The Beginning (4)

This is part 4 of 4 of chapter 2 of my book, Biblical Glasses.

When was it?

The only possible answer to the world’s existence is God. God’s Word, the Bible, tells us of a complete six day creation, which the reliable evidence supports beyond a reasonable doubt! None of the other theories fit with the evidence; rather, they detract from the Bible by causing people to question its truth.

Ask yourself this question: Is it true the earth is relatively young because I say so? No! I say so, because it is true! “Evolution is a faith that the facts have failed. Biblical Christianity [creation] is a faith that fits the facts.” By tracing Biblical ancestries to Adam, we find that creation took place about 6000 years ago, around 4200–4000 B.C., and the flood occurred around 2450 B.C.

Does it matter?

Robert Jastrow, a popular astronomer and evolutionist, said:

A sound explanation may exist for the explosive birth of our Universe; but if it
does, science cannot find out what the explanation is. The scientist’s pursuit
of the past ends in the moment of creation. This is an exceedingly strange
development, unexpected by all but the theologians. They have always accepted
the word of the Bible: In the beginning God created heaven and earth. … At this
moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the
mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power
of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of
ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the
final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there
for centuries.

The Bible says in the following passage that sin caused death.

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man [Adam], and death
through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—for
before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into
account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam
to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as
did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come. But the gift is not like the
trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did
God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the One Man, Jesus Christ,
overflow to the many! Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one
man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift
followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of
the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who
receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign
in life through the One Man, Jesus Christ. Consequently, just as the result of
one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of
righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as
through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also
through the obedience of the One Man the many will be made righteous. The law
was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace
increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace
might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our
Lord (Romans 5:12-21).

Jesus Christ atoned for our sin by His righteous life, sacrificial death, and physical resurrection to give us the gift of eternal life. In a nutshell, this is the Christian faith. If any description of the origins of life and the universe without God is true, then the Bible cannot be trusted as the inerrant Word of God.

While there are many Christians who either support an old earth cosmology or have no opinion on the creation issue while maintaining their faith in Jesus Christ, I have a hard time seeing how they link the significance of Christ’s atonement with any death-before-sin doctrine. I do not question their salvation; that is between them and God. Salvation certainly does not require a perfect understanding of Christian doctrine; however, the foundation of the Gospel is compromised with any old earth creation model, in which there was definitely disease, pain, suffering, and death before sin.

If there was death before sin, then sin does not cause death. If sin does not cause death, then we have no need of being saved from sin. We do not need Jesus as our Savior from sin. The entire Bible becomes untrustworthy and meaningless. If death is just part of evolution, then there is no hope for justice, much less for an afterlife.In the words of C.S. Lewis from his atheistic days, “All life will turn out in the end to have been a transitory and senseless contortion upon the idiotic face of infinite matter.” What a hopeless and pointless, worthless and futile existence this life would be if it were not for the overwhelming evidence showing a young earth creation model that fits perfectly with what the Bible says, a Creator God of the universe, and His awesome love for His creation!

The Beginning (3)

This is part 3 of 4 from chapter 2 of my book, Biblical Glasses. This section deals with the fossil record.

The fossil record is basically “billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth.” It is evidence of past plant, insect, animal, and even human life. Many people think fossils are formed very slowly, over long periods of time (hundreds, thousands, millions, even billions of years), but in recent years, scientists from both evolutionary and creationist bias have agreed that fossils are created very quickly, often within days or weeks and certainly no more than months.

In fact, fossil finders have recently unearthed fossilized clocks, boots, hats, and barbed wire, as well as a petrified dog and a fossil of a fish giving birth, demonstrating fossils form quickly in nature. Petroleum, which had been thought to take hundreds of thousands of years to form, can be made in laboratory environments in minutes! Fossils are formed by compression and rapid burial, most easily by vast amounts of water. The way fossils are formed certainly supports Biblical creation, as the flood in the time of Noah likely caused the majority of the fossils in existence today, but this formation method does not necessarily disprove evolution. Evolutionists now say there could have been lots and lots of mini floods through the billions of years of history.

