About Us

Name: ValiantForTruth
Location: Burleson, TX
Biography
Name: YoungerElder
Location: Keene, TX
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Implications of the Scientific Laws of Information

 
In the past there were so-called perpetual motion experts. These were inventors and tinkerers who wanted to build a machine that would run continuously without the supply of energy. The discovery of the law of conservation of energy brought all efforts to solve this challenge to a halt because a perpetuum mobile is an impossible machine. Such a machine will never be built, as the laws of nature make it impossible.

Evolution could only occur if the possibility existed that information could arise by itself out of matter. Those who believe that evolution is a plausible concept believe in a “perpetuum mobile of information”. If there were laws of nature that preclude a perpetuum mobile of this kind, the theory of evolution would be disproved. Such laws of nature actually exist.

The concept of this theory of information is explained in the first article [http://creation.com/laws-of-information-1] which enumerated four scientific laws of information arising from observations in the real world. None of them has been falsified by way of an observable process or experiment. In this article, conclusions will be drawn from the laws of information that have the same effect on macro-evolution as the law of conservation of energy had on perpetual motion machines.
 

Scientific Laws of Information (SLI): [ Werner Gitt; http://creation.com/laws-of-information-2 ]

SLI-1: A material entity cannot generate a non-material entity.
SLI-2: Universal information is a non-material fundamental entity.
SLI-3: Universal information cannot be created by statistical processes.
SLI-4: Universal information can only be produced by an intelligent sender.

4a: Every code is based upon a mutual agreement between sender and receiver.
4b: There is no new universal information without an intelligent sender.
4c: Every information transmission chain can be traced back to an intelligent sender.
4d: Attributing meaning to a set of symbols is an intellectual process requiring intelligence.
 
1. That God exists is refutation of atheism
 
Because it can be established that all forms of life contain a code (DNA, RNA), as well as all of the other levels of information, we are within the domain of our definition of information. We can therefore conclude by applying SLI-4 that: There must be an intelligent sender!

Because there has never been a process in the material world, demonstrable through observation or experiment, in which information has arisen without prior intelligence, then that also must be valid for all the information present in living things. Furthermore, what we do observe about information—namely that it intrinsically depends upon an original act of intelligence to construct it, excludes the possibility of information coming from non-intelligence. An intelligent author wrote the DNA programs for self-replicating life forms.
 
The spiritual realm and the question of origins are inaccessible to natural science; science cannot identify the message sender. But to argue that the sender cannot exist because the methods of human science cannot perceive him, both misapplies science and is untenable according to the laws of information. The requirement that there must be a personal sender exercising his own free will cannot be relinquished. This Sender, the Creator, has revealed Himself in the Scriptures in the person and work of Jesus Christ so that we do have information about Him. ‘Christ was in the world and the world was made through Him’ [John 1:10].
 
           The origin of life.
 
 
If one considers living things as unknown systems that can be analysed with the help of natural laws, then one finds all five levels of the definition of information: statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apobetics. In accordance with the natural laws of information, the origin of any information requires a sender equipped with intelligence and will. The fact that the sender in this case is not observable is not in contradiction to these laws. In a huge library with thousands of volumes, the authors are also not visible; but no one would maintain that there was no author for all this information. If one penetrates beyond the boundaries set by the limits of natural science by consulting the Bible, the Sender reveals Himself as the Almighty Creator. [Gitt]
 
The Bible also reveals truth about man and about the world that we could not otherwise know. Man is an image bearer of God and given dominion over the earth, but because of his sin, man is captive to his depravity and the world is under a curse. Depravity helps us to understand why men suppress the knowledge of God revealed in what exists. Depravity leads otherwise intelligent men to mock the self-revealed God of creation. Rather than seeing His eternal power revealed in what exists, they pose the question: Who made God? As if this justifies their unbelief, rather than testify to their depravity. [VfT]
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (32) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

American Public Education: Operating according to Purpose

 
“We, the American public, hold it as an article of faith that those responsible for devising and implementing public policy have our best interests at heart.” –Joseph Phillips

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/JosephCPhillips/2010/11/22/the_failing_promise_of_public_education

Mr. Phillips begins his article with this statement of faith because it is incredible to believe otherwise as it is also incredible to believe an American President is anti-America as founded. But isn’t it time to begin to acknowledge the forces behind the dismantling of America as we know it. There is no conspiracy here; these people have published their intent and their methods in the open. See Samuel Blumenfeld on public education at this link: http://www.newswithviews.com/Blumenfeld/Samuel8.htm

Consider that the public education system is doing what it is intended to do under the control of the NEA. Their far left agenda is to remove the students from their heritage of liberty and American exceptionalism rooted in Biblical Christianity. The system no longer respects the liberty of conscience of these young image bearers; the NEA has become tyrannical in its enforcement of the dogma necessary to indoctrinate the students entrusted to them into modern, anti-American liberalism. The products of these schools are unable to think independently and critically unless they are mentored by a rescuer outside the system.

Some might call this criminal because the system is funded by the public treasury with no alternative for those who would prefer to leave the system but are unable to purchase private education or afford to home school. Those outside the system are punished because there is no tax break for families that fund the educational expenses of their own children. In fact, the current tax code explicitly denies these expenses for home schoolers.

Those who like to blame the parents for public school failure forget that the parents are products of the system. In engaging in this defense, the administrators admit that their system is a failure, but actually the system is working as designed. It is producing a majority of young adults who are held captive to the atheistic world view. When children walk in the counsel of the wicked, it is to be expected that they will end up in the seat of scoffers. They have not known the paths of righteousness nor has grace come near to them.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Critiquing the Critics: Exposing the Criticisms of Werner Gitt

 
There are no lack of critics for Werner Gitt and his information theory. It is evident that Gitt has the attention of the darwinite community by the amount of response he has garnered against his work. A general observation is that the criticisms are less than substantive. They completely ignore Gitt’s argument about the non-material nature of information that precludes its having a material origin. They are not interested in addressing information theory past the basic statistical level introduced by Shannon in 1948. Gitt has challenged them with the scientific method by exposing what everyone knows, but will not admit: information in biological systems implies a super intelligent designer.

The conclusion of Gitt’s work is what bothers the darwinites…

“All these four laws of nature about information have arisen from observations in the real world. None of them has been falsified by way of an observable process or experiment.” [He is referring to the four levels of information added to Shannon’s basic level: syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apobetics.]

