Belief in evolution - reward or consequence?
One would think that one chooses atheism, but one does not. Rather, atheism, like a powerful current of force, chooses a person based on his personality, as if sucking him in. Similarly, a mouse does not choose the trap, but rather the bait that attracts it chooses the mouse.
Proven facts or different perspectives?
A person's belief in Darwinian evolution is not actually determined by proven science, but by the mental disposition of the person, which results in him seeing Darwinian evolution as a proven science. It is precisely this mental disposition that he has in advance, which is only confirmed later, based on the perspective that he already has.
This is proven, for example, by two people with completely different perspectives, whose scientific qualifications are at a very high level compared to today's education - yet they claim exactly the opposite about the reality of the science of Darwinian development and evolution based on proven facts. Someone in this story is definitely sitting on the horse with his back! See: e.g. Richard Dawkins and who sees things called "proven facts" completely differently:
Dr. Tomislav Terzin, a doctor of biology, explains DNA and why it supports creation. -https://www.facebook.com/SDADeafChurchDownUnder/posts/dr-tomislav-terzin-phd-biology-explains-dna-and-why-it-supports-creation-this-vi/951705637085624/
Serbian researchers, intellectuals and academics have been signing a petition for weeks declaring war on “Darwinism” and the theory of evolution. This petition, which demands the removal of the theory of evolution from school textbooks, has been signed by 166 people. Surprisingly, one of the signatories of the petition demanding the “banning of Darwin” is Tomislav Terzin, a biology professor at the University of Alberta in Canada. The author of the unconventional book “Censored Scientific Discoveries”, which combines religion and science, holds “atheists” and “Darwinian dogmatists” responsible... - https://koha.mk/en/serbet-me-peticion-kunder-teorise-se-darvinit-mbi-evolucionin/
“Darwinism has no answer to the question of the genetic code. It has no answer to the question of the origin of the vast amount of information contained in DNA molecules... There is censorship in science, which stems from the fact that there are dogmas that cannot be questioned in any way... In the 20th century, science adopted the doctrine that one must be an atheist, that this is not in harmony with scientific facts or the human psyche... The Darwinian-atheist lobby is so powerful financially and has such strong media control that new knowledge cannot be published due to strict censorship.” /Tomislav Terzin, professor of genetics, molecular biology and developmental biology at the University of Alberta, Canada. Interview and in his book "Censored Scientific Discoveries". - He has given more than 600 lectures worldwide on the relationship between science and religion. He is also the author of several influential books that examine the intersection of faith and science./
Then, whether this way of seeing things is a reward or a consequence for each individual will become absolutely clear when the veil is lifted on the reason behind creation for all people who exist, have existed, or will exist. (This has been promised, by the way!) In any case, it is an extremely important sign if a person classifies his own existence among the total insignificances, or in the exact opposite place, among the distinguished ones blessed with his own intelligence, the origin of which is the intelligent spirit /in whose image he was created/ and not the unintelligent matter /from which, so to speak, he developed due to the self-organization of matter/.
If ethics has no ultimate basis,how can it exist in traffic policing?
Does expanding knowledge of the macrocosm and microcosm necessarily stimulate a feeling of total insignificance in humans, or is this merely a by-product of the evolutionary perspective? If this does not affect some deeply committed atheists, either in their lifestyle or their mood, does that mean it does not affect others either? Not even certain social strata?
“Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) There are no gods worth having; 2) there is no life after death; 3) there is no ultimate basis for ethics; 4) there is no ultimate meaning to life; and 5) there is no human free will.” /William Provine, atheist professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University (1998)/
Is this view a reward or a consequence, the burdens or joys of which must be borne by both the individual and society? And what about the excesses of this view, which liberate a certain segment of society to indulge in cybercrime and other forms of criminality? If ethics has no ultimate foundation, how can it exist in traffic policing?
“The Uniform Regulation of Road Traffic Regulations (abbreviated: KRESZ)[1] is a collection of traffic rules contained in a decree, legally known as the Joint Decree 1/1975. (II. 5.) KPM–BM, which “regulates traffic on public roads and private roads not closed to public traffic in the territory of Hungary”. Since 1988, the most basic rules of traffic have been contained in Act I of 1988 on Road Traffic.[2] The rules of the KRESZ are in many respects similar or identical to the rules of most countries with public traffic.” /Wikipedia/
Is the evolutionary defense of a system of power a guarantee of its truth?
The fact that the so-called "mainstream scientific community" prefers Darwinian evolution and gives it a higher status is a consequence of its own chosen or acquired perspective. At the same time, the so-called religious community also prefers its own perspective within its own circles, in accordance with its religion, so there is no difference in this respect.
That the scientific community /Scientific Academies/, especially the higher powers /the state power/ are in a monopoly position /from a power perspective this means a privileged, exclusively favorable position/, is not in doubt, but this is not the result of the existing natural terrain conditions, but the result of the fact that the rule over the terrain conditions has been conceded to the extent and for the time that the one conceding the terrain conditions sees fit. (cf. Luke 4:5-7)
This is not a simple force, but a force behind the entire universe. Max Planck, Nobel Prize-winning physicist and founder of quantum mechanics (he laid the foundations of modern physics alongside Albert Einstein), vividly pointed this out:
"As someone who has devoted his entire life to the purest science, the study of matter, I can say this much as a result of my research on atoms: matter as such does not exist! All matter is created and exists only because of a force that causes the particles of the atom to vibrate and holds together this smallest solar system of the atom. Behind this force, we must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent spirit. This mind is the matrix of all matter." /Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech in Florence, Italy (1944) (in Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797)/
Therefore, the position dominated by the scientific community is a social /spiritual/ dimension that covers the entire world, where the given person either feels good because he sees Darwinian development and evolution as a science based on proven facts /since this is what they are led to believe, with the argument that the origin of intelligent events can be found in unintelligent forces./. And there are indeed places /not a few/, where he can go. As a historical figure once said:
Matthew 16:18 And I say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock /whom you have confessed, that is, on myself/ I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
[The Greek word "ekklēsía" means "community of the called out ones" or "assembly of the called out ones." This term refers to a community of believers chosen from the world, but originally in ancient Greece it also meant a political assembly of citizens.]
