Exodus8-14 NWT 2013 Edition

8 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “Go in to Pharʹaoh and say to him, ‘This is what Jehovah says: “Send my people away so that they may serve me.+ 2 If you keep refusing to send them away, I will plague all your territory with frogs.+ 3 And the Nile River will swarm with frogs, and they will come up and enter into your house, into your bedroom, on your bed, into the houses of your servants and on your people, into your ovens, and into your kneading troughs.*+ 4 On you, on your people, and on all your servants, the frogs will come up.”’”

5 Jehovah later said to Moses: “Say to Aaron, ‘Stretch out your hand with your rod over the rivers, the Nile canals, and the marshes, and make the frogs come up over the land of Egypt.’” 6 So Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt, and the frogs began to come up and to cover the land of Egypt.7 However, the magic-practicing priests did the same thing by their secret arts, and they too made the frogs come up over the land of Egypt.+ 8 Pharʹaoh then called Moses and Aaron and said: “Plead with Jehovah to remove the frogs from me and my people,+ as I want to send the people away so that they may sacrifice to Jehovah.” 9 Then Moses said to Pharʹaoh: “I leave to you the honor of telling me when I should plead to have the frogs removed from you, your servants, your people, and your houses. Only in the Nile River will they be left.” 10 To this he said: “Tomorrow.” So he said: “It will be according to your word so that you may know that there is no one else like Jehovah our God.+ 11 The frogs will depart from you, your houses, your servants, and your people. They will be left only in the Nile.”+

12 So Moses and Aaron went out from Pharʹaoh, and Moses pleaded with Jehovah about the frogs that He had brought upon Pharʹaoh.+ 13 Then Jehovah did as Moses asked, and the frogs began to die in the houses, the courtyards, and the fields. 14 They were piling them up in countless heaps, and the land began to stink. 15 When Pharʹaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart+and he refused to listen to them, just as Jehovah had said.

16 Jehovah now said to Moses: “Say to Aaron, ‘Stretch out your rod and strike the dust of the earth, and it must become gnats in all the land of Egypt.’”17 And they did this. Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod and struck the dust of the earth, and the gnats came on man and beast. All the dust of the earth became gnats in all the land of Egypt.+ 18 The magic-practicing priests tried to do the same and produce gnats by their secret arts,+ but they could not. And the gnats came on man and beast. 19 So the magic-practicing priests said to Pharʹaoh: “It is the finger of God!”+ But Pharʹaoh’s heart continued to be obstinate, and he did not listen to them, just as Jehovah had said.

20 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “Get up early in the morning and station yourself in front of Pharʹaoh. Look! He is coming out to the water! And you must say to him, ‘This is what Jehovah has said: “Send my people away so that they may serve me. 21 But if you do not send my people away, I will send on you, your servants, and your people and into your houses the gadfly;* and the houses of Egypt will be full of gadflies, and they will even cover the ground they* stand on.22 On that day I will certainly set apart the land of Goʹshen, where my people are dwelling. No gadflies will exist there,+ and by this you will know that I, Jehovah, am here in the land.+ 23 And I will make a distinction between my people and your people. Tomorrow this sign will take place.”’”

24 And Jehovah did so, and heavy swarms of gadflies began to invade the house of Pharʹaoh and the houses of his servants and all the land of Egypt.+ The land was ruined by the gadflies.+ 25 Finally, Pharʹaoh called Moses and Aaron and said: “Go, sacrifice to your God in the land.” 26 But Moses said: “It is not proper to do so, because what we would sacrifice to Jehovah our God would be detestable to the Egyptians.+ If we would make a sacrifice that was detestable to the Egyptians right before their eyes, would they not stone us? 27 We will make a three-day journey into the wilderness, and there we will sacrifice to Jehovah our God, just as he has said to us.”+

28 Pharʹaoh now said: “I will send you away to sacrifice to Jehovah your God in the wilderness. Only, you must not go so far away. Plead in my behalf.”+29 Then Moses said: “Now I am going away from you, and I will plead with Jehovah, and the gadflies will depart from Pharʹaoh, his servants, and his people tomorrow. But Pharʹaoh must stop trifling* with us by refusing to send the people away to sacrifice to Jehovah.”+ 30 Moses then went out from Pharʹaoh and pleaded with Jehovah.+ 31 So Jehovah did according to Moses’ word, and the gadflies departed from Pharʹaoh, his servants, and his people. Not one was left.32 However, Pharʹaoh again hardened his heart and did not send the people away.

9 So Jehovah said to Moses: “Go in to Pharʹaoh and say to him, ‘This is what Jehovah the God of the Hebrews has said: “Send my people away so that they may serve me.+ 2 But if you refuse to send them away and you keep holding them, 3 look! Jehovah’s hand+ will come against your livestock in the field. On the horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herd, and the flock, there will be a devastating plague.+ 4 And Jehovah will certainly make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, and nothing that belongs to the Israelites will die.”’”+ 5 Moreover, Jehovah set an appointed time, saying: “Tomorrow Jehovah will do this in the land.”

6 And Jehovah did this on the very next day, and all sorts of livestock of Egypt began to die,+ but not one of Israel’s livestock died. 7 When Pharʹaoh inquired, look! not so much as one of Israel’s livestock had died. Nevertheless, Pharʹaoh’s heart continued to be unresponsive, and he did not send the people away.+

8 Jehovah then said to Moses and Aaron: “Fill both of your hands with soot from a kiln, and Moses must throw it into the air in front of Pharʹaoh. 9 And it will become a fine dust on all the land of Egypt, and it will become festering boils on man and beast in all the land of Egypt.”

10 So they took soot from a kiln and stood before Pharʹaoh, and Moses tossed it into the air, and it became festering boils breaking out on man and beast.11 The magic-practicing priests were unable to stand before Moses because of the boils, for they had developed on the magic-practicing priests and on all the Egyptians.+ 12 But Jehovah allowed Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate, and he did not listen to them, just as Jehovah had told Moses.+

13 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “Get up early in the morning and station yourself in front of Pharʹaoh, and say to him, ‘This is what Jehovah the God of the Hebrews has said: “Send my people away so that they may serve me. 14 For now I am directing all my blows to strike your heart, your servants, and your people, so that you may know that there is no one like me in all the earth.+15 For by now I could have thrust my hand out to strike you and your people with a devastating plague, and you would have been wiped out* from the earth.16 But for this very reason I have kept you in existence: to show you my power and to have my name declared in all the earth.+ 17 Are you still behaving arrogantly against my people by not sending them away? 18 Here I will cause a very great hail to rain down tomorrow about this time, such as has never occurred in Egypt from the day it was founded until now. 19 Therefore, send word to bring all your livestock and all that is yours in the field under shelter. Every man and beast caught in the field and not brought into the house will die when the hail comes down on them.”’”

20 Anyone among Pharʹaoh’s servants who feared Jehovah’s word quickly brought his own servants and his livestock into the houses, 21 but whoever did not take Jehovah’s word to heart left his servants and his livestock in the field.