“The grand theory of atheistic evolution must attribute the origin of all information ultimately to the interaction of matter and energy, without reference to an intelligent or conscious source. A central claim of atheistic evolution must therefore be that the macro-evolutionary processes that generate biological information are fundamentally different from all other known information-generating processes. However, the natural laws described here apply equally in animate and inanimate systems and demonstrate this claim to be both false and absurd.”

Some will admit that ‘there is no law of physics able to create information from nothing’ [Paul Davies]. What information scientist Werner Gitt has demonstrated is that the laws of nature pertaining to information show that, in all known cases, information requires an intelligent message sender, a conclusion rejected by Davies on purely philosophical [religious] grounds.

But in fact, this is exactly what the SETI project is all about—the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence involves trying to detect a high-information radio signal, which the darwinites would regard as proof of an intelligent message sender, even if we had no idea of the nature of the sender.

One critic who was adamant about accusing Gitt of circular reasoning included this classic statement in his defense of Darwin…

"This is demonstrated to be incorrect by the Ev program."

The context was the assertion that no information chain can exist without a mental origin, based on Gitt’s actual statement that ‘every information transmission chain can be traced back to an intelligent sender.’

The Ev program is a computer simulation showing how genetic systems gain information by evolutionary processes. Do you think the simulation might contain some algorithm that assumes evolution? Now this is from a man quick to accuse others of circular-[non]reason. This is what we mean by the debased mind suppressing the truth. A man made simulation based on the best guess of how evolution might work is used to refute observational data that is contrary to evolution. That is as much as I could take of the ‘critics’ and the darwinite peer reviewers.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What more does Obama need do to reveal himself?

 
What does it say of a man who believes that the problem with the Constitution is that it restricts the power of the federal government? Does this not go to the fundamentals of what it means to be an American? How can an American be opposed to the founding principles of America? How does a man with this belief take the oath of office and swear before God that he will uphold the Constitution?

Now that we have seen Obama and his ilk in Congress trample under foot the will of the people in the legislative process we can know for sure that their disdain for the founding principles is real. How much more does it take to recognize it? The questions are indeed: Who are these people? Why do they oppose America as founded? Who keeps them in office? They are wed to their ideology, and their ideology is anti-America because they think they know better than ‘we the people’. That’s all we need to know about them.

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Neo-science and the Suppression of the Knowledge of God

 
The grand theory of [anti]theistic evolution posits that matter and energy alone have given rise to all things, including biological systems. To hold true, this theory must attribute the existence of all information ultimately to the interaction of matter and energy without reference to an intelligent [and] conscious source. All biological systems depend upon information storage, transfer and interpretation for their operation. Thus the primary phenomenon that the theory of evolution must account for is the origin of biological information. In these articles it is argued that fundamental laws of information can be deduced from observations of the nature of information. These fundamental laws exclude the possibility that information, including biological information, can arise purely from matter and energy without reference to an intelligent agent. As such, these laws show that the grand theory of evolution cannot in principle account for the most fundamental biological phenomenon. In addition, these laws give positive ground for attributing the origin of biological information to the conscious, willful action of a creator [Werner Gitt].
 

What is information?

The American mathematician Norbert Wiener made the oft-cited statement: “Information is information, neither matter nor energy.” With this he acknowledged a very significant thing: information is not a material entity. Let’s clarify this important property of information with an example. Imagine a sandy stretch of beach. With my finger I write a number of sentences in the sand. The content of the information can be understood. Now I erase the information by smoothing out the sand. Then I write other sentence in the sand. In doing so I am using the same matter as before to display this information. Despite this erasing and rewriting, displaying and destroying varying amounts of information, the mass of the sand did not alter at any time. The information itself is thus without mass. Information is not a property of matter!

We know what information is not; so the question remains: what is information?

Because information is a non-material entity, its origin is likewise not explicable by material processes.


What causes information to come into existence at all; what is the initiating factor? What causes us to write a letter, a postcard, a note of congratulations, a diary entry or a file note? The most important prerequisite for the construction of information is our own will. Information always depends upon the will of a sender who issues the information. Information is not constant; it can be deliberately increased and can be distorted or destroyed.

In summary: Information arises only through the will of a sender, having intention and purpose. 
 
 
A Definition of Universal Information
 
To fully characterize the concept of information, five aspects must be considered: statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apobetics. Information is always present when these five hierarchical levels are observed in a system. Information is formulated, transmitted and stored as a language. From a stipulated alphabet, the individual symbols are assembled into words (code). From these words (each word having been assigned a meaning), sentences are formed according to the firmly defined rules of grammar (syntax). These sentences are the bearers of semantic information. Furthermore, the action intended/carried out (pragmatics) and the desired/achieved goal (apobetics) belong of necessity to the concept of information. All our observations confirm that each of the five levels is always pertinent for the sender as well as the receiver.

   Figure 1. The five levels of information. To fully characterise the concept of information, five aspects must be considered—statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and apobetics. Information is represented (that is, formulated, transmitted, stored) as a language. From a stipulated alphabet, the individual symbols are assembled into words (code). From these words (each word having been assigned a meaning), sentences are formed according to the firmly defined rules of grammar (syntax). These sentences are the bearers of semantic information. Furthermore, the action intended/carried out (pragmatics) and the desired/achieved goal (apobetics) belong of necessity to the concept of information. All our observations confirm that each of the five levels is always pertinent for the sender as well as the receiver.                     
                      The five levels of information

1. Statistics. In considering a book, a computer program or the genome of a human being we can ask the following questions: How many letters, numbers and words does the entire text consist of? How many individual letters of the alphabet (a, b, c … z for the English alphabet, or G, C, A and T for the DNA alphabet) are utilized? What is the frequency of occurrence of certain letters and words? To answer such questions it is irrelevant whether the text contains anything meaningful, is pure nonsense, or just randomly ordered sequences of symbols or words. Such investigations do not concern themselves with the content; they involve purely statistical aspects. All of this belongs to the first and thus bottom level of information: the level of statistics. The statistics level can be seen as the bridge between the material and the non-material world. (This is the level on which Shannon developed his well-known mathematical concept of information.)

2. Syntax. If we look at a text in any particular language, we see that only certain combinations of letters form permissible words of that particular language. This is determined by a pre-existing, willful, convention. All other conceivable combinations do not belong to the vocabulary of that language. Syntax encompasses all of the structural characteristics of the way information is represented. This second level involves only the symbol system itself (the code) and the rules by which symbols and chains of symbols are combined (grammar, vocabulary). This is independent of any particular interpretation of the code.

