CREATION VS. EVOLUTION Tom Moore

Transcription

1 ...the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you (Matt. 6:33). A Quarterly Journal of Biblical Studies Volume 12, Number 1, 2009 CREATION VS. EVOLUTION Why is the matter of Creation versus evolution so important? The book of Genesis is the single most ridiculed book in all the Bible. Many have spent much time in saying the book of Genesis is foolish and antiscientific and therefore to be rejected. Some say it is nothing but a fairy tale written by a crazy old Hebrew story teller. My friends, if we can t believe the book of Genesis, we can t believe any of the Bible. Jesus said, If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? (John 3:12; NKJ). For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words? (John 5:46-47; NKJ). To reject the book of Genesis is to reject the whole Bible. The Bible clearly states, In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1; NKJ). In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made (John 1:1-3; NKJ). And: You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands (Hebrews 1:10; NKJ). Beloved, if evolution is true then the Bible is false, and if the Bible is true then evolution is false. It is just that simple. This is why creation versus evolution is so important! Why do many believe in evolution? Notice the following. Evolution is accepted by zoologists to be true not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, Special Creation, is clearly incredible (Dr. D. E. M. S. Watson). Evolution is unproved and unprovable, we believe it because the only alternative is Special Creation and that s unthinkable (Sir Author Keith). Our faith in the idea of evolution depends upon our reluctance to accept the antagonistic doctrine of Special Creation (Dr. L. T. Moore). In the words of James D. Bales, If one is acquainted with the background of Darwin and other evolutionists in the nineteenth century, he will realize that they accepted evolution not because scientific evidence proved it, but because they rejected the idea of creation by God, and had determined that all must be explained naturally. Clearly, evolution was and is believed by scientists (past and present) because they do not want to believe in God! This, my friends, is the crux of the whole matter. Strangely, and sadly I might add, many others believe in evolution because of what was stated by Dr. Henry Morris, The main reason most educated people believe in evolution is because they have been taught that most educated people believe in evolution. It is peer pressure of a sort, for peer pressure does not end with high school and college, but continues through out our lives. I am reminded of the words of our Lord, They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch (Matthew 15:14; NKJ). If the Genesis account of creation is rejected and evolution is accepted as fact, what does that do for Christianity? If we cannot believe the words of Moses in Genesis 1:1, can we believe what the Bible says about salvation? If we reject the biblical creation account and consider it only a myth, can we truly believe what the Bible says about the judgment to come? Again, if the Genesis account of creation is false and evolution is true, why should we waste our time with a book that based on a lie? Clearly, we see the importance of the Creation versus Evolution controversy. Either we believe in God and the Bible, or we believe in evolution - there is no middle ground. Jesus said, He who is not with Me is against Me... (Matthew 12:30; NKJ). Some have been truly convinced evolution is a fact of science. Others have never heard evolution questioned or even shown in its true light. Masses have never seen the overwhelming evidence against evolution. We hope to in this issue of Seek Ye First, in a brief way, set forth reasons why evolution is to be rejected and the Genesis account of creation accepted. Remember, the Bible says, In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1; NKJ). Will you believe the Bible or not?

