Tag: Creation

FAITH WITHOUT GOD!

The “unknowns” of evolution are too numerous to list, yet the whole package is pushed upon us as though the concept is beyond question. True science deals with observable, testable certainties: evolution cloaks itself in those certainties in order to appear respectable and equally true…

See the source image

Evolutionism takes its assertions and sells them to us as proven facts. It hypocritically presents itself as our parent, our originator, our creator, our guide and master. It’s a charlatan, masquerading as our Source, our sustainer and our future.

If we boil down the argument of secular evolutionists against the existence of God, we get something like this:

“We can’t see or detect any supreme being, so obviously he doesn’t exist, and we must proceed with this assumption”.

This is in fact part of the operating mode within secular science: God must be excluded from consideration right from the start, because he’s nowhere to be seen, and he won’t jump to attention when we pull his chain. That’s an interesting position, because the very same people who have adopted this attitude will insist that certain things they cannot see or test or experience “must be” there. Whether or not they are there, the point is that faith is okay for the evolutionist, so long as God is not involved.

Image result for images hypocrite

For example, the Oort cloud, a proposed cloud of ice and dust far outside the solar system, explains away the problem of comets not all having fizzled away millions of years ago. It hasn’t been seen. You can find plenty of pictures of the Oort cloud, but the problem is that they are all artist’s impressions. “Dark Matter”, also totally unseen and undetectable, is used to explain why galaxies, moving at 6000 kilometres a second, haven’t dispersed, but remain in beautiful clusters throughout the universe. “Dark Energy”, also unseen and a huge mystery to physicists, is invoked to explain why the expansion of the universe is not slowing as it should be according to Big Bang theory, but is instead speeding up.

The UK’s Astronomer Royal, Professor Sir Martin Reece, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of Cambridge, while discussing dark energy, stated this:

“We don’t know why the universe banged, or what banged” (1)

Not only do the greatest scientists and evolutionists in truth not know why or how the universe began, since they are totally unable to re-enact the event (though of course they have elaborate theories) but they also have to conclude that very shortly after that great “singularity” occurred, certain things must have happened which they also know nothing of. The laws of nature must have “changed” for some inexplicable reason, because quantum theory and classical physics do not agree. But they don’t know what changed or how.

Big Bang ClipArt

I’ve written before, in a post titled “The Must-Haves of Evolution” about some of these speculations, which get passed onto us and our children as proven, indisputable fact. Such “empirical” evidence came into play in a discussion I heard on the subject of photosynthesis, without which we could not be here. It was an intellectual presentation, the panel consisting of highly qualified biologists and educators. Photosynthesis, declared the all-knowing panel, began when single-celled bacteria were “captured” by large inorganic molecules, and conscripted as energy-producing slaves for their new masters. When asked by the program host if they could give an idea of “when” said evolution from bacteria into the necessary chloroplast organelles happened, “within, say, seven hundred million years or so”, one of the expert answers was this:

“…there are no fossils of this kind of thing-to date-in rocks, but it must have happened…” (2)

Chloroplasts are here, and all the vegetation we need, so they “must have” evolved. Isn’t that flawed logic? Doesn’t a conclusion have to be an arrangement of its propositions? Isn’t something missing?

Image result for images chloroplast

To summarize, there’s no empirical evidence that chloroplasts evolved. It happened only once in earth’s history, say the experts, and it has never been observed. There is no fossil evidence of the alleged two-billion years past transition from single-celled bacteria into chloroplasts. Evolutionists are sure, however, that it “must have happened”.

That “must have” phrase, along with many similar euphemisms, is invoked to bridge the enormous gaps between theory/hypothesis and evidence. There is no evidence to be seen, but it “must have” happened. Conversely, however, God cannot be seen, so he “must not” be there at all. A text book on the evolution of life from non life similarly bridges an enormous gap in one deft leap by invoking the “must have” imperative, demonstrating (on paper) how to easily solve or cover over a giant mystery by adding non-testable elements to the non-observable narrative:

Once the necessary building blocks were available, how did a living system arise and evolve? Before the appearance of life, simple molecular systems must have existed that subsequently evolved into the complex chemical systems that are characteristic of organism” (“Biochemistry. 5th Edition). (3)

In a movie called “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, released in 2008, Director Ben Stein interviewed none other than Richard Dawkins. Stein asked Professor Dawkins how life began from non-life. Dawkins answered:

Nobody knows how it started…we know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life”.

