Murphology — Darwin and Jesus Compared

W. Edward Murphy

This is your lucky day, dear reader. Once more we’re visiting the Alvin Sun-Advertiser of Alvin, Texas to discuss another thought-provoking article by that legendary Texas intellect, W. Edward Murphy.

Our last post about Murph was Creationist Wisdom #177: Murphology. It was so spectacular, in the subsequent comments we announced that although Curmudgeon University has heretofore offered only doctorates, that venerable institution is now seriously considering the addition of a simple bachelor’s degree to its mail-order product line. It would be called Bachelor of Murphology — or “BM.”

Murph’s latest is titled Darwin v Christ; Science V Religion? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

A couple years ago on Fox News Channel, there was discussion about Intelligent Design. Charles Krauthammer wound up the comments by saying that Darwinism is science; he dismissed Intelligent Design as “just religion”.

Oh goodie! Murph is going to contradict Krauthammer. Let’s read on:

Darwin is considered to have the scientific explanation of the origin of man; while Christ is to be confined within the boundaries of “religion”. However, Christ developed Intelligent Design – He is the Intelligent Designer, the Creator (you can verify this in the Gospel of John, 1st Chapter, Verse 3, and in the first chapter of the Paul’s letter to the Colossians).

At last we know — Jesus is the Intelligent Designer! Murph’s letter continues:

Oh, by the way, in all of Darwin’s writings, there is nothing as definitive as the statements by John and Paul.

Jeepers — Murph is correct about that. Here’s more:

Last week there was a front-page article in the Houston Chronicle that claimed that the first Americans were also the first Texans, and that they lived 13,100 years ago.

Murph is probably talking about this story, which was all over the news recently. Let’s see what he says about it:

I’ll believe that when the scientists give me the names of their descendants. Ridiculous you say? Well, the Bible says man was created (not evolved) about 6,000 years ago, and gives the descendants, and their families, starting with the first man, Adam, up to the family of King Saul, the first king of Israel.

They can’t fool ol’ Murph! Moving along:

Let’s compare the origin of man from Darwin’s perspective to what God said happened.

This should be good. Here’s Murph’s comparison:

Darwin: All life came from a simple cell. However, no explanation is offered as to the origin of the environment in which the first simple cell “happened”. For example, how did the “primordial ooze” happen to be there? What was the energy source that birthed the cell? Where did the energy come from? The discovery of DNA, the unimaginably complex composition of each cell, obliterates Darwin’s basic concept of a simple cell.

Christ: There is an invisible world that is more real than the physical world we see. (Read about it in the Book of Hebrews, 11th Chapter, Verse 3.) Everything that we see, everything we are, started with a Divine idea, culminating in orderly acts of creation, and finally, man (Genesis 1:1-27).

Wow — what a powerful comparison. Darwin was an idiot!

There’s more in Murph’s column — much more, but we can’t copy it all. Click over to the Alvin Sun-Advertiser and learn what your teachers never told you.

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

14 responses to “Murphology — Darwin and Jesus Compared

  1. Curmudgeon, you’ve sent me to the Word. John 1:3, in the Authorized Version, reads:

    All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    The problem with that translation is that the original Greek actually uses a verb form that means “came into being” rather than “made.” In other words, the book of John suggests theistic evolution, not special creation only 6,000 years ago.

    Murphy, et al., need to read their Bibles more carefully.

  2. Having now read three of Mr. Murphy’s learned pieces, I feel that I’m qualified for a BM.

  3. I feel that I’m qualified for a BM.

    TMI.

    Although it does raise an interesting linguistic possibility. “Oh, man, I gotta take a Murphy real bad.”

  4. I was surprised to find that Murphy believes the earth is billions of years old, because science has established the age of the earth. He has no problem with that, and thinks God just took his time getting around to creating man. But…science related to evolution is somehow not as reliable. Oh, well.

    Murphy also has a problem with Darwin’s inference that life descended from a “simple” cell. It’s all relative – compared to Darwin, that cell was very simple, but compared to Murphy, maybe not so much.

  5. Gabriel Hanna

    @Greg Camp: that’s a lot of interpretation to place on a phrase from a language that I am guessing you are not fluent in. On that ground I could argue that “put up with” means put something up with something else, rather than “tolerate”.

  6. Lewis Thomason

    Poor old Murph, he just gets more confused with every article he writes.It doesn’t do any good to try to reason with him either,he just spins in tighter circles.

  7. I find this amusing:

    “There are approximately 1,900 individuals mentioned over the first nine chapters of the Old Testament Book of 1st Chronicles. I say approximately, because I counted 150 names on the first page, and counted the number of pages (12-2/3).”

    After all his going on about the importance of being “definitive,” he approaches something that, if not unknowable by direct observation, is at least daunting to definitively count, and, instead, comes up with a more or less reasonable way to estimate. No, we can’t know all the individuals organisms that have ever existed but that doesn’t mean we know nothing about them … any more than it means that Murphy knows nothing about the number of individuals mentioned in 1st Chronicles.

  8. John Pieret says: “I find this amusing”

    Amusing? I was impressed. Ol’ Murph backed up his claim with solid arithmetic.

  9. Good ol’ Murph, what a card. Always good for a laugh.
    The Bible is true and cool because it has begats, but poor science has no begats so it isn’t true and headed for the fires of Hell.

    Murph and the attack gerbil should get together, no telling what they could begat together. It might even be a better coupling than Comfort and Cameron.

  10. Oh, by the way, in all of Darwin’s writings, there is nothing as definitive as the statements by John and Paul.

    I didn’t know The Beatles had anything to say about the origin of species …

  11. Uhoh, I was just taking a break composing a letter to the editor about Murph (who’s definitely a victim of the Abominable Befuddler) when I happened in here…is it a sign ?

  12. Gwhit asks: “…is it a sign ?”

    My fame as an oracle is spreading.

  13. As discoverer of the GBF (Great Abominable Befuddler), you’re indeed an oracle !

    As a small token, allow me to present this gem, worthy of a Murphy Award, posed to me in a chatroom” how did living things survive the big bang ?

    One wag replied: they hid under a rock, of course

    g

  14. Gwhit says: “how did living things survive the big bang ?”

    Ya know, I’ve been wondering that myself.