WAL MART AND CREATION
ONVIDEO-
.Profiling me?
.Pops don’t like that store?
.How old is the earth?
.Did they make encyclopedias?
.The flood
.Evolution
.Punctuated Equilibrium
.Kerry’s tongue?
PAST POSTS- [verses below]
(949)
. ECCLESIASTES 3:11 ‘No man can find out the
work that God has made, from the beginning to the end’. No man can completely
find out Gods works from beginning to end. A few weeks ago as I was
praying/meditating I had a thought; I said to myself ‘what in the world are the
evolutionists going to say when science ultimately overthrows their theory’ and
in a moment of clarity, I kinda heard ‘they will slowly develop ideas that will
make it look like they were right all along, even when these ideas themselves
are contrary to evolution’. I realized that mans inability to admit he was
wrong will cause him to lie. Sure enough, a few days later I caught an
interview on the P.B.S. news that had 2 scientists who were speaking on Darwin.
It just so happens that both Darwin and Lincoln celebrated their 200 year
anniversaries on the same day. During the interview these men reveled in the
wonder and amazement of Darwin, they were falling over themselves in
worshipping the man. They explained how evolution is this reality that is the
basis of all types of scientific advances. They went on and on. The interviewer
then asked about all the science and opponents on the other side. How there
were most certainly proofs that seemed to debunk Darwin’s theory. They
responded by saying ‘Evolution has opened the door for all sorts of
understanding and theories, one of them is called ‘punctuated equilibrium’,
evolution has made this idea possible. Therefore thanks to evolution we have
these other truths to look to for answers’. These men were doing the exact
thing I ‘thought about’ a few days earlier. They were taking the scientific
data that disproves evolution, and saying ‘evolution made this possible’!
Punctuated Equilibrium [or Equilibria] is a theory that was espoused to explain
how things really did not slowly evolve over millions of years. In effect the
scientific evidence shows us no slow evolving of one species into another. As
this reality began to settle in, the scientists realized that they needed to
begin floating alternative theories to Darwin. They knew that if they
religiously stuck with Darwin, that someday they would be disproved. So they
floated this competing theory. The theory basically says that since the fossil
record shows no data that things slowly evolved, how do we answer this? They
said ‘maybe things changed so fast [what!] that the fossil record didn’t catch
it’. In essence this theory says things did not slowly evolve! This theory does
not back up evolution at all, it denies it. In essence the evolutionists in the
interview were contradicting themselves, they were taking proofs against
evolution and saying ‘see, the wonderful knowledge of evolution has lead us to
this point in human history where we now know species DID NOT slowly evolve’.
Are you guys kidding or what?
GREAT AWAKENING- In between studies I have been reading the
‘shelf of books’ I bought a few months ago. I bought about 70 dollars worth of
books at the half price book store, they are worth a few hundred at least. The
last three I just went thru were published by universities; Oxford, Princeton,
etc. I have learned over the years that your time is well spent in the ‘higher
education’ category. You can spend a lifetime reading the popular Christian
culture stuff and never really get educated. The book I
[parts]
(1421) THE FOOL HAS SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD-
Psalms. Caught an interesting special last night on evolution; they got into
many of the fallacies and false things that have been foisted upon the general
population over the years. They went to a famous natural history museum and
interviewed the scientist responsible for teaching one of the most popular
missing links for whales. Darwin believed that whales came from swimming bears
who after many years evolved into whales- stuff that today would put you into
the intellectual category of believing in a flat earth! Darwin held to many
primitive beliefs that are disproven today, many of these beliefs were central
to his theory. He believed in spontaneous generation, that living cells can
self generate from dead matter. His proof? Well look at the piece of meat that
is left out and rots, sure enough over time maggots ‘self generate’. This man
believed this! It took a simple test to prove this theory false; they put
cheesecloth over the meat, which prevented flies from landing on the meat and
laying their eggs in the meat, and Walla- no maggots. This silly belief of
Darwin cannot be written off as ‘well he wasn’t perfect’ no, this belief is
central to the idea of evolution; it has been proven false beyond all doubt. So
back to the whale fossil, as they interviewed the famous scientist responsible
for the whale fossil, they also spoke to other scientists who fully held to the
belief that science has proven the missing link of the whale. They pointed to
the famous specimen of a 4 legged animal with this elongated nose and, well
yes, the tail of a whale! All the men interviewed used this as proof of
evolution, many school text books taught it, surely it must be true! As they
looked at the actual fossil [not just the pictures in the books] they
discovered that the famous fossil actually has no tail. They then asked the
scientist where he came up with the tail. He said he had to speculate at that
point. What! The most famous evidence for the evolution of the whale, the
fossil that all the other experts noted as absolute proof for evolution- it was
a creation in the mind of an evolutionist. The history of fossil hunting is
shot thru with these types of examples; there is actually an entire cottage
industry of ‘fossil hunters’ who have been caught time and again fabricating
missing links. Why so much effort? They know that many would pay much money for
these fossils. Why? Because they do not exist for real. If you were finding
tons of these transitional fossils, which Darwin said we would have to
eventually find if his theory were true, then there would be no market for the
fake ones. And the history of fake ones is quite large; they have caught people
doing this a lot. Chinese fossil hunters presented to national geographic 2 so called fossils
that were supposedly proof that dinosaurs turned into birds. They hired a top
team of researchers to look at the fossils. The team determined that the
Chinese fossils were frauds. The first fossil was shown to have been fabricated
with modern day materials. Then the Chinese finders found another one- hey
there’s much money in this field. The second fossil was also proven to have
been ‘fixed’ by the finders. To the surprise of the researchers, national
geographic went with the fossil anyway [hey they need to pay the bills too!]