3. Semantics. Sequences of symbols and syntactic rules form the necessary pre-conditions for the representation of information. But the critical issue concerning information transmission is not the particular code chosen, nor the size, number or form of the letters, nor even the method of transmission. It is, rather, the semantics: the message it contains, the proposition, the sense, the meaning.

Information itself is never the actual object or act, neither is it a relationship (event or idea), but encoded symbols merely represent that which is discussed. Symbols of extremely different nature play a substitutionary role with regard to the reality or a system of thought. Information is always an abstract representation of something quite different. For example, the symbols in today’s newspaper represent an event that happened yesterday; this event is not contemporaneous; moreover, it might have happened in another country and is not at all present where and when the information is transmitted. The genetic words in a DNA molecule represent the specific amino acids that will be used at a later stage for synthesis of protein molecules. By way of example, the symbols below represent what happened on Creation Day 1.

Figure 2. The first five verses of Genesis 1 written in a special code.
         Genesis 1:1-5 written in a special code.

4. Pragmatics. Information invites action. In this context it is irrelevant whether the receiver of information acts in the manner desired by the sender of the information, or reacts in the opposite way, or doesn’t do anything at all. Every transmission of information is nevertheless associated with the expectation, from the side of the sender, of generating a particular result or effect on the receiver. Even the shortest advertising slogan for a washing powder is intended to result in the receiver carrying out the action of purchasing this particular brand in preference to others. We have thus reached a completely new level at which information operates, which we call pragmatics. The sender is also involved in action to further his desired outcome (more sales/profit), designing the best message (semantics) and transmitting it as widely as possible in newspapers, TV, etc.

5. Apobetics. We have already recognized that for any given information the sender is pursuing a goal. We have now reached the last and highest level at which information operates: namely, apobetics (the aspect of information concerned with the goal, the result itself). In linguistic analogy the term “apobetics” is from the Greek apobeinon, meaning result, consequence. The outcome on the receiver’s side is predicated upon the goal demanded/desired by the sender—that is, the plan or conception. The apobetics aspect of information is the most important of the five levels because it concerns the question of the outcome intended by the sender.

Using the last four of the five levels, an unambiguous definition of information is given: an encoded, symbolically represented message conveying expected action and intended purpose. We term any entity meeting the requirements of this definition as “universal information” (UI).

          
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

To Every One that Believes

 

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…”
[Romans 1:16]
 

This is an anticipation of an objection; for he declares beforehand, that he cared not for the taunts of the ungodly; and he thus provides a way for himself, by which he proceeds to pronounce an eulogy on the value of the gospel, that it might not appear contemptible to the Romans. He indeed intimates that it was contemptible in the eyes of the world; and he does this by saying, that he was not ashamed of it. And thus he prepares them for bearing the reproach of the cross of Christ, lest they should esteem the gospel of less value by finding it exposed to the scoffs and reproaches of the ungodly; and, on the other hand, he shows how valuable it was to the faithful. If, in the first place, the power of God ought to be extolled by us, that power shines forth in the gospel; if, again, the goodness of God deserves to be sought and loved by us, the gospel is a display of his goodness. It ought then to be reverenced and honored, since veneration is due to God’s power; and as it avails to our salvation, it ought to be loved by us.

But observe how much Paul ascribes to the ministry of the word, when he testifies that God thereby puts forth his power to save; for he speaks not here of any secret revelation, but of vocal preaching. It hence follows, that those as it were willfully despise the power of God, and drive away from them his delivering hand, who withdraw themselves from the hearing of the word.

At the same time, as he works not effectually in all, but only where the Spirit, the inward Teacher, illuminates the heart, he subjoins, to every one who believeth. The gospel is indeed offered to all for their salvation, but the power of it appears not everywhere: and that it is the savor of death to the ungodly, does not proceed from what it is, but from their own wickedness. By setting forth but one Salvation he cuts off every other trust. When men withdraw themselves from this one salvation, they find in the gospel a sure proof of their own ruin. Since then the gospel invites all to partake of salvation without any difference, it is rightly called the doctrine of salvation: for Christ is there offered, whose peculiar office is to save that which was lost; and those who refuse to be saved by him, shall find him a Judge. But everywhere in Scripture the word salvation is simply set in opposition to the word destruction: and hence we must observe, when it is mentioned, what the subject of the discourse is. Since then the gospel delivers from ruin and the curse of endless death, its salvation is eternal life. [Calvin]
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Unnatural Law and Debased Mind

 
“Fidelity to the natural law…is at the very core of what conservatives seek to conserve.” –Terry Jeffery
 


If conservatism is about conserving the order of natural law, then its opposition must advocate the overthrow of natural law precepts. But the anti-theist Left likes to tell us that they have a morality based in natural law.
 
But what is natural about the murder of unwanted babies? Does that not indicate the want of natural affection that also leads to the abuse of children?
 
What is natural about sexual immorality? Doesn't the natural law teach us faithfulness to the marriage bed?

What is natural about sodomy? Does it not indicate an absence of morality and a debased mind that wants to legitimize sexual perversion under the banner of marriage? A mark of being given over to the reprobate mind is the lack of shame for one’s sin. They glory in their sin.

What is natural about encouraging dependency rather than self-sufficiency? Does that not indicate a fundamental hatred for the natural law? How can men know liberty and enjoy their freedom if they are wards of the state?

What is natural about dividing people into classes and pitting one class against another? Doesn’t the natural law teach that all men are equal before the law? Shouldn’t that also include the tax law? What justice is there in taxing one man at a different rate than another?

What is natural about usurping basic authorities and teaching doctrine contrary to home and church? Shouldn’t the public schools uphold the traditional morality rather than seek its overthrow?

What is natural about opposing a Constitution that it is based on natural law precepts? The anti-theists do have a morality and it is called the lawlessness of unnatural law. When cultures reject the natural law, they end up with law that opposes nature and is therefore destructive.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Man’s Depravity is a Sad Reality

 
“Since the Enlightenment, the secular world has had to believe in man (or "humanity") because if you don't believe in God and you don't believe in humanity, you will despair.” –Dennis Prager
 

The secular world exchanges reality for one of there own making not only in their view of man, but also in their view of the world. Rejecting Genesis as mythology cuts them off from the proper view of man…

Although he was created in the image of God and part of the creation that God declared as ‘very good’ [Genesis 1:31], he and the rest of mankind fell under the curse of sin that includes suffering and death [Genesis 3]. The world as created is broken because of man’s sin and remains broken because of man’s sin problem. For man to declare that he is basically good and then try to fix himself apart from the self-revealed God is sad because it reveals his innate depravity.

