The Apple Of God's Eye

September 11, 2011

Reconciling Evolution, History And the Bible

Filed under: Bible,History,Ice Ages — melchia @ 1:04 am
Tags: , , , , , , ,

guides.wikinut.com

Where do the so-called “Ice Ages” fit in Bible history? Why  did so many forms of animal and human life disappear at the close of  the geologic period labeled “Pleistocene” by scientists?

Most people do not know how a geologist reaches his conclusions. A geologist, of course, is one who makes a study of earth history. He investigates the rock structure of the surface of the earth. Working in the field, he discovers strata of sandstone, or limestone, or silt. Perhaps in them are fossils. He wants to know when the strata were deposited. How does he decide? The answer is: HE DOESN’T!

Being a very careful man — a scientific man — he will go to a paleontologist for the answer. And who is a paleontologist? He is a scientist who makes a special study of fossils. It is his function to explain to the geologist the apparent age of the fossils. And how does the paleontologist know the apparent age of the fossils? From geology? No! How can he learn it from geology when even the geologist does not know the age of fossil strata until he goes to the paleontologist who studies the fossils!! Then how does the paleontologist discover how old fossils are? Simple! He turns to the evolution theory!

Life, the paleontologist tells the geologist, developed from the very simplest cell into the varied complex creatures that inhabit the earth today. “But what is the age of the fossils?” asks the geologist.

“Let me explain that,” replies the paleontologist. “Evolution is a very slow process. It may take millions of years for one species of life to slowly develop into another totally different species. The age of your strata are determined by how long we think it took that particular species of fossils to develop. Of course, we paleontologists don’t all agree on these details. You might get a different answer from another paleontologist! After all, even though we all believe evolution is a fact, we do not know exactly how it occurs — or even the exact order in which various species of life evolved.”

And that, in simple language, is what happens! The age of the fossils is guessed at by the paleontologist. The source of his knowledge (or misknowledge) is not geology, but the evolution theory. He takes it for granted. He assumes the theory is a fact — or reasons as if it were a fact. The geologist then deduces the age of the strata from the assumed age of the fossils. (more…)

June 23, 2011

For Evolutionists Only….

hollyforrestteaches.blogspot.com

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. (more…)

June 20, 2011

Can You Believe Both The Bible And Evolution?

So many are saying today, “You can believe BOTH the Bible and evolution.” But this is emphatically not so! The Century Dictionary and Encyclopedia defines evolution as “opposed to creation” — the only PROOF of God. Huxley said it was “directly antagonistic to Creation,” adding, “Evolution makes it impossible to believe in the Bible.” And, we might add, the BIBLE makes it impossible to believe in evolution.

Sir Oliver Lodge said, “As taught by science, we learn that there has been no fall in man; there has been only RISE.” Another frank evolutionist, Carl Vogt, says: “Evolution turns the Creator out of doors.”

And yet, in high schools and colleges, many teachers and professors are teaching students that there is no conflict between the Bible and evolution. They teach that you can believe BOTH. Some try to teach that evolution was God’s METHOD of creation, and try to harmonize the first chapter of Genesis with the theory of evolution! This is merely crafty, cunning, lying deception, which is deceiving millions of students. They are then taught the “evidences” of evolution, they accept it, and soon become atheists before they realize it! (more…)

The Mathematical Impossibility of Evolution

Filed under: Evolution — melchia @ 9:46 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Editors Comment: This article came from The Philadelphia Trumpet, March/April 2002. It has hard facts about the improbability of evolution and should make a logical person think about the childish approach evolutionists take, despite the odds that they could be right.

——————————————————————-

archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com

Since random events within nature are supposed to be responsible for the spontaneous beginning of life and of all living things, let’s evaluate “randomness.” The tool used to evaluate randomness is the mathematical concept of probability.

The basic principle of probability is simple: If you have a coin with two sides, heads and tails, and toss it into the air, each side has a 50 percent chance of being on the top when the coin lands. This is the probability of a random event limited by two possible outcomes.

Now, imagine a pair of four-sided dice. The probability of any certain side landing in the bottom position when one of the pair is tossed is one in four, or 25 percent. Add the second of the pair, and there are 16 possible combinations (four times four). Add a third and there are 64 possible combinations (four times four times four). The probability of getting any certain combination in one toss of three dice would be 64 to one. The more possible combinations, the less the probability of any one specific result.

