The Apple Of God's Eye

December 30, 2009

Jesus' Birth: The Untold Story

In late December of each year, thousands of tourists flock into the small town of Bethlehem in the Judean Hills south of Jerusalem to participate in annual Christmas celebrations there. Some make the 6-mile journey from Jerusalem on foot. Upon arrival, they crowd with silent awe into the paved expanse of Manger Square in front of the revered Church of the Nativity, built over the traditional site of Jesus’ birth.

Inevitably, some of these tourists arrive in Israel unprepared. They have not thoroughly studied their guidebooks. As they step off their plane, they receive a real shock!  November through early March is “winter” in Israel! The weather gets cold, especially at night. Often it rains — or even snows! Yet many arrive in Israel carrying luggage bulging with summer attire, reasoning that it is always hot and arid in the Middle East. So they hurriedly purchase coats and sweaters in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem for their pilgrimage down to Bethlehem.

Nevertheless, most of those who stand in Manger Square on December 25 each year — prepared and unprepared alike — fail to perceive the message being proclaimed by the very weather around them!  Notice this plain testimony of your Bible: On the day of Jesus’ birth “there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night” (Luke 2:8). (more…)

October 28, 2009

Our Incomprehensibly Large Universe!

stevekanaras.blogspot.comThe Hubble telescope has shown us countless billions of galaxies in areas of the universe which we once thought were empty. For example, by focusing on a small speck in the sky in an area that was thought to be void of stars, astronomers soon discovered that this small speck actually contained 1,500 galaxies! And remember that each galaxy can contain untold millions of stars and some astronomers now believe that there may be as many galaxies in the sky as there are stars in our own galaxy.

Space travel

In an effort to learn more about space, mankind has put men on the moon and brought them back home safely, built a space station where astronauts can stay for months at a time. But space travel carries some great risks, and is quite costly. And these adventures of man into space are merely flying hundreds of miles into the sky—they come nowhere close to probing the true depths of space!

After reaching the moon, astronomy’s next goal is to put a man on Mars—a planet in our solar system about 150 million miles from Earth (compare to the moon at only 240,000 miles away). Even if this journey is successful, the trip of 150 million miles is a mere jog compared to the vastness of space. We might intrude into space, but we as humans cannot even begin to conquer it. Getting to Mars is only one planet of a vast solar system, part of an even larger galaxy—one of trillions of galaxies in this huge universe which are billions of light years away from Earth.

Light travels at over 186,000 miles per second; a light year is how far light can travel in a year moving at 186,000 miles per second, which figures out to be close to 6 trillion miles. (To travel just one light year at 100 miles per hour, it would take almost 7 million years.) Another measurement astronomers use is an au (astronomical unit). An au is the distance between the Earth and the sun—about 93 million miles.

The Giant Milky Way

All the space vehicles, manned or unmanned, still travel within our one galaxy—the Milky Way—one of millions or billions of galaxies. The Milky Way is considered a giant galaxy and contains about 400 billion stars. It is a spiral galaxy, which means that from a distance it looks like a pinwheel, or a big disc in the center with flat arms going out in all directions.

To get an idea of how vast this galaxy is, to travel the distance from the outer end of one disc to the outer end of another would take 100,000 years traveling at the speed of light.

Located on one of these discs—which is rotating around the center of the galaxy—is our solar system: the sun, moon, Earth and the planets. The star of our solar system, the sun, is located about two thirds of the way out from the center of the galaxy—roughly 28,000 light years from the center. Whereas it takes the Earth one year to orbit the sun, it takes the sun 250 million years to make just one orbit of the center of the galaxy.

Unmanned Spaced Probes

1Voyagers 1 and 2 were launched in 1977 to explore where nothing from Earth had ever been before. Now they each are much farther from Earth than any space vehicle has ever been. Speeding outward at more than 38,000 miles per hour, both continue to send back scientific information about their surroundings through the Deep Space program.

Voyager 1 remains operational, currently pursuing its extended mission to locate and study the boundaries of the Solar System, including the Kuiper belt and beyond. Its original mission was to visit Jupiter and Saturn; and it was the first probe to provide detailed images of the moons of these planets.