Geologists came up with the geologic column to show the various rock layers and the typical creatures fossilized in them. The column includes the following layers and their estimated evolutionist ages from oldest to youngest:

- Precambrian (4.6 billion–544 million years old)
- Cambrian (544–505 million years old)
- Ordovician (505–440 million years old)
- Silurian (440–410 million years old)
- Devonian (410–360 million years old)
- Carboniferous (Mississippian and Pennsylvanian eras: 360–286 million years old)
- Permian (286–248 million years old)
- Triassic (248–213 million years old)
- Jurassic (213–145 million years old)
- Cretaceous (145–65 million years old)
- Tertiary (65–1.8 million years old)
- Quaternary (1.8–.01 million years old)

Looking from the Precambrian era to the Quaternary era, evolutionists claim to see smaller, less developed creatures leading up to larger, more developed creatures. Given an incredible time scale, they say the smaller, less developed creatures evolved into the larger, more developed creatures. However, there is no evidence in the layers, like erosion, to support long time periods! Fault lines cross through all the rock layers as additional evidence of no lengthy time lapses between layers. In fact, unconformities and para-conformities show unexplainable gaps in the rock layers.

Fossils thought to be extinct from the Devonian era are found in the Quaternary era; fossils that should not be found until the Cretaceous era are found in the Silurian era. Clam fossils are found in abundance in every layer. All existing fossils are those of fully formed creatures. There are no transitional fossils necessary for evolution. There are no living transitional forms either.

Polystrate fossils, mostly trees, stand upright through several rock layers. Either these tree trunks stood for billions of years without decay (according to evolutionists), or these tree trunks were buried rapidly by mud, dirt, silt, sand, and water during Noah’s flood. This evidence alone should be enough to thwart evolution, but somehow the evidence gets overlooked.

Creationists consider the geologic column misleading, but they still use it as evidence for creation. Looking from the Precambrian era to the Quaternary era, creationists claim to see water-dwelling and less mobile creatures leading up to land-dwelling, more mobile creatures. The time scale for the creationists is a matter of weeks, as the majority of the column was laid down during a cataclysmic worldwide flood. What little order exists in the sequence of fossils is primarily due to burial of successive ecological zones, the ability of larger animals to escape to higher land, and the sorting action of water. In other words, the flood caused the earth to be a massive graveyard around 2450 B.C.. All of the creatures fossilized in the rock layers lived together, including dinosaurs!

After the flood waters wreaked havoc for several months on the earth, the waters slowly subsided, and the earth as we know it today was formed. The natural evidence for the formation of the earth lies in earthquake and volcanic activity, sure to be extreme during the flood. The Bible says in Genesis 7:11-24:

All the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. On that
very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and
the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. They had with them every wild
animal according to its kind, all livestock according to their kinds, every
creature that moves along the ground according to its kind and every bird
according to its kind, everything with wings. Pairs of all creatures that have
the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. The animals going
in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then
the Lord shut him in. For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as
the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose
and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the
water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the
entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a
depth of more than twenty feet. Every living thing that moved on the earth
perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the
earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in
its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out;
men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of
the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the
ark. The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days.

There is no complete geologic column anywhere on earth; nonetheless, one interesting piece of evidence lies at the top of Mount Everest. There we find millions of bottom-of-the-ocean-dwelling clam fossils. Evolutionists say the bottom of the ocean rose up to become Mount Everest over billions of years. While their timescale is off, they are semi-correct; God raised up land masses that were, at one time, under water. Creationists relying on the Bible say the flood covered the entire world, even the highest mountains, to a depth of more than twenty feet (see Genesis 7:17-20). Mount Everest certainly was not as high then as it is today; but, interestingly, the pre-flood earth may have been significantly flatter, in which case, there would be enough water currently on the earth to cover it to a depth of 8000 feet. It was conceivably during the water’s subsidence these clams were left to become fossils on the world’s highest mountain, as evidence of the truth of the Bible.

Scientists agree the best place on earth to look at these rock layers and fossil formations is the Grand Canyon. Creationists and evolutionists marvel at the amazing natural formation, which is 277 miles long, a mile deep, and between four and eighteen miles wide. Most people have heard that the canyon was formed by the Colorado River over millions or even billions of years, but that is simply not true. In fact, it is not even possible, because the origin of the Colorado River is lower in elevation than the top of the canyon! That means for evolutionists the Colorado River would have had to flow uphill to carve the canyon. Water does not flow uphill!

Creationists suggest the rock layers were laid down during the flood, and the canyon was formed later. Perhaps the Kaibab Upwarp, a large plateau near the beginning of the Grand Canyon, acted as a dam for three lakes occupying much of present day Utah, Colorado, and northern Arizona. These lakes catastrophically broke through the Kaibab Upwarp, and the Grand Canyon was cut out by the drainage of these lakes through this breach in the dam.