Evolution is hypothesized to occur when there is an alteration to the genetic material of a plant or animal, and the change produces offspring with a better chance to survive. In animals, the changes take place in the genome, the genetic material of the sperm or egg cells of a parent, and are passed on to the next generation. (more…)

May 25, 2011

The Impossibility Of Evolution

Filed under: Evolution — melchia @ 5:57 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

Editors Comment – Found this post at www.thetrumpet.com (2002 March/April Trumpet – print edition). It really puts into perspective the impossibility of evolution. It’s a must read for those searching for real truth.

—————————————————————–

Evolution vs. Creation

intelligentdesignfacts.com

Since random events within nature are supposed to be responsible for the spontaneous beginning of life and of all living things, let’s evaluate “randomness.” The tool used to evaluate randomness is the mathematical concept of probability.

The basic principle of probability is simple: If you have a coin with two sides, heads and tails, and toss it into the air, each side has a 50 percent chance of being on the top when the coin lands. This is the probability of a random event limited by two possible outcomes.

Now, imagine a pair of four-sided dice. The probability of any certain side landing in the bottom position when one of the pair is tossed is one in four, or 25 percent. Add the second of the pair, and there are 16 possible combinations (four times four). Add a third and there are 64 possible combinations (four times four times four). The probability of getting any certain combination in one toss of three dice would be 64 to one. The more possible combinations, the less the probability of any one specific result.

Evolution is hypothesized to occur when there is an alteration to the genetic material of a plant or animal, and the change produces offspring with a better chance to survive. In animals, the changes take place in the genome, the genetic material of the sperm or egg cells of a parent, and are passed on to the next generation.

In the human genome, there are four possible combinations of amino acids called nucleotides, but, instead of three dice, there are 3.2 billion nucleotides. The possible combinations would be four times four times four—repeatedly multiplying by four a total of 3.2 billion times. (more…)

March 28, 2011

Geology Reveals: Two Creations, Two Worldwide Floods

findingtruthmatters.org

Here is startling proof — from the Bible and geology — demonstrating not only two widely separated creations, but two world-wide destructions! Few have understood this astonishing truth!

Contrary to what millions have been led to believe — the true facts of science and the truth of your Bible agree! Theologians have long kept hidden this surprising truth. It conflicts with their theology. Atheistic professors have suppressed it. Science has refused to believe it.

Only a few understand where the key which unlocks the amazing geologic history of the earth is. It has been in the FIRST TWO VERSES OF YOUR BIBLE all these years — and you probably never noticed it.

The FOUNDATION of Knowledge

The very first truth revealed in your Bible is: “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). This earth was created so perfect, so beautiful, that “the morning stars {the angels — Rev. 1:20} sang for joy” (Job 38:7).

Yet the very next inspired verse of your Bible reveals that this perfect earth was destroyed by a terrible catastrophe! Genesis 1:2 reveals, “And the earth was without form, and void.”

The original Hebrew word, which the King James translators translated “was” in verse two, ought to be translated “became.” It is so translated in Genesis 19:26, in Genesis 2:7, and in many other verses of the Bible. Turn to the example in Genesis 19:26. In this verse the same Hebrew word which is INCORRECTLY translated “WAS” in Genesis 1:2 is here CORRECTLY translated “BECAME.”

Notice, God warned Lot and his wife not to look behind as they escaped from the burning city of Sodom. Lot’s wife disobeyed this command and looked back longingly at the wicked city of Sodom, “She BECAME a pillar of salt” (v. 26).

Obviously, Lot’s wife had not always been a pillar of salt! But when she sinned, she became a pillar of salt.

In like manner, the earth wasn’t originally created a waste and in confusion! The correct translation of Genesis 1:2 from the original inspired Hebrew makes clear: “The earth BECAME without form, and void.”

This truth is further brought out when we note in Genesis 1:2 that the English “without form” was translated from the original Hebrew word “tohu,” which means “desolation” or “confusion.” Is God the author of confusion?

The Apostle Paul was inspired to write: “God is not the author of confusion” (I Cor. 14:33).

Isaiah said, “He {God} created it {the earth} NOT IN VAIN {“tohu” in Hebrew — that is, not in chaos and confusion} (Isa. 45:18). It BECAME that way! (more…)

February 12, 2011

Anti-Evolution Quotes

Filed under: Evolution — melchia @ 6:50 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

“The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.” – Charles Darwin 1902 edition.

“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475.

“Nowhere was Darwin able to point to one bona fide case of natural selection having actually generated evolutionary change in nature….Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crises (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler & Adler, 1986) pp. 62, 358.