“Voyager 1 is currently the farthest human-made object from Earth, and as of August 28, 2009, it is about 110.94 AU (16.596 billion km, or 10.312 billion miles) from the Sun, and has passed the termination shock, entering the heliosheath, with the current goal of reaching and studying the heliopause, which is the known boundary of the solar system. If Voyager 1 is still functioning when it finally completes the passage through the heliopause (effectively becoming the first human-made object to leave the solar system), scientists will get their first direct measurements of the conditions in the interstellar medium. Its primary targets were the planets Jupiter and Saturn and their associated moons and rings; its mission was the detection of the heliopause and particle measurements of solar wind and the interstellar medium. Both of the Voyager probes have far outlasted their originally-planned lifespan. Each probe gets its electrical power from three radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs), which are expected to continue to generate enough electric power to let the probes keep communicating with Earth at least until the year 2025.” (Wikipedia)

By that time, Voyager 1 will be more than 12.4 billion miles from the sun. In some 296,000 years, if Voyager 2 was still traveling, it would pass Sirius, the brightest star in our sky, at a distance of about 4.3 light years (25 trillion miles).

Even more amazing were the Pioneer projects. Pioneers 10 and 11 were launched in 1972 and 1973—the fastest man-made objects to leave the Earth, launched at the incredible speed of 32,000 miles per hour. That is fast enough to pass the moon in 11 hours, and Mars’s orbit (50 million miles away) in just 12 weeks.

“Pioneer 10 (also called Pioneer F) was the first spacecraft to travel through the asteroid belt, which it entered on July 15, 1972, and to make direct observations of Jupiter, which it passed by on December 3, 1973. By some definitions, Pioneer 10 has become the first artificial object to leave the solar system. It is the first human-built object to have been set upon a trajectory leading out of the solar system. However, it still has not passed the heliopause or Oort cloud. The last weak signal from Pioneer 10 was received on January 23, 2003, when it was 12 billion kilometers (7.5 billion miles) from Earth. It is now heading in the direction of the star Aldebaran (about 68 light years away) in the constellation Taurus at roughly 2.6 AU per year. It will take Pioneer 10 over 2 million years to reach it. (Wikipedia)

Pioneer 11 was to go on after passing Jupiter 400 million miles away. Using this giant planet as a sling shot, Pioneer 11’s speed now reached 108,000 miles per hour. By 1979, Pioneer 11 flew within 13,000 miles of Saturn. In November 1995 the last communication from Pioneer 11 was received, as the Earth’s motion carried Saturn out of the view of the spacecraft antenna. Pioneer 11 is now headed toward the constellation of Aquila, just northwest of the constellation of Sagittarius and may pass near one of the stars in the constellation in about 4 million years.

Conclusion

We can barely begin to imagine how vast our universe is by how vast our own galaxy is! Manned and unmanned spacecraft can barely cover any significant ground in the area called “space.” Despite the incredible speeds of some of these vehicles, they are still millions of years away from the closest stars. The more we venture out into space, the more the immenseness of it staggers our imagination. That’s why I find it amusing when scientists make definitive statements about something that is so hard to comprehend. It’s better to keep the attitude humble, allow God to reveal truth to us and realize on our own, we really don’t know what we are talking about.

September 23, 2009

What Spokesmen For Science Are Not Telling You About Evolution!

Darwinsape-703382Is belief in a living intelligent Creator unscientific? Is the scientific method the only way to view reality?

The existence of a Creator is generally viewed by spokesmen for the scientific establishment as incompatible with objective reasoning and the scientific method. What guarantee, if there is a Creator, do we have that we are not dupes of “cosmic practical jokes” such as being placed in a young universe “created with an appearance of age”?

Has that Someone gone to a lot of trouble to produce fossils, even with worn-down teeth and arthritic joints, in order to trick us humans into thinking we evolved? Would a superior Being continually meddle with the laws of nature, thereby confounding the results of scientific experiments and making such results meaningless? These questions demand answers.