and it was presented as absolute proof for evolution. When the true researchers,
the ones who proved the fossils fake, confronted the scientists who were on the
payroll of national geographic, they responded that yes- all the fossils coming
from china have these types of problems. In essence they said the standard
practice of faking it was to be expected. These types of things are usually not
known by the general public at large, hey we’re taught things in school, we see
the pictures, and who has time to do the research? The apostle Paul said men
chose to reject the knowledge of God; they have made a conscience choice to do
stuff like this. There actually is a psychology to atheism. Believers need to
be aware of these so called belief systems and contend for the truth. In the
end many of the opponents have reprobate minds; they don’t want to really see
the truth, and they will fabricate stuff to prove their points.
(1414) A SMASHING SUCCESS-
This week we had the first successful test of the Hadron Collider. This
is an underground tunnel/chamber like device that stretches 17 miles around in
a circle and is used to smash atoms. It was built in Switzerland at much cost
and when they first tried it out around 6 months ago it failed. Well this week
they did a test and it worked great. They shot 2 protons at each other at 99%
the speed of light and
[parts]
THE
5TH ELEMENT.Ok- let’s talk philosophy today- the last post on this subject I traced what we normally refer to as the beginning of Greek philosophy- a man by the name of Thales- 6th century BCE.
We said that Thales had an idea that water was the principle element- water seemed to have the ability to move [motion] by itself- so Walla- maybe water is the principle thing.
He was what we refer to as a Monist.
Monists believed that there was one principle element- responsible for all other things.
Now- the pre Socratic philosophers debated about this- some said it was air- others earth- some said fire- as a matter of fact- some said all 4 of these elements were responsible for existence.
Now- some sought a 5th element- some yet to be discovered thing that would explain it all.
A man by the name of Anaximander described it as ‘the boundless’- something that has no origin- he said it was ‘both unborn- and immortal’ ahh- you can already see the attributes of God in this [boundless- what Theologians call omnipresent- God having no limits- he is everywhere [but not everything- get to that in a moment] and ‘unborn’ that is he himself has no beginning].
Ok- this 5th element [some called it Ether- or Aether- a sort of wave theory- that light travels along this ether- this idea lasted till the day of Einstein- who showed us that Ether does not exist [in this way] but that light itself is made up of particles- photons- this was one of the major breakthroughs of modern physics].
A few years ago the movie ‘the 5th Element’- Bruce Willis- hit on this theme- sort of like the ‘God particle’- that is they were in search for some type of being that was eternal – self existent.
The term Quintessence [quint- 5] came to be defined as this 5th element- and today we use the word Quintessential to describe the pure essence of a thing- the perfect embodiment of something.
Over time the Greek thinkers would arrive at the idea that yes indeed- there was one main thing- Monism- that could be the source of all other things.
It is interesting to note that the Jewish prophets- and wisdom literature- which predates these guys- already started from the standpoint of Monotheism- one God.
Now- Monism is not Monotheism.
Monism is really a form of what we call Pantheism [in the study of religion].
Pantheism says that God is ‘everything’- some eastern religions hold to this concept.
The Christian view is that God is separate from creation- that he is indeed the original source of creation- but not the creation itself.
The Geek philosophers even described this 5th element as ‘The One’- see- they were getting close.