Not only are the ideas of sin and moral guilt rejected, but accountability and punishment are seen as remnants of the times of ignorance when men actually believed the Bible. When the notion of sin and punishment is rejected, then it follows that good works and rewards will also fall from favor. Can’t we all see how much better off man is today since the so called Enlightenment has freed us from Biblical Theology?

Modern liberalism reflects the depravity of man, revealing what man becomes when he suppresses the knowledge of God. In Romans 1 it is written that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against such men in giving them over to the fruits of their own sins.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Anti-theists and Self-evident Truth

 
‘In our culture, even the most passionate atheist cannot help having been influenced by the Judeo-Christian worldview that shaped Western civilization.’ –Jeff Jacoby

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/JeffJacoby/2010/11/14/created_by_god_to_be_good

The American Founders appealed to the authority of the ‘Laws of Nature and Nature’s God’ to justify their belief that the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and Property not only exist, but are given to all men on account of being made as image bearers of their Creator. This they referred to as self-evident truths much as the Bible begins with the existence of God as evident from what He has made…’the heavens declare the glory of God’ [Psalm 19:1].

It is good to see the anti-theists adopt the Natural Law argument as a basis for their morality. What they fail to understand is that the Natural Law is the Law of Conscience and reflects the Moral Law of God given in the Ten Commandments. This Law was given to reveal sin as the transgression of the Law; never was it intended as a means for fallen men to obtain righteousness or goodness by law keeping. This is the redemption that man provides for himself; it has no value before God except to further man’s condemnation.

As men suppress the knowledge of God, they cannot escape the image they bear that testifies to the self-evident truth that God exists given the evidences of His work of creation and the work of His Law written on the conscience. Men who suppress the truth of God and yet live in His world and testify to the goodness of His Law are without excuse before His judgment.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Romans 1 and the Suppression of Truth in American Culture

 
What is Romans 1?
 
The New Testament book of Romans lays out the necessity for sovereign grace in the doctrine of justification by faith; a necessity that follows from the condition of man in his sinful depravity being unable to see God’s revelation in the work of creation and in the work of the law written on the conscience. Since he rejects this revelation, man is universally condemned for his unbelief and is without excuse. The claim that God is somehow unjust for the condemnation of all those who have never heard the gospel message is without merit, and implies that the Apostle Paul is wrong when he concludes that all men, both Jew and Gentile, are under sin and that 'there is none righteous, no, not one' [Romans 3:10].

In Romans 1 the apostle addresses how the wrath of God is revealed against sinful man. God punishes the sin of those who reject and turn away from Him for other gods by giving them over to their sin by ceasing to restrain it and allowing it to take its own course and show itself in all its foulness and ugliness.

There is a progressive nature of this giving over from immorality to the reprobate mind. Three times the apostle uses the phrase “God gave them over” and each time towards the depths of depravity. The progression given in the text is that because of their ungodliness and the continued suppression of truth, God gives them up to more ungodliness…

1. Although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened…therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves. [Romans 1:21-24]

2. Because they exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, God gave them up into vile passions. In context this behavior is identified as homosexual perversions. [Romans 1:25-26]

3. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not proper. [Romans 1:28]


Does Romans 1 speak to modern America?
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness” [Romans 1:18].

The wrath of God is revealed from heaven…” It is not a matter of opinion or of argument; wrath has been revealed in history and is being revealed not just in America, but among the nations of the earth. It matters not at all what men may think or say or decide. In our depravity, we make our own gods, or we take out of God everything which is hateful and repugnant to our natural minds, and fondly imagine that all is well. What a fool's paradise! How arrogant for sinful man to deny his own history and sit in judgment of the thrice holy God!

The nature of man has not changed since Adam’s fall into sin…’he begot a son in his own likeness’ [Genesis 5:3]. Would the scoffers have us believe that man has somehow overcome his sinful nature and that God has changed in his hatred of sin?

Why is the preaching of the Gospel such an urgent matter for the apostle and for the church? The answer is “that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.” Why is salvation entirely a matter of faith? The reply is that the whole world is hopelessly guilty before God. Why is nothing less than the power of God unto salvation sufficient for man’s redemption? The answer is that sin has corrupted man’s nature and put him in rebellion against his Creator. Wrath is a reality because sin is a reality.

[credits to Lloyd-Jones, Hendriksen, Haldane]
 

What is being suppressed?
 
I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith”[Habakkuk 2:4]. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man…’ [Romans 1:16-23]

What is the plain meaning of this passage? We expect the men of this world to pervert its meaning and suppress its message, but what about the churches? When is the last time you heard a message from the pulpit on the wrath of God from Romans 1?

Why is the message of truth suppression and wrath being suppressed in the church in general? If the church is supposed to be the pillar and ground of truth, then why is it suppressing truth that should be thundering out from American churches? What is so important to take the church away from its role as salt and light?

Consider that the meaning of Romans 1 is so plain and its message is so offensive to the men of this world that the churches are ashamed of it. Many in the churches fear men rather than God, including some pastors. The church rolls are full of the unregenerate, and the pastors know it. Some doctrines are not preached for fear of offending men.

Since God is jealous of His glory, He holds men accountable and takes an active role in their punishment when they suppress the knowledge of His glory revealed in what He has made. Some churches have accommodated the apostate doctrines of progressive creation over long ages which is really Darwinism infecting the Genesis account of creation along with the denial of NT testimony regarding the trustworthiness of Genesis as written and understood by the church many centuries before the age of radical naturalism and neo-science.

Who can stand against the suppression of truth when the churches fail to uphold the word of truth? Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. The apostate church is selling the truth for a lie and joins the world in the suppression of God’s truth for the revelation of His wrath. If the Bible is not eternal truth, then Christ is a liar, and we are fools playing at church. A sovereign Lord with all authority and a trustworthy revelation is the sure foundation of the Church that Christ is building that will stand forever; all others have a foundation corrupted by human wisdom that is unable to stand and will not stand.
 

What is the debased mind of Romans 1
?
 
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient…’ [Romans 1:28]

The Apostle then exposes the depths of human depravity in the sins of men given over to a debased mind. This is his conclusion which I take as characteristic of the debased mind…

‘Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them’ [Romans 1:32].