Was There a Beginning?

Modern science has made many amazing discoveries about our universe. These are nearly always presented to the layman in the language of evolution. But do these discoveries genuinely support evolution — or the opposite conclusion? Just what should we conclude from the evidence of scientific investigation?

The origin of the universe has been debated by astronomers, physicists, philosophers and theologians for centuries. Has the universe always existed? Did it come into existence at some definite time in the past? Many theories — theological and scientific — have been proposed and then discarded as new discoveries were made. In recent times, one theory — the big bang theory — has come to be accepted by many scientists as more consistent with the data than any other.

The big bang theory proposes that the entire universe exploded into existence in an instant of time. Physicists now claim to be able to project backward into the past to within one billion billion billion billionth of a second of the big bang (Science Digest, May 1981). Using known laws of physics, they theoretically tell what conditions would have been like within such a small time unit immediately after the big bang.

To accept the big bang theory, one has to believe that the entire universe came into existence suddenly and dramatically in an infinitesimally microscopic moment of time. Does that sound like the slow, gradual unfolding of evolutionary processes?

A few things bother scientists about the big bang theory. On the one hand, they observe inexplicable uniformity on the large scale, but, on the other hand, “clumpiness” on the small scale. There is also something they call “flatness” of the universe that requires special initial conditions. Moreover, the occurrence of the big bang itself seems to violate known physical laws.

In puzzling over these problems, scientists use expressions such as, “Someone had to time it very precisely,” “The conditions of the universe were specially arranged,” and “How did the universe manage to go ‘bang’ in such an improbable way?” (Science News, September 3, 1983).

So, the origin of the universe could not possibly be the result of a cosmological pipe bomb that somehow produced itself and just blew up.

Is there an explanation that agrees with the data? There is! The real big bang was a well-planned, deliberately executed act of CREATION! How would you expect a super powerful divine Being to bring forth an entire universe? With a small fizzle, a limp thud or a weak whimper? Of course not! The creation of the universe was accomplished with a glorious display of light, heat, matter and energy — a display that still reverberates throughout space and only recently has been described by scientists as the big bang!

Thousands of years ago David wrote: “The heavens declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1). The marvels known today — the incredible size and power of the stars, the enormity of galaxies, awesome phenomena such as supernovae, pulsars and quasars — tell us more about the glory of God than David could have ever imagined!

Age of the Universe

How old is the universe? The answer to this question is almost always misunderstood by creationists and misused by evolutionists. Creationists generally believe, falsely, that the universe is hardly more than 6,000 years old. On the other hand, many evolutionists falsely suppose that the great antiquity of the universe somehow “proves” evolution.

First of all, the Bible does not say the universe was created 6,000 years ago. It simply says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1, Revised Authorized Version). The physical evidence shows a universe and earth of great age. At the Grand Canyon alone one can see with the naked eye the results of geological processes that would require immensely more than 6,000 years to complete.

Further evidence from radiometric dating and astrophysics pushes the age of the universe back to more than ten billion years — or ten thousand million years for our British readers.

Evolutionists seize on these millions of years out of necessity. After all, they believe that given enough time, anything can happen. Apparently, some creationists also believe that given enough time, evolution could happen. Otherwise, why would they so desperately attempt to squeeze the history of the universe into a few thousand years in spite of stubborn facts to the contrary? Both viewpoints are wrong!

Necessity does not prove anything. You need air to fly an airplane. Just because you have air, that doesn’t mean you automatically have an airplane without the need of a designer. In the same way, just because you have billions of years, that does not make evolution occur. The great age of the universe does not in itself “prove” evolution or creation.

But what does the age of the universe tell us? Why would a Creator make it so long ago and maintain it? Not only merely to “declare his glory,” but for an astounding purpose!

The Creator is eternal. He inhabits eternity (Isa. 57:15). What better way to teach temporary human beings something of the concept of eternity, than to put them into a universe that is millions upon millions of years old?