Stein: “What was that?”

Prof. Dawkins: “It was the… origin of the first self-replicating molecule.”

Notice that Dawkins had just made a gargantuan leap from nothing but chemical soup to the first self-replicating molecule, actually skipping the profound degree of information needed to answer the question, were it even possible.

Image result for images dawkins

The conversation continued…

Stein: “Right. And how did that happen?”

Prof. Dawkins: “I’ve told you, we don’t know”

Stein: “So you have no idea how it started?”

Dawkins: “No, no, nor has anybody.”

So in summary, the great Professor assures us that while they “don’t know” how life evolved from non-life, and that they haven’t seen it happen, they’re pretty sure that it “must have” happened.

Phoenix_landing2

The Professor went on to suggest that life may possibly have come from somewhere else in the universe. Here is another bridge which attempts to cross the enormous chasm between non-life and life. Cambridge News discusses one scientist’s book on the theory:

Extra-terrestrials resembling humans must have evolved on other planets, according to a new book by a Cambridge professor“.

But wait a minute…no-one has any evidence that this happened either! Here is another empty chasm: more snake oil.

Go to the best natural history museum you can find (as I have) and ask to see a series of transitional fossils clearly showing one creature evolving into another: there will be none-just a few bones and some artists impressions. Think carefully about what you are being presented with.

1 IN OUR TIME: “Dark Energy”, with Melvyn Bragg.

2 IN OUR TIME: “Photosynthesis”, with Melvyn Bragg

3 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22508/

4 http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/intelligent-aliens-evolved-planets-says-cambridge/story-26814631-detail/story.html#IHazrJCcZi0Il174.99

 

 

GETTING SERIOUS ABOUT GOD

Thank you to my loyal readers who keep coming back and wondering where I’ve been: I’m planning on being back regularly from now on…

Two things have been on my mind lately above others. One is our current political and social climate, and the other is the widespread belittlement of God even among professing believers. These two things are inextricably linked. The loss of reverence for our Creator in society as a whole but also in the Church, was bound to result in lawlessness and degradation. The worst aspect to this is that many professing Christians have succumbed to it-often without realizing it themselves. Our testimony and witness to the world is compromised by our own lack of belief, dedication, and fear of God.

The half-hearted church was foreseen by our God, and we can know how He feels about it:

“So, because you are luke-warm-neither hot nor cold- I am about to spit you out of my mouth…” (Revelation 3:16).

The corrupt, compromising church was also foreseen by Him who knows the end from the beginning, so that He warned us to separate ourselves from the evils of fallen man:

“Come out of her my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues…” (Revelation 18:4).

Those who reject the deity of Jesus, who reject the fact that our God created all things, who reject the supremacy of Scripture, and who put their own words and the words of their favourite teachers above Scripture are all included in references to hypocrites and false teachers contained in the New Testament especially, but also in the Old. And once you cast off from the absoluteness of the truth of Scripture and invent your own, you are then metaphorically on a boat in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, without navigation, radio contact, charts, or even the benefit of experience.

thumbnailCAAOCEQD

Ironically, the One who will spit the luke-warm church out of His mouth identifies himself as “…the ruler of God’s creation” (Revelation 3:14).

Just as bad as the rejection of the Bible as our ultimate guide, is the determination to use it to support false teachings and faulty or corrupted interpretation. This attitude is rampant in the Christian world now: “Let’s follow what so-and-so says and find one or two verses which appear to back him up”. In contrast, Scripture tells us:

“Cursed is the one who trusts in man…” (Jeremiah 17:5).

The Western World is now in moral free-fall, and there’s no way of stopping or slowing that fall if all we have to offer is a few jangling guitars and singers shaking their hair, a weak impersonation for spiritual gifts, an effort to bow to political correctness, and politicians who make promises in order to promote themselves. (Having said that, I say “Trump 2020!” The alternative is the destruction of America and so the West).