In today’s debates- some espouse an idea that there was no beginning point- that the universe is either eternal [something Einstein disproved with the Big Bang theory] or that there is a sort of infinite regress- that there is no one starting point- but that there have been a never ending [or beginning] series of ‘big bangs’ that go on forever.
This defies the laws of logic- and math.
Math?
Yeah- many of the great physicists were also great mathematicians [like Einstein- and Max Plank- who was first a mathematician].
If there was no beginning point- mathematically it doesn’t ‘work’.
You would never be able to arrive at the present time- if there was no starting point to measure from [I know this might sound strange- but this is indeed a proof- that there had to be a starting point].
What these thinkers show us is that even thru the ancient field of Philosophy- you still arrive at some type of ‘thing’ that is responsible for all other things.
Some Christians reject the Big Bang theory- but in my view it gave the Christian apologist the greatest tool to argue for the existence of God.
For many centuries it was believed that the universe was eternal- and if that was true- then indeed you did not have to have an outside source that was responsible for it.
But Einstein showed us that there was a beginning point- that the universe is in a continual expansion mode- and if it is getting ‘bigger’ by the second- then yes- it did have a starting point.
Many today think that it ‘popped’ into existence on its own- this is both scientifically and logically impossible- it violates the law of Cause and Effect [every effect has to have a cause also ‘out of nothing- nothing comes’].
There was a famous Christian who abandoned the faith- Bertrand Russell- he said ‘if everything has to have a cause- then God must have one too- and if God needs a cause- then why not see the universe as the cause’.
[parts]
[1582]
HITCHENS-PIRATES AND M THEORY- Let’s talk a little more about
Christopher Hitchens book- God is not great. As I’m reading thru the book- and
also doing some studying on Modernity- it’s obvious for me to see the errors in
the arguments Hitchens is making in trying to refute the existence of God.
Instead of attempting to refute each argument he makes [and to be honest- he
does make many classic mistakes- things that are not really hard to show as
false]. Let me give you just a few points- Hitchens comes at you from all
angles- history, science, historical criticism [a view of the bible that tries
to undermine the historical accuracy of the faith] politics- he basically
covers all the angles that I too like to engage in. He is smart- no doubt about
it- and he mocks Christians, Jews, Muslims- and he does it in a way that says
‘you are all idiots’. So that’s why when attempting to refute him- when I see
him doing something stupid- I try and bring that out. Okay- one of the major
mistakes Hitchens makes [a common mistake in the field of apologists versus
atheists] is he appeals to the basic idea ‘we- as intellectual people do not
accept things based on faith- we only believe things that can be scientifically
proven to be true’ now- how many times have you heard this? This argument is
only made by those who are ‘novices’ in this debate. Why? Because at face value
it is very easy to refute. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris- and all the other famous
atheists believe in all types of historical events- things that happened in the
past- without a single shred of ‘scientific proof’. Let’s see- Do you believe
Lincoln was shot? Have you personally done DNA tests on the remains? Have you
even seen the remains? Let’s see- what about Aristotle and Socrates and Plato-
surely as refined as these men are- they most certainly believe that these
great Greek philosophers lived 4 centuries before Christ. Again- what
scientific proof can you show me- you know- the standard that you’re using to
judge whether or not Jesus ever lived? Basically the argument that says 'faith
and Jesus and God are not real truth- not like science’ is a totally illogical
argument- unless these men would have us believe that they reject all of the
above historical figures I just mentioned. So how does the bible- Jesus- God-
hold up to the historical test [not the scientific test!]? Point of fact- there
is no other historical person- in the history of the world- with more
historical proofs of his existence. There are no other ancient documents-
dating back to the time of Christ- that have the historical accuracy that we
find in the New Testament- Luke- the writer of both the gospel of Luke and the
book of Acts- from a purely historical point of view- is considered the best-
most accurate- first century historian to have ever lived [I explained it all
before under the Evolution/Cosmology section- I think it’s in the 8-2010
posts]. Basically the argument Hitchens is making is dishonest at its core.
