Re: Natural selection is a false term - says Darwin in Origin Species

On Oct 6, 10:03 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Meaning is semantics. To get the meaning of a word we define the word
and what it implies at dictionary.com.

...which means that before dictionary.com was devised no word in any
language had any meaning at all.

I wonder how we managed to communicate at all?

Good question, what you are really asking is where did language
originate? Chomsky says that natural selection can't explain where
language came from. Language came from God who have existed since
before eternity began.

The words "selection" and "choice" like love, truth, mercy, kindness
and integrity were given to us by God himself. These words are eternal
words, they in a sense belong to God and no man dares change their
meaning. If the meaning of these were to change language itself
becomes undefined. And if language becomes undefined nobody can
communicate their intent anymore. One can coin new phrases and
technical jargon terms such quantum mechanics and the meaning can
change with such terms. But with with a word like "selection" and
"choice" , the meaning and intent is eternally fixed by God himself.

Believing that in the beginning was language and information gives one
an absolute frame of reference. Language is neither matter nor energy
and no materialism that fails to take note of this can survive -
paraphrasing Norbert Weiner from MIT.

Christ said that "...for every idle word man shall speak he will give
account thereof in the day of judgment..."

This term NS has become so pervasive that nobody from Ken Ham to
Dawkins questions why are we using this phrase. Natural selection and
evolution for example are used so inter-changeably that nobody even
notices that there is supposed to be some sort of difference between
the two words. And having Ruse tell Dobbs on CNN that "Darwinism" is
the mechanism for evolution only adds to the confusion, since most
evolutionists would ascribe such a statement to creationists.

We observe the moon circling the earth and label it as gravity.
Labeling it doesn't explain why the moon is pulled towards the earth.
In the same way labeling the observation of changing allele
frequencies as 'evolution' doesn't explain why they change. Some even
label it 'Theory of evolution', confusing a theory and an observation.
A theory is a specification of the mechanism that causes the
observation.

Bob Jones University forces one to do a course on why evolution is
wrong. And in the exam they ask a person questions about natural
selection. My reply would be "what naturaled and who did the
selecting" to each such question, with an explanation to the
instructor that since there no such thing as a "natural selection" his
question is meaningless.

If as Dernavich has argued that there is no such thing as natural
selection, then how can a Christian answer a question concerning it
where the premise is that natural selection is a valid concept? It
would be a loaded question like :"Do you still beat your wife". No
imagine you are forced to answer the question with either a Yes or No.
Anything else is considered sabotaging the exam and will get you
expelled.

Any Christian doing a course in evolution wether forced or not and
doesn't state that there is no such thing as a natural selection is
in a sense denying Christ wether you understand it or not. All the
early Christians had to do to avoid being tortured to death was say
"Caesar is Lord" . But of course Jesus is Lord! And doing a course in
evolution at either Bob Jones , icr.org or Dawkins or MIT where you
are supposed to treat natural selection as actually meaning something
is in fact a denial of Christ - because there is no such thing as a
natural selection.

This means that the academic world is largely closed for Christians,
especially biology is off-limits. Only about engineering remains. Even
medicine is becoming impossible because the materialist priests force
you to do a course in evolution where you are supposed explain how
natural selection "does something". The truthful answer would be that
since there is no such thing as a natural selection it doesn't do
anything which means you fail the course and can't become a doctor.
You have to decide between renouncing Christ and becoming a doctor -
these are choices. You must understand the spiritual consequences of
saying you believe in something which doesn't exist like Ken Ham who
"believes in natural selection". Well so does Dawkins, so what is Ken
Ham then going on about then? This term NS has become so pervasive
that nobody from Ken Ham to Dawkins questions why are we using this
phrase. It is accepted as a given and everybody uses it. Natural
selection and evolution for example are used so interchangeably that
nobody even notices that there is supposed to be some sort of
difference between the two words. And having Ruse tell Dobbs on CNN
that "Darwinism" is the mechanism for evolution only adds to the
confusion, since most evolutionists would ascribe such a statement to
creationists.

We observe the moon circling the earth and label it as gravity.
Labeling it doesn't explain why the moon is pulled towards the earth.
In the same way labeling the observation of changing allele
frequencies as 'evolution' doesn't explain why they change. Some even
label it 'Theory of evolution', confusing a theory and an observation.
A theory is a specification of the mechanism that causes the
observation.

Bob Jones University forces one to do a course on why evolution is
wrong. And in the exam they ask a person questions about natural
selection. My reply would be "What naturaled and who did the
selecting?" to each such question, with an explanation to the
instructor that since there no such thing as a "natural selection" his
question is meaningless. And the same with the
Theory of Evolution - there is no such theory, so how could something
which doesn't exist be Godless?

If as Dernavich has argued that there is no such thing as natural
selection, then how can a Christian answer a question concerning it
where the premise is that natural selection is a valid concept? Such a
question would in essence be a LITMUS TEST.

Taking a course in evolution to get your credits to become a doctor is
like imagine the Apostle Paul doing a course in
Zeus studies having to answer a question:"How did Zeus create the
world?" a) In 10 days b)10million years. See there is no
option c)There is no such thing as a Zeus. Option (c) would not be
allowed as an answer at Bob Jones, MIT, http://www.icr.org or
http://www.answersingenesis.com

With evolution we are dealing with nothing else but pantheism. The
evolutionists are invoking nature as cause in and of itself because
God himself have eternally fixed the meaning the word "selection" as
being a conscious choice and the evolutionists can't change the
meaning of a word God has fixed for eternity. And thus as a Christian
to say you "believe" in
natural selection, you will be judged by God as saying you believe in
some sort of "nature selection force", wether you understand this or
not. Remember our premise as Christians is that God gave language and
that he established the absolute meanings of words. You must state
what you say in terms of your world view and my world view is that
"selection" has only one eternal meaning - the meaning God gave it
before he spoke time itself into existence.

And thus my rebuttal to Harshman, Richard is very simple as to why
they can't use selection given their premises: The semantics of the
word was established by God himself and you as a mere mortal can't
change the meaning of such a word for this implies that God himself
becomes subject to your arbitrary definitions. Evolutionists create
their own reality, for them there can't be such a thing as objective
truth and absoluteness and language becomes whatever they define it
be. Like for example "selection" that they now want to define as not
being a conscious choice.

As a 10 year old kid I communicated my intent to God by asking Christ
into my life. I felt my spirit being reborn in my stomach. By my words
I confessed Christ and was saved. At at 12 I said "I receive the Holy
Spirit" and spoke a supernatural Slavic like language, becoming
perhaps the only Christians who actually can speak in tongues. By my
words I called those things that be not as though they were. I was
saved by my words. By your words you shall condemned and by your words
you shall be justified. Ken Ham is condemning himself by his words - I
pray to God that he repents of his folly.

And thus my dear brothers and sisters in the Lord Jesus I motivate by
this posting why it is not possible to exclude your
religious beliefs in these evolution debates in an attempt at being
"scientific". The arguments from design form ID and their attempts to
hide their religious beliefs are mocked because nobody seems to get
it: Evolutionists do believe in design - the design by the nature
selection force. We all have beliefs, Christians believe that the
meaning of words given by God himself
are absolute and eternally fixed, evolutionists believe that they can
make words mean what each individual evolutionist wants to make it
mean as they each invent their own reality.

The love of money is the root of all evil. icr.org and Ken Ham are
engaging in a scam - why ? Because they ask for funding, money is
involved. They can't admit that there is no such thing as a natural
selection because then there would be nothing further to talk about.

--
Falsify my Glossolalia http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/TongueSpeaker

.