Pastoral Musings

I was recently accused of ignorance because of a recent post of mine. In that post I stated that the lizard which had changed to live births from laying eggs was not an example of macroevolution.

Macroevolution generally refers to evolution above the species level. So instead of focusing on an individual beetle species, a macroevolutionary lens might require that we zoom out on the tree of life, to assess the diversity of the entire beetle clade and its position on the tree.
Macroevolution refers to evolution of groups larger than an individual species.

Macroevolution encompasses the grandest trends and transformations in evolution, such as the origin of mammals and the radiation of flowering plants. Macroevolutionary patterns are generally what we see when we look at the large-scale history of life.

Berkeley (See footnote)

My statement regarding the lizard was as follows:

The lizard is a lizard still. It simply has adapted to its environment. Creationists, as a general rule, will have no problem accepting this. Its change has occurred as a matter of adaptation, but it is still a lizard and it remains a reptile.

I am correct on this issue, however. The definition of microevolution is as follows:

Microevolution is evolution on a small scale—within a single population. That means narrowing our focus to one branch of the tree of life…For animals, it’s fairly easy to decide what a population is. It is a group of organisms that interbreed with each other—that is, they all share a gene pool.

Berkeley

Thus my statement about the lizard is based upon the very definitions of microevolution and macroevolution.

Note: It is interesting to note that Berkeley’s site presents an example of microevolution among fruit flies as an example of macroevolution and speciation. It is here where evolutionists go wrongly. They see evidence for microevolution and wish to use that data to prove macroevolution. It is also quite interesting to note that there is no fossil evidence of macroevolution.

By the way, since there’s this idea that humans and chimps are related somewhere way back; well, there’s a study that is showing that the genetic similarity between humans and chimps is not as great as was previously thought.

The true issue with the whole creation vs. evolution discussion is one of authority. Who is the authority? God is. That is not something created by man, but belongs to God by virtue of being God. This is not something that is imposed upon the text of Scripture, but is inherent within Scripture by virtue of its being the Word of God. What we must do is approach the biblical text with reverence, humility, and awe, because it is God’s Word. We must then submit to what God is saying to us in Scripture. He is the final authority, and His Word is true.

Just musing…