2 Seek Ye First... 2 Seek Ye First... EDITORS: Michael Light Bangs Church of Christ P. O. Box 41 Bangs, TX (325) mclight@verizon.net Avenue T Church of Christ 2009 West Avenue T Temple, TX (254) preacher@clearwire.net Our Purpose The editors of Seek Ye First produce this biblical journal to provide scriptural material dealing with the issues that are currently affecting the church, our families, our nation and the world. Our intent is to challenge souls to return to the old paths (Jer. 6:16) for their sole source of authority in religious matters. Our policy is to speak as the oracles of God (1 Pet. 4:11), encouraging people to study to show themselves approved unto God, enabling them to rightly divide the word (2 Tim. 2:15). We make every effort to deal boldly with the issues that confront Christianity, with no apology, and strive to do so speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). Seek Ye First Volume 12 Number 1 This work is published quarterly in a joint effort among the editors and those which generously help to support it financially. If you would like to make a donation to Seek Ye First, contact Michael Light. For changes of address or subscriptions contact. All donations towards this work are greatly appreciated. Please note that every contribution, great or small, is beneficial to the paper. HOW OLD IS THE EARTH? Michael Light Of course there is no specific answer to the above question. However, there are two basic ideas which we will examine in this issue of Seek Ye First. On the one hand the evolutionary proponents propose millions (perhaps billions) of years for the age of the earth. On the other hand the Bible affirms a relatively young earth (somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years). Other articles in this issue will examine the basic tenants of evolution. It is our purpose to examine the biblical affirmation of the earth being young compared to what Darwinists teach. We will look at the chronology of the Bible as one proof of a young earth. Other methods can be used and are helpful, but this is an approach that is worthy of more attention than it usually gets. We need to realize that God put much emphasis on the various chronological lists found in His word. There are dozens of specific and repeated chronologies in the Bible. He is giving us specific people and events so as to provide a timeline for us. There are chronologies in not only the historical books, but also the prophetic books, the gospel accounts, and the writings of Paul. We need to be willing to examine this material and glean the timeline God has given us. The following information (adapted for space) is found in Dr. Thompson s Book, The Bible and the Age of the Earth (pages 7 and 8): The Bible provides impressive chronological data from Adam to Solomon. Combining that information with the Black Obelisk and the Assyrian Eponym Lists, the death of Ahab was B.C. and therefore Solomon reigned from B.C. (1 Kings 11:42). According to 1 Kings 6:1, 480 years before Solomon s fourth year of reign ( B.C.), Moses brought the Israelites out of Egypt. The date of the Exodus is 1446/1445 B.C. To this date is added the years of the sojourn (430 years Exodus 12:40), thereby producing the date 1876 B.C. as the year Jacob went to Egypt. Interestingly, the Bible records Pharaoh s query of Jacob s age (130 years) in Exodus 47:9. This would make the year of Jacob s birth 2006 B.C. (Gen. 25:26). Abraham was 100 years old when he begat Isaac, giving 2166 B.C. for Abraham s birth (Gen. 21:5). The chronology from Abraham to Adam is recorded very carefully twice in Genesis (chapters 5 and 11). According to Genesis 12:4, Abraham was 75 when he left Haran, after Terah died at 205 years old; thus, Abraham was born when Terah was 130 (Gen. 11:27; 12:4; Acts 7:4).

3 Having established the birth date of Abraham at 2166 B.C. it is possible to work the time line from Abraham to Adam to the beginning. The time from the creation of Adam to Seth was 130 years (Gen. 5:3). The time from Adam to Noah was 1056 years. The time from Noah s birth to the flood was 600 years (Gen. 7:6), or 1656 A. A. (After Adam). Shem was about 100 at the time of the flood (Gen. 5:32; 11:10) and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood (Gen. 7:11; 8:14; 11:10) in approximately 1659 A.A. Arphaxad begat Salah in his 35 th year; however Luke 3:36 complements the chronological table of Gen. 11 with the insertion of Cainan between Arphaxad and Salah, which indicated that Arphaxad was the father of Cainan. Proceeding forward, one observes that Terah was born in 1879 A.A. and bore Abraham 130 years later (2009 A.A.). Simply add the two together 2166 B.C added to 2009 A.A. places the creation date at approximately 4175 B.C. Some argue that the chronological tables are not literal or consecutive. But such is not justified by the Book. Five of the patriarchs clearly were literal fathers of their sons Adam named Seth (Gen. 4:25) Seth named Enos (4:26) Lamech named Noah (5:26), Noah s literal sons were Shem Ham and Japeth (5:32; 9:18) and Terah was the father of Abraham (11:27;31). Jude states that Enoch was the seventh from Adam (Jude 1:14), thereby affirming that the list is literal and consecutive. Moreover how better could Moses have expressed literal and consecutive than by using the terms lived and begat begat after he begat all the days and he died? Simply put, the Bible does not allow for an earth that is millions of years old. As we read from Genesis to the close of the first century there are specific events and people which give us reference points on the timeline of human history and the time line simply cannot be as long as many would like to think. There is no history on the earth that preceded the creation or the existence of man (Gen. 1, 2). The assertion of millions of years of some primordial existence without man is false. Jesus taught that God and man were together in the beginning (Matt. 19:1-9). Either evolution is true or the Bible is true, they both cannot be true. Men have struggled to get away from the authority of God from the beginning and they continue to do so in our day. And while the evolutionary model is complex and well received by many as truth, it is in fact just another attempt to run from God. The earth is fairly young just as the Bible teaches. We are going to be held accountable before God and judged by His word in the hereafter (2 Cor. 5:10; John 12:48). We had better accept the truthfulness of the scriptures and follow the message contained therein (Heb. 9:27). 3 Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009 This Issue s Theme: EVOLUTION Table of Contents: Creation vs. Evolution 1 How Old Is The Earth? 2 Michael Light Science and Evolution 4 Kevin Cauley Alleged Evidences 5 What Is At Stake 6 Tyler Young Theistic Evolution 7 David Harris FRIENDS OF SYF 8 Did you know "Exalted views of the objectivity of science and scientists were shattered recently when The New Scientist reported in its November, 1976 issue on the results of a survey it conducted on the subject of 'Cheating in Science.' Out of 204 scientists replying to the journal's questionnaire, 175 reported they were aware of cheating by their colleagues. They judged that 58% of the cheating was intentional, and they reported only 10% of these i n t e n t i o n a l c h e aters we r e dismissed; most of them, in fact, were promoted." (George Koshy. A Challenge To Biology. Bible- Science Association. Minneapolis. Minnesota p. 86).