I give Calvin’s comments on this verse because he brings out an interesting perspective on what separates men of debased mind from other men…

[These men] left nothing undone for the purpose of giving unbridled liberty to their sinful propensities; for having taken away all distinction between good and evil, they approved in themselves and in others those things which they knew displeased God, and would be condemned by his righteous judgment. For it is the summit of all evils, when the sinner is so void of shame, that he is pleased with his own vices, and will not bear them to be reproved, and also cherishes them in others by his consent and approbation. This desperate wickedness is thus described in Scripture:

“They boast when they do evil,” [Proverbs 2:14]

And again,

“She has spread out her feet,
and gloried in her wickedness
[Ezekiel 16:25]

For he who is ashamed is as yet healable; but when such an impudence is contracted through a sinful habit, that vices, and not virtues, please us, and are approved, there is no more any hope of reformation. Such, then, is the interpretation I give; for I see that the Apostle meant here to condemn something more grievous and more wicked than the very doing of vices: what that is I know not, except we refer to that which is the summit of all wickedness, — that is, when wretched men, having cast away all shame, undertake the patronage of vices in opposition to the righteousness of God. [Calvin]

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (67) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Most Scientific Dating Techniques Indicate That the Earth, Solar System, and Universe Are Young

 
For the last 150 years, the age of the Earth, as assumed by evolutionists, has been doubling at roughly a rate of once every 15 years. In fact, since 1900 this age has multiplied by a factor of 100!

For the past century, a major assumption underlying all radioactive dating techniques has been that decay rates, which have been essentially constant over the past 100 years, have also been constant over the past 4,600,000,000 years. Unfortunately, few have questioned this huge and critical assumption. This is the assumption of uniformitarianism which denies the Genesis Flood as the most catastrophic event in earth history. Several lines of evidence show that radioactive decay rates were once much greater than today. Therefore, dates predicated on the assumption of constant rates are completely wrong and misleading.

The public has been deceived concerning the consistency and trustworthiness of radiometric dating methods. Geologists hardly ever subject their radiometric age measurements to ‘blind tests’. Normally in science, such tests are a standard practice for overcoming experimenter bias. Many published radiometric dates can be checked by comparisons with the evolution based ages of the fossils that sometimes lie above or below the dated rock. In more than 400 of these published checks (about half of those sampled), the measured ages were at least one geologic age in error, indicating major errors in methodology and understanding. We wonder how many other dating checks are not published because of larger errors.

Evolution requires an old Earth, an old solar system, and an old universe. Nearly all informed evolutionists will admit that without billions of years their theory is dead. Yet, hiding the “origins question” behind a vast veil of time makes the unsolvable problems of evolution difficult for scientists to see and laymen to imagine. Our media and textbooks have implied for over a century that these almost unimaginable ages are correct. Rarely do people examine the shaky assumptions and growing body of contrary evidence. Therefore, most people today almost instinctively believe that the Earth and universe are billions of years old. Sometimes, these people are disturbed, at least initially, when they see the evidence.

Actually, most dating techniques indicate that the Earth and solar system are young; that is, on the order of 10,000 years old.  Let’s look at some of these points of evidence…

 
 
 
                                               Young Solar System Evidence

Young Comets

As comets pass near the Sun, some of their mass vaporizes, producing a long tail and other debris. Comets also fragment frequently or crash into the Sun or planets. Typical comets should disintegrate after several hundred orbits. For many comets this is less than 10,000 years. There is no evidence for a distant shell of cometary material surrounding the solar system, and there is no known way to add comets to the solar system at rates that even remotely balance their destruction. Actually, the gravity of planets tends to expel comets from the solar system rather than capture them. So, comets and the solar system appear to be less than 10,000 years old.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Comets2.html#wp1069425
 
 
Moon Recession
 
As tidal friction gradually slows Earth’s spin, the laws of physics require the Moon to recede from Earth. (Edmond Halley first detected this recession in 1695.) Even if the Moon began orbiting near Earth’s surface, the Moon should have moved to its present distance from Earth in billions of years less time than the 4.5-billion-year age evolutionists assume for the Earth and Moon. So, the Earth-Moon system must be much younger than most evolutionists assume.
 
For the mathematically inclined...
 
 
 
Moon Dust and Debris

If the Moon were billions of years old, it should have accumulated a thick layer of dust and debris from meteoritic bombardment. Before instruments were placed on the Moon, some scientists were very concerned that astronauts would sink into a sea of dust—possibly a mile in thickness. This did not happen. Very little meteoritic debris is on the Moon. In fact, after examining rocks and dust brought back from the Moon, scientists learned that only about 1/67 of the dust and debris came from outer space. Recent measurements of the influx rate of meteoritic material on the Moon also do not support an old Moon.

 
 

                                              Young Universe Evidence

Galaxy Clusters

Hundreds of rapidly moving galaxies often cluster tightly together. Their relative velocities, as inferred by the redshifts of their light, are so high that these clusters should be flying apart, because each cluster’s visible mass is much too small to hold its galaxies together gravitationally. Because galaxies within clusters are so close together, they have not been flying apart for very long.

A similar statement can be made concerning many stars in spiral galaxies and gas clouds that surround some galaxies. These stars and gas clouds have such high relative velocities that they should have broken their “gravitational bonds” long ago if they were billions of years old. If the redshift of starlight always indicates a star’s velocity, then a multi-billion-year-old universe is completely inconsistent with what is observed. If redshifts can be caused by phenomena other than a star’s velocity, much of current astronomical thinking is wrong.

http://www.haltonarp.com/articles/research_with_Fred

These observations have led some to conclude, not that the universe is young, but that unseen, undetected mass is holding these stars and galaxies together. For this to work, the hidden mass, sometimes called dark matter, must be 10–100 times greater than all visible mass, and the hidden mass must be in the right places. However, many experiments have shown that the needed “missing mass” does not exist. Some researchers are still searching, because the alternative is a young universe.

 

Supernova Remnants

In galaxies similar to our Milky Way Galaxy, a star will explode violently every 26 years or so. These explosions, called supernovas, produce gas and dust that expand outward thousands of miles per second. With radio telescopes, these remnants in our galaxy should be visible for a million years. However, only about 7,000 years’ worth of supernova debris are seen.  So, the Milky Way looks young.

Connected Galaxies

Galaxies frequently appear connected or aligned with other galaxies or quasars that have vastly different redshifts. This happens too often for all examples to be coincidences. If redshifts imply velocities, these galaxies and quasars have not been moving apart for very long.

