Stephen E. Jones

Creation/Evolution Quotes: Unclassified quotes: May 2008

[Home] [Updates] [Site map] [My Quotes; C/E quotes: Unclassified, Classified] [CED blog]

The following are quotes added to my Unclassified Quotes database in May 2008.
The date format is dd/mm/yy. See copyright conditions at end.

2008: Feb, Mar, Apr, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec.

25/05/2008
"Let us not omit here to note the ways in which the genesis of these traits distinguishing organic matter 
conforms to the laws of evolution as expressed in its general formula. In pursuance of the belief now widely 
entertained by chemists that the so-called elements are not elements, but are composed of simpler matters 
and probably of one ultimate form of matter (for which the name `protyle' has been suggested by Sir W. 
Crookes), it is to be concluded that the formation of the elements, in common with the formation of all those 
compounds of them which Nature presents, took place in the course of Cosmic Evolution." (Spencer, H., 
"The Principles of Biology," [1864], D. Appleton & Co: New York NY, Vol. I, Revised, 1910, pp.22-23)

25/05/2008
"Within the general class of triatomic compounds, more composite still, come the carbohydrates, which, 
being able to unite in multiples, form still larger molecules than other triatomic compounds. Decomposing as 
they do at relatively low temperatures, these are still more recent in the course of chemical evolution; and 
with the genesis of them the way is prepared for the genesis of organic matter strictly so called. This 
includes the various forms of protein-substance, containing four chief elements with two minor ones, and 
having relatively vast molecules. Unstable as these are in presence of heat and surrounding affinities, they 
became possible only at a late stage in the genesis of the Earth. Here, then, in that chemical evolution which 
preceded the evolution of life, we see displayed that process of integration which is the primary trait of 
evolution at large." (Spencer, H., "The Principles of Biology," [1864], D. Appleton & Co: New York NY, Vol. 
I, Revised, 1910, p.23)

31/05/2008
"The third possibility for the terminus a quo of the decree to restore and build Jerusalem is the 
commission granted by the same King Artaxerxes to his cupbearer Nehemiah, in the twentieth year of his 
reign, i.e., in 446 B.C. The text of decree is found in Nehemiah 2:5-8, which gives the tenor of Nehemiah's 
request the king. The main object in view is the rebuilding of Jerusalem, with timber to supplied from the 
royal forest, both for the gates of the fortress and for the walls general. But the problem with this 445 date is 
that 483 solar years would come to A.D. 38 or 39, which is wrong for the ministry and death of Jesus Christ. 
But proponents of this view urge that lunar years rather than solar years are intended in :his particular 
passage. Robert Anderson ([Anderson, R., "The Coming Prince," Hodder & Stoughton: London, 1895,] pp. 
67-75) calculated what he called `prophetic years' as consisting of 360 days each. The 360-day year was 
known, to be sure, in Egypt, Greece, Assyria, and Babylon, all of which made some use of a system of 
twelve months having 30 days each. All of them, however, used some sort of intercalary month in order to 
make an approximation to the 365 days of the solar year-whether 5 days added after the twelfth month or an 
additional month every six or seven years ... It remains completely unsubstantiated that any of Israel's 
ancient neighbors ever used 360-day years in complete disregard for the solar cycle. Nor did they ever use 
long series of 360-day years without some form of intercalation. If, then, the Hebrews did this, they would be 
the only nation in world history ever to do so." (Archer, G.L.*, "Daniel," in Gaebelein, F.E., ed., "The 
Expositor's Bible Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 1985, Vol. 7, 
pp.114-115)

31/05/2008
"Anderson finds support for the 360-day year in the reference to 1,260 days in Revelation 12:6 as the period 
of persecution during the Great Tribulation; in 12:14 this interval is referred to as `a time, times and half a 
time or 3 1/2 years. While it is perfectly true that 3 1/2 times 12 times 30 comes out to 1,260, it seems most 
unlikely that the figure of 3 1/2 years was intended in that context to be any more than approximate. Twelve 
hundred and sixty days is only 16 or 17 days short of 3 1/2 solar years, and even in modern usage we would 
have no hesitation whatever in speaking of 1,260 days as `about three and a half years.' This evidence from 
Revelation 12 therefore furnishes very slender support for the supposition that the Hebrews of the first 
millennium B.C. differed from all others in the ancient (or modern) world and used 360-day years rather than 
solar years in reckoning prophetic time. Certainly in their numerous chronological statements in Kings and 
Chronicles, the OT authors used nothing but true solar years. This consideration alone ought to be decisive 
against Anderson's theory." (Archer, G.L.*, "Daniel," in Gaebelein, F.E., ed., "The Expositor's Bible 
Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 1985, Vol. 7, p.115)

