Who cares?

A quick and simple question. Since people boast of the evolution of all that is, apart from God of course, one may want to consider the stifling predicament of a wrong answer.

Image result for tomatoes plants

When did the human baby ‘evolve’ to the point that they did not need parents lest they be chewed up by wolves?

Ah but you say this is a stupid or myopic question. Really? If the life of a human is still as we know it, dependant on ANOTHER already grown and mature adult, how does a baby even begin to survive without someone to care for it?

To the point further. If the so-called evolution of human life had a beginning, who cared for the first human child on day one?  Oh wait, babies grew like a crop of tomatoes, needing no one to care for them. Some made it through harvest, others did not. Heck, they evolved to where the strongest baby fought off all rodents… Uh huh, sure, and ground hogs build nests in trees.

Hint: without the law of absolutes to rely on, any answer apart from truth will be plain guesswork, chewed up and spit out, in the most mannerly way of fine dining mind you.

Once more: who cared for the first baby? Don’t you dare mention Darwin, Einstein, Frankenstein, Nye, Tyson,  fossils, or random piles of goo, poo, or ape glue.

And I certainly can’t leave you without words far better than mine:

With the pure thou wilt show thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt show thyself froward.

He careth for you.

 

Advertisements

About ColorStorm

Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture.
Gallery | This entry was posted in Genesis- in the beginning and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Who cares?

  1. limey says:

    “who cared for the first baby?”

    there wasn’t a ‘first’ baby.

    Like

    • Limey,

      Creatures don’t happen all by themselves.

      All creatures originate from parent organisms.

      According to the theory of evolution, two like-mutants of a particular sexually reproducing species, male and female, would have to be born in the same generation in the same area, find each other, mate and have offspring in order for a new “kind” or species to originate.

      And generations of inbreeding would be necessary to produce a substantial population.

      In the biology of life, inbreeding is a Bozo no-no because it eventually destroys genetic viability.

      Like

      • limey says:

        Evolution happens on the group, not the individual. The child is always the same species as the parent.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          -lime

          And you have just proved the SCIENCE of Genesis:

          And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

          And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

          So with humans: After their KIND. Whose seed is in itself. The kind of human is different from the kind of baboon.

          Thank you for proving the total accuracy and reliability of scripture.

          Like

        • limey says:

          Not at all.

          Like

        • limey says:

          What is a KIND? Define it so it fits with science!

          Then use genesis to explain why every landmass has it’s own species and why island groups have their own variants.

          Then use genesist to explain the Wallace Line.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          I just did limes.

          A pear tree produces pears not poison ivy.

          Human produce humans, not baboons. For God’s sake pay attention to your own lack of logic.

          Like

        • limey says:

          That is not a definition of kind, and nor does it explain the other things I mentioned.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Well then, you need to amend your definition, unless of course, you may actually be able to give birth to an elephant.

          Case closed. God’s word settles all nonsense.

          Like

        • limey says:

          So kind is a species?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          ‘The fruit tree after its kind.’ I’m pretty sure I said that already.

          There are Granny smiths, Ida red, McIntosh, and many more varieties, but you will note: all apples.

          And once more, humans reproduce humans, and not ostriches.

          It’s easy really, that is, if you want to give up your hostility toward the Creator.

          Like

        • limey says:

          There are some species that have never existed in Asia.

          Are lions and tigers the same kind? How about horses and donkeys?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Did you ever see a donkey run in the Preakness?

          Now that’s a horse of a different color…

          Like

  2. Citizen Tom says:

    I am not a big fan of the Theory of Evolution. My complaint is that instead of accepting theory as a hypothesis that may have some validity, some people make either the acceptance or the rejection of the theory part of their religion. Too many secularists accept the theory just because it leaves out God. On the other hand, because the theory does not sit well with the way they read the Bible, some Christians attack the Theory of Evolution with a bit too much enthusiasm. Neither of these extremes is reasonable.

    What is the best approach? Perhaps it would be best to consider how little we know. Since the Theory of Evolution is suppose to be about the survival of the fittest, I suppose it is difficult to imagine how evolution could have resulted in babies. Nevertheless, this question has been considered. Google “how did evolution produce babies” (without the quotes) and you will get over 100,000 hits. Many will apply to the issue you have raised.