Life Demands a Life

The earth teems with millions of forms of life — animals and plants of many distinct characteristics. Do these life forms give evidence for evolution?

In two previous articles in The Plain Truth (September 1981, U.S. edition; February 1983, all English language editions), we have shown the utter mathematical improbability of even the “simplest” components of life, let alone life forms, coming into existence and developing through evolution. Mutations and natural selection notwithstanding, there is no evidence that life “evolved” — the missing links are still missing.

But life does teach us something about the Creator, something very important, which neither evolutionists nor theologians understand — something fundamental about God’s plan!

Life forms reproduce after their own kinds. This fact in itself contradicts a basic tenet of evolution. (By the term “kind,” we do not mean the intentionally limited definition of “species.” For instance, there could be many species such as lions, tigers, etc., within a “cat kind.” But there is a total distinction between the “cat kind” and the “dog kind,” for example.)

Evolution requires major changes in already existing life forms by means of natural genetic reproductive processes. (That is, invertebrate to vertebrate: fish to amphibian to reptile to bird, monkey to ape and hominid, and hominid to man.) There is not one shred of proof in the fossil record that genetic changes of this magnitude have occurred — or are even remotely possible — by any known biological process. A careful study of the anatomy and behavior of numerous creatures clearly shows how preposterous such an idea actually is. Kind reproduces its own kind! Only the creative process could account for the geologic record and the contemporary world.

But the fact of reproduction after its own kind also contradicts the teaching of nearly all theologians about the purpose of God.

Does the Creator Meddle?

Would it make any sense for a living intelligent supreme Being to try to thwart legitimate scientific inquiry by “monkeying around” with the laws of nature? Would a Creator use cosmological trickery to deceive human beings about the creation they inhabit? The real Creator does not operate that way!

“The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens” (Prov. 3:19).

“These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him. … A false witness that speaketh lies …..(Prov. 6:16, 19).

The Creator would not create a universe or even a planet earth that was itself a false witness. That would hardly “declare his glory” and “show his handiwork” (Ps. 19:1).

Does that mean the Creator never intervenes? It’s very much like an airplane with an automatic pilot. The automatic pilot maintains the direction, speed and altitude of the airplane. However, the human pilot can override the automatic pilot at any time.

What we call laws of nature are like the automatic pilot. The Creator does on rare and usually unique occasions decide to override the “automatic pilot.” But there was only one parting of the Red Sea. If the Red Sea parted every full moon, we would certainly expect to find a physical explanation, not a supernatural one.

Spectacular divine interventions are unique and do not permanently alter the “laws of nature.” Similarly, miracles that affect an individual, such as a divine healing or an inexplicable protection from serious bodily injury, involve only a temporary or momentary alteration or cessation of existing physical, chemical or biological laws.

As more scientific discoveries are made, whether at the galactic level or the subatomic level, there is only more evidence of law, design, harmony and order — more evidence of an intelligent, ever-living, superpowerful Creator!

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20).

So the next time you read about the wonders of nature or watch a television program describing some fascinating scientific discovery, don’t be misled by evolutionary terminology and bias. Realize that you are seeing the handiwork of a master Creator!

Source: Plain Truth, 1984

June 1, 2009

Evolutionary Bafflegab!

tutor2u.net/blog

tutor2u.net/blog

For too long the creation versus evolution controversy has revolved around points of secondary importance. It’s time to get to the heart of the matter!

Most “creationists” are guilty of the very thing they accuse evolutionists of doing: misinterpreting the evidence!

Actually, the commonly accepted religious concept of creation has changed little since medieval theologians insisted the earth is flat. Only some six or so thousand years ago, according to this concept, God created “out of nothing” the universe and everything in it.

Not only does this idea overlook the actual biblical account of creation, it also represents a misinterpretation of the physical evidence to support a preconceived and erroneous notion.

One can only wonder how many educated people have rejected the whole idea of special creation merely because they have not heard the true biblical account. The biblical account of creation, as recorded in the first chapters of Genesis, is compatible with the entire body of provable, observable, measurable, recordable scientific data. What this means is that the physical evidence of and by itself does not require choosing between an evolutionary process on the one hand or belief in a universe that is only about 6,000 years old on the other hand.