22 Jehovah now said to Moses: “Stretch out your hand toward the heavens, so that hail may come down on all the land of Egypt,+ on man and beast and all the vegetation of the field in the land of Egypt.”+ 23 So Moses stretched out his rod toward the heavens, and Jehovah sent thunder and hail, and fire* fell down to the earth, and Jehovah kept making it rain down hail on the land of Egypt.24 There was hail, and there was fire flashing in the midst of the hail. It was very heavy; there had never been any like it in the land since Egypt had become a nation.+ 25 The hail struck everything in the field throughout the land of Egypt, from man to beast, and it struck down all the vegetation and shattered all the trees of the field.+ 26 Only in the land of Goʹshen, where the Israelites were, there was no hail.+

27 So Pharʹaoh sent for Moses and Aaron and said to them: “I have sinned this time. Jehovah is righteous, and I and my people are in the wrong. 28 Plead with Jehovah that there may be an end to God’s thunder and hail. Then I will be willing to send you away, and you will not stay any longer.” 29 So Moses said to him: “As soon as I go out of the city, I will spread out my hands before Jehovah. The thunder will stop and the hail will not continue any longer, so that you may know that the earth belongs to Jehovah.+ 30 But as for you and your servants, I know already that even then, you will not fear Jehovah God.”

31 Now the flax and the barley had been struck down, because the barley was in the ear and the flax had flower buds. 32 But the wheat and the spelt had not been struck down, because they were later crops.* 33 Moses now went out of the city from Pharʹaoh and spread out his hands before Jehovah, and the thunder and the hail stopped and the rain quit pouring down on the earth.+ 34 When Pharʹaoh saw that the rain, the hail, and the thunder had stopped, he sinned again and hardened his heart,+ he as well as his servants. 35 And Pharʹaoh’s heart continued obstinate, and he did not send the Israelites away, just as Jehovah had stated through Moses.+

10 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “Go in to Pharʹaoh, for I have allowed his heart and the hearts of his servants to become unresponsive,+ so that I may display these signs of mine right before him,+ 2 and in order that you may declare to your sons and your grandsons how severely I have dealt with Egypt and what signs I have performed among them;+ and you will certainly know that I am Jehovah.”

3 So Moses and Aaron went in to Pharʹaoh and said to him: “This is what Jehovah the God of the Hebrews has said, ‘How long will you refuse to submit to me?+ Send my people away so that they may serve me. 4 For if you keep refusing to send my people away, here I am bringing locusts within your boundaries tomorrow. 5 And they will cover the surface of the earth, and it will not be possible to see the ground. They will eat up what escaped the hail and was left for you, and they will eat all your trees that are growing in the field.+ 6 They will fill your houses, the houses of all your servants, and the houses of all Egypt to an extent that your fathers and your grandfathers never saw from the time they have been in this land until today.’”+ With that he turned and went out from Pharʹaoh.

7 Then Pharʹaoh’s servants said to him: “How long will this man continue to menace* us? Send the men away so that they may serve Jehovah their God. Do you not yet realize that Egypt has been ruined?” 8 So Moses and Aaron were brought back to Pharʹaoh, and he said to them: “Go, serve Jehovah your God. But just who will be going?” 9 Then Moses said: “We will go with our young people, our old people, our sons, our daughters, our sheep, and our cattle,+ because we will hold a festival to Jehovah.”+ 10 He said to them: “If I ever send you and your children away, then Jehovah is indeed with you!+ It is clear that you intend to do something evil. 11 No! Only your men may go and serve Jehovah, for that is what you requested.” With that they were driven out from before Pharʹaoh.

12 Jehovah now said to Moses: “Stretch out your hand over the land of Egypt for the locusts, so that they may come up over the land of Egypt and eat up all the vegetation of the land, everything that the hail has let remain.” 13 At once Moses stretched out his rod over the land of Egypt, and Jehovah caused an east wind to blow on the land all that day and all night. The morning came, and the east wind brought the locusts. 14 And the locusts came up over all the land of Egypt and settled down on the whole territory of Egypt.+ It was extremely severe;+ never before had there been so many locusts, nor would there ever be so many again. 15 They covered the surface of the entire land, and the land grew dark with them; they devoured all the vegetation of the land and all the fruit of the trees that the hail had left; nothing green was left on the trees or on the vegetation of the field in all the land of Egypt.

16 So Pharʹaoh quickly called Moses and Aaron and said: “I have sinned against Jehovah your God and against you. 17 Now, please, pardon my sin just this once, and plead with Jehovah your God that he just remove this deadly plague from upon me.” 18 So he* went out from Pharʹaoh and pleaded with Jehovah.+ 19 Then Jehovah caused the wind to shift, and it became a very stiff west wind, and it carried the locusts away and drove them into the Red Sea. Not a single locust remained in all the territory of Egypt. 20 However, Jehovah allowed Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate,+ and he did not send the Israelites away.

21 Jehovah then said to Moses: “Stretch out your hand toward the heavens so that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, a darkness so thick that it can be felt.” 22 Moses immediately stretched out his hand toward the heavens, and there was a dense darkness in all the land of Egypt for three days.+ 23 They did not see one another, and none of them got up from where they were for three days; but all the Israelites had light in their dwellings.+ 24 Pharʹaoh then called Moses and said: “Go, serve Jehovah.+ Only your sheep and your cattle will remain behind. Even your children may go with you.” 25 But Moses said: “You yourself will also provide us with* sacrifices and burnt offerings, and we will offer them to Jehovah our God.+ 26 Our livestock will also go with us. Not an animal* will be allowed to remain, because we will be using some of them to worship Jehovah our God, and we do not know what we will offer in worship to Jehovah until we arrive there.” 27 So Jehovah allowed Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate, and he did not consent to send them away.+ 28 Pharʹaoh said to him: “Get out of my sight! Make sure that you do not try to see my face again, for on the day you see my face, you will die.” 29 To this Moses said: “Just as you have spoken, I will not try to see your face again.”

11 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “One more plague I am going to bring upon Pharʹaoh and Egypt. After that he will send you away from here.+ When he does send you away, he will literally drive you out of here.+ 2 Now tell the people that all the men and women should ask their neighbor for articles of silver and of gold.”+ 3 And Jehovah gave the people favor in the eyes of the Egyptians. Moreover, Moses himself had become highly esteemed in the land of Egypt among Pharʹaoh’s servants and among the people.

4 Moses then said: “This is what Jehovah has said, ‘About midnight I am going out into the midst of Egypt,+ 5 and every firstborn in the land of Egypt will die,+ from the firstborn of Pharʹaoh who is sitting on his throne to the firstborn of the slave girl who is working at the hand mill, and every firstborn of the livestock.+ 6 Throughout all the land of Egypt, there will be a great outcry such as has never occurred nor will ever occur again.+ 7 But not even a dog will bark*at the Israelites, at the men or their livestock, so that you may know that Jehovah can make a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites.’+8 And all your servants will certainly come down to me and prostrate themselves to me, saying, ‘Go, you and all the people who follow you.’+ And after that I will go out.” With that he went out from Pharʹaoh in the heat of anger.