    To what extent is the Theory of Evolution true? I don’t know. None of us do. What we do know is that the Bible is not a science text book. Moses wrote as a lawgiver and as a historian. What he wrote was for a people who knew nothing of modern science and the Theory of Evolution. Did God inspire Moses? Yes, of course. Nonetheless, all Genesis has to say about Creation is done in a couple of chapters. So what is the point in getting tied up knots about details the Bible may or may not address?

    Does Noah’s Flood throw in another monkey wrench? I suppose so, but what does the Bible ask us to believe? Is not the Bible the story of how God sent His Son to redeem us by dying for our sins? Didn’t Jesus die on a cross and rise from the dead? Didn’t Jesus affirm the truth of the Old Testament?

    Once we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, that He died and rose from the dead, then the Theory of Evolution is small potatoes (=> http://www.aboutenglishidioms.com/2010/11/small-potatoes/). We don’t need to get into the weeds of the argument, and we don’t know enough anyway. Although the subject might be interesting, why would we want someones faith to hinge upon idle speculation? Sometimes it is sufficient to say: “I don’t know about that, but I do know Jesus loves me.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      @CT

      A mouthful to chew on. Tkx.
      We shouldn’t fear using the word ‘evolve’ in its proper context. Heck, look at how the first telephone evolved to smart phones today, complete with cameras, web, video, audio, and now there is a ‘level’ app.

      But as this post suggests, evolution apart from God has weak answers, just as the idea of the ‘first baby’ suggests.

      And yes, while scripture is not a science book, there is plenty of science in scripture. Plenty.

      There has NEVER been an infant who could care for itself. Evolution cannot improve upon this either.

      But I would like to suggest that we do know who cared for the first baby. Scripture does not speculate I believe.

      And btw, there are no ‘small potatoes’ if one is hungry! Always a matter of perspective eh.

      Like

      • Citizen Tom says:

        @ColorStorm

        The essential weakness of the secularist argument for the Theory of Evolution is that evolution occurs apart from God.

        Did humans evolve from complex molecules that somehow, some way formed in a primordial soup? I don’t know.

        Did humans evolve without the intervention of God? No. How do I know? Jesus loves me. The Bible tells me so.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          CT sez:

          -Did humans evolve from complex molecules that somehow, some way formed in a primordial soup?-

          I can relate to your sentiment that ‘knowing’ such things borders on the ‘arrogant,’ but I think there is a difference that is ‘confidence’ in the living God.

          When we say ‘somehow, someway,’ I see in that a degree of ambiguity, which in the Creator, there is none.

          So on the one hand we can say ‘I don’t know as to the process,’ we can with full assurance also say: ‘God has the process under control.’

          Out of the dust of the ground made He man, then woman from man. I sure as heck don’t know how that worked out, but I certainly believe it. 😉

          And yes, the love of Christ which surpasses understanding, is plenty of proof that God’s word is good, and He can be trusted.

          Liked by 2 people

  3. john zande says:

    It seems you’re mistaken. Your god, apparently, does indeed “evolve.” It changes its mind

    Like

  4. One thing that bothers me greatly about the theory of evolution is why would nature evolve a creature (man) who surpasses it?

    Man, from his beginning, has worked and succeeded spectacularly to overcome and master nature.

    Such a development is completely unique among living creatures on Earth and actually indicates a supernatural relationship between man and the Creator of life.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. tildeb says:

    ” how does a baby even begin to survive without someone to care for it?”

    Wrong assumption.

    If you guys wish to criticize the Theory of Evolution, then why not – at the very least – try to grasp what it defines and how it models it? I mean, seriously, relying on your belief about what it is obviously misleads you into astounding ignorance in this day and age… unless each of you presumes you’re by far the smartest person in the room when it comes to ‘seeing through’ this explanatory model, yet you don;t even know what it is. Your eagerness reveals your real agenda here and it has nothing to do with understanding, knowledge, or even respecting what’s true. For such humble guys writhing in humility before your god, your inflated egos blind, deaf, and dumb to any merit are astounding in their hubris.

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      Tkx tildeb but sorry, the premise is quite valuable in that babies cannot survive one day on their own.

      It seems you are missing the bigger picture. All genealogies funnel into the ‘first ‘ baby.