What the Bible Really Says

Where most “creationists” err is that they assume the Bible places the creation of the universe at a point in time about six or so thousand years ago. The Bible, however, says nothing about such an idea.

Genesis 1:1 states, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Those words describe a complete episode in the prehistory of the universe. There follows a time lapse of indefinite length between this verse and the verse that follows — a time lapse that may well have spanned multiple millions of years as measured by scientists using radiometric dating methods. The Bible does not describe this period in great detail, nor reveal how long it lasted.

As verse two of Genesis 1 opens, we are confronted with a totally different scene. We now see an earth that had come to be in ruins, in darkness and covered with water. Some great disaster had befallen the earth.

The English word was in this verse is better translated “became” or “came to be.” “Now the earth became without form, and void; and darkness came to be upon the face of the deep.” (See the New International Version rendering and footnote.)

This revelation of earth’s history is important because the second major error most creationists make is to attribute the near totality of earth’s strata to a flood in Noah’s day. They overlook the physical evidence of events, including flooding, before and up to the climax of Genesis 1:2!

From verse two the Genesis account goes on to describe a recreation, how God reshaped and refashioned, nearly 6,000 years ago, the already existing, but now desolate earth. The Bible thus reveals an earlier period for the earth and its original inhabitants long before man was created.

Why Evolution Then?

Many evolutionists have taken for granted the false explanation of the Bible. They have therefore concluded that the written biblical record of creation could not be true. Having carelessly set aside the biblical account, educators and scientists were left with no choice but to believe in some form of evolution and to interpret all physical evidence accordingly.

One highly celebrated proponent of evolution who totally rejects the traditional — and false — explanation given to the Genesis record of creation conceded in private, “The evolutionary explanation may not be complete or compelling but nothing else is possible.”

In other words, the evolutionist, after he has left the Creator out of the picture, because he found the traditional interpretation of Genesis to be in error, has no choice but to try making evolution work. As this well-known author remarked, “no alternate explanation to evolution is possible.”

Evolutionists are stuck with evolution. This, in spite of the fact that they cannot adequately explain the mechanism by which evolution is supposed to have taken place. There are all those gaps in the “evolutionary tree.”

Oh, there have been attempts to fill those gaps- — with a measure of wishful thinking. Charles Darwin, for example, wrote in The Origin of Species that “the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true [he doesn’t sound convinced!], such must have lived upon the earth.”

“Must have”? But where? When? Who has found the proof that this “inconceivably great” host of intermediate species existed? Where are all those missing links that “must have” lived on earth? One hundred years after Darwin this essential proof is embarrassingly absent!

Even a sizable number of evolutionists have come to accept that “transitional links” will never be found. But since they are aware of no plausible alternative to evolution that would involve God, the Creator is kept out of the picture. In an effort to bridge the gaps in the biological record, as revealed in geology, the idea of “punctuated evolution,” or evolution by leaps, has attracted recent interest. If, however, a long, slow process of evolution has failed to leave a credible record, it is certain an evolution-by-leaps has left even less of one.

Some seek to get around the difficulties in the evolutionary concept by resorting to a form of theistic evolution. This brings God into the evolutionary process. But only far enough to get evolution over the rough spots like the origin of the first living cells, missing links and other such troublesome problems. It is merely another effort to interpret the physical evidence without giving God the credit.

Not that the Bible is specifically a science textbook. It is not. But where the Bible speaks on scientific matters, it is in harmony with the facts of science.

Correctly understood, the Genesis account renders totally unnecessary any attempt to explain the physical evidence in evolutionary terms. Consider a couple of the popularly cited “proofs” of evolution and see how easily they fit into the biblical account of creation.

