At 06:44 AM 4/23/98, E G M wrote:
>Glenn, remember when I said "get my point" in previous messages, I was
>answering your question in the affirmative, it is design, whatever way
>God did it, it was design, the laws are part of the design, etc, etc.
>But the real question is not whether your hypothetical scenario is
>design (which I repeat myself by saying that it is indeed) but whether
>that is what actually gave rise to today's species from
>biochemicals/first-cells. That moths of one particular color are
>favored, or that bacteria offsprings are resistant to antibiotics
>because they were strong enough to overcome the insult, or that
>certain mutations favored certain organisms, is not absolutely the
>same to say that our ancestor was a cell or biochemicals. I'm with
>you only as far as the data supports the theory.
I will absolutely agree that evolutionists have not proven their point about
life arising from the molecules. But I could even envision a situation
where God designed THAt into the fabric of the universe. In other words He
created a universe which had a predilection for evolving life. Wouldn't
that ALSO be design? I say yes it is design, but I am not sure whether God
did or didn't design the inorganic origin of life into the fabric of the
universe. That awaits more evidence. I do know that the evidence for the
evolution of all living things in an ancestor descendant relationship is
very, very good.
>Now my question. Are we humans still evolving (speciating into some
>other species)? If the answer is in the affirmative, what about the
>man Jesus who lives today in flesh and blood, is he speciating too
>into another god (sounds like mormomism doesn't it)?
First let me point out that today, with the vast number of intercontinental
migrations occurring and the vast number of interethnic marriages (even mine
is one of those) mankind is homogenizing, not speciating. Speciation
requires some group to be isolated. So to answer your question no, we are
But to answer your real question lets do a theological thought experiment
(TTE). Assume that we explore the galaxy and occupy various stellar systems.
At that time each population of humans will be isolated and the genetics of
each population would be able to travel its own trajectory in DNA sequence
space. This could lead to speciation if the isolation lasted a million
years. So now we have human species A and human species B.
Given that, what is the theological problem? Are not both populations
descendants of today's earthlings? Are not all of them descendants of Adam?
Are not both subject to the doctrine of original sin? (to deny this implies
that we can breed sin out of us which is a goal of Eugenics). Why do you
think that the blood of Christ is only applicable to a certain morphology?
Are you aware that the men of one group of South American natives have blue
genitals? Does this 'evolved' trait eliminate them from the plan of
salvation? Of course it doesn't; not any more than red hair does.
(Reference:Boyce Rensberger, "Racial Odyssey," in Elvio Angeloni, Editor,
Annual Editions Physical Anthropology 94/95,(Sluicedock,Guilford, Conn.: The
Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc., 1994), p.40-45, p. 43)
So why would you think that alterations in morphology would do so in the
future? By the way some of the inhabitants of Keppel Island off Australia
were isolated from the rest of humanity for about 5000 years and their
appearance is different from the mainland aborigines. (Josephine Flood, "The
Archeology of the Dreamtime, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p.
190-191) Should we rule them out of the human family or consider them
children of Adam? I say they are us.
Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
Foundation, Fall and Flood