More than that, we have an insular Church which has largely rejected what God has to say. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” says the word of God, and, “In six days God created the heavens and the earth”. A large percentage of ministers prefer to follow what unbelievers and atheists say-that in the beginning, billions of years ago, something happened, our ancestors crawled out of slime and swung in trees, and later on God, or a few good teachers, came along and got involved, trying to get us all to be nice to each other. This is belittling God and calling Him a liar. This is putting the word of fallen, God-rejecting mankind above the Word of the Immortal, Almighty, Omni-present, omniscient Creator and sustainer of all things. This is nothing short of foolishness!

It not only calls God a liar, it calls Him weak and  incapable and irrelevant. “We know it’s all science now” is one pathetic view: pathetic because the real logic is that anyone who created all things would have to be The Master and Creator of science! Did an infinite being create all things by His infinite miraculous power, or did the universe create? That’s your choice! There’s no middle ground without putting God down beneath the feet of man.

Any true science today is only observing the handiwork of God. He is the Creator of science…not someone who just came along so that he could make us fall over backwards, or offer us new ways of being nice to each other. God is our Creator and He will be our Judge! He has the power to save us or to throw us into hell!

Its time for those of us who are serious about our faith to fall on our knees and worship the incredible being who made us, and who holds our souls in His hands.

 

INFINITE SCIENCE: INFINITE GOD

MAY 2012 to JULY 2013 158

A couple of hundred years ago the atom was thought to be like a tiny ping-pong ball. In 1911 Rutherford’s experiments led to the realization that the atom is made of even smaller component parts. Now we know that those component parts are so small, particularly the electrons, that each atom is almost entirely space alone: it is held together only by electrical forces. If not for these forces, we would fall through our chair (which couldn’t exist anyway) and into the core of the earth (which also could not exist).

Over the past fifty years scientists found that atomic particles are in turn made of even smaller particles named “quarks”, and in modern “String” theory, it is believed that those particles are not really little lumps of solid matter-they consist of loops of energy which pose as different particles depending on how they are vibrating. However, strings haven’t yet been observed, because, it is believed, they are up to a billion billion times smaller than the atom itself. So if strings really are the basic building blocks of matter, the structure of the atom is even more empty than was thought before strings came along. The study of quantum physics-the behavior of the tiniest particles up to molecule size- has produced such seemingly illogical and fantastical results, dumbfounding the most brilliant scientists, that the nature of reality, even in the twenty-first century, presents numerous profound mysteries to boggle the mind.

One human body consists of roughly forty to a hundred trillion cells. In numbers, that’s 100,000,000,000,000. Each one of those cells, consisting of one hundred trillion atoms,  is staggeringly complex, containing and employing for its survival and maintenance more machines than all of the factories of the industrial world combined. And of course DNA is almost beyond our imagining, being the blue-print for making me and you, and present in every single cell. Yes indeed, we are fearfully and wonderfully made.

I’ve documented before, from the mouths of top secular scientists and professors, that there is no evidence we can observe of how life arose from non-life by evolution. I’ve shared that there is no fossil evidence confirming the belief that the biological cell which facilitates photosynthesis-and so plant life-evolved from the proposed marriage of a bacteria and inorganic molecule. Intelligent Design proponents are brilliantly demonstrating that information can only come from information-not randomness. The vast volume of information required to make the simplest so-called “simple” cell easily discounts the notion that life came from non-life by chance.

I’ve heard from the mouths of secular scientists that they are mystified as to why so many of the constants of nature are the way they are-for example, the strength of electromagnetic force, and the mass of the electron in relation to protons and neutrons. If any one of dozens of these constants were just a little bit different, they say, stars could not exist, planets could not exist, and we could not exist.

Move the moon away from the earth just a little, and our oceans would die and so would we. Move it a little closer, and the tides would overflow the continents. Take it away and there would be no tides to preserve life on earth. Remove the electro-magnetic field around the earth and all our water would be blasted away by the fierce solar wind.

