Why we are here:

Our signature Bible passage, the prologue to John's Gospel, tells us that Jesus (the Logos) is God and Creator and that He came in the flesh (sarx) to redeem His fallen, sin-cursed creation—and especially those He chose to believe in Him.

Here in Bios & Logos we have some fun examining small corners of the creation to show how great a Creator Jesus is—and our need for Him as Redeemer. Soli Deo Gloria.


Saturday, October 29, 2005

Evolutionary Party Line

Last night I attended a Fyke Nature Association (local bird and conservation club) meeting and heard a fellow science educator's talk / PowerPoint presentation about his trip to the Galapagos. In general, the man did a fine job, having photographed a large number of the species and habitats of several of the islands.

But, as might have been expected, he concentrated on the finches and their "rapid evolutionary changes" brought about by climate changes (wet and dry spells.) "See how fast evolution can happen--within only a few years beaks became bigger or smaller by natural selection!"

Of course that wasn't evolution at all, but slight variations in beak size, with populations increasing and decreasing as food supplies to which each species of finch was adapted became more or less plentiful. When the weather conditions reversed, so did the populations of big and little-beaked finches. So "evolution" goes nowhere. Yes, there is natural selection, but it can't cause any large-scale changes because it doesn't add any new information, but merely selects from genes already present. In fact, as genes are selected for survival in a particular environmental niche, information is actually lost, so any large-scale "advancements" are impossible.

So this fellow science educator (he's a chemist, so let's not be too hard on him :-) was following the party line of naturalistic Darwinism, probably not having really thought out the problems inherent in the "theory."

Late in the talk, he asked the question, "how did this come about?" Someone in the audience shouted, mockingly or out of ignorance, "intelligent design!" which was received with equally mocking laughter from the audience. The speaker chortled, "Yea, right," or something to that effect.

The audience and the speaker had just mocked The Intelligent Designer and had become inexcusable, according to Romans 1:18-20. So, much prayer is necessary as to how to approach these very nice (in the human sense) people who have "exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures." (Romans 1:23) Perhaps some idolotrous birder will happen upon this humble blog and be encouraged to open a Bible instead of a Sibley (that's almost a private birding joke.)

p.s. Perhaps I should quote the entire relevant passage so you won’t have to go to the trouble of looking it up (although that would more a blessing than trouble, especially if you read it in the context of all of Romans Chapter 1—and then keep reading.) But here is the immediate context, after the reading of which you will have no excuse:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures (Romans 1:18-23 NASB)

Friday, October 28, 2005

More Dishonest Editing

As I reported in my September 9 post, a letter to the editor I had written was edited by the newspaper's staff in such a way as to change the whole point and thrust of the original. As the Intelligent Design Movement continued to be denegrated by further editorials, I wrote another letter, this time limiting it to exactly 200 words, so there would be no excuse for "editing for length."

The results were shocking. Not only did the editors add some of their own material, but they eliminated a key quote, thus again severely altering the meaning of my letter. I would call this a case of irresponsible and dishonest editorial policy and practice.

So what is a person to do? Write more letters to the editor? Write to the editors, complaining about their policies and practices? Cancel my subscription? Well, the first two are certainly possibilities. Cancelling my subscription would only cut myself off from further debate. And besides, I must have my daily dose of crossword puzzle therapy and the philosophical enlightenment of Ziggy cartoons :-)

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Once a Month?

I seem to be settling in on about one blog entry a month--not prolific to be sure. But I have other journal entries, stored as Word document files. They are mostly related to my writing project, so they would probably be boring or useless to anyone but me, at least in their present form.

Today, however, I decided to celebrate the revival of my new Dell (after 5 hours on the phone and a service call to get it going) by posting here. It is indeed a pleasure using a big, fast machine with a bright 19" flat panel monitor. Getting this machine might actually encourage me to get some serious writing done, an activity that had come to a halt over the past few months.

This morning I concentrated on reading several articles related to the Intelligent Design controversy. The most in-depth and useful was one at: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/1025nejom.asp It was a response and analysis of an article in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Now it's off to do some shopping, so I will have a little something to eat for dinner. The cupboard is bare :-(