Fat Bible Bloke's Blog

I'm getting more and more confused And I'm not surprised. People say that Darwin explained everything; but he didn't. Now we've got Darwin and genetics to think about. And their ideas don't match up. And neither can explain everything. Neither debate explains how a sea cucumber might sprout a couple of eyes! Or even why giraffes have long necks. Come on, that's easy; it's so they can reach tasty stuff high up in trees. Really? Have you ever seen a Giraffe drink? A long neck is a dis advantage here! Ouch! That looks painful! O.K. What do you believe, Mr Clever? Simple answer or complicated answer? Simple per-lease! The Bible wasn't interested in how God made the world, plants and you and me. The writers, probably around 4,000 years ago, had no knowledge of modern science; but they were keen to show that the beginning of life, the universe and everything was part of a grand plan and not a freak accident . But ...

What about my genes? They're a bit tight; and I don't like the faded bits! Oh, hysterically funny! Genes,NOT Jeans! They say it's all in the genes! Did Darwin know about Genes? Good question; and no, he didn't . The science of genetics had not been invented. yet. In a way this part of the story began... ... with peas and this man:- Gregor Johann Mendel from Silesia [Austrian Empire] Born July 20 1822 : Died January 6 1884 Mendel was boss of this Abbey at Brno in Czecoslovakia ... ... where he experimented with peas, sweet peas, grown for their flowers, not as a vegetable. He was trying to find out why the flowers were sometimes pinky-purple and sometimes white. Or why you have got your mum's green eyes; but you haven't got your dad's big nose! No need to get personal! Mendel devised a set of rules which began to explain how peas get some bits from their "mother" pea and other bits from their "father" p...

 The Bible never claimed to be a science book. I got an A star for science! More thinking! (see previous blog, click on the heading here on the right) It's not about how God created, but why . When Jeremy Paxman said that the story in Genesis was "reigious hogwash" (Remember?) the hogwash was more a description of Paxo's thinking; or not thinking . He wouldn't like that Trying to set the Bible up against the amazing recent discoveries in science is a bit like using a Haynes Manual ... What's a Haynes Manual? ... as a cookery book. Some of the basic principles are the same; like following instructions, having the right tools, reading it carefully and so on. But the purpose is very different. Try to make a nice cake using a Haynes Manual! Try to mend a car using a cookery book! So... the bible isn't simply inaccurate, it's different! A good way of putting it. And, finally, in this "thinking" bit..... What about,...

Or doesn't say. It's Thinking Time! We've seen, so far, that the Bible "version" of creation isn't much different, at least in the order of things, from modern scientific thought. Bearing in mind the fact that the writers of Genesis were sharing their wisdom at least 4,000 years ago, and basing it on much older word-of-mouth stories, this similarity is almost miraculous. They could never have invented it, not in a million years. but ... Hey, that's too easy a get-out! ... we do need to think about things like "evolution". But thinking is hard! But still, surely evolution does prove the Bible was wrong? . Not so fast, clever and inquisitive young person! Things to think about! Darwin's work was (and is) only a theory . It may be right but there are other theories which may also be right. Perhaps a whole mixture of "rules" are needed to explain things. Since Darwin, many scientists have suggested that...

So Bishop Ussher messed it up by stating that the world was created by God in 4000BC. A crackpot idea. It's easy to blame someone with hindsight, but his opinion was good enough for the science of the day. The fact the Ussher's dates were then printed in many bibles made them look "official"! Which they never were! That made the problem worse. So when this bloke came along, about 100 years after Ussher ... ... the aggro started getting a bit bitter and twisted. He was Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon. Born 1707, Died 1788. What did he say? He said a lot about a lot. He's famous for the "Buffon Needle Problem". If you have well over 10,000 needles and you drop them one-by-one onto a table marked out with straight lines, you can actually calculate pi. Don't tell me needles have got something to do with the Bible Absolutely nothing, but I thought you might be interested. Anyway, his particular claim to fame is ...

So did Charles Darwin believe in God? Actually, for most of his life he did; but he did begin to think that God might have, sort of, set the universe running and then sorting itself out and making itself better. He did stop believing in God when his daughter, Anne Elizabeth, died at the age of 10. She is buried in the graveyard of Great Malvern Priory. Her dad had taken her there to drink the "healthy waters". He was heart-broken when it didn't work.  That must have been tough for him. So it was then that Mr Darwin set out to prove the Bible was rubbish? NO, NO and a thousand times, NO! He knew that his ideas would upset some people and he was saddened by that. But most Christians thought he was simply explaining how God created , not disproving it. For Darwin, it all started with an invitation to take a trip on a boat. HMS Beagle Captain Robert Fitzroy's Second expedition set sail 27th December 1831. Returned to England 2nd October 1836 ...

But what about God creating humans? But animals first, remember? Then God commanded, “Let the earth produce all kinds of animal life: domestic and wild, large and small”; and it was done. So God made them all, and he was pleased with what he saw. Go on; show me some really weird animals! O.K. You asked for it! Thylacine (extinct) Aye-aye Colugo Glis-glis Bilby Dugong Human The wierd human is Carl von Linné [Linnaeus], born 1707, died 1778. He invented the system for naming all living creatures. In his system, the thylacine is (was!) "thylacinus cynosephalus", the glis-glis is "myoxus glis", the human is "homo sapiens"; that means "wise man". So man is just a clever monkey, right? In fact, that is one of the most misleading pictures that have even been drawn. As usual, various clever people don't agree completely but a simple explanation might be that man [homo sapiens] and the family of ape...