Home » Evolution » Evolution Disclaimer

Evolution Disclaimer

Here’s the closing disclaimer on a GodTube video about evolution (hat tip to bornagain77):

How good a metaphor is evolution for the Christian walk?

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

6 Responses to Evolution Disclaimer

  1. 1

    If evolution isn’t Christian, is ID? This post seems to imply ID is Christian.

  2. CrowsSupporter,
    ID may not be Christian, since it is only an inference to Design, but I certainly am Christian…by the way have you heard the good news about Jesus?

    ….I find the following papers crushing against the myth that Christianity is “unscientific”; In fact honest, unbiased, appraisal of the evidence indicates that Christianity happened to be crucial to the birth of science itself:

    Famous (Founding) Scientists Who Believed in God
    http://www.godandscience.org/a.....faith.html

    50 NOBEL LAUREATES AND OTHER GREAT SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE IN GOD
    http://nobelist.tripod.com/

    Christianity and the Birth of Science by Michael Bumbulis, Ph.D
    http://www.ldolphin.org/bumbulis/

    In fact, the more I look at the depth of the Christianity in the lives of most all the founding fathers of all the major sciences (save, of course, Darwin of evolution and also Einstein of relativity to a certain degree), the more fitting I think it is to say “Science is a gift that the risen Christ has given to this world.”

    As well I submit this following evidence;

    Let us look at evidence for God’s deep personal involvement with man. Many people would argue that the Bible is proof of God’s supernatural and personal involvement with man since it is the only sacred book in the world, besides the Torah, to have the supernatural watermark of precisely fulfilled prophecies in it that can be verified by a variety of sources. Unique among all books ever written, the Bible accurately foretells specific events-in detail-many years, sometimes centuries, before they occur. Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors. (The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.)

    Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible
    by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.
    http://www.reasons.org/resourc.....hecy.shtml

    The King Jesus (A Precise Mathematical Prediction)
    http://www.iclnet.org/pub/reso.....esenpr.htm

    The Decree of Cyrus
    The City of Tyre
    The City of Samaria
    http://www.allaboutthejourney......filled.htm

    These precisely fulfilled prophecies are compelling hard facts in and of themselves; yet, there is one more piece of solid physical evidence that bears powerful witness to the Bible’s validity and also sheds an undeniable light on God’s deep personal commitment to man; The Shroud of Turin. The Shroud of Turin is one of the most scientifically scrutinized artifacts in recorded history. Through a rigid process of elimination for all naturalistic possibilities, it becomes crystal clear that the way in which the image of the man, on the Shroud of Turin, had to be imprinted was “supernatural” in its process. Many solid lines of evidence pointed to the Shroud’s authenticity back in the 1980’s, yet the carbon dating of the Shroud indicated a medieval age. In spite of the many other solid lines of evidence establishing the authenticity of the Shroud, many people unquestionably accepted the carbon dating as valid and presumed the Shroud to be a medieval fake. Yet now the carbon dating question has been thoroughly addressed and refuted in the year 2000 by Joseph G. Marino and M. Sue Benford. Their research, with textile experts showing the carbon testing was done with a piece of the Shroud that was subject to expert medieval reweaving in the 1500’s, has been published in many peer reviewed science journals and cooborated by Raymond Rogers PhD. in 2005. Thus, the fact that a false age was shown by the 1988 carbon testing has been accepted across the board scientifically.

    The following is THE main peer reviewed paper that refutes the 1988 Carbon Dating:

    Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin:

    per: Thermochimica Acta (Volume 425 pages 189-194, by Raymond N. Rogers, Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of California) (Raymond N. Rogers (1927-2005) was an American chemist who was considered a leading expert in thermal analysis.He was appointed Director of Chemical Research for the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) in 1978)

    http://www.ntskeptics.org/issu.....oudold.htm

    The abstract in Thermochimica Acta reads in part:
    Preliminary estimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses. The radiocarbon sampling area is uniquely coated with a yellow–brown plant gum containing dye lakes. Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.

