEGISLATIVE. IT IS A GOVERNING BODY [emphasis added] in the sense that it makes the basic policy decisions of the nation, selects among the competing values of our society, and adminsters and

executes the directions it chooses in political, social, and ethical matters. It has become the major societal agency for reform." ("Are We Ready For Truth In Judging?", p.1214-15, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 68, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

PROF. FORRESTER NOT AGAINST THE USURPATION: Forrester was not attacking the condition of the Supreme Court, but rather approved the usurpation of power he describes. He said this new power "is legitimate because it has been accepted implicitly or at least acquiesced to by the American people as well as by the other departments of government and the states." And, "note well that it is not an act of condemnation or disapproval to say that the

institution is not primarily a court. It is a matter of healthy

recognition that a new kind of governmental institution has evolved - one probably unique in the history of

governmental institutions." ("Are We Ready For Truth In Judging?", p.1214-15, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 68, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "The research of Dr. Peter A.J.Adam, an associate professor of pediatrics at Case Western Reserve University, shows how far a Supreme Court decision can be taken. Six months after Roe v. Wade Dr. Adam reported to the American Pediatric Research Society on research he and his associates had conducted on twelve babies who had been born alive by hysterectomy abortion up to twenty weeks. These men took the tiny babies and cut off their heads - decapitated the babies and cannulated the internal carotid arteries (that is, a tube was placed in the main artery feeding the brain). They kept the

diminutive heads alive, much as the Russians kept the

dogs' heads alive in the 1950s. Take note of Dr. Adam's retort to criticism: "Once society's declared the fetus dead, and abrogated its rights, I don't see any ethical problem. . .Whose right are we going to protect, once we've decided the fetus won't live?"" (Dr. Peter A.J.Adam, "Post-Abortion Fetal Study Stirs Storm," p.21, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 67, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

BOB WOODWARD AND SCOTT ARMSTRONG: "The clerks in most chambers were surprised to see the [Supreme Court] Justices, particularly Blackmun, so openly brokering their decision like a group of legislators. There was a certain reasonableness to the draft [opinion], some of them thought. But it derived more from medical and social policy than from constitutional law. There was something embarrassing and

dishonest about this whole process. It left the Court claiming that the Constitution drew certain lines at trimesters and viability. The Court was going to make medical policy and force it on the states. As a practical matter, it was not a bad solution. As a constitutional matter, it was absurd. The draft was referred to by some clerks as Harry's abortion." ("The Brethren," p.233, as quoted in The Second American

Revolution, pp. 67, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ARTHUR GOLDBERG: "In determining which rights are fundamental, judges are not left at large to decide cases in light of their personal and private notions. Rather, they must look to the 'traditions and (collective) conscience of our people'." (Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479, 493 (1965), as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 68-69, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

Q: Even when it results in cruelty and injustice, such as when the Court upheld "war powers" under the Constitution and herded 70,000 Japanese-American citizens, including the aged and children, into concentration camps? When no Japanese-American had been found guilty of espionage, but many whites had been, the Court acquiesced to establishing racist concentration camps, all because it deemed this to be the 'national will.'

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE HUGO BLACK: "Any broad unlimited power to hold laws unconstitutional because they offend what this Court conceives to be the 'conscience of our people' . . .was not given by the Framers, but rather has been bestowed on the Court by the Court." (Leonard Levy, "Against the Law: The Nixon Court and Criminal Justice, p.36, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 70-71, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

*EVOLUTION, MORALITY OF

JOHN W. MONTGOMERY: "The loss of God leaves man at the naked mercy of his fellows, where might makes right." ("The Law Above the Law," 1975)

FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE (1844-1900): "The autonomous man knows but one law; and that law is his own law, the law of his own force, the law which is at once its own sanction and its own delimitation." (The Second American Revolution, pg. 191, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co.)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "The research of Dr. Peter A.J.Adam, an associate professor of pediatrics at Case Western Reserve University, shows how far a Supreme Court decision can be taken. Six months after Roe v. Wade Dr. Adam reported to the American Pediatric Research Society on research he and his associates had conducted on twelve babies who had been born alive by hysterectomy abortion up to twenty weeks. These men took the tiny babies and cut off their heads - decapitated the babies and cannulated the internal carotid arteries (that is, a tube was placed in the main artery feeding the brain). They kept the

diminutive heads alive, much as the Russians kept the dogs' heads alive in the 1950s. Take note of Dr. Adam's retort to criticism: "Once society's declared the fetus dead, and abrogated its rights, I don't see any ethical problem. . .Whose right are we going to protect, once we've decided the fetus won't live?"" (Dr. Peter A.J.Adam, "Post-Abortion Fetal Study Stirs Storm," p.21, as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 67, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: "Man is here to be used and then discarded. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn illustrates this principle in The Gulag Archipelago [pp.13, 58]. If people were needed for a new construction plan in Siberia or elsewhere, as much as one fourth of Leningrad was arrested and transported to slave labor camps. The people were impotent in the face of this. They tried to find the meaning of their arrests, but there was no meaning. There was only pragmatism, utility, and, in the end, terror. The consequence of the loss of meaning in general is that man himself, who was once seen in the image of God, loses his meaning. He is seen only as a bundle of urges and drives seeking existential satisfaction. Man, like a throwaway pop bottle, is disposable." (The Second American Revolution, pp. 134, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

NOBEL LAUREATE JAMES WATSON, 1973: "If a child is not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice only a few are given under the present system. The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have." (Prism Magazine, American Medical Association, 1973; as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 136, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co))

NOBEL LAUREATE FRANCIS CRICK, 1978: "...no newborn infant should be declared human until it has passed certain tests regarding its genetic endowment and that if it fails these tests it forfeits the right to live." (Pacific News Service, Jan., 1978; as quoted in The Second American Revolution, pp. 136, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co)

*EVOLUTION, ORIGINS

INFERENCE DEMANDS A BEGINNING: "If the universe is running down and nature's processes are proceeding in just one direction, the inescapable inference is that everything had a beginning; somehow and sometime the cosmic processes were started... Most of the clues, moreover, that have been discovered at the inner and outer frontier of scientific cognition suggest a definite time of Creation." --Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, (New York 1948)p. 103

DO NOT ASK WHY, ONLY HOW: "If we ask why the laws of physics... we enter into the territory of metaphysics - the scientist at all events will not attempt an answer... we must not go on to ask why." --Fred Hoyle, Frontiers of Astronomy (New York, 1955), p. 342

DO NOT ASK WHY, ONLY HOW: "Modern cosmology and cosmogony, like other branches of science, are concerned with investigating the laws of the universe. They do not attempt to answer questions relating to an Original Cause - that is where the laws of the universe came from or how they came into being."

--James A. Coleman, Modern Theories of the Universe (New York, 1963), p. 197

(2 Th. 2:10 "because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved.")

SCIENCE ADMITS NO ANSWERS: "But what is gravity, really? What causes it? Where does it come from? How did it get started? The scientist has no answers... Science can never tell us hy the natural laws of physics exist or where the matter that started the universe came from. It is good that our ancestry invented the concept of the supernatural, for we need it if we are to answer such questions." --Dean Wooldridge, The Machinery of Life (New York 1966), p. 105

SCIENCE ADMITS NO ANSWERS: "Science offers no satisfactory answer to one of the most profound questions to occupy the mind of man - the question of beginning and end." --Robert Jastrow, Red Giants and White Dwarfs (New York, 1967), p. 57

INEVITABLE: If an infinite number of rednecks riding in an infinite number of pickup trucks fire an infinite number of shotgun rounds at an infinite number of highway signs, they will eventually produce all the world's great literary works in Braille. -- Unknown

A VISION, NOT FACTS, CREATED EVOLUTION: "[Darwin's] observation of animal behaviour had shown him...that all higher creatures shared a range of emotional responses: such feelings as pleasure, rage, fear, pain and jealousy were not confined to human beings. It was Darwin's overriding vision of an interconnected natural order that made him regard this not merely as a psychological curiosity or the result of the creator's economy of effort, but as evidence of true relationship". --C. Warner Irvin, Jr., The Thomas Cooper Library

(An evolutionist himself states that Darwin created evolution, not because it was the facts, but because of an "overriding vision. " There is no God, therefore something else must have done it).