4 Seek Ye First... 4 SCIENCE AND EVOLUTION Kevin Cauley There may be no two words loaded with more assumptions than science and evolution. What do these concepts entail? Are they compatible? Two aspects of science relate to how we understand evolution. First, science concerns itself with things that are observable, repeatable, and demonstrable. A scientist may observe a rainbow. He may artificially create a rainbow. He may demonstrate how a rainbow is made through the refraction and diffusion of light. A rainbow is an observable, repeatable, and demonstrable phenomenon. Second, science is concerned with extending such observations to draw general conclusions about the world through the inductive method. The inductive method entails formulating hypotheses and devising experiments to test these hypotheses. In an open system, hypotheses can only be falsified. In a closed system, hypotheses can be both falsified and verified. The word evolution simply means change, but it entails two concepts that lineup with the two aspects of science discussed above. First, there are those processes of evolution (change) that are observable, repeatable, and demonstrable. Microevolution is a genetic change that does not result in the emergence of an organism genetically incompatible with its state prior to the change. Creationists do not doubt these processes. Second, there is the hypothesis of evolution (known as macroevolution), which refers to extending observable processes of evolution inductively to historical biology. This hypothesis entails a series of genetic mutations that randomly and chaotically occurs over very long periods of time, resulting in the eventual emergence of all genetically incompatible organisms (i.e., life on earth). Evolutionists want us to think that observable evolution (microevolution) and the hypothesis of evolution (macroevolution) are both the same process; but this is the assumption that evolutionists must demonstrate! Consider the potential logical fallacy of extending something that is observable, repeatable, and demonstrable beyond the immediate conclusion. The ancient astronomer Ptolemy did exactly this. The phenomenon of the Moon going around the Earth was an observable, repeatable, and demonstrable phenomenon. This phenomenon in the ancient world was confirmed through observation of lunar and solar eclipses. However, the same concept was then extended to the Sun, the planets, and all of the stars as well. Ptolemy then drew the unwarranted conclusion of geocentrism (i.e., the idea that the Sun is the center of the solar system). This is the same fallacy evolutionists make. They observe, repeat, and demonstrate small changes in the genetic code, and then conclude that these small changes are responsible for the creation of all life from a single organism. Such may be a hypothesis, but it does not fall within our first category of science. Such changes are not observable, repeatable, and demonstrable precisely because such changes are said to be historical. Unless scientists have invented a time machine, they still cannot observe, repeat, and demonstrate history. Moreover, the evolutionary hypothesis rests upon an invalid logical premise as well. As noted, science concerns itself with the inductive method. In an open system, conclusions using the inductive method can be falsified, but they cannot be verified. Historical genetic changes are part of an open system. The best scientists can do in such a system is to conclude that nothing has falsified the hypothesis. The bottom line, though, is that the hypothesis is still a hypothesis, and a hypothesis is not the same thing as an inductively verified fact. It is an invalid conclusion to state that the evolutionary hypothesis is a verified fact from an open inductive system. What is disturbing about macroevolution, however, is that evolutionists permit no historical information to falsify their theory. But if no falsification is allowed, that places the conclusion of the evolutionary hypothesis outside of the inductive method. And if those conclusions are outside of the inductive method, they are outside of the realm of science. Any way you look at it, the evolutionary hypothesis is not scientific. It is not observable, repeatable, or demonstrable. Nor is it a verified conclusion from the inductive method. Moreover, historical evidence can be brought forth that falsifies the hypothesis of evolution, but such is beyond the scope of this article. Other historical evidence that claims to prove evolution to be true has also been falsified. If you would like to see some of that evidence, please visit Manchaca Rd. Austin, TX k.cauley@swsbs.edu.