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” Søren Løvtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (New York: Croom Helm, 1987), p. 422.

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian Evolution and the Emperor’s New Clothes by N.J. Mitchell (United Kingdom: Roydon Publications, 1983), title page.

“The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination.” Albert Fleischmann. Witnesses Against Evolution by John Fred Meldau (Denver: Christian Victory Publishing, 1968), p. 13.

“[T]he theory suffers from grave defects, which are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our theoretical grasp of the facts…No one can demonstrate that the limits of a species have ever been passed. These are the Rubicons which evolutionists cannot cross…Darwin ransacked other spheres of practical research work for ideas…But his whole resulting scheme remains, to this day, foreign to scientifically established zoology, since actual changes of species by such means are still unknown.” Albert Fleischmann, “The Doctrine of Organic Evolution in the Light of Modern Research,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 65 (1933): pp. 194-95, 205-6, 208-9.

“Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Louis Bounoure. The Advocate, 8 March 1984, p. 17.

“And the salient fact is this: if by evolution we mean macroevolution (as we henceforth shall), then it can be said with the utmost rigor that the doctrine is totally bereft of scientific sanction. Now, to be sure, given the multitude of extravagant claims about evolution promulgated by
evolutionists with an air of scientific infallibility, this may indeed sound strange. And yet the fact remains that there exists to this day not a shred of bona fide scientific evidence in support of the thesis that macroevolutionary transformations have ever occurred.” Wolfgang
Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion (Rockford., Ill.: Tan Books, 1988), pp. 5-6. Dr. Smith, taught at MIT and UCLA.

“With the failure of these many efforts, science was left in the somewhat embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins which it could not demonstrate. After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the inevitable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort could not prove to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.” Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey (1957), p. 199.

“If complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process took place contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what may rightly be termed the miraculous.” R.E.D. Clark, Victoria Institute (1943), p.

” `Creation,’ in the ordinary sense of the word, is perfectly conceivable. I find no difficulty in conceiving that, at some former period, this universe was not in existence, and that it made its appearance in six days (or instantaneously, if that is preferred), in consequence of the volition of some preexisting Being. Then, as now, the so-called a priori arguments against Theism and, given a Deity, against the possibility of creative acts, appeared to me to be devoid of reasonable foundation.” Thomas H. Huxley, quoted in *L. Huxley, Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley, Vol. I (1903), p. 241 (1903). 63.

“Our theory of evolution has become . . one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it . . No one can think of ways in which to test it. Ideas wither without basis or based on a few laboratory experiments carried out in extremely simplified systems, have attained currency far beyond their validity. They
have become part of an evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training.” L.C. Birch and *P. Ehrlich, Nature, April 22, 1967.

“What is at stake is not the validity of the Darwinian theory itself, but of the approach to science that it has come to represent. The peculiar form of consensus the theory wields has produced a premature closure of inquiry in several branches of biology, and even if this is to be expected in `normal science,’ such a dogmatic approach does not appear healthy.” R. Brady, “Dogma and Doubt,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 17:79, 96 (1982)

February 25, 2010

A Credible Religious Answer To Evolution!

Mankind has a long history of seeking God, but it now appears that human intellect is in a rush to eliminate Him. Supposed superstition, ignorance and fear is said to give way to intelligence in order that human civilization may be brought fully into being.

And no wonder. The gods of some nations have been carved by men’s hands out of wood, stone, or other existing material. The gods of some religions and individuals have been carved out of human imaginations and faulty human reasoning. Some have worshiped the sun, or other inanimate objects of nature. All these gods are merely the created—most of them formed and fashioned by man, therefore inferior to man.

But He who did the creating—He who brought everything that exists into existence, including all else falsely called God—He who created all matter, force and energy, who created all natural laws and set them in motion, who created life and endowed some of it with intelligence—He is God! He is superior to all else that is called “God.” He, alone, is God! (more…)

August 16, 2009

The Myth Of The Geological Time Scale!

Scientists say evolution is a very slow process. Therefore the evolutionist, in order to prove his theory, creates different “eons, eras, periods, epochs and ages” to allow for what he considers sufficient time for evolution to occur. However, these vast theoretical units of time allowed for in the geological time scale do not represent a succession of life forms in successive eras. The show instead, the relative order in which life died died during two great worldwide destructions – both which are mentioned in the Bible.