Evolutionary science places heavy emphasis on comparative embryology. So what if the embryos of humans, chickens, pigs and turtles look similar at certain stages in their development? That’s no problem. One Designer designed them all. Why wouldn’t there be similarities? Why wouldn’t there be a repetition of themes just as individual buildings by the same architect or different models of automobiles made by the same company may have similarities? Most houses and most automobiles look similar in the early stages of manufacture. So it is with embryos. A pig embryo, however, never becomes a chicken. Nor a chicken a turtle. Nor a turtle a human. Each reproduces after its kind.

But what is the origin of the different “kinds” with their individual characteristics? Evolutionists have derided creationists for continually citing examples of the “wonders of nature.” But such chiding does not answer the question: How can the design evident in the “wonders of nature” be explained? The skill of the garden spider in building its web, the interdependent partnership between certain insects and flowers, the deadeye accuracy of the archer fish, the entertaining antics of dolphins and seals, the agile trunk of elephants, and man himself — an assemblage of 30,000,000,000 living cells functioning harmoniously, capable of thought, of emotion, of expression, able to split atoms he cannot see or to construct immense edifices — these and incalculable numbers of other “wonders” cannot be rationally accounted for by a blind, purposeless, unintelligent, time-and-chance process of evolution.

The subject cannot be avoided. Nor can the conclusion: Design demands a Designer!

What about the “survival of the fittest”? Which schoolchild has not read about the light-colored moths and the dark-colored moths on the tree trunk? The light-colored ones, if more conspicuous, are quickly eaten by birds. The dark moths survive because they are less visible.

“See?” proclaim the evolutionists, “survival of the fittest.” And indeed it is. The principle of survival of the fittest does have a place in the natural scheme. But it does not bring about a change from one life form to another! It does not explain the arrival of the fittest. It merely helps determine the survivability under given conditions of varieties naturally occurring within the boundaries of each Genesis kind. The dark-colored moths do not become something else. They are still moths. And so they shall ever be.

These are two of the primary proofs given for evolution. And yet, as these examples illustrate, the physical evidence of and by itself does not require an evolutionary explanation. In order to fit into the concept of evolution the physical evidence must be interpreted according to evolutionary thought. It is not the evidence itself that is even the central issue in the creation versus evolution controversy. It is the interpretation of that evidence that is the crux of the whole matter!

In other words, the evidence used or discovered by evolutionists does not pose a problem for creationists who understand the true biblical account of creation.

Seeing the Facts Clearly

Interpretation of evidence is one thing. There is unfortunately, however, another factor sometimes at work: lack of candor. The marvelously complex human eye could not have evolved from “primitive” eyes, yet evolutionists still obscure the facts.

They say eyes in existence today range all the way from light-sensitive spots near the heads of some animals, to indentations, to indentations with a membrane, to lens-like membranes, to everything up to humans. So far, so good. This is evidence. It is true. No creationist would deny it.

Now comes the interpretation! The evolutionist takes the quantum leap and takes for granted that evolution has occurred, by believing that all the various stages in the evolution of the eye still exist today. But that is only one way of interpreting the evidence. That is not proof. A creationist could just as easily say that “all the various kinds of eyes God created still exist today.”

But then evolutionists cloud the issue even further by looking at [all the varieties of eyes in] the living world, to see how something as complex as the eye could evolve.

But here’s the problem! “Could evolve does not mean it “did” evolve that way.” Evolutionists cannot claim that if you line up all existing eyes in the living world in order of complexity, from the light-sensitive spots to the human eye, that the arrangement would show how the eye evolved? That would be laughable!

Why? Because if you line up all living creatures in an order based solely on the complexity of their eyes — from simple eyes to complex eyes — the position of the creatures themselves in such a lineup would be out of conformity with the “evolutionary tree.”

Such a common statement then, that by looking at all the different eyes “we can easily see how something as complex as the eye could evolve” implies what evolution itself cannot support. Yet this type of reasoning — even in textbooks — misleads many people.

When all is said and done, we are still left with the question, how did the different eyes develop if they were not created?