Further evidence to support this damn breaking was recently shown: A small canyon, nearly a replica at 1:40 scale of the Grand Canyon, was formed this same way, in only one day, as a result of the eruption of Mount St. Helens! If a localized volcanic eruption can cause a large canyon in a single day, certainly a worldwide flood could have caused a larger canyon in a matter of weeks.

There is plenty more to examine about the fossil record, like the dragonflies with over two-foot wingspans, the giant beavers, and the twelve-foot tall humans, but the real key behind the fossil evidence is the age of the fossils and rock layers. Dating methods are extremely important to examine and understand, because they are ultimately the key to evolution. Evolution requires billions of years, so any evidence refuting old age claims effectively shows evolution is false. Few non-scientists dispute the dates of fossils and rocks, etc., because they feel like dating methods are too difficult to understand. There is definitely some complexity in dating methods, but I will try to simplify the procedure’s explanation.

Think back to your elementary school science classes and picture the Periodic Table of Elements—with hydrogen, helium, oxygen, carbon, potassium, lead, gold, etc. Everything in the universe is comprised of combinations of those elements. For example, water is comprised of two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. Some of these stable elements have unstable versions called isotopes. Dating methods rely on unstable parent isotopes that decay until they become stable daughter elements. Some examples are: Uranium 238 decaying into Lead 206, Potassium 40 decaying into Argon 40, and Carbon 14 decaying into Nitrogen 14. Theoretically, if the half life, the decay rate, of an isotope is known, then the difference between the original amount of an isotope in a fossil and the amount in the fossil today can be used to calculate the fossil’s age. It is assumed the half life of Uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years; it is assumed the half life of Potassium 40 is 1.25 billion years; it is assumed the half life of Carbon 14 is 5730 years. You can already see that this idea requires several assumptions.

As an analogy, we can figure out how far a car has traveled if we know that it started out with ten gallons of gas in its tank, gets twenty miles per gallon, and has five gallons of gas remaining in the tank. Five gallons of gas have decayed at the rate of twenty miles per gallon; therefore, the car has traveled 100 miles. If all of these assumptions are true, then the results are accurate. If any of the assumptions are false, the results are worthless. For example:

· If we guessed the starting amount of gas in the tank wrong, our answer is wrong.
· If gas was added during the trip, our answer is wrong.
· If gas leaked out of the tank, our answer is wrong.
· If the gas mileage was estimated wrong, our answer is wrong.
· If the gas mileage varied over the trip, our answer is wrong.

Just like the assumptions made above, the following assumptions on radioactive dating methods are:

· The atmosphere had the same element concentration in the past as it does today.
· The production of parent elements has always been constant.
· The original element amount and ratio in the fossil or rock is known.
· The decay rate is constant.
· No contamination has occurred.
· No daughter element was originally in the fossil.
· The only element loss is due to the decay process.
· The decay rate was determined accurately. (Decay rates are constantly modified and criticized to get desired results.)

We only can know for sure how much of the element remains in the fossil today (i.e. how much gas is currently in the tank). All the other information is based on speculation. If you knew these conditions were speculative, would you still promote the idea as fact? Evolutionists know about these assumptions, yet they still claim their stance as truth. Even worse, anytime evolutionists get dates that do not work with their theory, they throw the dates out, rather than throw their theory out!

A living mollusk only a few years old was dated radioactively as being 2300 years old. Part of a mammoth carcass was dated at 15,000 years old, while another part was dated at 21,000 years old. A dead seal, recently killed, was dated as having died 1300 years ago. Living snails had shells dated as being 27,000 years old. Dating methods are speculative, conflicting, and inconsistent at best!

Despite the assumptions and flaws in dating methods, science has still learned a great deal about the elemental make-up of the universe. In fact, everything science has truthfully observed supports creation. For example:

· World population is too low for old age, and its growth rate suggests that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. The entire world population standing side-by-side would fit in the city limits of Jacksonville, Florida—twice!
· Stalactites and stalagmites have been thought to take millions of years to form, but they have recently been observed growing at rates of fifteen inches per year.
· The Carbon 14/Carbon 12 ratio is not yet at equilibrium, indicating the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
· The decay rate of the earth’s magnetic field indicates the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
· The amount of Helium in the atmosphere is still increasing, limiting the earth’s age to 10,000 years.
· Coal and oil deposits are nonrenewable resources, because they were formed by the flood and are not renewing or forming new deposits anymore.
· Ocean and river delta sediments support only about 4000 years of age, fitting with Noah’s flood.

Even Charles Darwin was skeptical. “In a letter to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology, Darwin wrote, ‘I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science.’” He also said:

To suppose that the human eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting
the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and
for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed
by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.