    The fact that vanillin can not be detected in the lignin on shroud fibers, Sea scrolls linen, and other very old linens indicates that the shroud is quite old. A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000-years old. Even allowing for errors in the measurements and assumptions about storage conditions, the cloth is unlikely to be as young as 840 years.

    Plus here is a web site that has fairly good overview of the Shroud facts as they now stand:

    THE SHROUD AS AN ANCIENT TEXTILE
    http://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html

    Now all major lines of evidence converge and establish the Shroud as authentic. This rigidly tested and scrutinized artifact establishes the uniqueness of the Shroud among all the ancient artifacts of man found on earth. I know of no other ancient artifact from any other culture which has withstood such intense scrutiny and still remained standing in its claim of supernatural origin. It is apparent God thought this event was so important for us to remember that He took a “photograph” of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, using the Shroud itself as a medium. After years of painstaking research searching through every naturalistic possibility, scientists still cannot tell us exactly how the image of the man on the Shroud was imprinted. Even with the advantage of all our advanced space-age technology at their fingertips, all scientists can guess is that it was some type of electro-magnetic radiation (light) that is not natural to this world. For the “light”, that had to be used to make such a precise (photographic negative and stereoscopic/3-dimensional) image, left no detectable “heat signature” when it imprinted the image. (note: a precise photographic negative is an artistic impossibility, whereas a stereoscopic/3-dimensional image is an impossibility for any normal unretouched photograph). All electro-magnetic radiation that scientists are familiar with, with enough intensity to make an image of a man on that type of “unprepared” medium, would have left a detectable “heat signature” on the Shroud (note: it is proven that no liquid was used in image formation, thus no photographic solution was ever applied to the Shroud). I have a suggestion, if scientists want to find the source for the supernatural light that made the image, of the man on the Shroud, I suggest they look to the thousands of documented Judeo-Christian after-life experiences of people who have been deceased for a short while. It is in their testimonies that you find mention of an indescribably bright “Light” or “Being of Light” who is always described as being of a much brighter light than the people had ever seen before. All people who have been in the presence of “The Being of Light” while deceased have no doubt whatsoever that the “The Being of Light” they were in the presence of is none other than “The Lord” of heaven and earth. Another very interesting point is, since the Shroud had to be extremely close to the body when the image was made, and also considering the lack of any distinctive shadow pattern on the image, it is made apparent the only place this supernatural light that produced the image could have possibly come from is from the body itself ! In other words, THE SOURCE OF LIGHT WAS THE BODY ITSELF !!! God’s crowning achievement for this universe was not when He created this universe. God’s crowning achievement for this universe was when He Himself inhabited the human body He had purposely created the whole universe for, to sanctify human beings unto Himself through the de^ath and resurrection of his “Son” Jesus Christ. This is truly something that should fill anyone who reads this with awe. The wonder of it all is something that I can scarcely begin to understand much less write about. Thus, I will finish my paper with a scripture.

    Hebrews 2:14-15
    “Since we, God’s children, are human beings – made of flesh and blo^od – He became flesh and blo^od too by being born in human form; for only as a human being could He die and in dying break the power of the devil who had the power of de^ath. Only in that way could He deliver those who through fear of de^ath have been living all their lives as slaves to constant dread.”

    Sources:

    ***NASA technicians established these following points in 1977 (see “Proceedings of the 1977 U.S. Conference of Research on the Shroud of Turin):

    1) The body did not press on the slab of the tomb at the time the impressions were made (page 82). Thus, the body may have been weightless at the time of image formation.

    2) The image was not formed by direct contact with the body (page 83).

    3) The images are three-dimensional. This fact eliminates any hypothesis of image formation other than that of some type of radiation (pages 182-183). This three-dimensional fact also eliminates any proto-photography hypothesis since any “normal photograph” can not produce a three-dimensional image.