TAUTOLOGY: (Tautology: 1.a. Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy. b. An instance of such repetition. 2. Logic. An empty or vacuous statement composed of simpler statements in a fashion that makes it logically true whether the simpler statements are factually true or false; for example, the statement Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not rain tomorrow.)

The answer is much too simple and also much too revealing: the fittest are those who survive (Period). Why are they the fittest? Because they survived. But why did they survive? Because they are the fittest. That's all we know about them. The same answer applies to the more obscure phrase, (survival or "preservation") by "natural selection": the types that have been selected by nature are those who have survived. Both arguments are tautological. Nothing is learned about the real scientific cause of evolution or the origin of species by learning that the population consists of survivors. --Anonymous, from Darwin's Great

*EVOLUTION, PLURALITY OF

THE SCOPES TRIAL MOVIE: "'Inherit the Wind' is not history.... Only a handful of phrases have been taken from the actual transcript of the famous Scopes Trial.... Inherit the Wind does not pretend to be journalism. It is theater. It is not 1925." (Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, playwrights; cited by John Clayton, www.doesgodexist.com, Jan/Feb, 2000. See The Amercan Biology Teacher, April, 1999, vol. 61, #4, pages 246250 for a breakdown comparison between fact and fiction).

CLARENCE DARROW: "For God's sake, let the children have their minds kept open -- close no doors to their knowledge; shut no door from them. Make a distinction between theology and science. Let them have both. Let them both be taught. Let them both live." (1925 'Monkey Trial,' cited by Geisler & Turik, "Legislating Morality," Bethany House Publ., Minn., MN, 55438, pg 66)

JOHN SCOPES: "Education, you know, means broadening, advancing, and if you limit a teacher to only one side of anything the whole country will eventually have only one thought, be one individual. I believe in teaching every aspect of every problem or theory." (1925 'Monkey Trial,' cited by Geisler & Turik, "Legislating Morality," Bethany House Publ., Minn., MN, 55438, pg 65-66)

*EVOLUTION, PROBLEMS WITH

UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE: How can evolution bring about a wasp that can inject a PROGRAM into a spider, causing it to weave something other than a web, and then die on cue??? Read on:

"The Puppet Spider," John Clayton, "Does God Exist?" July/August 2001 (doesgodexist.org)

"One of the more difficult things to change in nature is balance. Man has a hard time learning that fact and continues to struggle with it. In recent years in our part of the country, deer have multiplied to disastrous proportions because they have no natural enemies left to hold their numbers in check. In one of the state parks near us in Indiana, deer were starving to death because their numbers had gotten huge and they had eaten everything possible. In the natural world where man has not upset the balances, biologists find some incredible cases where design features hold a population in check so tragedy does not happen to a whole species. Recent studies in Costa Rica have shown us one of these that is remarkable. A wasp catches the spider, stings it to paralyze it, and glues an egg to the abdomen of the spider. The spider wakes up after a while and goes about its normal life of catching insects. After a week or more, the spider will suddenly change its behavior and, instead of making a normal web, it starts making a strangely shaped web--shaped more like a cocoon than a normal spider web. When the oddly shaped structure was built, the spider went to the center of the structure and died. The larva in the egg then emerges, eats the spider's body, and finishes spinning the cocoon the spider started. In a few days, the baby wasp emerges from the cocoon and flies away to repeat the process. This is the first time, according to the scientists studying the puppet spider, that there has been a change in behavior produced by a parasite. It appears that the spider is leaving out certain steps of his normal process of building a bug-catching web. How all of this is done is being studied extensively and may have all kinds of interesting and practical applications. The timing of all of this is critical and keeps a balance between the living organisms involved. Some may turn the spider into a human in their mind and make this a negative thing, but having systems that keep balance in nature is what keeps all organisms in an environment healthy and supplied with basic needs. We would suggest that the design systems present in nature to do this are too complicated and sophisticated to be the product of blind forces. The biblical injunction that "we can know there is a God through the things He has made (Romans 1:19-22) seems borne out more and more as we come to understand all of the systems built into nature to maintain balance."