So called geological eras

Is This Time Scale Really Proof? - www.daviddarling.info

Is This Time Scale Really Proof? - http://www.daviddarling.info

What geologists label the “Cenozoic Era” is in reality the age of man’s existence on the earth. It is characterized by the abundance of animals and plants essential for human survival. Livestock and other mammals, and fish and fowl, which provide meat for man, are found buried in this strata.

Fruits, vegetables and grains are entirely missing from the pre-Adamic or “pre-Cenozoic” world. All edible food that is essential for man suddenly appears in the era scientists have dubbed “Cenozoic.” Even the atmosphere, the climate, the seasons and the modern topography – including the present limits of the oceans – are characteristic only of the Cenozoic era.

Our world, the so called Cenozoic, was re-fashioned from the shambles left after Lucifer’s rebellion against God. Fossils found in so called Cenozoic rocks are generally due to the rapid burial of life forms at the time of Noah’s flood (Genesis Seven & Eight) or other events since man’s creation 6000 years ago.

These Cenozoic deposits are found above other earlier strata laid down in a terrifying catastrophe that befell the world before man existed. The deposits of that earlier world end with the first “time of great dying.””

Mesozoic and Paleozoic eras

Fossil remains from the pre-Adamic world are found buried in a relative order – with the rocks on the bottom generally containing sea life – because the sea life was first destroyed and buried. Then later, as the terrifying destruction of life enveloped the land, the dinosaurs and other  land life forms were covered by heavy sediments from raging water. These last deposits of the pre-Adamic world, the so called “Mesozoic Era,” are termed “Cretaceous.” Some Cretaceous strata have been mislabeled and, in reality, belong in the Cenozoic, or age of man.

listverse.com

listverse.com

The Mesozoic world – the time before man’s creation – was so characterized by dinosaurs and other reptiles that  that scientists have rightly called it the  “Age of Reptiles.” Giant reptiles – some weighing up to 40 tons – not only roamed the land, but flew in the air, while yet others excelled the fishes in the sea. Gigantic insects filled the air. Giant tree ferns, horsetails, club mosses, cycads and conifers covered the face of the earth, creating vast forests unlike any we know today.

In that world were no true mammals, no fish with true scales, no feathered fowl, no grass, no grains or fruits for man. Man was not then in existence.

The so-called “Paleozoic” rocks – layers containing sea life – therefore do NOT represent a separate time apart from the Mesozoic. Paleozoic rocks merely contain the buried remains of sea life that was first to be destroyed consequent to Lucifer’s rebellion. The characteristic fossils found in Paleozoic rocks are ammonites, trilobites, sea scorpions, sharks and other inedible fishes. Many were giant varieties.

This was an entire world unfit for human habitation and enjoyment. All life was suddenly buried. Most life forms were never re-created when God re-formed the earth and made this world habitable for man (Gen. 1:2-31).

June 23, 2009

How Old Is Mankind – 6000 Years Or 600,000?

mankindRemove from a library shelf any volume on ancient man. Examine its opening chapter. What will you find? Expressions as: “it is thought,” “there appears to be some basis for believing,” “it has been suggested,” “it may be presumed,” “one may safely assume,” and “others are of the opinion” — just to mention a few.

What do all these carefully chosen expressions really signify? Just this: Science has no demonstrable evidence for accepting as fact what has been written in the book. The conclusions are mere speculation!

Never Safe to Assume

Just how old is Man? Is there any AUTHORITY who can tell us? Several modern writers, relying only on geological inferences, place the appearance of man about 25,000 to 35,000 years ago. Others suggest the period is no less than 100,000 years ago. No small number of scholars assume it may be 500,000 years ago. And there are a few who place it several hundred thousand years earlier. Do any of these men really KNOW?

And how could intelligent, able men arrive at such absurdly varying figures for the origin of man and the beginnings of ancient history? They all have access, remember, to the same geological and archaeological sources of information. They all have the same facts — but they don’t have the same answers! Why?

The answer is, they are all interpreting geologic and archaeological evidence in accordance with their private theories. They are only guessing. They have no way of knowing.

One well-known writer phrased it this way: “We know that there is no absolute knowledge, that there are only theories; but we forget this. The better educated we are the harder we believe in axioms” (Lincoln Steffens “Autobiography”, page 816). (more…)

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

May 31, 2009

The Universe: Evolution Or The Work Of God’s Fingers?

antifan-real.deviantart.com

Whenever we read about evolution, it’s usually preceded by the word theory. A theory, according to Webster’s, is described as “speculation, an idea, hypothesis or a scheme.” A theory then is an unproven statement.