    4) The radiation used to form the image was uniform in length and breadth (page 82).

    5) The whole body (front and back) was in focus (ibid.).

    The most significant peer-reviewed scientific journal articles for the Shroud of Turin are as follows. (It is important to note all these journals are secular. Of these, only Nature argues against authenticity of the Shroud but its conclusion is now moot because of the article in Thermochimica Acta which overturns its premise.

    Peer Reviewed Journal Articles on Shroud:

    Thermochimica Acta – Raymond N. Rogers, Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of California (Volume 425 2005 Issue 1-2, pp 189-194). The article is available on Elsevier BV’s ScienceDirect® online information site.

    Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology – Lloyd Currie, NIST, Washington D. C. (Volume 109, Number 2, March-April 2004 pp 185-217)

    Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics – Fanti, Giulio and Maggiolo, Roberto. “The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin Shroud.” (2004: pp 491-503)

    Melanoidin – Rogers, Raymond N and Arnoldi, Anna. “The Shroud of Turin: an Amino-Carbonyl Reaction (Maillard Reaction) May Explain the Image Formation.” s vol.4, Ames J.M. ed., Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2003, pp.106-113;

    Journal of Imaging Science and Technology – Fanti, G. and Moroni, M. “Comparison of Luminance Between Face of Turin Shroud Man and Experimental Results.” 46: 142-154 (2002);

    Archaeological Chemistry: Organic, Inorganic and Biochemical Analyses – Adler, Alan D. Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin. ACS Symposium Series No. 625. Mary Virginia Orna, editor. 1996 by American Chemical Society, pp.223-228;

    Interdisciplinary Science Reviews – Mills, Allan. Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin. , December 1995, 20(4):319-327;

    Archaeological Chemistry IV; Advances in Chemistry – Dinegar, Robert H. and Schwalbe, Larry A. “Isotope Measurements and Provenance Studies of the Shroud of Turin.” Series 220, 1989; Ralph O. Allen, ed.; Washington: American Chemical Society, pp. 409-417;

    Nature – P. E. Damon, et al (Vol. 337, No. 6208, pp. 611-615, 16th February, 1989) Open Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal – Heller, JH and AD Adler, “A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin.” Volume 14 (1981), pp.81-103.

    Applied Optics – Jackson, J., Jumper, E., and Ercoline W. “Correlation of Image Intensity of the Turin Shroud with the 3-D Structure of a Human Body Shape.” , 15 July 1984,23:2244-2270; Jumper, Eric J.;

    Archaeological Chemistry III; Advances in Chemistry – Adler, Alan D.; Jackson, John P.; Pellicori, Samuel F.; Heller, John H.; and Druzik, James R. “A Comprehensive Examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin.” Series, #205; Joseph B. Lambert, ed; Washington: American Chemical Society, pp. 447-476.

  3. Disclaimer… these following videos may be too intense for atheists and may result in an irrational belief in God/Jesus. Adu^lt atheistic supervision is required:

    Famous Atheists Last Words Before Dying:

    http://www.godtube.com/view_vi.....01330d30ab

    Jesus Is Coming Soon – Objective Evidence

    http://www.godtube.com/view_vi.....2c6a6eebe3

  4. Logically speaking, you can’t believe in Darwinian evolution and believe that the world was created by God.

    ID is not Christian, but it’s theistic friendly, just like evolution is atheistic friendly.

  5. @CrowsSupporter

    If evolution isn’t Christian, is ID? This post seems to imply ID is Christian.

    No. No no no, as both Discovery Institute and Uncommon Descent make clear: ID is consistent with religion but is not a religion nor is it founded on religion, it is certainly not in any way related to creationism, and the designer is not necessarily God. This is entirely consistent with the “Discovery Institute’s persistent stress on humans being made in the image of God“.

  6. Off topic:

    Answer – Sarah Mclachlan – video

    http://www.godtube.com/view_vi.....c7d043d892

Leave a Reply