Entering here is called repentance /conversion/ in the Bible, which offers a completely different perspective: which is precisely the opposite of the total insignificance of one's own existence – the glorification of God, deepening one's service to Him, and even possessing the hope of eternal life, finding one's place and belonging in the company of God.
From here on, each person decides, according to their own individual position and temperament, whether conversion means freedom for them or prison, which they definitely want to go into or which they definitely want to stay away from. Here, therefore, the decisive moment above all is the sovereign personality of man.
Nevertheless, everyone is placed before a choice, whether they want it or not, because no one can avoid this choice. The message in which one must choose reads as follows:
Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse: therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;
Each person chooses what Life means to them, and what they will reap will either be a reward or a payment.
His choice means that he allows his personality to come to the fore, the force working within him chooses this or that. That is why the Scripture says that a person should resist the negative impulses within him, in other words, control the destructive desires of his own body.
The true choice means that a person is able to override their own personality traits that tend towards negativity.
Romans 8:12-13 Therefore, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh: For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
❗ ❗ ❗ ❗ ❗
Justified questions
- Nevertheless, there are justified questions for which the community that considers Darwinian evolution and individual development to be a science based on proven facts /despite the proclaimed evolutionary dogmas/ has no answers based on proven facts:
1. Where did the first subjects of evolution-capable organisms come from?
/They evolved from the inanimate by themselves, which is a philosophical, worldview position, without evidence!/
2. Where does the genetic information come from, from whose faulty copying /mutation/ allegedly the entire biological world emerges, because this would be the engine of evolution? If everything arises from the mistakes, what came into being from the initial, flawless state?
If program errors on an assembly line produce a saleable product (e.g. a car), then what does error-free operation produce – it does not produce any valuable product?
/The genetic code developed spontaneously through chemical processes, from which all known living organisms originated due to faulty replication. Nothing has been created from the original, error-free state. By the way, neither chemistry nor physics has ever written a textual message in which information filled with intellectual intelligence could be detected./
3. What kind of life tree does the initial cellular complexity, whose origin is unknown, prove?!
„Evolutionary units need to know that they are multiplying, they have inheritance, genetic diversity." - https://24.hu/tudomany/2020/12/09/a-jovomegmentoi-evolucio-szathmary-eors/
"The fundamental problem is that the first evolutionary units could not have arisen through evolution, since they did not yet possess the necessary characteristics." - http://www.c3.hu/~tillmann/konyvek/ezredvegi/szathmary.html
"The concept of a tree of life is widespread in the evolutionary literature... Prokaryotic evolution and the tree of life are two different things and should be treated as such, rather than extrapolating from macroscopic life to prokaryotes... the belief that prokaryotes are related to such a tree has now become stronger than the data supporting it. The monistic concept of a single universal tree of life seems increasingly outdated in the face of genomic data." /Eric Bapteste, Prokaryotic evolution and the tree of life are two different things - PhD in evolutionary biology and philosophy of biology. Director of the CNRS/ - https://biologydirect.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1745-6150-4-34
4. Survival of the most viable individuals/microevolution/ since when is it the same as the necessarily selective development of specimens of a given species with initial racial characteristics from a cluster of cells of unknown origin /macroevolution/? Where does blind natural selection get the millions of different necessary environmental selection pressures from until the full development of millions of not yet existing living beings participating in the development process?
/There is no directed selection pressure, nor is it necessary, yet the result is an end product as if blind evolution were capable of the results of selective breeding?/
5. If Darwin did not essentially talk about the true origin of the first species, then what he discovered was a microevolutionary adaptation based on natural selection. But what does this have to do with the origin of living beings in which evolutionary adaptation subsequently takes place?
Evolution affects already existing organisms, but it has no idea what the origin of already existing individuals is.
- The claim that Darwinian evolution is unable to select for traits necessary for the formation of species is incorrect, since natural selection is the fundamental mechanism of speciation, leading to the accumulation of traits that differentiate populations and ultimately create new species. -
The problem is that this applies to existing populations, not to the initial origin of species, because species populations did not yet exist at that time.
Modern biology interprets this as a continuous process of gradual changes, driven by natural selection acting on inherited variations, leading to the diversification of life from simple to complex forms over vast periods of time.
- The interpretation of modern biology and Darwinian science based on proven facts have been the same since the interpretation was presented as fact-based science - of course completely arbitrarily!
Cell specialization - Over millions of years, cells in colonies began to specialize for different functions, such as reproduction, movement, or sensing the environment.
- Cows also began to specialize in excellent milk production on their own, thus creating the Holstein-Friesian cows. If not, then the same applies to the alleged species-specific development of cells!
Final thought: Intelligent events cannot originate from unintelligent forces! If they do, then humanity's testimony about itself on the gold discs placed on the Pioneer 10-11 space probes is worthless.
Megjegyzések
Megjegyzés küldése