Darwin’s theory of evolution teaches that the first life upon the earth came by “spontaneous generation,” or by “electrochemical action,” or some unknown process millions of years ago in the warm ocean slime. Thus it is the theory of evolution that life sprang out of dead matter, or that the living came from the non-living.

Now probability is the mathematics of chance, and therefore probability should have a great deal to do with evolution.
Given a monkey, a typewriter and a stack of paper, by chance alone, words, sentences, even whole books could be written, right? This is a doctrine deemed holy by a not-insignificant number of educated men in the biological and geological sciences today. (more…)

May 13, 2009

Seven Proofs Of The Existence Of God!

Filed under: Evolution,God — melchia @ 3:53 am
Tags: , , , ,

There is a delusion gripping the minds of people today. It holds them in its sway, deceiving them, making them veritable slaves. It is the concept of “no God.”

Sir Julian Huxley, grandson of the famed evolutionist, has stated: “There is no longer either need or room for supernatural beings capable of affecting the course of events in the evolutionary pattern of thought. The earth was not created, it evolved. So did all the animals and plants that inhabit it, including our human selves, mind and soul as well as brain and body.”

Is there “no longer any need for a concept of God”? Is the Bible merely a collection of Hebrew fables, or the dynamic living Word of an intelligent, all-wise Creator Being? Here are seven proofs to counter this claim.

Proof Number One

Is the Bible totally out of harmony with all science? Do modern-day discoveries in the sciences render the Christian helpless to reconcile his belief with the “enlightened age” in which he lives?

The first Positive Proof of the existence of God is so broad, so all-encompassing, so diverse in its many ramifications that it is possible only to barely scratch the surface in this article. However, there can be no clearer way to substantiate this proof than to quote from a typical college textbook which discards the Biblical record. In the foreword material, the authors offer various explanations as to the origin of the earth:

“Our own galaxy, which we remember is but a tiny part of the universe, has probably existed a million, million years.

“But some progress has been made in attempting to explain how and when the sun and its nine planets came into being. The study of the solar system gives us at least a clue to the origin of that part of the universe most important to us — the earth. The explanation commonly accepted today is called the Hypothesis of Dynamic Encounter formulated about 1900 by T. C. Chamberlain and F. R. Moulton of the University of Chicago. In brief it suggests that our solar system had its birth when the sun was approached by another huge star. The latter, through the operation of the law of gravitation, detached from the sun great masses of flaming gas. The orphan masses from the parent sun gradually cooled and crystallized to become the nuclei of planets. These continued to revolve around the sun, held in their orbits by the gravitational pull of the parent body. The evolution of the earth to its present state was very gradual” (Wall-bank and Taylor, Civilization Past and Present, Vol. I, page 31).

Even though it is outdated in certain respects, I quote this statement in full for a very special reason. Let’s go back and carefully ANALYZE what we have just read. Notice carefully the italicized words in the quotation you have just read. We have such words in the opening phrases as “probably, some progress has been made, attempting to explain, at least a clue, explanation commonly accepted, and the “suggestion” of a “hypothesis” — the very word itself meaning “we guess.”

Then, in very careful wording, having begun with a number of “possibles” and “perhapses” the book begins to tell of definite past occurrences which are said to have taken place. But let’s analyze further this very vital first proof of the existence of God.

In the very beginning the writers, even though beginning with many attempts to explain, clues and guesses, admit the existence of our solar system, a “sun,” another “huge star,” the “operation of the law of gravitation,” great “masses of flaming gas,” and admit that these gases “gradually cooled.”

They also mention how these gases “crystallized” and then continued to “revolve around the sun, held in their orbits by the gravitational pull of the parent body.” What a fantastic array! Here is a tremendous, limitless, imagination-defying expanse — an entire universe. Here is a whole solar system, a huge sun, the operation of certain, definite, immutable, unchangeable LAWS. Here is a supposed collision between gigantic, breathtakingly huge astral bodies, resulting in the supposed formation of our present solar system.

