- No Co-Authorship Allowed!
Co-authorship, is simply a partnership in correlation to an original work. Which simply implies that full credit cannot be given to one individual, but rather require a equal attribution.
In that light, Theistic Evolutionism is the direct slap in the proverbial face of God; And the worship, credit, and glory that he demands and deserves!
It also discredits His mighty acts, marvellous works, incredible creativity, orderly design, and is not only misrepresented, poorly observed, inaccurately estimated, badly contorted, twisted, and fraudulently fabricated, by the scientific community, the science, of which they claim to hold true, has been purposely censored, and reinterpreted through the misinterpretations of assumptions and an evidentiary factually unsupported worldview and blatant refusal in use of the scientific method.
God’s design demands credit not of itself but to its Author! The Creator!
Take for instance, co-evolutionary processes:
Scientists are teaching our children that Co-Evolution had to have occurred for the symbiotic processes observed in nature!
Charles Darwin’s examination of the complexity of orchids and their relationship with insects captivated him insomuch that his love for Orchids captured the attention of Botanists and Darwin found himself with these flowers from all over the world!
In January 1862, Charles Darwin was doing research on the particulars of orchids and how they were pollinated by the insects.
A distinguished horticulturist James Bateman was said to have sent Darwin a package of orchids, and in a follow up letter, with a second package, Bateman’s son sent the names of the orchids and also one from Madagascar.
This particular Star Orchid was different in appearance than the others, and Darwin discovered something very surprising upon examining its flowers!
Upon finding the very long length of the whip-like green spur forming the nectary of each flower, he remarked to Joseph Hooker “I have just received such a Box full from Mr Bateman with the astounding Angræcum sesquipedalia with a nectary a foot long— Good Heavens what insect can suck it”
The nectar was stored away at about 11 inches (28 centimeters) deep! Some were even up to 13″!
In his book: “Fertilization of Orchids” in 1862, Darwin said that the Orchid must of had an unusual pollinator moth. A species of moth with very long proboscis. (Their ‘tongue’, if you will, only a narrow tube that coils and serves as a straw)
He wrote that in the insects attempts to sip the nectar, its head would scrub the pollin and when visiting the next orchid, would be the cause for the pollination.
In 1867, Alfred Russell Wallace reimplemented the assesment, in an article remarking that the African hawkmoth Xanthopan morganii (then known as Macrosila morganii) had a proboscis almost long enough to reach the bottom of the spur. He also added that he had no doubt there was a like Hawkmoth in Madagascar.
Sure enough: The hawkmoth was found in Madagascar in 1903! (Xanthophan morgani praedicta) commonly called Morgan’s sphinx moth. Such an honour to Wallace.
These moths have a probiscis measuring from 12 to 14 inches (30 and 35 centimeters.) This told Darwin that other kinds of insects -no matter how hard they tried- would never be able to reach that deep into the flower and did not obtain a long proboscis.
The Orchid and moth could not exist without the other!
The scientists concluded both evolved and that their mutual adaptation was, “co-evolution”. His conclusions led him to believe that both the flower and the moth had “evolved” at the exact same time. In fact he was certain there was no further explanation.
- Observational Factors:
The moth must carry the Orchid pollen to other Orchids in order to make new seeds to produce new orchids!
And the nectar was way deep into the cup….So, he concluded that the Moth developed a longer tongue, to reach the nectar. The result was that with such a long tongue, the Moth could keep its body clear from the flower and thus missed the pollen.
Since the flower needed its pollen too be carried away by the Moth for pollination, the other conclusion was that the flower produced longer spurs to reach the Moth. Such kind of “evolution” is too powerful to speak of random chances of adaptation or Evolution.
How do they know that this plant and this insect ‘evolved’ these traits at all? Or were created specifically for one another?
- Creation? Or Evolution?
Creation Scientists do not deny the adaptation and variation of kinds, as God has equipped animals with the ability to adapt to specific climate and conditions. However, no random macro evolution exists to show us that animals evolve at all into another kind of animal. This did not prove anything concerning macro evolution but rather the evidence that Darwin and Wallace found was overwhelming to show that God the designer made nature compatible and perfect from the beginning of time.
- Further Conundrum:
Another supposed co-evolutionary process rests in the unique sight of the honeybees!
Seeing by ultraviolet light, why is it that the flowers that bees need, have ultraviolet patterns that humans can’t see with the naked eye?
Did these randomly evolve in such order? Not at all! Darwin had evidence right before his eyes that God is a God of order and design and what Darwin observed was not Co-evolution at all!
One author demands our worship and not the worship or accreditations to evolutionary processes!
Evolutionism is not only at enmity with God, but robs humanity of realizing that one day this Holy Righteous God of order design and omniscience, will be the one “with whom we have to do” where “the books will be opened” and we will stand before the ever-existing omni-present and all-powerful author at the judgment: The Author and finisher of our faith.
“Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” Matthew 4:10 KJV
“Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” Romans 1:25 KJV
- Ref. (“Billions of years of Amazing Changes” By Laurence Pringle, pg. 74-75)