      His name was Cain. You can preach evolution till the sun doesn’t shine, it will not change the facts of life.

      Truth is a biatch.

      Like

    • tildeb,

      In 100,000 words or less, please explain the theory of evolution.

      Like

  6. Well said, Colorstorm.

    Something I love to ponder, who says we are evolving rather than de-evolving? Evolution suggest we are progressing, getting better and better, but by Whose standard? How do we even measure better? Nature alone cares nothing about “better,” it has no intelligence,no desire to see the human race improve. It doesn’t even know what “improve” means. Nature frequently de-evolves creatures right out of the equation, renders them obsolete. Nature has no concern for our well being.

    So the idea that only the strongest, those who genetically managed to adapt, finally producing people as these hairless apes that can be taken down by a microscopic parasite, is deeply flawed. Planet of the apes. In the absence of God,who is to say that apes are not more highly evolved than we are and people are simply the result of defective and mutated monkey genes? Which than begs the question, if we are made up of nothing more than defective and mutated monkey genes, are we really qualified to even question the nature of our own existence? Monkeys are not even that stupid!

    And of course, absent God we are simply bits of biological goo, possessing all the sentience of a table lamp, but even better, a table lamp that sprang into existence randomly, without a Creator. But even more ridiculous, even a table lamp would realize it has an umbilical cord that connects it to the “life” that makes it light up. It is not powered by it’s own brilliance, sorry.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      I just love it when the comments are much better than the post. Hope zande and tildeb appreciate such daylight.

      ‘By whose standard’ do we judge such things? Nice msB.

      You are right, nature does not care, the same way a piano doesn’t give a whit if songs are played to the devil or God.

      That umbilical cord makes a strong point too. There are cordless lamps though I’m sure. 😉 Still, needs powered.

      And to Him belongs the ultimate power and glory. 😉 😉

      (btw, when your comment came thru, I was visiting your place. lol)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Insanity,

      Evolution happens due to environmental causes.

      “Good” is defined as being able to survive and do beaucoup reproduction.

      So the “best” animal creatures are probably insects.

      Dinosaurs were exemplary in their time which lasted 100’s of millions of years.

      Man has only been around for 100,000 years or so.

      Like

    • Citizen Tom says:

      What the Bible seems to demonstrate is that we are inferior to Adam and Eve. We don’t live as long, and we are probably not as smart or strong as were Adam and Eve. Why? That is not clear.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. KIA says:

    The first baby was cared for by its parents, invisible sky daddy not required or necessary

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      Sorry if once more the main point sailed over your head M.

      Like

      • KIA says:

        Nope. I understood perfectly.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          You understand perfectly mike, yet you say there is no God?

          Hmm. Seems your understanding is defective, bu the polite biblical phrase is ‘foolish.’

          Like

        • KIA says:

          I’ve never said there is no God. I agree that the biblical God is a myth.

          Like

        • KIA says:

          Once again, I am not atheist. Just not Christian anymore. Even if I were… atheist do not claim that there is no God. They just don’t believe. Evidence would of course change their minds. You have none for the biblical God’s actual existence. All you have is arguments from ignorance and bully tactics

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Have a gr8 day m!!

          Like

        • KIA says:

          I certainly will, thx

          Liked by 1 person

        • KIA says:

          Your biggest hangup, cs is the difference between Knowledge and Belief. You think you know when you only believe

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          I know the Euphrates river exists. I believe it exists. I have never seen it.

          Case closed.

          Sorry mike, but you lose every argument against ultimate truth. It is not the fault of believers that you find the scriptures suspect.

          There are no defects in God or scripture. You can cry for the rest of your life, but let God be true, and every man a liar.

          Like

        • KIA says:

          More like… “every man is able to be questioned whether he is lying, and the biblical God isn’t anywhere to be questioned”

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          ‘Vain babblings.’

          Tkx mike for your consistent reasons that prove every word of scripture.

          Like

        • KIA says:

          The irony of your statement and quotation of that scripture obviously escapes you, cs

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Hey mike-
          Do you ever notice that it is extremely difficult for you to add something of worth to a post?

          No. It does not escape me. It is perfectly true regarding your nonsense.

          See ya.