5 There are many alleged evidences of evolution that are being crammed down our throats these days - evidences that are even being taught our youth from a very early age. Our world is being told that evolution is a fact - that we evolved from monkeys, and that the creation model is nothing more than a myth. We are being intimidated into thinking that if we do not accept evolution as fact we are not scholarly. The theory of evolution is based on such evidences as Natural Selection, Comparative Embryology, Vestigial Organs, Comparative Arguments (Homology), and Genetic Mutations. Space will not allow an examination of each of these alleged evidences, but I recommend you do some research at the Apologetics Press website ( for information in this regard. We will, though, briefly examine two of these alleged evidences in this article. Vestigial Organs Vestigial organs are said to be left over organs, those for which in one's lifetime there has never been a use. They are said to be left over parts from our ancestry in the evolutionary process. In 1931 Gilbert Vedershine said there were 180 vestigial organs. Contrary to this, Dr. Randy Wysong says, Not long ago man was imputed to have 180 vestiges. Organs like the appendix, tonsils, thymus, pineal gland and thyroid gland were on the list. Today, all former vestigial organs are known to have some function during the life of the individual. If the organ has had any function at anytime, it is not to be called rudimentary or vestigial As man s knowledge has increased the list of vestigial organs have decreased. So what is really vestigial? Was it not man's rudimentary knowledge of the intricacies of the body? We now know that there is not one single vestigial organ in the human body or any animal. Dr. Randy Wysong interestingly states, If man does have 180 vestigial organs, organs that were once functioning, then in the past he would have had more organs than he has now. In the past he would have been developing the organs that he presently has plus he would have had the 180 functional organs. So the further back we go in time, the more complex the organisms - rather an interesting evolutionary twist. This would not be evolution but devolution. This is the very opposite of what the evolutionists want to prove. That which proves too much - proves nothing. 5 Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009 ALLEGED EVIDENCES Comparative Arguments This argument, simply stated, is this: Where you have similarity you have common ancestry. Evolutionists believe that the closer the similarity of structure, the closer the relationship, therefore pointing to a common ancestry. In this argument, though, the evolutionists are simply selecting the data they wish to exhibit and reject that which they wish. I don t know about you, but I would call that deceptive. It is important to ask, before you come to any conclusion, Have I seen all the available data? Sure there are many similarities between species - this can not be truthfully denied. But what about the differences, how are they to be explained? If similarity proves commonality, then wouldn t differences prove the opposite? Does similarity show common ancestry? If not, then the whole argument fails. The octopus eye, pig heart, Pekingese dog s face, milk of the donkey, and the pronator quadratus muscle of the Japanese salamander are all very similar or analogous to the human structure. Do these similarities show evolutionary relationships? Not according to the evolutionary model. Did you know that the weight of the brain in proportion to body weight is greater in the dwarf monkey of South America, the marmoset, than in man? Since this proportion is used to show relation between primates and man, is the marmoset, therefore, more evolved than man? The evolutionists dug themselves a hole they can not get out of. The plague (Pasteurella pestis or Yersinia pestis) afflicts only man and rodent. Does this similarity show a close relationship? I have known some men who are rats, but I do not think this is what evolutionists are trying to prove. Lysozyme (Emzyme) studies show that: man are more closely related to chicken than to apes, turtles are more closely related to birds than they are to snakes, man is more closely related to a shark than a shark is to a fish, and that man is more closely related to a fish than he is to an amphibian. What proves too much proves nothing, my friends! When we look honestly at all the alleged evidences of evolution (not picking and choosing), it is easy to see that evolution is probably the biggest hoax (lie) of all times!