Think of it! All of these myriad laws — of heat, light, energy, motion, the rotation of astral bodies, the laws of gravity, and myriad other laws, entirely too numerous to mention — are admitted to exist. Where to begin? Is it an attempt to explain the existence of our present solar system? Decidedly not. Scientists and astronomers tell us that our solar system is only one of many such systems in our great galaxy called the “Milky Way.” However, even our galaxy is only one of myriad galaxies, which form only a part of the vast, limitless expanse of the universe. Our planet, astronomers assure us, is merely a third-rate planet in a second-rate solar system, lost in the expanses of seemingly limitless space.
Do you begin to comprehend? By what law did one star approach another? By what law did heat gradually cool? By what law was there a “gravitational pull”? By what law was there the existence of the “operation of the law of gravitation”?

Yes, there it is. In dissecting and looking carefully into the statements of some of the preposterous hypotheses which have been advanced, you begin to see that in every case the writers have begun with an orderly, law-abiding universe, governed by irrefutable laws. The existence of law, unchangeable, immutable, irrevocable, unseen and yet active, absolutely demands the existence of a great lawgiver.

“There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy …” (James 4:12).  That Lawgiver is God!

Proof Number Two

Before seeing this next amazing, irrefutable proof, it is first necessary to state, in simple terms, the meaning of the word “evolution.” Of course, there are many processes called “evolution.”

The process of development of music from simple to complex is, in a sense, an “evolutionary” process as is true in all technological inventions. This has perhaps led many to assume such a development is also true in organic, living material.

Here is one such stated idea:

“Evolution is the gradual development from the simple, unorganized condition of primal matter to the complex structure of the physical universe; and in like manner, from the beginning of organic life on the habitable planet, a gradual unfolding and branching out into all the various forms of beings which constitute the animal and plant kingdom” (Richard Swann Lull, Organic Evolution, page 6).

Evolution theorizes from the beginning of organic life — already having LIFE with which to begin. It does not now show, nor has it ever shown, nor will it ever be able to show, how life itself first CAME into existence.

The theory of evolution (the word “theory” means “we think”) states simply that all life forms that we know today, including humankind, have gradually evolved from the most simple life forms to the complex, intricate, interdependent species we see about us today, each reproducing according to its own kind.

Evolution postulates that life evolved in a “gradual process,” by “resident forces” into the complexity of life we see about us today. And herein, at the very basic trunk of the tree of all evolutionary thought, lies one of the greatest proofs of God!

Evolutionists, geneticists, biologists, scientists in any field whatsoever have never been able to demonstrate, nor to offer the slightest evidence that the not-living can make itself into the LIVING. It is true that certain laboratory experiments have taken place in which supposed “dead cells” are said to have been “revived” and brought back to life by the means of certain chemical compounds. In other experiments, scientists have diligently tried to produce organic type compounds called amino acids. This, however, is a far cry from “spontaneous generation.”

There is a broad, gaping, yawning chasm of separation between life and death. The great gap between the not-living and the living is so broad, so insurmountable, so unfathomable by man, that evolutionists can only “suppose” and guess, offering vague, ethereal, nebulous “theories” as to how life for the first time “might have” begun accidentally! However, on the other hand, there is an absolute, demonstrable law of science which comprises the second major proof of the existence of a life-giving God. That is the law of biogenesis!

“Bio” means life! “Genesis” means beginning. This law, then, is a law concerning the beginning of life. This law, simply stated, is the absolute law that life comes only from life. That the not-living can never give rise to, give birth to or produce the living.

There is perhaps no law known to science that can be any more firmly and easily demonstrated than the law of biogenesis. The very existence of life demands a Life Giver!

God states dogmatically, “And the Eternal God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Gen. 2:7).

Almighty God — the Life Self-Existent, the One who has life, who is Life, who was before all things — imparted life to the first man and set within man, the animals, and all plants the cyclical character of life which enables them to reproduce according to certain set laws. God is the great Life Giver!

Proof Number Three

Many of these amazing proofs of the existence of an Almighty God “overlap.” That is, each is, to a degree, interrelated with the others. The third major proof of God can be stated quite simply from the quotation you saw under Proof Number One.

You will notice that evolutionists, in trying to substantiate their theory, always BEGIN with an orderly universe and the existence of matter. Notice the so-called Theory of Evolution BEGINS with matter, laws, and “simple” life.

What is matter? Matter occupies space and has weight. It is not always necessarily seen, since certain gases, and even the air which you breathe, are also classified as “matter.”

Until recently, scientists talked of the law of the “conservation of matter.” However, with the discoveries in nuclear physics, and following Madame Curie’s experiments with radium, scientists have now found there is a certain amount of “disintegration” in matter!