9 Jehovah then said to Moses: “Pharʹaoh will not listen to you,+ in order for my miracles to be multiplied in the land of Egypt.”+ 10 Moses and Aaron performed all these miracles before Pharʹaoh,+ but Jehovah allowed Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate, so that he did not send the Israelites away from his land.+

12 Jehovah now said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt: 2 “This month will be the beginning of the months for you. It will be the first of the months of the year for you.+ 3 Speak to the entire assembly of Israel, saying, ‘On the tenth day of this month, they should each take for themselves a sheep+ for their father’s house, a sheep to a house. 4 But if the household is too small for the sheep, they* and their nearest neighbor should share it between themselves in their house according to the number of people.* When making the calculation, determine how much of the sheep each one will eat. 5 Your sheep should be a sound,+ one-year-old male. You may choose from the young rams or from the goats. 6 You must care for it until the 14th day of this month,+ and the whole congregation of the assembly of Israel must slaughter it at twilight.*+ 7 They must take some of the blood and splash it on the two doorposts and the upper part of the doorway of the houses in which they eat it.+

8 “‘They must eat the meat on this night.+ They should roast it over the fire and eat it along with unleavened bread+ and bitter greens.+ 9 Do not eat any of it raw or boiled, cooked in water, but roast it over the fire, its head together with its shanks and its inner parts. 10 You must not save any of it until morning, but any of it left over until morning you should burn with fire.+ 11 And this is how you should eat it, with your belt fastened,* sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you should eat it in a hurry. It is Jehovah’s Passover. 12 For Iwill pass through the land of Egypt on this night and strike every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from man to beast;+ and I will execute judgment on all the gods of Egypt.+ I am Jehovah. 13 The blood will serve as your sign on the houses where you are; and I will see the blood and pass over you, and the plague will not come on you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt.+

14 “‘This day will serve as a memorial for you, and you must celebrate it as a festival to Jehovah throughout your generations. As a lasting statute, you should celebrate it. 15 Seven days you are to eat unleavened bread.+ Yes, on the first day you are to remove the sourdough from your houses, because anyone eating what is leavened from the first day down to the seventh, that person* must be cut off* from Israel. 16 On the first day you will hold a holy convention, and on the seventh day, another holy convention. No work is to be done on these days.+Only what every person* needs to eat, that alone may be prepared for you.

17 “‘You must keep the Festival of Unleavened Bread,+ for on this very day, I will bring your multitudes* out of the land of Egypt. And you must keep this day throughout your generations as a lasting statute. 18 In the first month, on the 14th day of the month, in the evening, you are to eat unleavened bread until the 21st day of the month, in the evening.+ 19 No sourdough is to be found in your houses for seven days, because if anyone eats what is leavened, whether he is a foreigner or a native of the land,+ that person* must be cut off* from the assembly of Israel.+ 20 You should not eat anything leavened. In all your homes, you are to eat unleavened bread.’”

21 Moses promptly called all the elders of Israel+ and said to them: “Go and select young animals* for each of your families, and slaughter the Passover sacrifice. 22 Then you must dip a bunch of hyssop into the blood that is in a basin and strike the upper part of the doorway and the two doorposts with the blood; and none of you should go out of the entrance of his house until morning.23 Then when Jehovah passes through to plague the Egyptians and sees the blood on the upper part of the doorway and on the two doorposts, Jehovah will certainly pass over the entrance, and he will not allow the plague of death* to enter into your houses.+

24 “You must observe this event as a lasting regulation for you and your sons.+ 25 And when you come into the land that Jehovah will give you just as he has stated, you must keep this observance.+ 26 And when your sons ask you, ‘What does this observance mean to you?’+ 27 you must say, ‘It is the sacrifice of the Passover to Jehovah, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt when he plagued the Egyptians, but he spared our houses.’”

Then the people bowed low and prostrated themselves. 28 So the Israelites went and did just as Jehovah had commanded Moses and Aaron.+ They did just so.

29 Then at midnight, Jehovah struck down every firstborn in the land of Egypt,+ from the firstborn of Pharʹaoh who was sitting on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the prison,* and every firstborn of the animals.+ 30 Pharʹaoh got up that night along with all his servants and all the other Egyptians, and there was a great outcry among the Egyptians, because there was not a house where someone was not dead.+ 31 At once he called Moses and Aaron+ by night and said: “Get up, get out from among my people, both you and the other Israelites. Go and serve Jehovah, just as you have said.+32 Take also your flocks and your herds and go, just as you have said.+ But you must also bless me.”

33 And the Egyptians began to urge the people to depart quickly+ out of the land “because,” as they said, “we are all as good as dead!”+ 34 So the people carried their flour dough before it was leavened, with their kneading troughs*wrapped up in their clothing on their shoulder. 35 The Israelites did what Moses had told them and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and of gold as well as clothing.+ 36 Jehovah gave the people favor in the eyes of the Egyptians, so that they gave them what they asked for, and they plundered the Egyptians.+

37 Then the Israelites departed from Ramʹe·ses+ for Sucʹcoth,+ about 600,000 men on foot, besides children.+ 38 And a vast mixed company*+ also went with them, as well as flocks and herds, a great number of livestock. 39 They began to bake the dough that they brought from Egypt into round loaves of unleavened bread. It was not leavened, because they had been driven out of Egypt so suddenly that they had not prepared any provisions for themselves.+

40 The dwelling of the Israelites, who had dwelled in Egypt,+ was 430 years.+41 At the end of the 430 years, on this very day, all the multitudes* of Jehovah went out of the land of Egypt. 42 It is a night on which they will celebrate Jehovah’s bringing them out of the land of Egypt. This night is to be observed to Jehovah by all the people of Israel throughout their generations.+

43 Then Jehovah said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the statute of the Passover: No foreigner may eat of it.+ 44 But if someone has a slave man who was purchased with money, you should circumcise him.+ Only then may he share in eating it. 45 A settler and a hired worker may not eat of it. 46 In one house it is to be eaten. You must not take any of the meat outside of the house, and you must not break any of its bones.+ 47 All the assembly of Israel are to celebrate it. 48 If a foreigner resides with you and he wants to celebrate the Passover to Jehovah, every male of his must be circumcised. Then he may come near to celebrate it, and he will become like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised man may eat of it.+ 49 One law will apply for the native and for the foreigner who is residing among you.”+

50 So all the Israelites did just as Jehovah had commanded Moses and Aaron. They did just so. 51 On this very day, Jehovah brought the Israelites along with their multitudes* out of the land of Egypt.

13 Jehovah spoke further to Moses, saying: 2 “Sanctify* to me every firstborn male* among the Israelites. The first male to be born, of both human and animal, belongs to me.”+

3 Then Moses said to the people: “Remember this day on which you went out of Egypt,+ from the house of slavery, because with a mighty hand Jehovah brought you out of here.+ So nothing leavened may be eaten. 4 You are going out on this day, in the month of Aʹbib.*+ 5 When Jehovah has brought you into the land of the Caʹnaan·ites, the Hitʹtites, the Amʹor·ites, the Hiʹvites, and the Jebʹu·sites,+ which he swore to your forefathers to give you,+ a land flowing with milk and honey,+ then you must keep this observance in this month. 6 Seven days you are to eat unleavened bread,+ and on the seventh day, there will be a festival to Jehovah. 7 Unleavened bread is to be eaten for the seven days;+ and nothing leavened is to be found with you,+ and no sourdough is to be found with you within all your territory.* 8 And you must tell your son on that day, ‘It is because of what Jehovah did for me when I came out of Egypt.’+ 9 And this will serve for you as a sign on your hand and as a memorial* on your forehead,*+ so that Jehovah’s law may be in your mouth, for with a mighty hand Jehovah brought you out of Egypt. 10 You must keep this statute at its appointed time from year to year.+

11 “When Jehovah brings you into the land of the Caʹnaan·ites, which he has sworn to give to you and to your forefathers,+ 12 you must devote to Jehovah every firstborn male,* as well as every male firstling of the livestock that you acquire. The males belong to Jehovah.+ 13 Every firstling donkey you are to redeem with a sheep, and if you do not redeem it, then you must break its neck. And every firstborn male of your sons you are to redeem.+

14 “In case your son should ask you later on, ‘What does this mean?’ then you should say to him, ‘With a mighty hand Jehovah brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery.+ 15 When Pharʹaoh stubbornly refused to send us away,+ Jehovah killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of man to the firstborn of beast.+ That is why I am sacrificing to Jehovah all the firstborn males,* and I redeem every firstborn of my sons.’ 16 This must serve as a sign on your hand and as a headband on your forehead,*+ for with a mighty hand Jehovah brought us out of Egypt.”