6 Seek Ye First... 6 We ve heard it said, or perhaps have said ourselves, that Some things just aren t worth fussing over. Is the creation-evolution debate one of them? Should we be concerned over whether or not evolution is, as some allege, a fact of science? If Darwin was right about the origin of species, does that present a serious problem to those who believe in God and the Bible? Why all the controversy over whether public school textbooks should teach the evolutionary view of life as fact or theory, or include references to intelligent design as an alternative explanation for origins? Why the battle over whether students should be required to learn about scientific evidence which contradicts the evolutionary hypothesis? Does it really matter what we think about how we got here? What is at stake? Everything, actually. Those who think the truth or falsity of evolution has no real bearing on religious faith Christianity in particular and the fundamental issues of our existence need to think again. If we are comfortable believing in the Bible and evolution, then we don t understand either. The two are diametrically opposing ideas which, correctly understood, cannot be reconciled to each other. There are only two possible explanations for the origin of the universe, of life, and of man: the natural, and the supernatural. That is, either we have arrived as a result of purely random, natural processes and are therefore mere accidents of history, or we were created by God. Which position we take determines our worldview how we think of the world, ourselves and the most important concerns of our lives. Consider the implications of the biblical perspective. If we were created by God in his image to spend eternity with him, then we have purpose and meaning. Each human life is inherently valuable. There is real, absolute morality grounded in the very nature of our Creator to whom we are accountable, and therefore our choices have meaning and consequence. But what if we were not created? If evolution is true that is, if we owe our existence to nothing more than time and chance then we are merely a configuration of chemicals. If we arose by accident from a primordial puddle, then we are nothing more than matter, with no ultimate purpose for our existence and nothing but the gloomy prospect of passing pointlessly out of existence. In the final analysis, if man is mere matter, then nothing really matters. Of special concern are the evolutionary implications regarding the value of human life. From the Darwinian viewpoint, man is not fundamentally different from animals or any other form of life. There is no inherent WHAT IS AT STAKE Tyler Young sanctity or dignity to human life which commands our respect. If we are merely the product of a fortuitous collusion of atoms, then when we are found to be inconvenient whether in the womb or the infirmary we may be disposed of with impunity. Evolutionists themselves admit as much. Some, like famed Princeton ethicist Peter Singer, take evolution to its logical conclusion to argue for the killing of the unborn, the newborn, the impaired and the aged. The increasing popularity of his view is alarming, for ultimately, if Darwin was right, no one is safe. From the death camps of the Holocaust to the gulags of communism, tens of millions died in the twentieth century as a result of atheistic philosophies based on the Darwinian view of man. The stench of Hitler s ovens and the blood of over forty million babies slaughtered in the womb these are the legacy of Darwin. And the momentous issues of life and death we are facing in our culture abortion and euthanasia especially ultimately hinge on our understanding of ourselves, which is determined by how we settle the debate over origins. Ideas have consequences, and our thinking about our origins has everything to do with the value of human life, of who lives and who dies. The renewed attacks on biblical creationism and the ongoing effort to indoctrinate our children in the molecules-to-man story is thus an issue of the highest consequence. For this reason, we appeal for all to examine the data closely, consider the facts honestly, and weigh the issue carefully, for the evidence shows we are not accidents of history but the handiwork of God. Some things aren t worth fussing over. Some things are. P. O. Box 737 Roanoke, TX toddtyleryoung@gmail.com Thank You To Seek Ye First Supporters The editors wish to express their heart felt gratitude for all the encouragement we have received recently. The outpouring of your sacrificial support and the kind comments has motivated us to greater dedication and stronger conviction in producing a publication that holds fast to the Old Paths. We continue to strive to present Gospel truths in love without compromise. Your continued financial support will allow us to offer Seek Ye First free to those who love the truth. The Editors