Finally, Darwin had concerns regarding several simple ways to disprove his theory. One of those ways was to show that symbiotic relationships existed. Darwin said, “If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection.” Of course, since Darwin made this statement, many symbiotic relationships have been observed. Several examples include: Small cleaner fish swimming into the mouths of carnivorous larger fish (i.e. sharks and barracuda), pollinating insects and flowering plants, algae living on the backs of spider crabs to camouflage them from predators, bacteria living in human intestines to aid digestion, and protozoa living in termites to digest wood the termites eat and provide food for the termites to digest. These amazing relationships simply cannot be explained by evolution; they point to a Creator.

Now I do not mean for my discussion of natural selection, mutations, and fossils to be conclusive or exhaustive; I intend for it be a building block for your own further study. There have been thousands of volumes written by experts on these topics, and I certainly encourage a continued investigation of the evidence to add to your knowledge on these topics. They are critical for understanding both our beginning and our destiny. See Appendix B for several recommended readings on this topic.

Despite the staggering amount of evidence against evolution, it is unfortunately taught in schools as the truth. By 1963, the ACLU had the theory of evolution taught in schools as truth and supported by taxpayers’ money! That means we have been supporting the teaching of evolution in public schools! Children learn it right from the start and see no reason to question it, because they are not given another option.

In support of learning the truth, I see no reason why both viewpoints should not be taught. If evolutionists are so certain their theory is fact, why do they fear allowing the so-called creation story to be taught as well? Perhaps they realize evolution cannot stand up when closely scrutinized against the truth of God’s six day creation. By teaching both viewpoints, students would have an opportunity to investigate the evidence and come to a conclusion based on reason and logic. That is called learning! Sadly, not much of it is occurring today.

Scientists use the evidence for a young earth and add billions of years to get evolution. While many people are effectively brainwashed to believe it, there are those who know better. Over the past 150 years, evolution has gone nearly full circle—from a ludicrous hypothesis, to a possible theory, to a probable truth, back to a possibility, and now to an idea people are not so sure about. We are hearing more and more about the idea of intelligent design. It teaches that a greater power had to have had something to do with the creation of the universe because of the overwhelming evidence. There is so much order in the universe that it had to be designed!

Science has been caught numerous times teaching falsehoods about evolution. For example, public school textbooks (and most private school textbooks) contain only Ernst Haeckel’s drawings, not the actual photos, of human and animal embryos, which attempt to show similarities in an effort to prove evolution from a common ancestor. See the drawings (on top) compared with the actual photos (on the bottom) below.

Haeckel (1834–1919), a German zoologist and evolutionist, supported the Nazi party, going so far as to justify racism and social Darwinism through his false extrapolations of the evidence. The drawings have been known to be false for over 130 years, yet nothing has been done to get them out of the textbooks. The similarities that do exist (i.e. each creature has a head) between the embryos simply show a common creator. This teaching of lies is completely against for what science really stands. While the embryo picture was truly a disaster for evolutionists, it has been kept from media criticism; parents of school children probably know nothing about the lies taught in schools.

Despite the farce of evolution, the bottom line is that many people still believe in God. In fact, over ninety percent of Americans admit regularly praying to God. There is a sense evolution could not have occurred on its own. Those who do not really know what to think often get stuck believing the idea of theistic evolution.

Theistic evolution maintains God’s existence but suggests He plays a passive role in the world. Theistic evolutionists might say God started the Big Bang knowing everything would turn out the way it did; He just sat back and watched it happen. Theistic evolution is the viewpoint most people take if they do not have time to search for the truth. It is easy to keep their faith and conform to the popular worldview of evolution, but theistic evolution is absolutely false. It is the worst viewpoint to take, because it leads to a halfhearted faith. Jesus said:

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!
So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of My mouth. You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked (Revelation 3:15-17).

Twisting the Bible, the Word of God, to fit with a secular opinion will not work. The beautiful thing about the Word of God is that it needs no twisting to fit the evidence for the origin of our universe. It tells the story accurately and perfectly depicts the creation that actually occurred.

The Parable of the Sower

The Parable of the Sower

Mark 4
1Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. 2He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3"Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times." 9Then Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." 10When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12so that, " 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'" 13Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14The farmer sows the word. 15Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown."

Matthew 13
1That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake. 2Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore. 3Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. 8Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. 9He who has ears, let him hear." 10The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" 11He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: " 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it. 18"Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. 22The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. 23But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."