Then- he gets into M Theory [geez- didn’t really want to go there] Okay- I love
studying science, history, Physics. And to be honest- Physics is really not my
‘field’ that is I prefer to show you the mistakes Hitchens is making when he
pretends to be a bible student [he makes statements that he is a regular reader
of the bible- who goes thru it often- I seriously doubt that claim- he seems to
be familiar with certain critical scholars of scripture- theories that have
long been rejected- documentary theory by Wellhausen- and you can kinda tell he
simply reads the critics and incorporates their ideas into his own- heck- if
there is no God- then what’s wrong with plagiarism?] Okay- Hitchens seems to be
enamored with Stephen Hawking- I wrote about Hawking a month or so ago- in his
recent book- Grand Design- he made some ‘Grand mistakes’ and I refuted these
errors. Now Hitchens seems fascinated by certain theories of Hawking- and his
worship of the man’s theories goes to the extreme. Hitchens speaks of the
famous idea in theoretical physics called M Theory- modern physics [standard
theory] says our universe is made up of Pixels- fine points of matter that are
unseen by the naked eye- but exist as the basic fabric of the universe. Now- we
all accept this- Atoms- Neutrons- etc. all little ‘dots’ if you will, that make
up our universe. So M theory [a theory that expands upon String theory] says
‘no- maybe the universe is made up of these strings- these vibrating strings
that form into circles- and under these hoops- there are buckets that make up
the matter of the universe’ Okay- just think in your head of a piece of string-
make a loop- under the loop stick a basketball net. Walla- that’s the theory.
Now- does this sound stupid to you? Well you’re in good company- it also sounds
stupid to a growing number of very able physicists! Yes- many brilliant- non
religious scientists- will tell you that doing science like this- just making
stuff up- is loony. So to be honest- as interesting as theoretical physics is-
there are many things that simply do not meet the standard of ‘solid science’.
So- why mention this. Hitchens uses this theory as proof against the existence
of God [in a weird- tortured way] and at the same time says ‘I don’t accept
things that can’t be scientifically proven’ yet the whole M theory field is
very doubtful- some think the whole thing is simply not true. So it’s stuff
like this- obvious mistakes- that are sprinkled all thru out his book. I mean
he even makes mistakes that novices make- he mistakenly refers to the
establishing of the state of Israel as having occurred in the 19th
century- I mean I can’t believe he doesn’t know the actual date- 1948- I have
to think that he simply made the common mistake of thinking the years 1900-1999
are the ‘19th century- a common mistake made by people who are just
beginning the journey of learning [obviously the 1900’s are the 20th
century]. But at the same time he lambasts Christians as idiots and does stuff
like this. It reminds me of the time I was watching MSNBC- now this cable
channel is filled with nonstop mocking of the political right- one morning the
host [Scarborough] was doing his show- and he reads the upcoming story to come
on after the commercial- but you can see he’s confused- he asks someone off screen
‘does that say Pirates’? And they tell him yes- he then says ‘folks- your not
gonna believe this- but when we get back- yes- we will cover the developing
story of Pirates- yes I know it sounds unbelievable- Pirates attacked a ship
off the coast of Somalia’. Now- no one ever said anything- he came back and
simply reported the story. What’s wrong? He obviously thought Pirates meant
‘Pirates’ you know- Johnny Depp and the Caribbean. I’m sure someone informed
him during the commercial ‘Piracy is the official term for robbery on the high
seas- you dummy’! Can you imagine the mocking they would have done if Sarah
Palin had done this? So I see in Hitchens a mocking of religion and at the same
time a conceited view of his own intellect- and the intellect of other
atheists- he engages in a sort of debate that says ‘look- you religionists are
idiots- we are not’ and he makes such obvious mistakes- things that
‘uneducated’ people do all the time- not bad people- just common mistakes like
the ‘19th century’ thing. And if people make mistakes like this
[Pirates- etc.] fine- we don’t want to beat people up- but if the entire
premise of your book [or cable channel] is ‘look at all the Christian idiots’
and then you make the same mistakes your criticizing the Christians for- well
then yes- you look as silly as Joe Scarborough thinking Johnny Depp and his
crew were out robbing ships!
[parts]
(1132)
Nehemiah 9- as the people repent, they stand, fast, confess their sins and read
from God’s law for a quarter of the day! There is a real renewal that takes
place thru the reading of the word. In the last chapter we saw the emphasis on
the teaching of Gods word, the bible says the Levites not only taught/read, but
also gave the sense, the meaning of it. Jesus rebuked the religious leaders of
his day, not because they weren’t ‘reading/quoting’ bible verses, they were
doing it all the time! But because they weren’t really grasping the principles
behind the word. In this chapter the people were not only hearing, but also
understanding. Now they also do an historical remembrance of Gods great past
works. They recount his promise to Abraham, the story of Egypt and Gods great deliverance.