7 Mankind has always been pretty good at rebelling against authority. Anytime one has to submit to authority or to a standard of right there will always be initial resistance. Man therefore has turned to compromise to justify his selfish position, keeping one foot in the church and one foot in the world; straddling the fence of right and wrong, light and darkness, good and evil, (Isa. 5:20) all the while forgetting that Satan owns the fence. This idea of compromise has also been put forth with evolution to try to make a false theory (evolution) fit the time table of the Bible. It has been the case for some time now that if any educated professional professes Biblical Creation to be true, he is either ridiculed by his associates or banned from any teaching or authoritative position. The fact is if Biblical creation is true, then evolution is false. Both cannot co-exist in truth. The Bible says God created the heaven and the earth in six literal days by fiat, that is, God spoke and it happened (Gen. 1:1-31). These are not days lasting a thousand years as some would claim, but the same kind of days as the Hebrew Sabbath (Ex. 20:11), twenty-four hour days. Evolution, among other things, claims that the origin of the earth and all that is in it, requires some five billion years (This figure has constantly changed since Darwin proposed the theory). If one uses the genealogy of Genesis chapters 5, 10, and 11, along with Matthew chapter one, we cannot even come up with ten thousand years if we do bad math. This is only one area where the Bible and evolution will conflict. Massive amounts of time is of the utmost importance if evolution can even seem remotely logical to anyone; actually time is the enemy of evolution and the theory cannot exist without it. Accordingly men have come up with their theories as to how to compromise the Biblical account of God with the evolutionary account of science. The Gap Theory and the Day-Age Theory (all dealing with time) have been advanced to attempt to bring some kind of harmony between God s position and the evolutionary theory. These theories simply try to affix more time into the Divine Revelation by adding to, where God has not revealed. The theistic evolutionist wants to believe that God created the universe through evolution rather than by fiat. J.D. Bales wrote: There are many in the religious world, and a few in the New Testament church, who think that Genesis can and must be harmonized with evolution. They are theistic evolutionists who maintain that evolution was God s method of creation. 7 Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009 THEISTIC EVOLUTION David Harris It would be very convenient for evolutionists of all stripes, if the first twelve chapters of the book of Genesis were to be non-existent. But they are here for our learning and our admonition (Rom. 15:4). The creation account is set forth in both the Old and New Testaments of our Bibles (Gen. 1:1-31; Heb. 11:3), and if one rejects one account, he will then need to compromise and reject the other. Just as plain old evolutionists will be condemned for their rejection of the Word of God (Jn. 12:48-49), so will the Theistic evolutionist be condemned for trying to harmonize the Word of God with a theory that rejects the magnificent creation of God. Theistic evolution is a damnable doctrine that rejects and denies God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Evolutionists claim that something came from nothing, which is not provable, logical, nor rational to a human beings way of thinking. Theistic evolutionists want to soothe their conscience by claiming to believe in God, but compromising God s Word with popular scientifically accepted theories. One of the great problems that theistic evolutionists have yet to overcome, is trying to come up with legitimate answers as to how the evolved man finally got his soul. The answer is found in God s wonderfully revealed Word which they reject. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them...and the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (Gen. 1:27; 2:7). This is also affirmed in the New Testament (1 Cor. 15:45-47). Man has not evolved from a kind of animal, he was created a full grown living soul by God Himself. To deny this is to deny and reject inspiration. God has dealt with the wise thinkers of the world before. Listen to Paul; For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God, For it is written. I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe (1 Cor. 1:18-21) Northwest Loop Stephenville, TX davidharris53@yahoo.com

8 Seek Ye First... 8 Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009 Friends of SYF Church Contributions Bangs Church of Christ Bangs, TX Baird Church of Christ Baird, TX Cold Springs Church of Christ Lancaster, TX Emerson St. Church of Christ Magnolia, AR Hillcrest Church of Christ Stephenville, TX North Main Church of Christ Malvern, AR McCloud Church of Christ McCloud, OK Portland Church of Christ Portland, TX Rising Star Church of Christ Rising Star, TX Individual Contributions John Brown Magnolia, AR Bill & Trevonne Davis Early, TX Ruth Dunn Bangs, TX Aaron LeMond Bangs, TX Michael/Carrie Light Bangs, TX Seek Ye First... P. O. Box 41 Bangs, TX Mary Marbut San Angelo, TX Cynthia M c Intyre Magnolia, AR Mr./Mrs. James Meredith Dixon, MO Anna Ruth Moore Bangs, TX Tom/Carole Moore Temple, TX Sam/Charlin Mullen Bangs, TX Eddie/Oleta Pafford Bangs, TX Cecil/Rena Robertson May, TX Did You Know If evolution were true it would be clearly seen in the fossil record. But guess what, it is simply not there! If it were, the Evolutionists would be shouting it from the house tops. If evolution were true we would expect to see a large number of transitional forms. Darwin himself said, The number of intermediate and transitional forms between all living and extinct species must be inconceivably great. The truth is, the fossil record does not show any transitional forms - evolution is a hoax conjured up by those who do not want to believe in God and in the biblical creation account. U.S. POSTAGE PAID NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION PERMIT #13 BANGS TX 76823