17 Now when Pharʹaoh sent the people away, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Phi·lisʹtines, although it was near. For God said: “The people may change their minds when they are confronted by war and will return to Egypt.” 18 So God made the people go around by the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea.+ But it was in battle formation that the Israelites went up out of the land of Egypt. 19 Moses also took Joseph’s bones with him, because Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear: “God will not fail to turn his attention to you, and you must take my bones up out of here with you.”+ 20 They departed from Sucʹcoth and encamped at Eʹtham, at the edge of the wilderness.

21 Now Jehovah was going ahead of them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way,+ and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day and by night.+ 22 The pillar of cloud would not move away from before the people during the day, nor the pillar of fire at night.+

13 Jehovah spoke further to Moses, saying: 2 “Sanctify* to me every firstborn male* among the Israelites. The first male to be born, of both human and animal, belongs to me.”+

3 Then Moses said to the people: “Remember this day on which you went out of Egypt,+ from the house of slavery, because with a mighty hand Jehovah brought you out of here.+ So nothing leavened may be eaten. 4 You are going out on this day, in the month of Aʹbib.*+ 5 When Jehovah has brought you into the land of the Caʹnaan·ites, the Hitʹtites, the Amʹor·ites, the Hiʹvites, and the Jebʹu·sites,+ which he swore to your forefathers to give you,+ a land flowing with milk and honey,+ then you must keep this observance in this month. 6 Seven days you are to eat unleavened bread,+ and on the seventh day, there will be a festival to Jehovah. 7 Unleavened bread is to be eaten for the seven days;+ and nothing leavened is to be found with you,+ and no sourdough is to be found with you within all your territory.* 8 And you must tell your son on that day, ‘It is because of what Jehovah did for me when I came out of Egypt.’+ 9 And this will serve for you as a sign on your hand and as a memorial* on your forehead,*+ so that Jehovah’s law may be in your mouth, for with a mighty hand Jehovah brought you out of Egypt. 10 You must keep this statute at its appointed time from year to year.+

11 “When Jehovah brings you into the land of the Caʹnaan·ites, which he has sworn to give to you and to your forefathers,+ 12 you must devote to Jehovah every firstborn male,* as well as every male firstling of the livestock that you acquire. The males belong to Jehovah.+ 13 Every firstling donkey you are to redeem with a sheep, and if you do not redeem it, then you must break its neck. And every firstborn male of your sons you are to redeem.+

14 “In case your son should ask you later on, ‘What does this mean?’ then you should say to him, ‘With a mighty hand Jehovah brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery.+ 15 When Pharʹaoh stubbornly refused to send us away,+Jehovah killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of man to the firstborn of beast.+ That is why I am sacrificing to Jehovah all the firstborn males,* and I redeem every firstborn of my sons.’ 16 This must serve as a sign on your hand and as a headband on your forehead,*+ for with a mighty hand Jehovah brought us out of Egypt.”

17 Now when Pharʹaoh sent the people away, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Phi·lisʹtines, although it was near. For God said: “The people may change their minds when they are confronted by war and will return to Egypt.” 18 So God made the people go around by the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea.+ But it was in battle formation that the Israelites went up out of the land of Egypt. 19 Moses also took Joseph’s bones with him, because Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear: “God will not fail to turn his attention to you, and you must take my bones up out of here with you.”+ 20 They departed from Sucʹcoth and encamped at Eʹtham, at the edge of the wilderness.

21 Now Jehovah was going ahead of them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way,+ and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day and by night.+ 22 The pillar of cloud would not move away from before the people during the day, nor the pillar of fire at night.+

14 Jehovah now said to Moses: 2 “Tell the Israelites that they should turn back and encamp before Pi·ha·hiʹroth, between Migʹdol and the sea, within view of Baʹal-zeʹphon.+ You are to encamp facing it by the sea. 3 Then Pharʹaoh will say about the Israelites, ‘They are wandering in confusion in the land. The wilderness has closed in on them.’ 4 I will allow Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate,+ and he will chase after them, and I will glorify myself by means of Pharʹaoh and all his army;+ and the Egyptians will certainly know that I am Jehovah.”+ So that is what they did.

5 Later it was reported to the king of Egypt that the people had run away. Immediately, Pharʹaoh and his servants had a change of heart regarding the people,+ and they said: “Why did we do this and release Israel from serving as slaves for us?” 6 So he made his war chariots ready, and he took his people with him.+ 7 He took 600 chosen chariots and all the other chariots of Egypt, with warriors on every one of them. 8 Thus Jehovah allowed the heart of Pharʹaoh king of Egypt to become obstinate, and he chased after the Israelites, while the Israelites were going out with confidence.*+ 9 The Egyptians chased after them,+ and all the chariot horses of Pharʹaoh and his cavalrymen and his army were catching up with them while they were camping by the sea, by Pi·ha·hiʹroth, facing Baʹal-zeʹphon.

10 When Pharʹaoh got closer, the Israelites raised their eyes and saw the Egyptians pursuing them. The Israelites became terrified and began to cry out to Jehovah.+ 11 They said to Moses: “Is it because there are no burial places in Egypt that you have brought us here to die in the wilderness?+ What have you done to us by leading us out of Egypt? 12 Is this not the very thing we told you in Egypt when we said, ‘Let us alone, so that we may serve the Egyptians’? For it is better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the wilderness.”+ 13 Then Moses said to the people: “Do not be afraid.+ Stand firm and see the salvation of Jehovah that he will perform for you today.+ For the Egyptians whom you see today, you will never ever see again.+ 14 Jehovah himself will fight for you,+and you will keep silent.”

15 Jehovah now said to Moses: “Why do you keep crying out to me? Tell the Israelites that they should break camp. 16 As for you, lift up your rod and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it, so that the Israelites may go through the midst of the sea on dry ground. 17 As for me, I am allowing the hearts of the Egyptians to become obstinate, so that they will go in after them; thus I will glorify myself by means of Pharʹaoh and all his army, his war chariots, and his cavalrymen.+ 18 And the Egyptians will certainly know that I am Jehovah when I glorify myself by means of Pharʹaoh, his war chariots, and his cavalrymen.”+

19 Then the angel of the true God+ who was going ahead of the camp of Israel departed and went to their rear, and the pillar of cloud that was in front of them moved to the rear and stood behind them.+ 20 So it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel.+ On the one side, it was a dark cloud. On the other side, it was lighting up the night.+ So the one camp did not come near the other camp all night long.