The giving of the law to Moses and the rebellion of their fathers during the
time of the judges. It’s a great retelling of their history, sort of like
Stephen in Acts 7. They also praise and worship God as the creator of all
things. I have been reading a good book on the current debate between ‘young
earth’ and ‘old earth’ creationists. Though I personally lean towards the old
earth idea, yet the book brings out very good arguments for a young earth. They
show the historical development of the geologic table [the levels of earth and
the dating of these levels] and the book also brings out the fact that though
many of the church fathers spiritualized the days of creation, this did not
mean they were old earth creationists! Augustine believed in ‘instantaneous
creation’ in a moment. So his idea was really young earth, even though he did
not take the creation days as literal. One of the points brought out is the
basic belief in God as creator, man seems to have a difficult time simply
believing in the fact that God made all things out of nothing [Ex-Nihilo]
whether you are an old earth or young earth advocate, the fact is God made it
all by his word! The people in Nehemiah’s day praised him for his great works
as seen in creation. It’s important to see the role that the reading of the law
played in this national revival. We see this happen a few times in Israel ’s
history. Times where they rediscover the law after many years and repent as
they return to Gods precepts. Recently I have been reading/studying from around
11:00 am to 3-4 pm. Not every day, but a few days a week. I found it
interesting that the people were giving one fourth of their day to reading the
law; God saw it as vital for the restoration of his city and people. I want to
encourage all my Pastor friends, as you build Gods people, don’t underestimate
the importance of good bible teaching. Don’t just give people verses to
memorize/hear [what the Pharisees were good at] but give them the understanding
too. God used his law [word] to revive the people after the walls were built.
1936 EINSTEIN THE DETERMINIST.
In keeping with the last post [propaganda]
I read an interesting AP article on Syria.
As most of you know Syria has
been in a civil war for many months- they are the 1st ‘Arab spring’
nation that has not ‘fallen’ to the rebels.
Now- there are lots of political
things going on in the region [Russia and China not supporting a Libyan style
NATO action] that are sustaining Assad’s regime.
But I found it funny how the
western media have chosen to portray the war.
In order for the media to side
with those who want to depose Assad- they must ‘side’ with the ‘deposers’.
So- the article spoke about the
outside Al Qaeda groups who are coming in to assist the rebels.
It used terms like ‘heroism’
‘valor’ ‘experienced fighters who know what they are doing’.
These terms were used to describe
Al Qaeda fighters- in contrast to Assad- a ‘crimes against humanity’
description.
Wow- I never thought the media
would actually try and honor Al Qaeda fighters- in order to accomplish their
agenda.
That my friends is the ultimate
in propaganda.
Okay- I read some more on
Einstein over the weekend- and wanted to cover a few things.
Over the years as you read
various sources about famous folk- you need to be aware of the source.
For instance- Christian writers
[writing from that perspective] often portray the religious tendencies of a
figure in a more favorable light then an atheist writer would.
So you have to be careful that
the author is not writing his own story into the person he is covering.
But the biography I’m reading was
not written from a religious view.
Yet- the author does share the
various positions Einstein has taken about God over the years.
One thing to note is Einstein was
a lover of philosophy- he admired men like Hume, Kant and Spinoza.
If you remember- a few years ago I
covered the history of philosophy and how much of it dealt with what the causes
of things are.
The law of Cause and Effect [also
referred to as causality].
As a Physicist- Einstein had a
great interest in these subjects.
At the end of the day- Einstein
fell into a camp of thinkers called Determinists.
That means he believed that that
the universe was ruled by definite principles- even though we did not have the
answers to all the puzzles- yet he was convinced that if we searched long
enough- we would find order to it.
This belief is in keeping with
Theistic thinkers- not with those who ascribe chance and disorder to the
creation.
I might have bitten off a little
much here- but the point is- at the end of the day Einstein rejected the
commonly held belief that there is no real cause to the things we see.
Many thinkers who argue against
the existence of God argue form a perspective that chance is behind the
‘perceived’ design we see in nature.
Dawkins [the famous atheist]
calls it ‘the appearance of design’.
Einstein did not simply believe
in the ‘appearance’ of design- but he believed that the Cosmos was indeed a
product of some type of cause that gave it design.
Now- I’m not saying Einstein was
a Christian [or observant Jew]- but the point is- in his thinking- he rejects
the most commonly held arguments that are made against the Theistic world view
[in Cosmology- science] and sides with the Christian thinkers of our day.
Einstein famously said ‘God does
not roll dice’ meaning he did not believe in the atheistic argument that things
just happen without any cause.
No- Einstein seems to agree with
one of his favorite thinkers- Spinoza said ‘All things are determined by the
necessity of Divine nature’.
Yes- Einstein was a Determinist
in his thinking- he did indeed side with the Theists at the end of the day.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
No comments:
Post a Comment