DARWIN: "This preservation of favourable individual differences and variations, and the destruction of those which are injurious, I have called Natural Selection, (adding in a later edition) or the Survival of the Fittest." --Charles Darwin, 3rd Chapter of "The Origin of Species"

What is so interesting about this quote is that in Darwin's Origin of Species, the key to the understanding of evolution is natural selection, i.e. survival of the fittest. The entire concept pivots around this one idea. However in the book's complete entirety this is the only definition given for it. He compares it to artificial selection (the process used by breeders to create better, stronger animals), idealizes it, and ties it to many other different concepts. But nowhere else other than this one sentence is the definition of natural selection expounded upon. An already flimsy concept, evolution founds itself upon 27 words.

Welcome to scientific problems with evolution:

Dead matter evolving into living organisms

The evolution of mind/consciousness/intelligence

The zero mathematical probability of the formation of DNA/RNA by chance.

The impossible odds of males and females of each species evolving at the same time in the same geographical location in order to reproduce

All body parts evolving simultaneously (imagine a body without an esophagus, a liver or a rectum)

What blind creatures did for eons while their eyes were evolving

How invertebrates decided to grow a spine

How millions of species evolved from other species without leaving even one transitional fossil

How reptiles came to grow feathers, avian lungs and a specialized bone structure in order to become birds

How a mosquito can be related to a hippopotamus

How a land mammal evolved into a 20-ton whale

How to reconcile the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics with evolution

How swallows find Capistrano

From what love, courage, altruism and loyalty evolved

*EVOLUTION, RACISM OF

"China is readying a new law that would use abortions and sterilization to prevent people suffering from certain illnesses from having children. The draft law on eugenics before China's national legislature is designed "to avoid new births of inferior quality and heighten the standards of the whole population," the Xinhau News Agency reported recently." (Omaha World Herald, 12/22/94; cited in the American Family Assoc. Journal, April, 1994, p.13)

*EVOLUTION, STATEMENTS ON RELIGION

ADOLF HITLER: "The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science...Gradually the myths crumble. All that is left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light, but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity...The man who lives in communion with nature necessarily finds himself in opposition to the Churches, and that's why they're heading for ruin - for science is bound to win...Thousands of excursionist will make a pilgrimage there every Sunday...It will be our way of giving man a religious spirit." (Alan Bullock, "Hitler," p.389; as quoted in The Second American Revolution, p.146, JW Whitehead, 1982, David C. Cook Publishing Co.)

*EVOLUTION, THEISTIC

JESUS ACCEPTED CREATION: Christ and several of the New Testament writers accept the Genesis account of creation. Since Christ was the agent of creation and he accepted the Genesis account of the creation of man and woman, we should accept that account as well.

NO SUCH THING IN ACADEMIA: Don England, Harding science professor: "I know of no ranking proponent of evolution theory who is a 'theistic evolutionist.' ...I do not like theistic evolution because of its deistic implications. Theistic evolution makes God creator of natural law only. Somewhere along the long line of a series of unlikely events, God apparently inserted the human spirit into the body of an evolving brute beast and it became unique. It seems to me that the God of the Bible is much more involved in the events of human affairs than would be true of deism." (8-25-99)

Professor William Provine, Cornell University: "Persons who manage to retain religious beliefs while accepting evolutionary biology 'have to check their brains at the church-house door." (April 27,1999, Don't Buy Into Theistic Evolution by Jack Robinson, http://weather.amarillonet.com/stories/042798/opi_buy.shtml)

SB, PREACHER:

First point: Evolutionists have a real problem with the concept of "Christian" evolution. In fact, a die hard evolutionist and professor of science from Cornell, Dr. William Provine, is stated that "persons who manage to retain religious beliefs while accepting evolutionary biology "have to check their brains at the church-house door." The whole concept of evolution is the worship of the creation NOT the Creator. They don't mesh. It's like trying to play racquetball with a baseball bat. You are playing two different sports.

