Rev. David Rives — Evolution’s ‘Popularity’

The Drool-o-tron™ suddenly went into action with its sirens and flashing lights. The blinking letters of its wall display said WorldNetDaily (WND). The Drool-o-tron™ had once again found the latest video by the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries.

Our computer was locked onto this headline at WND: How did evolution gain popularity in science?. What a great question!

The rev tells us that evolution is everywhere — on television, in the schools, in magazines. But how did such a weird idea become so popular? It didn’t start with Darwin. He got the idea from others. How did he popularize it?

Darwin was a naturalist on the Beagle. He was actively looking to explain things without god. Because he saw finches with different beaks that he thought came from a common ancestor, he leaped to the idea that everything came from a common ancestor. That’s a big leap!

He wanted to push god out of the way because he didn’t trust the bible, so he ignored the bible’s actual historical account and relied instead on human reasoning. He actually re-wrote history relying on nature. Once he showed that species can change, and because people were already accepting the idea of millions of years, they accepted his ideas.

But Darwin was wrong! We should use the bible to interpret nature, not the other way around! Science shows us that’s the right way to do it.

The rev finally got rid of that outfit he’s been wearing for the last couple of months. Now he’s wearing a blue bible-boy blazer and — get this! — a bright red shirt! He’s the cutest rev you’ve ever seen! The video is about three and a half minutes long before the commercial at the end. Go ahead, click over to WND and watch it.

As we always do with the rev’s videos, we dedicate the comments section for your use as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Okay, the comments are open. Go for it!

Copyright © 2017. 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

15 responses to “Rev. David Rives — Evolution’s ‘Popularity’

  1. He tells us that the Bible does not tell us about fixity of species.
    Good.
    Will he tell us that the Bible does not tell us about the evolution of species, the origin of species, or anything at all about species?
    Will he tell us that the Bible does not tell us about fixity of any taxon, or about any limit of evolution?

  2. Michael Fugate

    Like the person who showed up to complain about the Bible and a flat earth, this is basically the same. If one can be convinced that the Bible declares the earth is 6000 years old and humans are not related by descent to other organisms, then why not be convinced about a flat earth?

  3. Oooo, I love the green-screen library! That gives even more gravitas than Lil Morphin’ Annie’s green-screen lab!

  4. And a trivial footnote for the IFFZ:

    Earlier this month (on the 2nd of April), our Curmudgeon duly marked the Ninth Anniversary of the Founding of this Blog

    Far less noteworthy, I grant, is that this Saturday, the 22nd of April, will mark my own Ninth Anniversary as a reader and commentator of this blog–which is to say, I have racked up 9 years of posting here without mastering the use of HTML tag thingies, and without making a single paradigm-busting contritbution to science or human knowledge.

    But I don’t mind.

    I’ve got Olivia….

  5. Megalonyx, unless I am mistaken, this is the first time you’ve posted links in proper form. A remarkable accomplishment for one of your species.

  6. @Michael Fugate
    Why do people believe in fixity of taxa, even though the Bible doesn’t say anything about that?
    Why don’t people believe in a fixed, flat Earth, even though the Bible does mention that?
    I am led to surmise that people’s beliefs are not determined by what the Bible says. Perhaps it is something the other way around: What they choose to believe determines what they find in the Bible?

  7. Michael Fugate

    TomS – I agree that is much more likely.

  8. Eddie Janssen

    The rev has lost his baby-face.

  9. Good graphics, Rev. But so wrong. Science and your ancient text aren’t compatible, no matter what you say. Darwin was successful because he provided abundant evidence for the only known mechanism of adaptive evolution. Today’s evidence for natural selection and mechanisms of speciation is overwhelming. A nod and pointed finger don’t make it go away.

  10. Ross Cameron

    You have to understand there are two categories of believers–Xians Heavy-those that accept the whole of the bible (even though they won`t follow the rape and kill instructions, but love slavery) and Xian Lite, who pic`n`choose what they follow. Neither see any contradictions.

  11. Some of my best friends are Xians light. There is no contradiction in believing the authors of the Bible to have been divinely inspired, but writing within the limits of their own understanding. The big problem with that, however, is that it raises the question of what is the result of inspiration, and what merely the result of the authors’ understanding in their historical context. Perhaps the very idea of a personal God reflects limitations of human understanding (I think Maimonides came very close to saying this).

    But now, as last, thanks to the profound insights of Rives and Ham, I know where Darwin went wrong. He used human reasoning! He should have used inhuman reasoning, or human unreasoning, or maybe both. I will try to follow this advice myself in future

  12. May I be so bold as to suggest that to many Christians, today and throughout the past, the central focus of Christianity is Christ. Not the Bible, how to interpret it, its infallibility, the original (if any such things) manuscripts, …

  13. techreseller

    Our baby faced minister certainly plays fast and loose with facts. Mr Darwin was an ordained minister. Hardly a person looking for a path to push away god. Lying for Jesus. What a way to make a living.

  14. He wanted to push god out of the way because he didn’t trust the bible, so he ignored the bible’s actual historical account and relied instead on human reasoning. He actually re-wrote history relying on nature.

    ??? Oh, yeah; “history” for the good reverend means the Biblical account. Anything which contradicts that account is Satan’s work.

    Once he showed that species can change, and because people were already accepting the idea of millions of years, they accepted his ideas.
    But Darwin was wrong! We should use the bible to interpret nature, not the other way around! Science shows us that’s the right way to do it.

    But of course science shows us no such thing, which is why so many fundies explicitly condemn it, using phrases like “naturalistic presuppositions” to denigrate scientific ideas they don’t like.

  15. @Eric LippsOr
    The Biblical account as amended by the fundamentalists. For example, there is nothing in the Bible about microevolution limited by a barrier of kinds. While there is the fixity of the Earth.
    What is it to “interpret nature”? Is it something like astrology?

Make a comment

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