This deterioration of uranium is a scientific fact! Uranium (U238) gradually disintegrates through many intermediate states into lead (Pb206). Uranium, as you may well know, is radioactive and gives off energy in the form of radiation.
Gradually, over a period of seemingly limitless years, this radioactive material disintegrates into lead! There is no proof of any new uranium coming into existence today!

Hence science has firmly established that there has been no past eternity of matter! Matter must have at sometime come into existence. It had to have been, at some time, created.

Creation, then, the very existence of things, absolutely demands and requires a Creator. That which is made requires a Maker. That which is produced requires a Producer. Therefore, the third great proof is that the creation requires a great Creator.

Proof Number Four

The One who is quoted in the first person as being God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good” (Gen. 1:24-25).

Scientists have attempted to show the evolutionary pattern by “comparative embryology,” by a study of selective breeding, genetics, and various other aspects of biology.

However, without taking the tremendous amount of space necessary to even faintly scratch the surface of such a broad subject, suffice it to say there is an absolute, irrefutable, immutable, unchangeable law, which absolutely prohibits a jump from one kind to another kind!

There are hundreds of different varieties within a certain species, and while there may be small, tiny dogs, such as the Mexican Chihuahua, and also huge dogs such as the St. Bernard or the Great Dane, they are still dogs! They are not cats, or horses, nor are they even beginning to show a gradual trend toward developing into another species. They are all of the same kind.

Comparative embryology tries to point out that the beginning embryos of fish, polliwogs, and humans look very much alike. This is absolutely true. But while it proves absolutely nothing for the case of evolution, this does offer a STRONGER proof of the existence of God. Scientists are defied to attempt to make the embryo of a fish turn out to be a polliwog, a man, or anything other than a fish of the exact same kind of fish which laid the egg in the first place.

Proof Number Five

Look about you. You live in a complex, intricate and interdependent world. It is a world of great design. You have never seen an ugly sunset. You have never seen an ugly scene in the desert, in the mountains, at sea, or anywhere on the surface of this entire earth, unless it were a scene made ugly by man. All is in harmony. Life, as we know it, is entirely interdependent upon other forms of life. Nothing lives or dies to itself.

The question to the evolutionists is: Which “evolved” first, the corn or the bee? Did the bee evolve slowly for thousands, millions or billions of years independent of the cornstalks, the flowers and the pollens from growing things which are his life source?

Did the flowers, grasses, trees, and grains all evolve slowly and gradually over a period of millions or billions of years independent of the little bee, upon whom they must rely for their very continuation of life?

These are totally insurmountable, and unanswerable questions to the evolutionists! The old question, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” is a question which the evolutionist feels worthy only of disdain. Why? Simply because he cannot answer it.

It is better, from his point of view, to merely scoff, make fun of and attempt to dismiss such a question when he cannot answer it.

This total interdependency of all life forms — the tremendous design within this universe shows a common Beginner, one main Architect, one great Designer with an overall framework of a plan of creation into which all life forms fit.
Nothing lives or dies to itself. Each living thing, whether plant or animal, when it dies, supplies further life for other living things. Observe a forest. A tree grows, finally dies and falls, only to become part of the fallow forest floor, supplying life-giving elements for the young trees which it had sown in its lifetime.

This great universe, and the complex intricate earth on which you live and draw breath, is a world of great design. It is a world of such complex and intricate design as to take the very breath in beginning to investigate even the minutest part.

The cleavage properties of minerals, the wings of a bird or a fly, the beauty of a sunset, the facets of a quartz crystal, and above all, the marvelous, tremendous masterpiece of all design, the human body, all point out that for such intricate design, there had to be an eternal Designer. Design in the universe proves the existence of a Designer!
[Photo Caption – Left: Even when magnified 100 times, the titanium alloy (top) still follows a definite pattern of construction. Slightly oxidized iron crystals (below) have been enlarged 10,000 times, revealing even more intricacy. Right: From the tiniest metallic crystals to the most gorgeous sunset, everything is in perfectly designed harmony.]

Proof Number Six

This sixth proof of the existence of an Almighty God is perhaps the most astounding of all. It is fulfilled prophecy!
About one full third of your Bible is prophecy; and while most of that one third pertains to our present day, there are many, many prophecies which have already been fulfilled, and which are presently BEING fulfilled.

God sent His prophets hundreds of years ago to such major cities as Babylon, Ekron, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Tyre and Sidon. These prophets — simple human beings who had been commissioned with a message — foretold the decay, fall and particular type of fate which was to befall each of these ancient cities.