Second Point: Theistic evolution bases itself upon the concept of chance being defined as not something random, but instead an opportunity for God to work providentially. For example: Instead of organic matter occurring from several inorganic molecules being lucky enough to combine together at the right time, it was God putting those molecules together in the right spot to do the chemistry limbo. This concept of random just being another term for Godly intervention is ludicrous. The whole point of religion is to answer questions. Using the theory that science is correct and God is to, doesn't work. It still leaves us with the questions of what makes man different from animals, and what is the point of life. Why would Christ sacrifice Himself for mankind, but not squirrels. If we are all just combinations of atoms stemming from the same evolutionary tree, what makes humans special. Why would dogs have souls, and pigs need spiritual cleansing of sins. It doesn't make sense.

Third Point: Theistic evolution is also based upon the concept of science being correct, however science doesn't not speak kindly of evolution (theistic or not). For example the scientific world finds gaps in evolution daily (if they are willing to use their own methods to dissect evolution like they would anything else!).

DNUTLEY:

1) It flagrantly contradicts the Bible. So why do you believe in God anyway?

2) It ascribes to God vast deception. He created everything Himself, but just made it look like He didn't?

3) Evolution looks to chance for direction, and personally directed chance is not chance at all, so the evolutionists think that theistic creationists are stupid.

CATHOLICISM ON "EVOLUTION" (Latin evolvere, to unroll): . . .Subsequent research of a hundred years has supported the main outline of biological evolution. Darwin's publication generated much opposition from theologians accustomed to look upon the first chapter of Genesis as a scientific account of creation. Further study, however, has made it clear that this chapter means to teach religious rather than scientific truth. Catholics are now free to envisage any evolutionary hypothesis which leaves room for the Creator, that is, for God as the ultimate cause of all things that exist. On the evolution of many, Catholics must hold some reservations. 1. The soul itself does not evolve, but is created immediately by God. The intellect and will are spiritual faculties of the soul; therefore any theory of the evolution of the mind which denies this qualitative difference would be untenable. 2. "The faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents" (Pius XII, Humani Generis), for this theory of polygenism seems to be incompatible with the doctrine of original sin. 3. Even if God used an animal's body to make a man, man could not be called (for philosophical reasons) the "son" of a brute animal (Pius XII, Allocution 1941). 4. A decree of the Biblical Commission requires Catholics to hold that the first woman was formed from the first man; many Catholic scholars now interpret this to mean that the first woman was formed on the model of the first man, taken from him as a copy from an original. Within these guide lines one may hold for evolution of species and evolution of man' body from other primates." (The Maryknoll Catholic Dictionary, 1965 Edition, Grosset & Dunlap, NY, NY)

*EVOLUTION, THERMODYNAMICS

ENERGY MUST RUN DOWN: "Energy cannot run downhill forever, and like the clock weight, it must touch bottom at last. And so the universe cannot go on forever, sooner or later the time must come when its last erg of energy has reached the lowest rung on the ladder of descending availability, and at this moment the active life of the universe must cease. The energy is still there, but it has lost all capacity for change; it is as little able to work the universe as the water in a flat pond is able to turn a waterwheel." --Sir James Jeans, The Universe Around Us, 4th revised edition, (New York 1960) p. 279

A BEGINNING IS INESCAPABLE: "If the universe is running down and nature's processes are proceeding in just one direction, the inescapable inference is that everything had a beginning; somehow and sometime the cosmic processes were started... Most of the clues, moreover, that have been discovered at the inner and outer frontier of scientific cognition suggest a definite time of Creation." --Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, (New York 1948)p. 103

*EVOLUTION, WEAKNESS ADMITTED

If man ever creates life, all that it will show is that it took intelligence to create life. --Unknown

These pictures are shrunk from a larger version: enlarge them if you desire to! For more photos, go to www.bible.ca.