Unstable Galaxies

Computer simulations of the motions of spiral galaxies show them to be highly unstable; they should completely change their shape in only a small fraction of the universe’s assumed evolutionary age. The simplest explanation for so many spiral galaxies, including our Milky Way Galaxy, is that they and the universe are much younger than has been assumed.

Walt Brown: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences53.html

 
 
                                                Young Earth Evidence
 
Shallow Meteorites
 
Meteorites are steadily falling onto Earth. This rate was probably much greater in the past, because planets have swept from the solar system much of the original meteoritic material. Therefore, experts have expressed surprise that meteorites are almost always found in young sediments, very near Earth’s surface. (Extensive searches have been made for these deep—and very valuable—meteorites, including in the Grand Canyon and along conveyor belts in coal processing plants.) Even meteoritic particles in ocean sediments are concentrated in the topmost layers. If Earth’s sediments, which average about a mile in thickness on the continents, were deposited over hundreds of millions of years, as evolutionists believe, we would expect to find many deeply buried iron meteorites. Because this is not the case, the sediments were probably deposited rapidly, followed by “geologically recent” meteorite impacts. Also, because no meteorites are found directly above the basement rocks on which these sediments rest, those basement rocks were not exposed to meteoritic bombardment for any great length of time.
 
 
Geologic Column

Practically nowhere on Earth can one find the so-called “geologic column.” Most “geologic periods” are missing at most continental locations. Only 15–20% of Earth’s land surface has even one-third of these periods in the correct order. Even within the Grand Canyon, 150 million years of this imaginary column are missing. Using the assumed geologic column to date fossils and rocks is fallacious.


Parallel Layers

Because no worldwide or even continental unconformity exists in earth’s sedimentary layers, those layers must have been deposited rapidly. (An unconformity represents a time break of unknown duration—for example, an erosional surface between two adjacent strata.) Parallel layers (called conformities) imply continuous, relatively rapid deposition. Because unconformities are simply local phenomena, one can trace continuous paths, which sometimes move horizontally, from the bottom to the top of the stratigraphic record that avoid these time breaks. The sedimentary layers along those paths must have been deposited rapidly and continuously as a unit.

Frequently, two adjacent and parallel sedimentary layers contain such different index fossils that evolutionists conclude they were deposited hundreds of millions of years apart. However, because the adjacent layers are conformable, they must have been deposited without interruption or erosion. Often, in sequences showing no sign of disturbance, the layer considered older by evolutionists is on top! Evolutionary dating rules are self-contradictory.


Human Artifacts

At various times and places, man-made objects have been found encased in coal. Examples include a thimble, an iron pot, an iron instrument, an 8-karat gold chain, three throwing-spears, and a metallic vessel inlaid with silver. Other “out-of-place artifacts” have been found inside deeply buried rocks: nails, a screw, a strange coin, a tiny ceramic doll, and other objects of obvious human manufacture. By evolutionary dating techniques, these objects would be hundreds of millions of years older than man.  Again, something is wrong.

 

Old DNA, Proteins, and Soft Tissue?

DNA. When an animal or plant dies, its DNA begins decomposing. Before 1990, almost no one believed that DNA could last 10,000 years. This limit was based on measuring DNA disintegration rates in well-preserved specimens of known age such as Egyptian mummies. DNA has now been reported in supposedly 17-million-year-old magnolia leaves and 11-to-425-million-year-old salt crystals. Dozens of plants and animals have left their DNA in sediments claimed to be 30,000–400,000 years old. DNA fragments are also said to be in alleged 80-million-year-old dinosaur bones buried in a coal bed and in the scales of a 200-million-year-old fossilized fish. DNA is frequently reported in insects and plants encased in amber, both assumed to be 25–120 million years old.

These discoveries have forced evolutionists to reexamine the 10,000-year limit. They now claim that DNA can be preserved longer if conditions are dryer, colder, and freer of oxygen, bacteria, and background radiation. However, measured disintegration rates of DNA, under these more ideal conditions, do not support this claim.

Proteins and Soft Tissue. Evolutionists face similar contradictions with proteins, soft tissue, and blood compounds preserved in dinosaur bones.  As with DNA, these remains should not last 70–150 million years, as is ridiculously claimed.
 

Helium

One product of radioactive decay within rocks is helium, a light gas. This helium enters the atmosphere at a much faster rate than helium escapes the atmosphere. Radioactive decay of only uranium and thorium would produce all the atmosphere’s helium in only 40,000 years.  Therefore, the atmosphere appears to be young.

Lead and Helium Diffusion

Lead diffuses from zircon crystals at known rates that increase with temperature. Because these crystals are found at different depths in the Earth, those at greater depths and temperatures should have less lead. If the Earth’s crust is just a fraction of the age claimed by evolutionists, measurable differences in the lead content of zircons should exist in the top 4,000 meters. Instead, no measurable difference is found.

Similar conclusions are reached based on the helium content in these same zircon crystals. Because helium escapes so rapidly and so much helium is still in zircons, they and the Earth’s crust must be less than 10,000 years old. Furthermore, the radioactive decay that produced all that helium must have happened quite rapidly, because the helium is trapped in young zircons.
 
 
Excess Fluid Pressure

Abnormally high oil, gas, and water pressures exist within relatively permeable rock. If these fluids had been trapped more than 10,000 to 100,000 years ago, leakage would have dropped these pressures far below what they are today. This oil, gas, and water must have been trapped suddenly and recently.

Volcanic Debris

Volcanoes eject almost a cubic mile of material into the atmosphere each year, on average.  At this rapid rate, about 10 times the entire volume of Earth’s sedimentary rock should be produced in 4.5 billion years. Actually, only about 25% of Earth’s sediments are of volcanic origin, and much greater volcanic activity existed in the past. No means have been proposed for removing or transforming all the missing volcanic sediments. Therefore, Earth’s sediments seem to be much younger than 4.5 billion years.

River Sediments

More than 27 billion tons of river sediments enter the oceans each year. Probably the rate of sediment transport was much greater in the past as the looser topsoil was removed and as erosion smoothed out Earth’s terrain. Even if erosion has been constant, the sediments now on the ocean floor would have accumulated in only 30 million years. No process has been proposed which can remove 27 billion tons of ocean sediments each year.  So, the oceans cannot be hundreds of millions of years old.