The Creator’s Credentials

The realm of the physical sciences confines itself to what can be experimented with, observed, measured and weighed — the physical, material universe. While many scientists — including evolutionists — may allow for the possible existence of God, most freely admit they do not allow belief in the spiritual to affect their theories. They pride themselves in their powers of inductive reasoning. But they leave out data from an entire dimension — the spiritual. Why? Because they cannot quantify it — measure it. There is, then, a built-in antisupernatural bias in most scientific reasoning.

It is no wonder science never even claims to have the truth! Rather, its avowed goal is only to find a closer approximation to “truth.” Significantly, the Bible describes as one of the characteristics of our times that some would be “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (II Tim. 3:7).

Jesus Christ promised his followers, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). He meant spiritual truth, certainly. But not exclusively. He also meant truth concerning even a physical matter that affects one’s worship and perception of the true God.

Where science sticks to the facts in areas such as chemistry, physics or mathematics, there is no argument. But when human beings depart from strict observation and measurement of physical laws and begin to theorize and interpret evidence erroneously, when they ignore an entire dimension of evidence — the spiritual — when they seek to take away the credentials of God the Creator and Lifegiver, then it is they who have encroached upon the realm of the spiritual, and not vice versa!

The credentials of the true Creator God set him apart from all gods. One day the apostle Paul confronted a crowd of idolators and admonished them to worship the real God. Which one? The “living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein” (Acts 14:15). That is how God is identified.

On another occasion Paul was standing amid lifeless idols worshiped in ancient Athens. But Paul didn’t worship those gods. He worshiped the real God. How did Paul identify this one true God and distinguish him from gods humans had made? Listen to Paul! “God that made the world and all things therein … he is Lord of heaven and earth …” (Acts 17:24).
The theory of evolution attempts to strip the Almighty Creator God of those credentials, making him little different from impotent idols, the works of men’s hands!

To demonstrate God is the Creator, we don’t have to produce lengthy volumes detailing all the proofs. The evidence is already available. It is everywhere. It is beneath our feet, in stratified deposits. It is all around us, in everything we can see, hear, touch, taste and feel. It is above us, stretching out incalculable numbers of light years into space. It has been gathered by geologists, biologists, paleontologists, astronomers. It has been written up in countless volumes. One needs only to separate erroneous interpretation from measurable facts.

Whereas scientists who acknowledge God as Creator can look at the physical evidence and see God’s handiwork — brilliant, imaginative, colorful, sometimes even humorous — evolutionists look at the same evidence and try to construct a workable godless theory. Those who understand the true account of creation simply give God credit for his workmanship and marvel at what he has done and at the ultimate purpose of life; evolutionists have to contend with an idea whose mechanism they cannot explain and which is purposeless.

It all boils down to a matter of rejecting the false and unscientific, traditional explanation of creation and accepting the true biblical record of creation (this makes all the evidence explainable), or rejecting God as Creator (in which case faith in some form of evolution, with all of its difficulties, is the only — and erroneous — alternative).

Why not look at all dimensions of knowledge — including the most important?

Source: The Plain Truth, November/December 1983

Could The Universe Contain An "Uncountable" Number Of Stars?

From time immemorial, man has been fascinated by the beautiful, and awesome spectacle of the stars of heaven. Many centuries before the birth of Jesus, David observed that “the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handywork” (Psa. 19:1).

Even today, the seeming myriads of stars and nebulae continue to be a breathtaking and inspiring panoply. Yet at any given time, despite one’s initial impression, the actual number of stars distinguished by the naked eye is less than 3000. This means that you could easily count them all in less than an hour!

By contrast, the Bible states in Jeremiah 33:22 that “the host of heaven CANNOT BE NUMBERED.” During the thousands. of years before Galileo’s invention of the telescope, such a statement was considered to be either false or at least a gross exaggeration. The stars uncountable? The universe, they said, was too small to contain that many stars!

However, astronomers have estimated that there are billions of billions of stars in the visible universe. More specifically, astronomers estimate that their number is equal to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or one sextillion. Is this an “uncountable” number?