(Above) The Taylor Trail in the Paluxy River in Glen Rose Texas. 14 human footprints cross 134 dinosaur prints, disappearing into a river bank, which would eliminate any possibility of fraud-carvings.

Twenty meters upstream from the Taylor Trail is the Upper Taylor Platform, called the McFall Trail.

WWW.Bible.ca: "Prized Ryals Track destroyed once for all time! This is one of three tracks featured at the 1989 Dayton, TN creation conference that was destroyed the next day. On August 12, 1989 Dr. Don Patton spoke at a creation conference in Dayton, TN. He presented compelling evidence that both human and dinosaur tracks were present at the Taylor Trail, including these pictures. Two well known evolutionists were present and at least one was conspicuously disturbed by this presentation. Both flew to Dallas the next morning and went immediately to the Paluxy River. It is reliably reported that they were in the river that afternoon with an "iron bar." Three days before they were in the river the footprint was observed looking like the pictures above. Three days after they were in the river, the track was destroyed."

The following refer to the finding of fossilized human footprints in dinosaur footprints:

Richard Dawkins, Oxford "…there are certain things about the fossil record that any evolutionist should expect to be true. We should be very surprised, for example, to find fossil humans appearing in the record before mammals are supposed to have evolved! If a single, well verified mammal skull were to turn up in 500 million year old rocks, our whole modern theory of evolution would be utterly destroyed. Incidentally, this is a sufficient answer to the canard, put about by creationist and their journalistic fellow travelers, that the whole theory of evolution is an 'unfalsifiable' tautology. Ironically, it is also the reason why creationist are so keen on the fake human footprints, which were carved during the depression to fool tourist, in the dinosaur beds of Texas," (The Blind Watchmaker, 1986, p.225)

Steven M. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University: "There is an infinite variety of ways in which, since 1859, the general concept of evolution might have been demolished. Consider the fossil record--a little known resource in Darwin's day. The unequivocal discovery of a fossil population of horses in Precambrian rocks would disprove evolution. More generally, any topsy-turvy sequence of fossils would force us to rethink our theory, yet not a single one has come to light. As Darwin recognized, a single geographic inconsistency would have nearly the same power of destruction." (The New Evolutionary Timetable, 1981, p.171)

NOVA TV Special: "God, Darwin And The Dinosaurs," "...dinosaur footprints, side by side with humans. Finding them would counter evidence that humans evolved long after the dinosaurs became extinct and back up...[the] claim that all species, including man, were created at one time."

Ernst Mayr, Harvard: "Creationists have stated that humans and dinosaurs were contemporaries in time...Were this momentous statement true the names of its discoverers would thunder down the corridors of time as individuals who made one of the most outstanding discoveries of the twentieth century." (Gish-Mayr Debate, Evansville, Indiana.)

Niles Eldridge, American Museum of Natural History.: "We have been looking at the fossil record as a general test of the notion that life has evolved: to falsify that general idea, we would have to show that forms of life we considered more advanced appear earlier than the simpler forms." (Monkey Business, p.46, 1982)

STEPHEN JAY GOULD: "We can tell tales of improvement for some groups, but in honest moments we must admit that the history of complex life is more a story of multifarious variation about a set of basic designs than a saga of accumulating excellence. .... I regard the failure to find a clear 'vector of progress' in life's history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record. ....we have sought to impose a pattern that we hoped to find on a world that does not really display it." Stephen Jay Gould Natural History, 2/82, p.22, 23.

RETURN TO INDEX