Dissolved Metals

Rivers carry dissolved elements such as copper, gold, lead, mercury, nickel, silicon, sodium, tin, and uranium into the oceans at very rapid rates when compared with the small quantities of these elements already in the oceans. In other words, far fewer than a million years’ worth of metals are dissolved in the oceans. There is no known means by which large amounts of these elements can come out of solution. Therefore, the oceans must be much younger than a million years.

Continental Erosion
 
The continents are eroding at a rate that would level them in much less than 25 million years. However, evolutionists believe that fossils of animals and plants at high elevations have somehow avoided this erosion for more than 300 million years.  Something is wrong.
 
Yes, Dr. Brown something is wrong. Why are these evidences suppressed from public consumption? Why is the neo-science community engaged in fraud?
 
 
Next article: Romans 1 and the Suppression of Truth in American Culture
                     What is Romans 1 and why is it being suppressed by the church?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (40) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ancient Trees and Biblical Chronology

 
We appreciate ICR and their ministry of upholding the Genesis account of creation and global flood. We agree that day-age theories of the days of creation did not enter the churches until the nineteenth century, which began the age of theological liberalism and neo-science. So this article in no way is intended to disparage their ministry. To think so is to misunderstand the article.

The intent is to point out what we believe is an inconsistency in some young earth creationists, which is similar to the fault that we use to accuse the darwinites in their religious practice of naturalism. Why doesn’t the evidence cause you to reexamine your theory? Have you considered again what assumptions are being made and how much weight they should bear? How long will your presuppositions trump the evidence?

      Reference 1: http://www.icr.org/article/5702/  
 

Neo-Science: Lessons in Circular Reasoning

Neo-science presumes macro-evolution has occurred since the fossil record exists. So the fossil record is used to prove macro-evolution. The darwinites presume the millions of years necessary for macro-evolution to occur. They hang their hat on radio-metric dating because it gives the desired answers. So when soft tissue and blood cells are found in dinosaur fossils that are presumed to be millions of years old, the immediate reaction is to circle the wagons to protect their theory.

The theory is used to filter the evidence. It never occurs to the neo-science community that the theory could be wrong, nor do they ever critically examine the assumptions inherent in radio-metric dating. Evidence contradictory to the theory is ignored or denied. By doing so they cut themselves off from the data that cries out to them for attention that the theory is the problem. This is why we say that neo-science has exchanged the scientific method for the defence of darwinism. They need the theory to be right in order to confirm their godless world view. They have left off being considered scientists and have become the new fundamentalists, only their prophet is Darwin instead of Moses.
 
 
The Evidence of Ancient Trees
 
There is much evidence of young earth which we intend to begin presenting in order to expose the neo-science community as darwinite frauds. The scientific method demands that data that challenges the accepted theory be seriously considered. The history of scientific discovery teaches the scientist that anomalous data leads to advancements in science; history also shows the scientist that the community is wed to their theory and change is resisted irrationally. The real scientist understands these things. That’s why we refer to the darwinites as frauds.

One such evidence of young earth that is also supportive of the biblical framework concerns the study of ancient wood and trees. Trees are the oldest living things. Why are no trees extant that date more that 3 millennium BC [from reference 2]? We ask the question not to solicit more neo-science nonsense built on a foundation of nonsense, but to consider this evidence in the light of the Genesis record.

Here is the statement from reference 1 that prompted this article…

‘The date provided for the door [3063 BC], cannot be correct…the worldwide Flood of Noah had not yet occurred when the door is claimed to have been made. That Flood obliterated mankind and human artifacts, except for those preserved on the Ark.’


Assumptions regarding Biblical Chronology
 
What are the assumptions that promoted ICR to have such confidence in a Flood date later than 3000 BC? Is there another answer that also upholds a high view of Genesis as authoritative and is consistent not only with the ancient tree evidence but also the dates of the earliest post Flood civilizations? Let's address these questions...
 
The question of interest is whether Moses intended to convey to his readers that the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided a chronology from the beginning of the world. When a good man like B. B. Warfield says that “it is precarious in the highest degree to draw chronological inferences from genealogical tables” we must proceed with caution, but proceed we will because we are image bearers and priests to our God through Jesus Christ just as every New Covenant believer with open Bible.

Ussher’s chronology provides the following dates for key events in the Biblical history of the world.
Creation:           4004 BC
Noah’s Flood:    2348 BC

We understand Warfield’s objection to this chronology. The ancient Babylonian civilization dates to 4000 BC and after the confusion of tongues the Egyptian civilization dates to 3000 BC. From the Biblical framework of history these must be post Genesis Flood, meaning the Flood date must be much older than 4000 BC to allow time for repopulation.

Let’s look at the way the genealogy is read and the assumption that is made in deriving the chronology…

‘Seth lived one hundred and five years, and begot Enosh. After he begot Enosh, Seth lived eight hundred and seven years, and had sons and daughters. So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died’ [Genesis 5:6-8].

The assumption made in the chronology is that Enosh is the immediate son of Seth. Therefore, their life spans begin to overlap when Seth is 105 years old at the birth of Enosh. This method of reading seems contrary to the purpose of time keeping with reference to patriarchs since it allows Noah to be born within the life span of Enosh even though he is 7 generations removed. This can be seen below in the genealogy chart provided by Walt Brown....

 
 
 
We believe the genealogy is a method of marking time. Just as we in this age reference time to Jesus Christ; this is the year of our Lord 2010. The ancients used their patriarchs to reference time; thus, providing a record of time since the beginning of time. But in order to do this the life spans must usually be consecutive, not concurrent. Is there any justification of this in the text? We believe there is…

Our premise is that the verb ‘begot’ is ambiguous; it does not necessarily imply an immediate father-son relationship, but can mean an ancestral relationship. In order to remove the ambiguity in the genealogies the verb ‘called his name’ is added to mean an immediate father-son relationship. So, the life spans should be concurrent in the few cases where naming the son is added, but the patriarchal life spans should be end to end when the verb begot is used alone. Here are 2 examples in Genesis 5. Note that the naming verb is used at the beginning of the genealogy and at the time of Noah when the line was cut off…

And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. [Genesis 5:3-5]

Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and had a son. And he called his name Noah, saying, “This one will comfort us concerning our work and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD has cursed.” After he begot Noah, Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years, and had sons and daughters. So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years; and he died. [Genesis 5:28-31]

So what happens to the chronology when this different assumption is made in the reading of the genealogy?
 

A Different Reading with respect to Ussher...
 
This proposed reading of the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies gives 6023 years from Adam to the Flood compared with the 1656 years from Ussher, adding 4367 years from Adam to the Flood.
 