          Like

        • KIA says:

          By the way, why does the God of the bible need a cs to defend his honor? Poorly I might add

          Like

        • KIA says:

          Cs, the main difference is that although neither of us has seen the river Euphrates, we have Evidence of its existence from photos, videos and eyewitnesses who have been to see it, and have corresponded and taken photos and videos of their own… Along with satellite images and testimony to its existence from many other Independants and unbiased sources.
          Evidence for the existence of the God of the bible in reality? Nil

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          EYEWITNESSES? Careful fella.

          There were eyewitnesses to the life and times of Christ, as well as His verifiable resurrection.

          Like

        • KIA says:

          Name one eye witness who wrote as it happened? Zero

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          -mike

          It’s a good thing God is patient, longsuffering even.

          My tolerance of your ignorance has long expired. 😉

          Like

        • KIA says:

          Does that mean you acknowledge that not even the gospels are eyewitness testimony as it happened, and that they were written anonymously decades after the time when they are supposed to have happened?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Can you picture a most polite voice saying to you ‘please go away today,’ the drip drip is annoying.

          God’s word has never lost an argument to ants, as industrious as they are………….

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          Mike, you would ignore a point if it poked you in the butt.

          Is that actually what ColorStorm said? No, it is not. What you just did is called a LIE.

          What he meant was exactly what he said. That is is, in fact, fortunate for some (like you and your cackling hyena friends.) that God is far more patient and forebearing than we weak humans are.

          Liked by 1 person

        • KIA says:

          So Wally, let’s see if you do better than cs. Name one eyewitness to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus who recorded it for others at the time it was supposed to have happened?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Just for mikey the stubborn one:

          –This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

          And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.–

          You love casting doubt on scripture don’t you? Oh how God’s word proves the bitter poison of rebellion in the human heart toward the living God. And you wonder why you cannot be taken seriously. And again:

          –That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

          For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

          That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.–

          Get it? SEEN. HEARD. LOOKED UPON. TOUCHED.

          Please mike. Stop it. Scripture is accurate. Truthful. Reliable. There is no argument you can dream of to justify your recalcitrance, and it is really getting boring.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Approved for 6.4 seconds. Now to the trash bin, lest you get the idea your perverse suggestions have merit.
          My site is not a dump site for every vile and unclean bird under the sun.

          Maybe you can post at your place………

          Like

        • KIA says:

          Ah… the wonders of open communication. And the fear of being wrong. Have a wonderful day.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Mike,
          Take an honest assessment at your commenting. How in God’s good name was this even in the same universe as the gist of the post………..

          Case closed. I am actually pretty good at discerning things, but u have a good day too.

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          So, if I decline to chase your rabbit, and get back to the point, AS DEFINED BY THE WRITER, NOT YOU, is that where you tell the world that I concede your point?

          That is why you are a waste of time.

          Have a nice day, preacher!

          Liked by 1 person

        • ColorStorm says:

          It is completely otherworldly for people who claim to not believe one word of scripture Wally, to then lecture believers who actually believe every word of it.

          Yet, God saw it all coming, and gave us a heads up, speaking of things such as ‘vain babblings,’ ‘foaming out their own shame……..’ on and on and on.

          Now back up. They CLAIM to not believe it, but their own actions and interest condemns their hypocrisy. They cannot rid themselves of the truth of scripture, while accusing others of believing in the bizarre virtues of faith, hope, and charity……….. Uh huh, sure.

          Too strange. And there is a good chance that your preacher mike may have tasted the good word of God, and that’s it, for there would be quite the predicament for him, for if he once ‘knew the Lord,’ then the Lord’s own words: ‘I never knew you…………’ would be quite the dilemma. So, do you know the Lord?

          God’s words do not fail, and expose us perfectly. Wake up mike, and since you have done another fine job of derailing a post, maybe make one of your own.

          God’s word has collected every hammer of mikes, and sent them to the scrapyard of oblivion.

          Liked by 1 person

  8. KIA says:

    You do realize, cs… That the majority of even Christians accept evolution as fact, right?

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      The difference between them and you is simple. At least they give God the courtesy of existing to set in motion all things, whereas all you have is guesswork which glorifies your ignorance.

      There is no true knowledge apart from He who gives you hot and cold for God’s sake.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s