I have personally seen nothing evolve-have you? In answer to this question the uninformed go to the observance of supposed bacterial evolution, not considering that what they are left with is bacteria: just what they started with. It simply adapted to its environment. The potential for such adaptation was built into life, so that the potential variety of each kind of life is enormous. But bacteria remains bacteria, horses remain horses, pigs remain pigs and roses remain roses. That’s the way it’s meant to be.

There are so many impossible, incredible facts about the make-up of life and the universe that were scientists to have another thousand years of freedom to study it, we probably could not come to the bottom of it all.

So I for one am not being swayed by any atheist or agnostic away from my faith in an amazing Creator. Science and God are not antonyms: they are synonymous. God is The Scientist and Mathematician. But more than that, I see from my own limited understanding of the universe around me that God must indeed be infinite. His power is limitless, as is His intelligence, His beauty, His glory, His character, and His imagination. He has to be eternal. He has to transcend all of the physical universe and the unseen world also. He has to be greater than the universe itself. He must possess information even beyond what we observe in nature, along with the ability to process it.

If, or since, God is so great, He is also able to pass to us a simple but profound message, though we already have one written within nature itself, and within our own being. That message is called the Bible, and the first verse of the Bible says this:

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”.

Glory to God for ever and ever!

 

ROCK ‘N SOUL

It’s amazing how many things evolutionists and creationists agree on, without realizing it. A well-known creationist* when debating evolutionists, loves to point out that they believe humans came from a rock. The Bible says something similar…

When the evolutionists protest that they believe no such thing, he explains. According to the evolutionary history of the universe, space, time and matter came from nothing, or virtually nothing, when it expanded into all the universe we see today. A part of that matter, a large lump of rock, became the earth. Rain appeared on it magically, and created a soup in which life with all its incredible intricacies popped into existence (none of this was ever observed). That life developed itself over enormous amounts of time, until, well, here we all are communicating, pro-creating, and writing blog-posts. Voila: life from a rock.

Not only does this very wry creationist have a point, but actually, so do the evolutionists, because Scripture says something similar. Early in the book of Genesis we read that God created man out of the dust of the ground:

“Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Genesis 2:7).

Here is one example of agreement between evolutionists and creationists: humans originate from the earth itself. The most obvious difference is that we believers acknowledge that intelligence is required to make information: DNA and life, even in the simplest of cells, is mind-bogglingly rich in information.

Another difference between the two accounts of man’s origins is that according to Scripture, we (mankind) have a spirit within us, also created by God. Believers (and everyone else) get an incalculably valuable bonus which most evolutionists don’t seem to want: an immaterial, immortal soul. We are more than rock plus information.

However, we believers, along with our unbelieving brothers and sisters-in-flesh-if-not-in-spirit, sometimes get inflated ideas of ourselves and of our value. We think that our Creator owes us all kinds of goodies and service. We think we can act our way and not His way without consequences. We’re like a painting which attempts to assert rights and privilege over the artist and the owner. We think that we are the important ones and the artist is irrelevant.  With this principle in mind, John the Baptist drew the attention of those he was preaching to where they had come from-that is, the ground:

“And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Matthew 3:9).

God made us from the dirt of the ground, adding information and life. So then let’s not insult our Creator by compromising with the evolutionists about our origins: a painting does not paint itself, and information does not come from nothing or from chaos. Let’s instead give God the honor and reverence He deserves, for creating us with a certain amount of dignity, with a spirit, with a little free-will and intelligence, and the promise of much more even than that:

“Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12).

Thanks for reading.

*Kent Hovind

 

 

SEEING GOD

Millions of people make the gigantic mistake of expecting God to peep through the clouds, or to audibly speak the winning lotto numbers, before they’ll believe he’s there. God isn’t undetectable. He isn’t “the God of the gaps” as one famous evolutionist insists we evangelicals believe. He isn’t only in the things we can’t explain.

20190628_121549[1]

In fact, God is so there that it’s really impossible not to see his handiwork, unless you are that determined not to see it. What evolutionists observe while intentionally ignoring the fact, is God’s workmanship. Go and look outside, or look in the mirror: there’s all the evidence you’ll ever need that there’s an amazing, mind-bogglingly intelligent Creator, full of beauty, love, power and order. What we can see, hear and touch, and the fact that we can see it, is proof enough:

“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).