And without fail, in every single instance, exactly at the time prescribed, all these things HAPPENED! The very fact that God is able to foretell the future, and bring it to pass, is a great proof of His existence!

Proof Number Seven

This last proof is perhaps the greatest proof of all to true Christians. It is the proof of answered prayer. However, since the skeptics, atheists and doubters have never prayed, and hence have never had prayers answered, they continue to DOUBT.

Now take George Mueller’s example.

George Mueller is dead now, but he was a great man of FAITH. He founded five great orphanages and other charitable institutions in Bristol, England. He started out, as FAITH always does, with a very small work, without any financial backing, and absolutely no means of support, except to get down on his knees and send up a believing prayer to God.
For nearly seventy years George Mueller continued that great work, and it grew into a tremendous institution until it housed thousands. Every dime for feeding, clothing, sheltering, and schooling those thousands of orphans came in only one way — as a result of believing prayer.

Altogether he received more than a million four hundred thousand pounds — that was about seven million dollars — sent to him in answer to his prayers!

Real answered prayer is NOT the mere working out of events as a result of “concentration.” Many people seem to assume answered prayer is merely an accomplishment as a result of “positive thinking” or a psychological adjustment.
This is a gross error!

Real answered prayer is a direct, miraculous supernatural intervention from Almighty God! It is the result of obedience to God’s laws, asking according to His will, and then believing in faith until the answer comes.

These seven, irrefutable unchallengeable PROOFS of the existence of Almighty God represent only the minutest beginning of the subject. They are, nevertheless, proofs. It’s about time people quit assuming — it’s about time they began to really PROVE all things.

It’s about time YOU said with Job, “For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth” (Job 19:25).

Source: Tomorrow’s World, October 1971

April 5, 2009

Scientism: Materialism On Steroids!

Scientism is the belief that the sciences have no boundaries and will, in the end, be able to explain everything in the universe. It is an ideology unto itself.

The Encyclopedia of Science, Technology and Ethics defines scientism as “an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of natural science to be applied to all areas of investigation.”

Is hard science really the only way of understanding reality? If something can’t be “proved” through the scientific method, through observable and measurable evidence, is it then irrelevant? In general, scientism leaves little or no place for the imagination and rather than further human understanding, it limits it.

For example, the education system teaches children not to think, but to accept taught dogma. Any student that uses logic and solid “contrary” evidence to question the Theory of Evolution is ridiculed and insulted into quiet submission. This is a type of brainwashing, or conforming to the system. Individual thoughts or opinions are not allowed. This “team player” attitude, forcefully thrust upon students with massive peer pressure, is little else than a soft pedalled version of brainwashing techniques used by communist countries.

Society today is replete with children unable to think logically, scientifically and accurately. They are taught to doubt elements of purpose around them, and accept unscientific theories like evolution, or the result of life by pure chance. All of this defaults to atheism. It assumes incorrectly that what we believe, and the way we live, is always based on provable “facts,” which never include – gasp – faith.

Yet science itself has always had a speculative component, as we see with theories about quantum physics and the Big Bang and evolution. Arguing that any other idea counter to evolution is “nonsense” reflects blindness to the real insights offered by God through nature.  Agreed, God cannot be observed or measured by scientific instruments or, for that matter, scientifically proven to even exist. But the reality is that the workings of God can, indeed, be observed when measured against the Light of the Word of God.

Getting back to evolution, few today would argue that it is an incomplete theory. Those who will must explain how the concept of consciousness has engendered in the form of its highest evolutionary accomplishment – mankind. At what point in the evolutionary tree did it start? And what prompted the process? It’s no good to merely talk about it – prove it, as creationists are consistently told.  If you can’t prove when man became self aware and started looking back and observing himself, then all lines of reasoning become pantheistic, which is a religious belief system of its own when boiled down to the lowest common denominator. It is, as the atheist Richard Dawkins describes, “materialism on steroids.” Here is a great link to disproving the theory of evolution through its many problems, errors and lies.

“So, armed with only the observations of current and historical geologic processes and other empirical data, and assuming natural history has been a continuum across billions of years, the present secular paradigms of geological and evolutionary theory are about the best belief system that the educated mind of carnal mankind could be expected to conceive and accept from the available physical evidence. Without the input of Biblical Authority, current theories are, in reality, incomplete. And many questions and mysteries remain unresolved, especially in relation to the origins of mankind.”  Scienceblog.com

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.