The new reading gives 3183 years from the Flood to the death of Joseph compared with Ussher’s 713 years, adding 2470 to the post flood chronology.
 

                        Ussher                         Begot and Called His Name

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Creation           4004 BC                      4004 + 4367 + 2470 = 10841 BC

Flood               2348 BC                      10841 – 6023           =   4818 BC
 

This Flood date better correlates with the archeological evidence of the earliest civilization dated at 4000 BC. This date correlates to the generation in the genealogy that led to the building of the city in the plain of Shinar [Genesis 11].

The Genesis Flood event introduced a severe thermodynamic disturbance on the earth through the release of the subterranean waters. This disturbance took centuries to reach a new equilibrium in global temperature and resulted in the ice age. The best work being done in the earth sciences on this subject is by Walt Brown @ http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ29.html

In the aftermath of the catastrophic events of the global flood of Noah’s day, it does not seem unreasonable to expect nearly a millennium for mankind to repopulate and rebuild a civilization.

We are not dogmatic about the reading of the genealogy or the chronology. We offer it for consideration that Ussher’s dates should not be held as inspired truth. They are subject to error based on interpretation of the inspired text. We believe these new dates are more reasonable and still uphold the integrety of the Genesis record. Christians need not be intimidated by the darwinites for believing the biblical testimony that the earth is young. The Bible believer need not stand in opposition to science. It is neo-science that we oppose.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (60) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

From the beginning God made them Male and Female

 
“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matthew 19:5,6)

We thank Mr. Knight for using this quote in his article. We pray for him in being like a Jeremiah and boldly speaking truth to a people opposed to truth and given to what is right in their own eyes.

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/RobertKnight/2010/10/26/the_choice_that_liberals_hate

The context of the Matthew 19 quote is the answer Jesus gives in the face of the unbelief and deceit of the Pharisees testing Him with the question whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife.

The Pharisees denied the one flesh relationship between a man and his wife. They wanted easy divorce so they could engage in a sexual relationship with another woman. They did not deny Genesis 1 that ‘from the beginning God made them male and female’ and that lawful sexual expression was within the boundaries of the marriage union. Lawful divorce was restricted to a breach of the marriage covenant either by uncleanness or desertion.

Today men suppress the truth of Genesis 1. They deny that God made them male and female from the beginning for the mutual benefit of one another in the marriage covenant. No fault divorce was followed by abortion on demand. And because men suppress the truth of God’s glory displayed in the creation, God has given them over to lawlessness that displays the depth of human depravity.

We must speak truth to the culture and make the same link that Paul makes in Romans 1 as to the cause of the increase and normalization of sodomy in the culture. Again, the culture's greatest enemy is the vain philosophy that leads to lawlessness, not the sodomites.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (21) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Economic Experiment at Plymouth Colony: A Home School Essay

 

In the early 16th century through the early 17th century there were a group of people known as the Puritans that lived in the first colonies of America. The Puritans had very strong view points regarding such things as church membership, marriage, predestination, and the government. They were not afraid to express these view points to anyone. Although all of their view points played a role in the development of the early American ideologies none of them had more of an influence than the idea of private property ownership. The experiment of Plymouth Colony is a clear example of this. 

The Puritans thought of private property ownership and collectivism as social experiments. The Puritans were forced to adopted the concept of collectivism by there financiers that provided the funds to travel to the new world in the early 16th century. Collectivism is the idea that every member of a group, such as a colony,  should work together for the wellbeing of the group as a whole, not for the wellbeing of their person. Private property ownership on the other hand encouraged the ideas that a man should take pride in his work and land, that he should provide for his family to the best of his ability, and that he should trade and barter his surplus goods to help his family, and also to help the families of other men in need. The results of these experiments differed significantly from one another. 

One of the more familiar Puritans was a man named William Bradford. He was one of the first leaders of the Plymouth Colony when they first arrived in the new world. These were his thoughts on collectivism " The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tries sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity on that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times; and that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser then God." Collectivism results in laziness and defiance to work amongst men. A man has no interest in the prosperity of another, nor does he desire to work for no wages. Private property ownership results in a man having to care and provide for his own land and family.  So collectivism eventually fell, and capitalism and private property ownership slowly became the economic system of America  

Collectivism failed because young men found it unfair that they could work all day and still get the same treatment as an old man that did not work at all. The men just found it easier to sit around and do nothing and still get the same treatment as everyone else. Even a sober godly Puritan does not want to work to put food on another mans table when that man has not done as much labor as he has. Men are also sinners, which makes them selfish and self-centered. Private property ownership and capitalism meant that a man could not just sit around and expect to be provided for. He must work for his provisions and food, and when every man works for his own provisions and food there will be an enormous amount of economic growth. 

So in the end the Plymouth Colony experiment and private property ownership established the basis for the American way of life. Although the Puritans are rebuked for there strong view points on church membership, church discipline, and their Calvinism, no other group in American history have played a bigger role in the development of the greatest country in history. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (129) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Neo-Science Update: Origin of Life reveals Depravity

 
A team of investigators…has approximated…atmospheric conditions on Saturn's moon Titan. Through a series of experiments, they bombarded the gases with radiation, producing a number of compounds, including amino acids.

Could these molecules be the basis for the development of life on Titan?

What happened to the scientific community for this to be a serious question rather than a matter of comic relief?

Neo-science masquerades as science, but is really the religious practice of radical naturalism. Darwinite dogma has replaced the scientific method. In this religion all life can be reduced to a bio-chemical machine. There is no difference between man and non-man except the level of bio-chemical complexity.

Since there is no supernatural explanation for life on earth, there can be nothing unique about earth or life on earth. Since the earth is an insignificant speck in the universe, then life must of necessity exist elsewhere in the universe. So the search continues...

But there is no interest nor answers for the questions not asked. What is the origin of the information necessary to build living things? Where is the intelligent work being done to increase the complexity of living things? How does life come from non-life?

The Bible says in the book of Genesis that all living things were created ‘after its kind’ except for man. In Genesis 1:26 it is written that man was made in the image of God, after the likeness of God. Neo-science denies the existence of God and in so doing denies the uniqueness of man, reducing man to an animal. If the creation is for the glory of God and the purpose of man is to worship his creator and redeemer, then neo-science undermines the purposes for which God created the universe.

So this is really not a laughing matter, but one of serious reflection. I will stop mocking neo-science and begin to consider it as among the strongest evidence in support of human depravity and the power of the god of this world to blind the minds of the unbelieving.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive