You will
find much commentary and valuable information, herein.
But be
aware, it is a work in progress and portions are little more than
outlines of what is to come.
RELIGION AND BELIEVERS ARE UNDER ATTACK
Look around at our society
and you will see that religion and Christianity are under attack. They
are being minimized and even ridiculed. If you haven’t experienced it
already, soon you will find that you and your children are being
attacked by atheists, agnostics and secular humanists. They will attack
your beliefs, your intellect and create the kind of peer pressure that
can cause your children to lose the faith that you worked so hard to
instill in them.
Having one’s belief
diminished or shaken by this assault doesn’t have to happen. This
article will help avoid it by arming anyone that needs it with facts and
logic that strongly, if not, irrefutably support your belief in
God, Creation and Christ. It provides the facts to answer
your children’s toughest questions (hopefully in an understandable way),
so the atheistic education of today does not create an atheist adult
tomorrow.
WE ARE AT WAR
In today’s society there is
a constant onslaught of attacks against religion; attacks not only
against the beliefs of religion and specifically Christianity, but
attacks against the intellect of anyone that is naïve enough to
believe in a resurrected Christ or an all powerful God.
Many believe that the
simple existence of an emerging understanding of physics, geology, and
the biology of nature is proof that the beliefs of religion are untrue.
i.e. we know of the existence of the “big bang”, we know how it happened
and we didn’t see God there, so that means God didn’t do it. We know of
the existence of “survival of the fittest” and the existence of natural
adaptation of various species in nature. Since we can see how animals
change in nature, this proves that all was done by nature and this
similarly proves the nonexistence of a God that created
all. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Our scientists and left
wing ideologues are using science as a sledgehammer to destroy the
beliefs that founded our country and society; attempting to ridicule
those, that in spite of what “the educated” consider contrary
“evidence”, still believe in Christ, God and the existence of a supreme
fundamental goodness.
SCIENCE HAS NOT DISPROVED THE EXISTENCE OF
GOD.
The fact of the matter is
that an objective analysis of science and facts does not preclude or
disprove God. God is only disproved when analysis is done by
biased, results oriented individuals that look and give credence only to
evidence and interpretations that support their atheistic beliefs.
In reality, when science is examined rationally and objectively, there
is very little, if any, actual conflict between science and the belief
in God.
What science has done is
not to disprove God, as many believe. In my opinion, what science has
done is revealed the mechanism with which God, at times, works.
As Galileo said, "The
book of nature is written by the hand of God in the language of
mathematics."
The more we learn, the more
we see God.
A simple example (and there
will be many more to follow), is the understanding of the “Big Bang”
theory. Our researchers and scientists believe that this is fact and
that because they understand the quantum and macro mechanics of the
process, somehow, that proves that God had no hand in the creation of
the universe. Assuming their understanding of the mechanics is
correct, that would in no way, preclude the existence of God and
creation. At most, it would simply have revealed the mechanism by which
God operated; in this instance to create the universe...
If analyzed objectively,
it can be seen that the emerging “string theory” could actually be the
mechanism by which God could create all things.
Genesis:
I’m paraphrasing, In the
beginning earth was “formless and void”… and then God said “let there
be light”. This sounds a lot like the big bang, in which, we believe
that at the beginning of time, all matter was condensed into virtual
nothingness so that effectively, nothing, not even light existed. Then
about 10 billion years ago, in the blink of an eye, an incredible
explosion released all matter and energy so that it expanded and created
the universe. So in reality, the explosion of the big bang sounds very
much like the “let there be light” explanation of the bible!
Any rational person without
a bias or agenda would look at these simple facts and conclude that
there is no conflict, at least, as to this aspect of science and the
bible. The main point of contention becomes that science said it
happened at random, by accident if you will. We, believers, on
the other hand would simply say that is was the hand of God as described
in Genesis, 2,000 years, before the human race had even the most
rudimentary concept of the universe, its nature or its beginning.
The big bang doesn’t unequivocally prove the existence of God, but it
certainly, doesn’t disprove it, either, as atheists would have us
believe.
Unfortunately, the
scientific and educational community is not without bias.
What follows is information
gleaned from the world’s greatest minds, studies beyond refutation,
facts uncontroverted by anyone. Why are these facts and articles
included in scientific journals? Because, of the bias inherent in the
scientific community. No esteemed publisher would dare allow an article
that remotely gave support to the idea of creation over Darwinism. By
publishing the article they would be seen as supporting the science of
creationism and that is simply anathema to science.
The educational and
scientific community has a general agenda that is affirmatively
anti-religion. There is a tendency to interpret all things in a way as
to minimize and preclude any religious significance. The result is that
we are rapidly moving into a society that is not simply not less
religious, but rather one that affirmatively, at every turn tries to not
only destroy religious beliefs, but to make it uncomfortable or
impossible to express them. Additionally, the tendency is to make
intelligent people feel like idiots for having religious beliefs in the
first place.
The reality is that a
compelling scientific, logical, factual case for a Creator or for the
divinity of Christ can be made. Actually, this case can be
made, at least, as compelling or even more so than the case that the
atheists make against religion.
What is
doubly frustrating is the fact that many of the most educated are
completely aware of the bankrupt nature of the theories they espouse.
See…
The
world-renowned astrophysicist and cosmologist Sir Fred Hoyle has long
attacked the idea that life originated by mere chance. By his
calculations, the probability of life emerging spontaneously is only 1
in 10^40,000 (1). In a book coauthored with Chandra
Wickramasinghe, Hoyle said in 1981 of Darwinism,
It is
not only inadequate to explain the evolutionary changes that have
occurred, sometimes over quite short intervals for both plants and
animals, it is woefully inadequate.
Darwinian evolution is most unlikely to get even one polypeptide right,
let alone the thousands on which living cells depend for survival. This
situation is well-known to geneticists and yet nobody seems prepared to
blow the whistle decisively on the theory. If Darwinism were not
considered socially desirable, and even essential to the peace of mind
of the body politic, it would of course be otherwise.
GOD IS UNDER ATTACK
A fundamental tenant of our
country had been Freedom of religion. It is rapidly turning into
freedom FROM religion. The foundation of our country had
been formed with Judean Christian values at its core while at the same
time allowing the freedom for all to worship as they see fit.
Not that I believe that
because someone is an atheist they are a horrible person, generally, I
simply believe that they don’t know any better. But the fact of the
matter is that the destruction of organized religion opens the gates to
horrid political philosophies and governmental tactics…
The following is an
uncontroverted fact.
Darwin and his followers
were racists who believed that blacks were closer to the alleged ape men
than whites. Thomas Huxley, Henry F. Osborne, Professor Edwin Conklin
and others preached white superiority – because of their evolutionary
bias. The haters for a hundred years after Darwin can be tied to
Darwin starting with Nietzsche (who asserted that God was dead, called
for the breeding of a master race and for the annihilation of millions
of misfits), followed by Hitler, Mussolini, Marx, Engels, Stalin,
etc. Evolutionary teachings have resulted in soaking the soil of
Europe in innocent blood. After all, evolutionists tell us that man is
only a little higher than the animals rather than a little lower than
the angels as the Bible teaches, so what's a few million lives to be
concerned about? Think about it, if we are not created in God’s image,
each special and unique individual, where is the basis for individual
God given rights?
The march of Darwinism and
the shutting down of religion has opened the door to some of the worst
horrors in history.
Now, we are little by
little turning into a country that allows all to worship, as they see
fit, unless they are Christian! We are all aware of the
attacks on Christmas, the removal of nativity scenes on government
properties, the removals of Crosses on roadsides, the battles to be able
to even say the pledge of allegiance, etc…
Christianity is under
attack. The teachers, the scientists the researchers, the comedians,
the left wing agenda driven ideologues have an easy time attacking
Christianity partially, because often, even though we have our
faith, the society of believers can’t or won’t factually and logically
support it. We know what we believe and that’s good enough for
us. We have no reason to doubt it, because it is in our hearts, God is
in our very soul.
God might remain in our
hearts. But unless we can compete on the battleground of ideas,
God will be driven from our society and culture. God is not
simply being eliminated from our schools. Our schools are subtly and
not so subtly teaching our children, from kindergarten and beyond that
God doesn’t exist.
This is the implication
when Darwinism is taught as absolute fact, rather than a theory, leaving
no room for the guidance of God in the creation of man and the universe.
If we want our children and
their children our future generations to continue to understand and
believe the truth that we already know in our hearts, we need to be
armed with FACTS that countermand the secular beliefs with which our
children and families are being deluged.
What will we do when our child comes
home and says…
“Mommy, today I learned we came from
monkeys” or “God didn’t make us, life was an accident that started in a
pond”.
Then later, your older, more learned
children or high school students come home and announce something like…
“I learned about the theory of
evolution. I’ve been thinking about it, a lot. Natural selection and
survival of the fittest makes a lot more sense than the idea that God
did it. I just don’t think I believe in God anymore. I’m too smart for
that”.
What inevitable comes?...
“I don’t believe in God, so I certainly
can’t believe that Jesus was who he said he was. He was either a fraud
or a mad man, I mean, it’s only logical”
Our children are losing
their religion, and we are becoming idiots in their eyes.
WHAT ABOUT US?
Don’t we have an obligation
to our fellow man to help them with the truth, if possible? Not
necessarily to convert, but to be able to point the non believer in the
right direction if the subject comes up. i.e. your friend says, “Why
are you a Christian? I thought you were smarter than that?”
When faced with a similar question, I
ask, “why aren’t you???”
I usually get a response
something similar to
“where have you been, ever
heard of Darwin”
I will then respond, “yes I
have. I’ve actually spent a good bit of time, studying the theory,
objectively and found that it has many holes and flat out factual
inaccuracies about the theory that I wasn’t taught in school, and I bet
you weren’t either. Much of what were taught are flat out lies.”
I don’t ask or say another
word. I’m not trying to convert, only provide information to those who
want to hear it.
At this point, in almost
every case the next thing I here is “like what?”
The result is a discussion
that for those that are ready, the heart and mind is opened just enough
for them to want to see more, study more and in many cases, come to God.
After here’s what ALWAYS
happens. Eyes are opened and their certainty that a belief in God, is
evidence that believers are idiots or deranged.
This is a cancer that is
permeating our society. This attack is ongoing and will never stop.
But it’s a battle we can win if we take the time to educate ourselves in
some of the FACTS (not opinions), that actually support our beliefs.
WHAT ARE THE FACTS
This article is, by no
means the end all and be all of supportive information and data for
Christianity. But it does provide many; inarguable
facts that even the most
ardent atheist will have difficulty explaining away. Unless a person
has an open mind, nothing here will persuade them of anything. But for
anyone that actually desires truth, rather than a comfortable ideology,
I suggest they continue to read this article and then examine some of
the suggested texts. The heart may not change, but there will
be little choice but to re-examine their beliefs. . In
reexamining their beliefs, they may find God
EDUCATION
It is our education that is
undercutting belief in God, so the first step is to understand the truth
about the “Facts” that we have been taught and are being taught to our
children to destroy their belief in God.
This happens in many ways,
but most importantly are certain icons of the Evolutionary theory that
are being taught from grade school, even into higher institutions of
learning. They do a fantastic job of promoting and selling the theory;
teaching these has created millions of atheists… the problem is that
they are demonstrably, provably wrong!
Following are some of the
most destructive “facts” that we and our children are and have been
taught.
Then after we’ve dismantled
the evidence that we’ve all been fed that supposedly Prove’s the non
existence of God, we will move on to affirmative evidence that supports
the idea of an almighty God with a miraculous design and strong evidence
for the divinity of our Saviour.
Evidence we’ve been taught that “proves”
the non existence of God.
The cell- happened
randomly.
Haeckel
analysis
of embryos- early developmental stages show ancestral evolutionary
similarities. Supposedly proves common decent. false
Fossil Record-
supposedly shows evolution and transitional fossils. In fact, it does
not!
Similarity
of Structure as proof of common decent.
Artist’s drawings of pre
humans.
Mischaracterization of
archaeopteryx
Affirmative Evidence for God.
Limitations of survival
of the fittest in evolution.
Butterfly-change of
color, but not change of species.
Fruitfly- mutated to
4 wings, can’t has trouble reproducing, put back into general
population, within few generations, they are normal.
Incredible balance, but
in opposition to survival of the fittest.
Short life span is not a
positive adaptation to be passed. But is necessary to the balance
of our designed world..
Rat’s, Mice, Flies,
Octopus,squid, long lifespan would destroy balance but be good for the
individual.
Cambrian explosion,
destroys Darwinism. And looks suspiciously like the immediate creation
of life.
Irreducible complexity,
biological systems that could not have happened bit by bit as stated by
Darwin, rather, it looks simply like the design of a creator. See video
examples. http://www.arn.org/mm/mb_ic.htm
The Universe was created
for life
Magnetic force, Gravity,
Strong force, Week force.
The More many astronomers
learn, the More they believe in God.
AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE THAT CHRIST IS LORD
Resurrection-Strong
evidence of the resurrection. If the resurrection is
true,everything else false
into place.
Prophecy- many of
the prophecy’s could not have been purposefully fulfilled.
And we’ll
tough on some of them.
MORE DETAILS RE ALL ARGUMENTS
Arguments against
the existence of God that created aetheists.
The first cell- They
“proved” a cell could be made in nature.
The miller experiment.
In the beginning of
evolutionary theory, the thought that life could have arisen
spontaneously, by accident, actually made some sense. There was no
understanding of the true nature and properties of the cell. They were
considered little more that “bags of stuff”.
The experiment in the early sixties by
“miller” showed that the creation of life was relatively simple…
Now, thanks
to our technologies and our ability to see into the core of the cell we
have found the complexity of even the simplest cell is impossibly
complicated...
Assuming the first cell did
come by chance, by random accident from the primordial soup, now what?
It dies, or it reproduces. This means more than just life, but the
unbelievable complexity of rna/dna allowing for reproduction. The
chances of the first cell are astronomical, the chances that this life
was accidently created with the complexity and power or reproduction are
impossible.
Michael
Denton in his Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.
This book is one of the most brilliant critiques of evolution written in
recent years. Denton, whose specialty is microbiology, approaches
the subject from the perspective of an evolutionist who is
nevertheless forced to concede that Darwinian evolution could never have
occurred.
It has been learned
that the simplest single-celled organism is incredibly complex. E. coli,
a bacterium that lives in the human intestine, has a complexity roughly
equivalent to 10^12 bits of information. That is the information
content in about 100 million pages of the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Probably no cell has any less complexity.
But we are
to believe that they were have to developed randomly by chance over
millions of years. It is more likely that Pianos, automobiles, and even
space ships where thus created, as they are far simpler by comparison.
Even Darwin recognized
that this was a huge improbability, and since his day no one has offered
any remotely plausible theory as to how the first living cell might have
been produced by known chemical processes. Today, thanks to great
advances in molecular biology, it is well established that life
simply could not have appeared spontaneously.
Haeckel’s
analysis
of embryos-- early developmental stages show ancestral evolutionary
similarities. Supposedly proves common decent. false
Simply put, a lie. It’s
been known to be a lie for over 150 years, but they still end up in
school books and even in some higher educational institution’s biology
class. Why? They assume the theory is correct, so have no
problem, providing false evidence to support what they believe is true.
Human embryo with gills.
They are not gills. Little more than folds in the skin.
Fossil Record- the
fossil record, partially supported evolution. Assumed the more complete
it became, the less support it gave.
The truth is that, there is
no search for truth, simply the search for information and then trying
to find a way to interpret it to support evolution. They are putting
square pegs in round holes. Objectively they don’t fit.
Even Darwin knew the fossil
record was incomplete but assumed as more fossils found, it would
support the theory. What has happened. Where certain that would find,
transitional species leading from, ape to man. And it seems that every
fossil they find, they try to make it prove the theory and this has led
to some very embarrassing situations. Discussed below.
Some of the most vaunted
fossils that had been touted as proof of transitional forms simply were
not… for example eohippus, thought to be a
predecessor of the horse; is now believed by many
anthropologists, to be nothing but an ancient form of a current day
Hyrax
or
Coney.
It looks like a robust,
oversized guinea pig, or a rabbit with rounded ears and no tail. Hyraxes
have stumpy toes with hoof-like nails, four toes on each front foot and
three toes on each back foot.
Java man- scull cap,
3 teeth, thigh bone.
(there is an
unmitigated desire to prove evolution to the degree that objectivity is
thrown out the widow, and anything will be believed if it destroys God
and supports Darwin)
It was eventually found
that as to Java man,
·
The protocols
of the dig would have discredited any of the findings, by today’s
standards.
·
The Thigh
Bone didn’t belong to java man
·
The skull cap
was consistent to a modern day man.
·
Conclusion?
Java man has no evolutionary value. But is still being touted in text
books!
All fossils of “humans”
ever found, that could possibly be transitional will fit in one medium
sized box. Everything else is either, obviously, human or something
completely different.
Drawings of humans
starting at ape and ending with us.
Artists renditions, were
based on skimpy and info and ending with us.
Time Magazine hired 4
separate paleontological artists to create complete animal based on the
type of evidence that we always find. The result was 4 completely
different appearing “humans” ranging from appearing perfectly modern to
looking like a wolf man. The artists renderings seem to be based on what
“theory” says they should be, rather on simply where the evidence
actually leads.
Similarity of Structure as proof of common decent. (hand bones similar
to whale fin).
Bones in fins of Whales-
they say that because whales, dolphins, seals, have a bone structure in
their fins that is similar to that of a human hand, it evinces common
descent and evolution.
Not true, as far as
I can see, it is simply a common design feature. You have a physical
structure that has to be able to withstand the force of movement in
water. By necessity, it would need a solid physical structure of some
sort, to accomplish this purpose.
That doesn’t
prove descent; it is simply a design that is common to all weight
bearing and force bearing physical attributes. It is as easily
evidence of a common mechanism that God utilized in the design of all
animals, as it is proof that ancestors of elephants lived in the sea.
Just as
our auto designers decided that the best way to allow a car to move
smoothly was to use round wheels, our designer decided that a multi
segmented bone structure was best for bearing weight and force needed
for varying types of locomotion.
Archaeopteryx-
Touted as the transitional
stage between dinosaurs and birds. Today’s scientists achnowledge that
it is not, but it is still taught as such in the classrooms and even on
national geographic specials. EDUCATION IS NO LONGER ABOUT TRUTH,
IT’S ABOUT SUPPORTING A WORLD VIEW IN WHICH GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
“Most evolutionists imagine
that the first bird evolved from a dinosaur-like ancestor, that is, from
a creature covered by something akin to reptilian scales “However,
no transitional state between scales and feathers exists in the
fossil record, or, for that matter, among modern living things.
Moreover, evolutionists have no firm grasp on how flight itself is
supposed to have evolved… (A recent
study on the alleged evolution of bird flight, by Sarah Randolph
of the Department of Zoology at Oxford University (Randolph 1994))
Evolutionists have long cited
Archaeopteryx as a transitional form between dinosaurian/reptilian
ancestors and birds, citing its mix of avian and "reptilian" (non-avian)
characteristics. At the same time, they reference the phrase
"incompleteness of the fossil record" as the reason for the lack of
transitional forms. In this instance, the phrase indirectly acknowledges
that Archaeopteryx is not transitional in any meaningful sense of the
term. Surely, a skeptic might observe,
if Archaeopteryx were actually a transitional form, worries about the
incompleteness of the fossil record with regard to early birds would be
misplaced!
The reality is that
Archaeopteryx is a mosaic of fully-formed reptilian features and
fully-formed avian features, not a half- reptile/half-bird. It appears
to be an intermediary of NOTHING, but is nevertheless used and sited as
strong support for evolution and implicitly, the non existence of God.
Much as the duck
billed platypus, which has the mouth of a duck, the fur of a
mammal, lays eggs like a bird, suckles it’s young like a mammal, has the
tail of a beaver, the body of an otter and the male is poisonous with
stingers on its feet.
If found in the fossil
record, it would be considered an intermediary of what… everything? In
fact, it is not considered an intermediary form of any animal. It’s
just a fascinating animal with many varied traits.
Archaeopteryx appears to be
an interesting animal, but nothing more. But is still used as evidence
to destroy the bible’s account of God and Creation.
Concerning transitional
fossils, world famous paleontologist Colin Patterson admitted that
"there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight
argument." Not one.
Fraud and misinterpretation in the
Fossil Records
Piltdown Man-
Found
in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1912, this fossil was considered by
some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the
evolution of man—until it was found to be a complete forgery 41 years
later. The skull was found to be
of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the
appearance of age, and the teeth had been filed down!
Nebraska Man- A
single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary
link between man and monkey. How exciting an obvious, intermediary form
between man and ape… until another identical tooth was found which was
protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig.
Java Man- scull cap,
3 teeth, thigh bone. It was eventually found:
·
By today’s
standards, the protocols of the dig would have discredited any of the
findings.
·
The Thigh
Bone didn’t belong to java man
·
The skull cap
was consistent with a modern day man.
·
Conclusion? Java man has no evolutionary value.
But is still being touted in text books!
Orce man: Found in the
southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest
fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later
officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came
from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had originally stated the
skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million
years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent
what he would have looked like.
Neanderthal: the first
Neanderthal remains were found in France in 1908. It was considered to
be ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging. Current evidence
suggests that Neanderthal was just as human as us, and his stooped
appearance was because of arthritis and rickets. Neanderthals
are now recognized as skilled hunters, believers in an after-life, and
even skilled surgeons, as seen in one skeleton whose withered right arm
had been amputated above the elbow.
Archaeoraptor- The
most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed
in China. The perfect missing link the tail of a dinosaur and the fore
limbs of a bird. The world was astounded and in 1999, national
geographic published an article about this evolution proving find; the
best evidence ever for Darwin’s missing link. It was later found that
it was the fraudulent product of Dinosaur bones being glued together
with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off
as a very important new evolutionary intermediate.
There are countless
additional mistakes. This doesn’t mean that the Darwinist’s are
necessarily purposefully deceitful. But the is evidence obvious that
they are so committed to their belief system, that as long as a
particular “finding” supports their “theory”, they will often do not
give it proper scrutiny. Whereas, if it contradicts their theory, they
bury it.
The evidence is pretty
clear. The educated elite would rather believe and promote a lie that
supports evolution, than a fact that supports God.
Dr. Soren Lovtrup,
Professor of Zoo-physiology at the University of Umea in Sweden
wrote, "I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if
an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this
is what has happened in biology: for a long time now people discuss
evolutionary problems in a peculiar 'Darwinian' vocabulary...thereby
believing that they contribute to the explanation of natural events." He
went on to say, "I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be
ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science." He also said,
"Evolution is 'anti-science.”
Tree of Life
We’ve all seen the
Darwinian tree of life showing the roots flowing from the first cell.
It’s a compelling presentation, but doesn’t reflect reality. Again, the
more we learn, the more it is proven to be wrong… but like so many other
falsehoods, it is still being taught.
Because of the
Cambrian explosion, it should be called the “lawn of Life”.
AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE
OF EXISTENCE OF GOD
Survival of Fittest i.e.
adaption. The faster deer survives to pass on genes, the strongest
lion survives to pass on gene’s to have stronger offspring. That’s
obvious, that’s how God made the world. But that is a far cry from
saying the most fit individual, eventually becomes a cat although it
started as a mouse.
Butterfly-change of
color, but not change of species.
Fruitfly- mutated to
4 wings but can’t has trouble reproducing, put back into general
population, within few generations, they are normal.
No one argues that there is
no such thing as a mutation. The question do mutations lead to new
species? There is no actual evidence of that. Survival of the fittest
and natural adaption is an obvious fact. But it is not evolution.
God’s Plan incredibly
and perfectly balanced.
(This is a huge
simplification, but explains the process in an understandable fashion),
through, mutations that create an advantage, that mutation creates an
individual animal that has an edge in survivability. The
advantages are for the individual only then, ultimately passed to the
species. ( If a trait is not an advantage to the individual, it
will not be passed to the species, as a whole.)
Each successful individual
descendent then passes those genes to their offspring, which then pass
the trait to theirs until there is a new and better animal. Eventually
these mutations will turn the mouse into the cat or some other more
successful animal (so the theory goes). By definition a trait
that will cause a premature death is not a trait that is beneficial to
the individual to be passed on.
But in reality that’s what
we see. Much of what we see in nature is an incredible balance that
seems more of a miraculous design for balance of the world rather than
survival of the fittest individual.
WHERE IS THE BENEFIT TO
THE INDIVIDUAL WHEN:
Mice die within 2 to
3 years of birth?- It’s not a benefit to the individual, but if looked
at in terms of God’s plan it is a benefit to the system.
Because of their enormous birth rate, there are always mice available as
a part of the system to provide food to animals higher on the food
chain. But if they didn’t have such a short life span, they would
overrun the ecosystem and consume to the degree that nothing was left
for themselves or other life forms in the system.
Their short life span is
not a positive trait that should be passed on to offspring. But is a
perfect part of God’s perfect plan. They are an integral food source
that is kept in check by their short life span. Their short life
span is contrary to “evolution” but fits miraculously for a perfectly
designed world, created by a perfect God.
Squid and Octopus-
Great predators, but live absolute max of about, 3 to 5 years. Like
mice and rats are a huge food source for other predators and lay
thousands of eggs at once. If not for short life span, would overrun
the oceans .
Flies. As the
above. They live only about 2 to 4 weeks as adults. A larger life span
and the world would be overrun.
Most flies die off,
rather than hibernate in the winter. Otherwise each spring, there would
be an immediate deluge of all the flies that were alive the end of the
last season. Instead, it’s as if, God causes a resetting of the clock
every year. How does this happen?
As the weather
changes, there is most die due to a fungus. If each season started with
the flies that were alive at the end of summer having that kind of head
start, the world would be overrun.
Flowers that smell like
rotting carrion to attract flies for pollination.
Flowers that smell like
wasps and only pollinated by them.
Much of Life doesn’t
support the small step by step improvement theory… if that’s the
case, then every living thing we see is the result of small, incremental
beneficial mutations leading to their current state. Even if what they
are now, is a perfectly adapted species, how did they get here?
How did the
lizard, losing its legs create a beneficial trait that made it
more likely to survive? The snake is a successful animal only because
of all the evolutionary “adaptations” currently exist. The difference
between a successful lizard and snake is infinitely more than the lack
of legs.
There is a totally
different skeletal structure, extra rows of teeth to hold onto prey, as
there are no legs to do so, and if the new musculature didn’t develop in
unison with the absence of legs, you would just have a lizard that had
its legs missing. It would have been unable to constrict or hold its
prey; hardly a beneficial mutation. In addition to this is a different
scale structure, including labial scales on the underside, in which each
one is connected to its own set of muscles so that it can properly move.
Unless the snake mutation came pretty much fully formed as it is, it
would not have survived as a successful species to pass on its genes.
This problem for evolution is
called irreducible complexity and we’ll discuss it more later.
Irreducible Complexity.-
Biological systems that
could not have happened, gradually, step by step as stated by Darwin.
Rather, they appear to be the design of a creator. See video examples.
http://www.arn.org/mm/mb_ic.htm
From the Mouth of Darwin
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could
not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
--Charles Darwin, Origin of Species
The theory of successive
modifications breaks down all throughout creation.
Here are few examples.
Bacteria flagellum-
Because the bacterial flagellum is necessarily composed of at least
three parts -- a paddle,a rotor, and a motor -- it is irreducibly
complex. Without each part working together, it doesn’t just work less
efficiently, it does nothing, accomplishes no purpose. It COULD NOT
HAVE OCCURRED STEP BY STEP, because there is no possibly intermediary
stage that could have accomplished any purpost that would have given any
evolutionary advantage.
Snake as described
above. Unless the changes we mentioned happened almost simultaneously,
there would be no adaption, only a crippled lizard incapable of eating,
escaping or defending itself.
Blood Clotting- this
is actually one of the most complicated processes in all of biology. We
know, that if our blood won’t clot, the smallest cut can kill us. The
blood clotting cascade is a 16 step process, if even one step is
missing, it won’t clot and we die. To the individual, a partial cascade
is worthless and that portion of the genetic code would not be passed
on. It works only if the entire process and system is created and
available at once. The step by step process of evolution, simply will
not create it. See
http://www.doesgodexist.org/NovDec98/IrreducibleComplexityBloodClotting.html
The Cell- the
incredible complexity of the cell is such that it is an all or nothing
proposition. If the entire organism, complete with mitochondria,
flagellum for movement, DNA for reproductive coding and all the other
parts, it could not function.
A simple question. If
we were able to create all the component parts of a cell from scratch
using all of our incredible technology, (which we can’t), does anyone
really think, it would be alive? LIVE COMES FROM GOD.
Cambrian explosion-
Evolutions dictates that
gradual evolving of species with intermediary species in between
gradually leading to modern forms. The fossil record shows anything
but…
From beginning of life
(according to theory 3.5 billion years ago (found fossilized algae),
fossil record shows NOTHING but algae, a few worms and jelly fish.
From goal to 16 yard line
of other field.
Then, within the span of
one step, EVERY for of advanced phyla, chordates arose. With
absolutely no intermediary steps to be found. NONE. THAT IS NOT
EVOLUTION. Sounds like Creation.
This should have been a
death blow to Darwinism, but they just adjusted the theory and came up
with new excuses/theories. Instead of looking at the evidence
objectively and acknowledging that the theory has holes, they made lame
excuses.
1.
All of the
intermediate species must have been of a soft structure that they left
no fossil evidence.
a.
This, of
course, is absurd as we have fossil records of things as small and
delicate as bacteria dating back 3.5 billion years.
2.
“punctuated
equilibrium”- They decided that all of these intermediary
species, did in fact, arise gradually; they were simply doing so in
segregated groups that no one has found, and then suddenly expanded into
the general population. The sum total of the adjustment to the theory,
is that they were hiding. As
with many other things, they have absolutely not one shred of evidence
supporting this idea.
a.
Thankfully, this theory is not well accepted amongst academia. There is
no good explanation for the this bit of evidence. So, they are left
with a gaping hole in the fossil record and no way to explain it, a
record that doesn’t support the theory, but looks suspiciously like the
virtual instantaneous creation of life by God. So what do they do?
Nothing! They just adhere to “theory” and continue teaching it as fact
even though, the more evidence we find, the less viable the theory seems
to be. Again, the goal seems to
be to ignore the evidence and the facts at all costs. Simply make
certain that God stays out of the equation.
CREATION AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNIVERSE IT WAS CREATED FOR LIFE.
Scientist, don’t look for
truth, but rather support for preexisting theories.
Historically, the believed
that could not exist and could not have created the world and universe
because the universe was eternal. There was not beginning of anything.
We now are
pretty convinced of the big bang.
The universe does have a
beginning, and it sounds suspiciously like “let there be light”.
Now scientists argue that
there can no God, because he would have to be eternal, and there is not
eternal. But when it fit their purposes, they argued that there
could be no God, because the universe was eternal.
Now, instead of just
situational ethics, we have situational science. They seem to believe
and argue whatever fits the belief that they have, irrespective of where
the evidence actually leads.
The Universe was created
PERFECTLY for life.
Subatomic forces of
matter.
If the binding force
holding the nuclei of atoms together were slightly weaker, no
element could exist except hydrogen. If it were slightly stronger,
hydrogen would be rare. The result would be hardly any water and hardly
any other compound of hydrogen. And these are all necessary to life as
we know it.
The evolutionist would
argue that just because we couldn’t live, doesn’t mean that another form
of life, wouldn’t have arisen.
The fact is that the
perfectly balanced construction of the universe, from the atom up, is
such that if anything were changed, it wouldn’t simply mean
that humans couldn’t exist; it would mean that no form of life could
exist.
For example:
Electrons are negatively charged, and an
atomic nucleus is positively charged. The force that holds electrons in
their orbits about an atomic nucleus is the electromagnetic force—the
force that exists between any charged particles. If this force were
slightly stronger, atoms would not be able to share electrons.
Consequently, there would be no chemical compounds. Also,
if the same force were slightly weaker, electrons would escape
from their orbits. There would be no stable atoms.
No stable atoms
equals a completely unstable universe.
A proton is 1836 times
heavier than an electron. If the ratio of their masses was any
greater or smaller, electron orbits would not have
characteristics permitting formation of molecules. With no
molecules, there would be no order, no humans, no animals, no rocks,
simple, random chaos!
UNIVERSE AND OUR SOLAR
SYSTEM CREATED FOR US.
·
But not only
was the universe created for order and life, it was created for us.
·
Van Allen
Belt, to protect us from radiation.
·
Moon, for
tides (no tides, stagnating, eventually lifeless oceans and protection
from meteors and such..
·
Our sun is
nearly white. Bluer or redder light from the sun would make it harder
for plants to carry out photosynthesis, less photosynthesis, equals,
less vegetation, which negatively impacts the food chain, and less
vegetation means less oxygen needed for life.
·
Our sun is
located on the outskirts of our galaxy. If it were closer to the center,
radiation from other stars would be too great, and we’d be subject to
collisions from the infinitely greater amounts of space debris,
asteroids, meteors. additional
The More the Learn, the
More they believe in God.
The fact is, many life long
atheists in the scientific community are turning to and believing in
God, not in spite of science, but rather because it.
Other Scientists with a bit
more objectivism find that the more they learn, the more they believe
that it is impossible that the incredible “coincidences” require for
life could have possibly been the result of random acts and chance. The
more they learn, the more they believe in an all powerful creator.
Evidence for Divinity of Christ
Resurrection
First he was denied all saw
him arrested crucified, no one even acknowledged even knowing him.
"you
were one of them, you was with Jesus of Nazareth".
The
Bible says "he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this
man of whom ye speak." (Mark 14:71) Three times Peter denied
the Lord, cursing and swearing,
"I know not this man".
And Mark 14:50, says,
"And they all forsook him, and fled".
Soon, they were all
willing to die for him.
WHO WOULD DIE FOR A LIE?
And if they knew it WAS a lie, they knew it.
Acts
chapter 4:18-19,
reads, "And they called them,
and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in
the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye."
Obviously something
miraculous had happened, something to take away any doubt and any fear,
the resurrection.
Dr. Greenleaf,
the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the
greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume
entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, considered by many
the greatest legal volume ever written. He was an atheist and decided
to debunk the resurrection and divinity of Christ once and for all.
When he
approached it as he would in a court of law, his conclusion, Jesus is
Lord and has risen!
"it was IMPOSSIBLE that the
apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated,
had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ."
(Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four
Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of
Justice, p.29).
Greenleaf concluded that according to the jurisdiction of legal evidence
the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the best supported event in
all of history!
And not only that, Dr. Greenleaf was so
convinced by the overwhelming evidence, he committed his life to Jesus
Christ!
John 20:27-28
Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out
your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas
said to him,
“My Lord and
my God!”
SAUL
And then there's the man called Saul of
Tarsus.
Saul of Tarsus thought Jesus was a false messiah, a fake, a blasphemer.
And the extermination of Christianity, became his passion! The Bible
describes him:
"As for Saul, he made havoc of the
church, entering into every house, and haling men and women
committed them to prison."
(Acts 8:3)
"And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter
against the disciples of the Lord, . . ." (Acts 9:1)
Saul of Tarsus was one of Christianity’s'
most rabid persecutors.
One day traveling the dusty road to Damascus, Saul burning with
vengeance, with documents authorizing him to capture all the followers
of Jesus. But on the road to
Damascus something happened to Saul of Tarsus. . .
"And as he journeyed, he came near
Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul,
why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord
said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest".
(Acts 9:3-5)
And on the road to Damascus, the greatest conversion in history took
place!
For Saul of Tarsus, among the greatest
enemies of Jesus Christ, that ever lived — became the Apostle Paul
— who many believe was the
GREATEST CHRISTIAN THAT EVER LIVED!
What happened to this man? Did he make it
up?
Just want a change?
What could so transform this man, that he completely dedicated his life
to spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ? And was later beheaded at Rome
in 67 A.D. for his faith in Jesus Christ.
The only thing that makes sense, is a
resurrected Christ who visited himself upon Saul.
The tale of intellectuals proving
Christianity false.
Gilbert West and Lord Lyttleton, two
Oxford students, believed Christianity was a "tale gone mad" and
they determined to refute the Christian faith. Lyttleton resolved to
disprove the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, and West would refute the
resurrection of Jesus Christ.
They figured a careful, rational,
examination of the evidence would easily disprove the Christian faith.
But after examining the evidence — they both
separately came to the exact opposite conclusion! Lyttleton concluded
that Saul of Tarsus did, in fact, convert to the Apostle Paul through
Jesus Christ. And Gilbert West concluded that the Resurrection of
Jesus Christ was among the best established facts in all of history!
West went on to write a book entitled, "Observations on the History
and Evidences of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ".
HISTORIAN’S OPINION
Professor Thomas Arnold, former chair of
history at Oxford, and author of the famous volumes, History of Rome,
was skillfully educated in the study of historical facts. Professor
Arnold, stated, "I have been used for
many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and
weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know
of no one fact in the history of mankind which is PROVED BY BETTER AND
FULLER EVIDENCE of every sort, than the great sign which God has given
us that Christ died and rose again from the dead."
THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING
After investigating the evidence of the
resurrection, Lord Darling, former Chief Justice
of England, stated, ". . . there
exists such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual
and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to
bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true."
It is clear that objective evidence
supports the fact
that Christ is Lord.
Why should we be so surprised, many
hundreds of years before these events took place there were many
prophecies of the messiah that clearly pointed to Christ, his life, his
death and his resurrection.
Prophecy-
there
are countless prophecies for the coming of the messiah that point
directly to Christ. But in many of these the skeptic would say, well he
purposefully, intentionally fulfilled them so it doesn’t count. For
example riding the donkey, or rage in the temple with the money
changers. If he were, trying to create this fraud and have himself
exalted and revered, this is the type of thing that he would have done.
But many of the prophecies that were
fulfilled were not susceptible of purposeful fulfillment. The fact they
occurred are in themselve’s strong evidence of his divinity. Following
are a few:
Prophecy of the slaying of first born male
infants.
"Thus says the Lord: 'A voice was heard
in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her
children, refusing to be comforted for her children, because they are no
more.' " (Jeremiah 31:15, NKJV)
"Then
Herod,
when he saw that he was deceived by the wise men, was exceedingly angry;
and he sent forth and put to death all the male children who were in
Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under,
according to the time which he had determined from the wise men. Then
was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying: 'A voice
was heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for
her children, refusing to be comforted for her children, because they
are no more.' " (Matthew
2:16-18, NKJV)
Betrayal by Judas
"Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I
trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.
" (Psalm 41:9)
"And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve,
went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them." (Mark 14:10)
False witness against the
Messiah.
"Deliver me not over unto the will of mine
enemies: for false witnesses are risen up against me, and such as
breathe out cruelty." (Psalm 27:12)
"False witnesses did rise up; they laid to
my charge things that I knew not.
" (Psalm 35:11)
"Now the chief priests, and elders, and
all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to
death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found
they none. At the last came two false witnesses, And said, This fellow
said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three
days. " (Matthew 26:59-61)
Silence in spite of accusations
"He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
" (Isaiah 53:7)
"And the chief priests accused him of many
things: but he answered nothing. And Pilate asked him again, saying,
Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against
thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled. Now at
that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
" (Mark 15:3-6)
Prophecy and description of Crucifixion
(crucification was not in use at the time
of this prophecy)
"For dogs have compassed me: the
assembly of the wicked have enclosed me: they pierced my hands and my
feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. " (Psalm
22:16-17)
"As many were astonished at thee; his
visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons
of men: " (Isaiah 52:14)
"Then released he Barabbas unto them: and
when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. . . And
when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put [it] upon his head,
and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and
mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and
took the reed, and smote him on the head. " (Matthew 27:26, 29-30)
The Messiah was to die for our sins.
"Surely he hath borne our griefs, and
carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and
afflicted.
But he was wounded
for our transgressions;
he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was
upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have
gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way;
and the LORD hath
laid on him the iniquity of us all. . . .
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he
hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for
sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the
pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the
travail of his soul, [and] shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my
righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. "
(Isaiah 53:4-6, 10-11)
"For when we were yet without strength, in
due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man
will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to
die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet
sinners, Christ died for us. " (Romans
5:6-8)
CONCLUSION:
The “facts” that we have been taught all
of our lives, (which if true call into question our belief in God), are
simply not facts.
·
No matter how we try, we can’t even begin
to understand the creation of the simplest first cell. It could not
have happened by accident. It was designed.
·
Pictures of early embryonic development
that show evolutionary decent were fabricated and do not represent
reality. (these pictures, still in many text, robbed many of Christ).
·
The Drawings that we have all seen,
showing the gradual evolution of monkey to man, are nothing more than
artists speculation based on the flimsiest of fossils (Java man, scull
cap, 3 teeth and on thigh bone). And no true intermediary species i.e.
missing link has yet been found)
·
Archaeopteryx- the “proof” of Darwinism,
the missing link between dinosaurs and birds is a product of wishful
thinking, and is not an intermediary missing link, just an interesting
animal.
·
Fossil record, the more complete it
becomes, the less and less it supports the theory of evolution with
gradual intermediary forms eventually leading to modern forms. In fact,
via the Cambrian explosion, the more we find, the more it appears that
most life forms came about rapidly with no intermediary forms. It more
supports creation than evolution.
·
The universe was created for life. If the
various, forces of gravity, strong and weak force were even
infinitesimally greater or weaker, no life of any sort could have
existed. Was this perfectly crafting of every aspect of the universe an
accident?
·
Christ lived, there is a historical record
of his life and death.
·
Christ was crucified and resurrected, the
actions of the apostles, living and dying for the resurrected Christ
indicates nothing else.
·
100s of years and generations before God
was made man, his miraculous birth, his life, his death, betrayal and
resurrection were fortold.
The evidence is clear, God created our
universe and gave us his only begotten son.