21 Moses now stretched out his hand over the sea;+ and Jehovah drove the sea back with a strong east wind all night long, turning the sea basin into dry ground,+ and the waters divided.+ 22 So the Israelites went through the midst of the sea on dry ground,+ while the waters formed a wall on their right hand and on their left.+ 23 The Egyptians pursued them, and all Pharʹaoh’s horses, his war chariots, and his cavalrymen began going after them into the midst of the sea.+ 24 During the morning watch,* Jehovah looked at the camp of the Egyptians from within the pillar of fire and cloud,+ and he threw the camp of the Egyptians into confusion. 25 He kept taking wheels off their chariots so that they were driving them with difficulty, and the Egyptians were saying: “Let us flee from any contact with Israel, because Jehovah is fighting for them against the Egyptians.”+

26 Then Jehovah said to Moses: “Stretch out your hand over the sea so that the waters may come back over the Egyptians, their war chariots, and their cavalrymen.” 27 Moses at once stretched out his hand over the sea, and as morning approached, the sea returned to its normal condition. As the Egyptians fled from it, Jehovah shook the Egyptians off into the midst of the sea.+ 28 The returning waters covered the war chariots and the cavalrymen and all of Pharʹaoh’s army who had gone into the sea after them.+ Not so much as one among them was allowed to survive.+

29 But the Israelites walked on dry ground in the midst of the seabed,+ and the waters formed a wall on their right hand and on their left.+ 30 Thus Jehovah saved Israel on that day from the hand of the Egyptians,+ and Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the seashore. 31 Israel also saw the great power* that Jehovah wielded against the Egyptians, and the people began to fear Jehovah and to put faith in Jehovah and in his servant Moses.+

The blind mariner?

Heads or Tails: The Problem of Evolving Animal Body Plans

Ann Gauger May 15, 2015 3:17 AM 

Nearly all the animals we know have bilateral symmetry at some stage of their lives, meaning they have right and left halves that are mirror images of each other. These animals also have a head and a tail, a top and a bottom to them. The technical terms are anterior/posterior (A/P) and dorsal/ventral (D/V) axes (plural for axis, not the wood-chopping instrument). The exceptions are things like sponges, jellyfish, sea anemones, and small creatures like the Volvox I wrote about last week.

Even simple little worms like C. elegans have A/P and D/V axes, but how those axes get specified during the worm's development is far from simple. It involves something like this pathway:

I have generalized the diagram to describe all signaling pathways. The specific details vary from organism to organism, from situation to situation. In C. elegans, subject of the new Discovery Institute video "How to Build a Worm," the cue is the entry of the sperm into the egg at one end. This sets off the signal -- in C. elegans's case it is the formation of an asymmetric arrangement of microtubules -- structural elements involved in cell division. The asymmetric arrangement of microtubules causes a wave of cortical contractions that redistributes a protein in the cytoplasm to the cortex. (The cortex is the area of cytoplasm just under the cell membrane, and it is rich in structural proteins that cause movement and in developmental receptor molecules.) That protein then causes changes to other proteins embedded in the cortex. The asymmetrical redistribution of these proteins is represented as the receiver in the diagram. Then an asymmetrical cell division caused by the asymmetric microtubules partitions the proteins into different cells. This division is indicated by the slash marks in the diagram.

The worm has now established its A/P axis. The partitioned proteins go on to affect downstream targets in different ways. How the target molecules are affected influences the fates of all the future cells resulting from those first two cells, including which will become dorsal, and which ventral cells. If you want more detail, you can read about it in Scott Gilbert's textbook,Developmental Biology.

The development of all bilaterally symmetric animals involves signaling networks. A signal is sent based on some cue, it is received, and some change is effected, over and over again. We see the developmental cascade that results in "How to Build a Worm."

 As shown there, the cascade of signaling leads to the production of multiple cell types arranged in a particular pattern that is C. elegans. The details differ from organism to organism -- when the cells divide, when the signals are sent -- but all bilaterally symmetric animals use something like the same process to set up their basic body plans and what cell types are made.

Even when the signaling pathway is stripped to its simplest, it still involves a cue to cause a signal to be sent and received. The cue is of no use unless it triggers a signal that can be received and cause downstream effects. That is what is necessary to begin to establish a difference in cell fates, and that requires a minimum of three molecules all to be present in order to work. It would take a very long time to assemble such a pathway, but would the result be of any selective advantage? Not unless there were more pathways involved that caused movement in the direction of some resource, or assigned a special function to particular cells that benefitted the whole.

These signaling pathways pre-date the animals that use them now. Based on genomic analyses, these signaling molecules have been around well before the first bilaterian animals ever existed. They are expressed in organisms that lack these body axes completely. Even more surprising, many of the molecules used to make complex structures such as muscles, eyes, and brains also predate their use for those purposes.

What were these signaling molecules used for before there was a left and right, a top and bottom, a head and tail? How did they come to be at all, and why did they persist until they could be co-opted for the establishment of body axes? It has been suggested that they were used to establish body sections in the earliest multicellular animals, but that only pushes the question back a step. Where did that use come from? How did the signaling pathways start?

With these questions, I conclude the series I began to address the white space in evolutionary thinking -- how to account for the evolution of C. elegans. First there is the problem of getting a cell, then of getting aeukaryotic cell, then of getting a multicellular animal, and now of getting one with a head and a tail and multiple cell types. Saying C. elegans didn't have to solve the problem all at once is merely to suggest that the problems are easier if taken one step at a time. They are not.

Why Darwinism's quest for a free lunch re:information is doomed.

Probabilistic Programming and Conservation of Information

Evolution News & Views May 14, 2015 3:53 AM 

MIT scientists have improved on a new kind of computer language that enables "probabilistic programing," Larry Hardesty writes for MIT News. The new algorithms allow a programmer to write in fifty lines of code what used to take thousands. Hardesty emphasizes that this advance came at a high cost. And interestingly that is just what William Dembski shows in the chapter on "Conservation of Information" in his newest book,Being as Communion.

Let's say you want to write facial recognition software. This task, which humans perform so effortlessly, has long been a challenge for artificial intelligence. Traditional attempts have been deterministic: trying to specify all the variables. Probabilistic programming, by contrast, iterates attempts at a match till an acceptable level of success is achieved. "It means canvassing lots of rival possibilities and selecting the one that seems most likely," Hardesty explains. An MIT-developed language called Picture uses this method:

In a probabilistic programming language, the heavy lifting is done by the inference algorithm -- the algorithm that continuously readjusts probabilities on the basis of new pieces of training data. In that respect, Kulkarni and his colleagues had the advantage of decades of machine-learning research. Built into Picture are several different inference algorithms that have fared well on computer-vision tasks. Time permitting, it can try all of them out on any given problem, to see which works best. [Emphasis added.]

The problem fits exactly what Dembski describes in his discussion of "search for a search" (S4S). In his previous technical book, No Free Lunch, Dembski proved from the "No Free Lunch" (NFL) theorems that no evolutionary algorithm is superior to blind search, once all the costs of obtaining additional information are factored in. For instance, the cost of a search for a treasure map meets or exceeds the cost of digging around an island at random. The treasure hunter first has to pay the cost of searching for the right treasure map -- a search for a search. The cost of S4S has to be cashed out in information from some other source or by trial and error; thus, information is conserved.

In the current case, the MIT computer scientists are also conducting a search for a search: finding a method for recognizing faces out of all possible algorithms that attempt the task. Notice that the researchers "had the advantage of decades of machine-learning research." This had reduced their task to "several different inference algorithms that have fared well on computer-vision tasks." In other words, they didn't find Picture's algorithm by blind search. They first had to pay the cost of all that prior information, just like the treasure hunter had to either receive or test information to find a reliable treasure map.

The article might seem to suggest that you can still find a successful target for free by letting the machine learn the information:

Moreover, Kulkarni says, Picture is designed so that its inference algorithms can themselves benefit from machine learning,modifying themselves as they go to emphasize strategies that seem to lead to good results. "Using learning to improve inference will be task-specific, but probabilistic programmingmay alleviate re-writing code across different problems," he says. "The code can be generic if the learning machinery is powerful enough to learn different strategies for different tasks."

But do you see where the cost of information snuck in? The machine will never "learn" anything by blind search without the intelligent programmer providing it with the right information on what constitutes a success. Information must also be supplied in both the hardware and software from outside the machine. Conservation of Information is not violated.

How does this principle intersect with evolutionary theory? In both books, Dembski shows that no evolutionary algorithm improves on blind search, once the accounting is done. Darwinian biologists mistakenly think that natural selection is an algorithm that drives organisms to higher fitness. The mathematical models that attempt to show this, however, all violate Conservation of Information by inserting intelligently designed information into the model.

The well-known analogy to evolution from Richard Dawkins's book The Blind Watchmaker is a case in point. Dawkins got a computer algorithm to write the Shakespearean line "methinks it is like a weasel" in a finite number of iterations, starting from a random sequence. What he failed to factor in was the information he himself provided as to what the target was, and what constituted a success. The same oversight plagues all evolutionary algorithms and models, such as Avida. Accounting for the extra information proves that no evolutionary algorithm is superior to blind search.

Dembski writes:

The point to realize is that those whose job it is to find the right optimization procedure (e.g., operations research people) must, for a given search, try to choose one search strategy that works well to the exclusion of other search strategies that work less well. Such a choice of strategy identifies one possibility to the exclusion of others within a matrix of possibility (the matrix, in this instance, consisting of search strategies, or classes of different types of searches). It follows that such a choice of search strategy entails an input of information into the search in the exact actualize-exclude informational sense emphasized throughout this book. (Being as Communion, pp. 149-150)

What about biology? Don't organisms succeed at their searches for fitness when they adapt to changing environments? Of course they do, but only because of the information programmed into them. It's analogous to the cost of the hardware, software, and algorithms in a computer. Such information is explainable by a mind, but is exceedingly improbable by blind search.

MIT's advance in probabilistic programming is commendable, but it illustrates the tremendous informational investment that went into being able to reduce programs to fifty lines of efficient code: decades of research, testing, and insight. It even cost a lot of money:

To make machine-learning applications easier to build, computer scientists have begun developing so-called probabilistic programming languages, which let researchers mix and match machine-learning techniques that have worked well in other contexts. In 2013, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, an incubator of cutting-edge technology, launched afour-year program to fund probabilistic-programming research.

When hearing reports about the success of evolutionary algorithms that appear to explain the spontaneous emergence of complex organisms, be sure to look for the information snuck in the side door. Information always comes at a cost.

Being as Communion is the third of Dembski's books that, after The Design Inference and No Free Lunch, present the theory of intelligent design with rigorous logic and math. It's also the shortest and most accessible to the layperson.

The fundamental stuff of the universe is not matter and energy, Dembski argues, but information. If you're interested in learning more about Conservation of Information, search, probability, and related concepts, check out this engaging book that not only explains the principles clearly and cogently, but defends a startling new way of looking at reality.

Argument by asertion and insult?

Contradictions, Irony, and Appeals to Authority Permeate The Language of Science and Faith

Casey Luskin May 31, 2011 12:38 PM

The title of Chapter 1 in Karl Giberson and Francis Collins' book The Language of Science and Faith is "Do I Have to Believe in Evolution?" The very title of the chapter itself implies that affirmative belief in evolution is an indisputable matter for Christians. If you doubt that they are so adamant, bear in mind that it was Giberson himself who recently wrote that "Jesus would believe in evolution and so should you." They're welcome to believe in evolution, but should they present their case in such a non-inclusive way? But before delving further into the rhetorical strategies of The Language of Science and Faith, let's revisit some of the main scientific evidence and arguments they cite in this chapter for why you "have to believe in evolution":

repeated appeals to a singular pseudogene which they call "broken DNA," which is shared by humans and other primates (this turned out to be a weak argument since we're continually finding new function for pseudogenes);

feathers evolved from scales (an argument that has been abandoned by evolutionary biologists);

eyes evolved from light-sensitive pigments (they gave no evidence to help the reader accept this claim, but the evidence strongly challenges their assertion)

humans share common ancestry with Neanderthals (many consider humans and Neanderthals to be so similar that they are -sub-races of the same species, so this doesn't show common ancestry with some non-human type); and finally...

macroevolution is simply repeated rounds of microevolution (they provided no empirical evidence for this claim other than bald assertions and misguided appeals to intelligently designed technological evolution).

Giberson and Collins want the reader to feel that the answer to the question posed in the chapter title is an unequivocal 'yes.' But as we've seen, the evidence cited in this chapter was extremely unimpressive. Their arguments were outdated and in some cases consisted of little more than bald assertions that is contradicted by the evidence. But again, they are welcome to 'believe in' neo-Darwinian evolution if that's what they want. We can agree to disagree and I have no problems with the making a case for their viewpoint. They have their right to believe what they wish; likewise there's nothing wrong with logically critiquing their argument in a civil manner to show why I find it unpersuasive. 

But there's another quality to The Language of Science and Faith that is much more disconcerting. The troubling part about The Language of Science and Faith is the level of rhetoric that that Giberson and Collins use while trying to lead readers to conclude that they "have to believe in evolution." The book is full of appeals to authority and attacks upon the character and competence of Darwin-doubting scientists. It is into this most unfortunate territory that we now cautiously step. 

Appeals to Authority
Theistic evolutionists seem to love making appeals to authority. Last year we saw Biologos president Darrell Falk rely heavily upon appeals to authority in his book Coming to Peace with Science. It seems that Giberson and Collins have followed Falk's rhetorical strategy. Thus, in chapter 1 of The Language of Science and Faith alone, we find comments like:

"almost all Christian biologists accept evolution." (p. 30)

"in most large gatherings of scientists you would not find even one person who rejects the theory of evolution." (p. 30)

"The scientists at the BioLogos Foundation are unaware of anybiologists who have abandoned evolution in the past few years. Not one." (p. 31)

"we are equally unfamiliar with any premier scientists who reject evolution." (p. 31)

"Christians should take no comfort in the misplaced hope that the scientific community is gradually abandoning the theory of evolution." (p. 34)

"the validity of scientific ideas is best addressed by the leading experts." (p. 33)

And just in case you didn't get the message, they even go so far as to claim that "[v]irtually all geneticists consider that the evidence proves common ancestry with a level of certainty comparable to the evidence that the earth goes around the sun." (p. 49) (Note: this is from the paragraph where they again cite a singular pseudogene as a "broken" gene.") 

Get it? The not-so-subtle message is that if you doubt universal common ancestry, then you're no better than a geocentrist. I get the sense that Giberson and Collins don't want people to think for themselves on topics like evolution, but to simply capitulate to those whom they deem "the leading experts." 

I wasn't sure if the book actually intended such a message until I read Giberson's recent response to William Dembski where Giberson makes it very clear that he doesn't want people thinking for themselves on topics like evolution. He writes:

To suggest that this "data" can be handed over to non-specialists so they can make up their own minds is to profoundly misunderstand the nature of science.

Stop and think for a moment about what Professor Giberson just said. 

Dr. Giberson doesn't think that the average person should be allowed to "make up their own minds" on evolution. 

Unfortunately, this mindset is becoming more and more typical of the Darwin lobby: they want people to stop thinking for themselves. Berkman and Plutzer's survey in Science from earlier this year went so far as to criticize a teacher who felt that "[s]tudents should make up their own minds" on evolution "based on their own beliefs and research." Such a mindset seems profoundly dangerous and wrong in many ways. In fact it seems, dare I say it, anti-intellectual because it demands intellectual conformity from all. 

Self-Contradictory Argument
What's most ironic, however, is that Giberson and Collins later defeat their own appeals to authority. They write that "scientific truth is not decided by the number of names on a list, or who wins the debate or convinces the most people. It is based on the evidence." (p. 33) Here I completely agree! But if they really believe that statement, and the evidence is all that matters, then why do they feel the need to persistently rely on appeals to authority? 

I think that Giberson and Collins want to have their cake and eat it too. On the one hand, they want readers to imbibe a not-so-subtle message that they ought to capitulate to experts who 'believe in" evolution because those experts are in the majority. Realizing that's a fallacious and dangerous argument, on the other hand they want to be able to say that they still made the correct argument that that scientific truth is "based on the evidence," not "the number of names" who support a theory. They're completely right about this latter point, but they seem to be sending contradictory messages, not giving "straight answers" to these questions. 

But there are other contradictions that are even more troubling yet to be found in The Language of Science and Faith. 

Attacking Darwin-Doubting Scientists
What's most unfortunate about the The Language of Science and Faith is not the book's questionable and self-contradictory appeals to authority. Nor is it the book's apparent attempt to dissuade people from thinking for themselves on evolution. Rather, it's how Giberson and Collins try to win the hearts and minds of their readers by using the rhetorical strategy of attacking the competence and character of Darwin-doubting scientists. 

Let's start with their attacks on the competence of Ph.D. scientists who have bravely signed a list dissenting from neo-Darwinian evolution. In one instance Giberson and Collins write:

"The 'Dissent from Darwin' list includes philosophers, physicists, mathematicians and academics from other fields. Many of them never took even a single course in biology beyond high school." (p. 32)

This is a bald assertion--and there's no evidence at all that it ought to be taken seriously. And how do they know that is true? Their intended point, of course, is that these Ph.D. scientists are supposedly not qualified to express real dissent from Darwinian evolution. In fact, they make this argument explicit, stating: "Many of the scientists listed are not trained in biology and so are not in a position to evaluate the central theory of the field." (p. 32) 

What's ironic (and contradictory) about their argument is that the book's first author, Karl Giberson, is not trained in biology and even admits that he "took his last biology course in 1975." (p. 32) Now I'm not raising this point to attack Giberson's knowledge or credentials, and in fact I don't think that Dr. Giberson is unqualified to comment on evolution simply because he is not a trained biologist. In fact Giberson--who is the first author of The Language of Science and Faith--must feel the same way since he just wrote this book which spends many pages evaluating evolution. 

Giberson's admission that he lacks the same qualifications of those whose qualifications he attacks does not exactly make for a compelling argument. Given that he's writing extensively about evolution, his attack on the competence of Darwin-doubting scientists seems downright hypocritical. 

Giberson and Collins have also misconstrued the purpose of the Dissent from Darwinism list. As noted, they write that "scientific truth is not decided by the number of names on a list, or who wins the debate or convinces the most people. It is based on the evidence." Again, I could not agree more. But the "Dissent from Darwin" list was never intended to demonstrate that neo-Darwinian evolution is false simply because x number of scientists disagree with neo-Darwinism. What the list does demonstrate is that one cannot dismiss scientific dissent from neo-Darwinism simply by appeals to authority. The list shows that there is a critical mass of credible scientific dissent from neo-Darwinism. 

By overstating the purpose of the Dissent from Darwinism list, Giberson and Collins hope they can convince the reader to dismiss it. But when used properly, the list defeats their own quite explicit argument, that one ought to ignore scientific dissent from Darwinism because of appeals to the authority of the majority viewpoint. 

But their most unpleasant jab at Darwin-doubting scientists is yet to come. They write:

"The evangelical literature is so filled with misrepresentations and outdated information about evolution that even a lot of research might not lead an honest seeker to the truth." (p. 34)

To be sure, there have been some Christians who challenged evolution with bad arguments. But by making broad-brushed attacks upon the entire body of Christians who would argue against neo-Darwinism, Giberson and Collins apparently want to paint all Christians who doubt neo-Darwinism in a negative light. 

That faux pas aside, again, we see irony in their statement: If their claim is true, then Giberson and Collins' book defeats its own argument, since The Language of Science and Faith uses outdated arguments that feathers evolved from scales. 

The 'Seeds of Doubt' Strategy Fails
The rhetorical strategy of Giberson and Collins is now becoming clear: they want to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of readers not through discussing the evidence, but by attacking the trustworthiness and competence of skeptics of neo-Darwinian evolution. Aside from the fact that this implied argument of commits the genetic fallacy, Giberson and Collins haven't done a very good job of making this argument, because every attempt to plant doubt in the reader's mind is refuted by their own book:

Giberson and Collins make repeated appeals to authority but then admit that all that matters is the scientific evidence;

Giberson and Collins attack the qualifications of non-biologist scientists who doubt evolution, but Giberson himself is a non-biologist who lacks training in biology and evolution.

Giberson and Collins attack the "misrepresentations and outdated information" among writings that challenges evolution, but their own book is far from mistake-free, and uses some unambiguously outdated and now-abandoned arguments about evolution.

I raise these points not because I want you to distrust Giberson and Collins. They're both very smart, qualified, and informed scientists, and they make arguments worth considering. Read their books. Evaluate their arguments. Read the responses. Decide for yourself if they make a persuasive case. 

But also realize that there are a lot of smart, qualified, and informed scientists who doubt neo-Darwinian evolution. The fact that some of those scientific critics may happen to be "evangelicals" does not mean that therefore those responses are "filled with misrepresentations and outdated information about evolution." Giberson and Collins are making arguments designed to stifle your own self-investigation, not encourage it. 

Whenever Giberson and Collins stop talking about the evidence, and start appealing to authority, attacking Darwin-skeptics personally, and asking you to stop thinking for yourself, it's time to become skeptical: If the evidence is on their side, why do they feel the need to do this? 

On Darwinism's sexual issues.

Sex, the Queen of Problems in Evolutionary Biology

The origin of sexually reproducing organisms from asexually reproducing ancestors is a profound mystery which has baffled many an evolutionary biologist. The origin and subsequent maintenance of sex and recombination is a phenomenon not easily explained by Darwinian evolution. Indeed, there are several substantive, well-known reasons why the origin of sex presents a serious problem for conventional evolutionary explanations. Graham Bell described the dilemma in his book, The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality:

Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology. Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest; certainly none has sowed as much confusion. The insights of Darwin and Mendel, which have illuminated so many mysteries, have so far failed to shed more than a dim and wavering light on the central mystery of sexuality, emphasizing its obscurity by its very isolation.