31/05/2008
"The 445 B.C. date is intended with one further difficulty, that it comes out to A.D. 32 as the exact year of 
the Crucifixion. (H.W. Hoehner, "Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ," BS 132 [January-March 
1975]: 64, follows Anderson's method with minor corrections and contends for an A.D. 33 date for the 
Crucifixion.) Those who hold to this interpretation seem therefore to be committed to a deviation of two or 
three years from the generally accepted date of A. D. 30 as the year of Jesus' death. In view of the claim for 
great exactitude advanced by proponents of this view, a discrepancy of even two or three years would seem 
almost fatal to the tenability of their theory. That is to say, 360 days times 483 comes out to 173,880 days in 
all; and according to Hoehner's reckoning, 173,880 days is the exact interval of time between 5 March 444 
B.C. (which he assigns as the correct date for the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, who began his reign in 465 or 
464) and 30 March A.D. 33. Yet it seems rather irrelevant to establish what the exact date of the Crucifixion 
may have been in this connection since all that v.25 really says is that 483 years will elapse between the 
decree to rebuild Jerusalem and the appearance of `the Anointed One, the ruler.' It says nothing about the 
time of his death. It is only v.26 that speaks of his being cut off, and it does so only in the words `after the 
sixty-two `sevens.' ` Three years later-or however long the interval between the beginning and the end of 
the Messiah's public ministry-fulfills the specification `after' perfectly." (Archer, G.L.*, "Daniel," in Gaebelein, 
F.E., ed., "The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets," Zondervan: Grand Rapids 
MI, 1985, Vol. 7, p.115)

31/05/2008
"[Dn 9:]26 As for the Hebrews themselves, it is quite certain from the references to regularity of seasons 
throughout the OT books that they followed a solar year. If they had followed a 360-day year, with a loss of 
5 1/4 days each successive year, it would not have taken very long for the seasons to shift all around the 
calendar. Thus it would have come about that within every eighteen years the whole season of fall would 
have shifted to winter (because of the deviation of ninety days that would have accumulated by then). 
Correspondingly, winter would have shifted to spring, and spring would sizzle with the heat of summer. 
There is no trace of this in the OT record, but the twelve months of the year fit into the same seasonal 
rhythm year after year throughout the recorded history of Israel. In Egypt, as we have just seen, that very 
thing did take place, though over a much slower cycle 1,460 years. That resulted from their using a year of 
365 days, ignoring a portion of the additional time (approximately six hours) required by the sun to reach 
exactly the same position as it had occupied a year before." (Archer, G.L.*, "Daniel," in Gaebelein, F.E., ed., 
"The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets," Zondervan: Grand Rapids MI, 1985, 
Vol. 7, p.120)

31/05/2008
"The six items presented in this vs. [Dn 9:24] are all Messianic. This fact settles the terminus ad quem of 
the prophecy. The termination of the 70 sevens coincides then, not with the times of Antiochus, nor with 
the end of the present age, the 2nd Advent of our Lord, but with His 1st Advent. `For when our Lord 
ascended into heaven and the Holy Spirit descended, there remained not one of the six items of Daniel 9:24 
that was not fully accomplished' (Mauro)." (Young, E.J.*, "A Commentary on Daniel," [1949], Banner of 
Truth: Edinburgh, 1972, Reprinted, 1978, p.201)

31/05/2008
"The Tanakh [Old Testament] gives clear indications that the Messiah had to come before the Second 
Temple was destroyed, since the prophets predicted that the Lord himself would visit that Temple, that its 
glory would be greater than the glory of the First Temple (Solomon's Temple), and that final atonement 
would be made before the Second Temple's destruction. ... But that Temple was destroyed in 70 C.E., 
meaning that either the Messiah came right on schedule, almost two thousand years ago, setting in motion 
the plan of redemption and deliverance for Israel and the nations, or that there will never be a Messiah, since 
he failed to come at the appointed, prophesied time. I choose to believe the former." (Brown, M.L.*, 
"Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: Messianic Prophecy Objections," Vol. 3, Baker: Grand Rapids MI, 
2003, Third printing, 2006, p.159. Emphasis original)

* Authors with an asterisk against their name are believed not to be evolutionists. However, lack of
an asterisk does not necessarily mean that an author is an evolutionist.

[top]