To find out, let’s suppose that every man, woman, and child on the face of the earth were employed in an “all-out” effort to count the stars. Every, person is given a giant telescope, capable of “seeing” all the stars in the direction it is pointed. Each telescope is limited to a certain part of the sky so that no star will be counted twice. Further, the sun is darkened so that the stars can be seen even during “daylight” hours. When the signal is given, everyone on earth begins counting — quickly — each person recording one new star every second. They work diligently hour after hour with no periods of rest. How long would it take to “count” the stars of heaven? A day? A week? A month?

No, it would take everyone on earth — over 8 thousand years to count the stars in the visible universe. But 8000 years is longer than man has been on the earth! So the term “uncountable” is indeed a very appropriate description of the number of stars, in the observable universe.

But is the number of stars literally “uncountable” in the sense of there being “infinitely many”? Some have assumed that if the term “cannot be numbered” is taken literally, then the Bible must be unscientific. They reason that astronomy knows only of an estimated sextillion stars — and that is a finite number and, hence, countable.

Ironically, the assumption that there is only a finite number of stars is often based on the Biblical statements that “God tells the number of the stars and calls them all by their names”. (Psa. 147:4) and “God brings out their host by number” (Isa. 40:26). These scriptures supposedly “prove” the universe is finite, for “even GOD could not give names to an INFINITE number of stars.” Actually, the fact is, that ALL objects in an infinite set may STILL have a “name.” For example, all the natural numbers (1, 2, 3, 4 ..) have a “name,” even though they comprise an infinity. Furthermore, the infinite mind of God would surely be capable of assigning names to an infinite number of stars. Thus, the Scriptures do not claim that the universe can only have a finite number of stars.

Moreover, astronomers readily admit that they cannot determine if there are “infinitely many” stars, because man is limited to observing the visible universe. Note that the size of the visible universe is NOT determined by how large a telescope man can build. Rather, it is determined — according to most astronomers — by a fascinating property of the universe itself! No matter where in the heavens astronomers look, they find the stars and galaxies “retreating” from us. The farther away these celestial objects are, the faster they appear to be traveling.

Now light reaching us from a receding object “looks” redder (lower frequency) just as the pitch of a train whistle drops in frequency as the train passes us by. Scientists know that at a certain velocity (near that of light itself, i.e., 186,000 miles per second) this “red shift” will be so great that man cannot detect any light coming from the object — not with his eyes, not with any known instrument — even using the largest telescopes available.

In other words, there are certain absolute limits beyond which physical man cannot go — and one of these is the boundary of the limit of detection of the visible universe. What is on the “other side” of this boundary? What lies beyond the limits of man’s perception? Man as a physical being does not know.

Yet there is a Great Plan by which man can know the size and scope the vast, unfathomable expanses of the universe — a plan instituted by the very Being who created the heaven and the earth (Gen. 1:1), who designed the lights of the firmament to divide day and night and to serve as signs for seasons, days and years (Gen. 1:14), who calls the stars by their names (Psalms 147:4), and whose understanding is infinite (Psalms 147:5; Isa 40:28).

No, the universe is not “too small” to contain an “uncountable” number of stars. In fact, even if the universe were much “smaller,” it would still be humanly impossible to count or number all the stars. And considering the possibility that the universe may be infinite, what better description could one give than that there is, as the Bible states, an innumerable number of stars?

Source: Tomorrow’s World, October 1971

April 19, 2009

Did The Sun Really "Stand Still For Joshua?"

132Did Joshua make a mistake in astronomy? Critics cite Joshua 10 and other passages as proof that the Bible is scientifically inaccurate. D

In order to give the Israelites more time to defeat their enemies, God lengthened the day by causing the sun to “stand still” (verses 12-13). Didn’t Joshua know that the earth rotates around the sun? He probably did. Technically speaking, he should have said, “Earth, stop rotating!” But the Bible wasn’t written for astronomers, in scientific language. Though the Bible does give the foundation for understanding science, it is written in language for the average man. 

Technically, the earth stopped rotating during Joshua’s long day, but to the observer on earth the “sun stood still.” We still use “unscientific” expressions like “the sun sets” and “the kettle is boiling.” Critics should not construe such expressions in the Bible as errors in science.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.