What Are The Problems?
There are several reasons why the origin of sex presents a problem. For starters, there is the waste of resources in producing males. Assuming a sexually-reproducing female gives birth to an equal number of male and female offspring, only half of the progeny will be able to go on to have more offspring (in contrast to the asexually reproducing species, all the offspring of which can subsequently reproduce). Thus, it is to be expected that the asexual female will proliferate, on average, at twice the rate of the sexual species. Given the disadvantage thereby confronting the sexually-reproducing species, one would expect them to be quickly outcompeted by the asexual species. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that, in contrast to the asexual species, the females of the sexually-reproducing species perpetuate only half of their successful genotype. To transition, therefore, from a state of asexuality to sexual reproduction is, in effect, to gamble with 50% of one's successful genotype. Given that the whole purpose of natural selection is the preservation of those organisms which pass on their successful genes, this strikes at the heart of evolutionary rationale.

These dilemmas are nothing new. In his book, Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea, Carl Zimmer acknowledges these problems:

Sex is not only unnecessary, but it ought to be a recipe for evolutionary disaster. For one thing, it is an inefficient way to reproduce...And sex carries other costs as well...By all rights, any group of animals that evolves sexual reproduction should be promptly outcompeted by nonsexual ones. And yet sex reigns... Why is sex a success, despite all its disadvantages?"

The problems extend even deeper than this. For there is, of course, the additional conundrum related to the fact that gametes (i.e. sex cells) undergo a fundamentally different type of cell division (i.e. meiosis rather than mitosis). Meiosis entails the copying of only half of the chromosomal material. In similar fashion to mitosis (which occurs in somatic cells), each chromosome is duplicated to yield two chromatids. In contrast to mitosis, however, the homologous chromosomes are also associated. So, at the start of meiosis, each visible 'chromosome' possesses four chromatids. At the first division, these homologous chromosomes are separated such that each daughter nucleus has exactly half the chromosome number. At this stage, each is present as two copies (chromatids). These chromatids are hence separated at the second division such that each new nucleus only has a single copy. In order for sexual reproduction to work, it is essential that the process of meiosis evolve to halve the chromosome number. And this ability must also only occur in the gametes and not in the somatic cells. This difficulty is accentuated by the multitude of novel elements which are found in meiosis, rendering it unlikely to be explicable in terms of single mutational steps.

And then there is the added problem of male and female complementarity -- a seemingly remarkable incidence of co-evolution.

Attempted Solutions
On the same day last week, two articles were published in the popular science media offering two different (but completely contradicting) accounts of the evolutionary origin of sexual reproduction.

One of these articles bears the headline, "Sex evolved to prevent parasite infections, say scientists". The article opens by acknowledging the problems which I outlined above:

Sexual reproduction that involves two partners is far less efficient than self-fertilization -- at least, from the perspective of evolution. So why did creatures like humans ever start having sex with each other? According to a new study, we did it to fight parasites. We spoke with the researchers to discover what this says about sex.

The article goes on to explain,

Biologists at the University of Indiana found some of the most convincing evidence yet that the evolutionary driver of sexual reproduction is a need to avoid death by parasites. The basic logic is that, if an organism reproduces asexually, then the genetic variation of its species as a whole will slowly grind to a halt, and it becomes increasingly likely that a parasite that can kill one member of the species can wreak havoc on the entire population. (For proof of that, just look at bananas.)

Sexual reproduction, then, serves as a way to keep introducing genetic variety, a process that has to constantly be repeated in order to continue staving off attacks the latest and deadliest parasites. This is known as the "Red Queen Hypothesis", taking its name from a line in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass in which, "It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place."

And thus, it is argued that the apparent disadvantages of sex, outlined above, are compensated by the advantage which comes from the immense genetic flexibility which arises from the shuffling of genes through the process of recombination and fertilisation. This entails that the population is in a better position to enable it to adapt more readily to environmental hazards such as parasites. This would thereby give the sexually-reproducing species a significant advantage, while rendering the asexual species more susceptible to extinction.

But here's the thing: the fact of this obvious advantage does NOT explain how sexual reproduction arose in the first place. Indeed, such immense genetic flexibility is of benefit only to future generations, and not to the present population. But natural selection, being devoid of foresight, is not able to retain biological phenomena for their potential future utility. The problems which I outlined above are potent short-term disadvantages which should have mitigated against sexual reproduction evolving in the first place! Moreover, sexual reproduction is a phenomenon of such complexity sufficient to render it extremely unlikely to evolve by mutation on a frequent enough basis that we might expect it to become fixed by virtue of a few organisms somehow surviving these obvious disadvantages.

Moreover, the efficacy of the Red Queen Hypothesis has been increasingly challenged of late. As noted in one BBC article in 2004, "for this theory to work, there have to be an awful lot of parasites about, and they have to have very dramatic effects."

As John Maynard Smith stated in chapter 12 of his book, The Theory of Evolution,

We are therefore driven to the conclusion that the early stages in the evolution of the sexual process took place under the influence of selective forces quite different from those which are responsible for the maintenance and spread of sexual processes once they were erected.

The second article, published on Science Daily, bore the heading, "Sex Is Not About Promoting Genetic Variation, Researchers Argue". This article acknowledges the problem with the hypothesis in the previous article, and reports,

Heng and fellow researcher Root Gorelick, Ph.D., associate professor at Carleton University in Canada, propose that although diversity may result from a combination of genes, the primary function of sex is not about promoting diversity. Rather, it's about keeping the genome context -- an organism's complete collection of genes arranged by chromosome composition and topology -- as unchanged as possible, thereby maintaining a species' identity. This surprising analysis has been published as a cover article in a recent issue of the journal Evolution.

"If sex was merely for increasing genetic diversity, it would not have evolved in the first place," said Heng. This is because asexual reproduction -- in which only one parent is needed to procreate -- leads to higher rates of genetic diversity than sex.

The article goes on to ask,

In fact, two billion years ago in Earth's biosphere, life relied exclusively on asexual reproduction, and every organism was capable of bearing young without costly competition to mate. With asexual species' faster and more efficient mode of reproduction, the origin and maintenance of sex -- not exactly the fittest means of reproduction -- puzzles scientists, who for decades have been asking, Why has sex evolved and survived?

And what solution are we offered this time, you might be wondering?

According to Heng, the hidden advantage sex has over asexual reproduction is that it constrains macroevolution -- evolution at the genome level -- to allow a species' identity to survive. In other words, it prevents "Species A" from morphing into "Species B." Meanwhile, it also allows for microevolution -- evolution at the gene level -- to allow members of the species to adapt to the environment.

That's right. Sex evolved in order to limit evolvability. Apart from the fact that this still doesn't provide anything like the type of causal explanation which we require (nor does it really resolve any of the problems I outlined previously), the thesis that sex evolved in order to prevent macroevolution renders even more implausible the grander claims of evolution that all extant species are the product of descent-with-modification as a result of random variation acted upon by selection.

Sex continues to reign as the ultimate conundrum, the queen of problems, in evolutionary biology. Accounting for its origin in terms of evolutionary rationale is inevitably doomed to failure. As David Tyler recently remarked, "Time and time again, Darwinists fill the gaps in knowledge with their theoretical models, but sooner or later, the next generation of scholars will realise that Darwinists have constructed a virtual world that does not match the real world revealed by research."