Luke 8
4While a large crowd was gathering and people were coming to Jesus from town after town, he told this parable: 5"A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path; it was trampled on, and the birds of the air ate it up. 6Some fell on rock, and when it came up, the plants withered because they had no moisture. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up with it and choked the plants. 8Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up and yielded a crop, a hundred times more than was sown." When he said this, he called out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." 9His disciples asked him what this parable meant. 10He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, " 'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.' 11"This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. 12Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. 13Those on the rock are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. 14The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life's worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. 15But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop.

We have three things here: a parable (not the first), Jesus' explanation to His disciples (meaning closest followers as Mark shows, not necessarily just the 12 apostles, despite Matthew's and Luke's failure to include mention of others present) of His reason for speaking in parables (of utmost importance), and the detailed explanation of the parable He had just given.

We can dwell on the soils and whether or not "soil X" represents a true believer or not, but that's not the key to the passage. The key to the passage lies in the reason for Jesus' speaking in parables. Once we gain understanding of that, then we can better analyze the intended menaing of the parable. And that's the exact order Jesus does it in all 3 accounts. So before continuing, let me say that tone is difficult to interpret with text conversation. My tone tends to be interpreted as being much more aggresive than it is meant to be. I am writing the following with meekness and fear. Here goes:

We seem to think that Jesus' command, "He who has ears, let him hear!" is critical. While it is true that there is great reward for seeking out Jesus and striving to find the deeper meanings to His parables, getting people to do that is not the sole purpose of Jesus' speaking in parables. Rather, doing that is evidence of having been blessed with ears to hear, just as Matthew records Jesus as saying: "Blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear." The reason the ears hear is because they are blessed by God. Ears that do not hear have not been blessed by God. This is evidenced throughout Scripture. Proverbs 20:12 says this: "Ears that hear and eyes that see—the LORD has made them both." We must acknowledge that our seeking and searching is a direct result of our having been blessed by God to do just that.

Now what is the other purpose of Jesus' speaking in parables? Not merely to reveal truth to those who have been blessed by God to receive it, but also to conceal the truth from those who have not been blessed by God. And this sounds harsh. But it's exactly what the text says. In Mark, Jesus speaks in parables so that those outside will hear but not understand, will see but not perceive. And the last statement is the real kicker: If they did hear and understand and see and perceive, then then might repent to be healed, and that's not what Jesus wanted at this time. That's what Isaiah records God as saying, and that's why Jesus quoted him. The same is true in Matthew. (Luke doesn't elaborate.)

The focus is on their hardened hearts. It's not God's fault that they don't hear or see. It's their fault. But the discplies were in the same condition. And that ties back in to the soils. One soil is not inherently better than another. If it were, then that particular soil would have reason to boast and something in itself to credit the growth. But it is not the soil that grows the crop; it's God. God has blessed some soil and not other soil. No soil has worthiness in itself. The same is true for mankind. We believers (we good soil kind of folks) have nothing within ourselves to lord over unbelievers (those bad soil folks). God Himself has blessed us to be good soil. And that's why we receive His Word and produce crop, because God is at work in us. God simply has not blessed the bad soil in the same way that He has blessed the good soil. He gives the growth.

Now, that's probably not what you think about the whole thing. But it's exactly what Scripture says. The great question that needs answering when discussing this topic is this: WHY DO SOME RECEIVE THE GOSPEL MESSAGE AND NOT OTHERS? Why do some beleive and not others?

If the difference lies within man, then man has reason to boast. If one man humbles himself more than another, and that's the reason he believes, then he has in a sense made himself more worthy than the other man.

If however, the difference is with God (which is what Scripture says), then man has nothing about which to boast. I know that I believe the Gospel because God has given me a new heart. I did not believe the Gospel before God did that work in me. I couldn't have. Furthermore, once God did give me a new heart, I couldn't have kept from believing the Gospel, nor can anyone else. Want more evidence of this? Post a reply. Let's work it out.

The Beginning (2)

This is part 2 of 4 of the second chapter of my book, Biblical Glasses.

Can it be explained?

Unfortunately, the brief explanation above is not enough for many people. God’s Word, despite the evidence reviewed in the previous chapter showing its accuracy, is doubted, even by true Christians, more on the topic of creation than on any other. So we need to briefly look at the different theories of universe existence under the scientific microscope to see if there is evidence to support one theory over another. Keep in mind, since the beginning cannot be tested and observed, we cannot scientifically prove the date of creation. No one alive today was an eyewitness to the origins of the universe, so any origin theory must be taken on faith. We can, however, prove with a preponderance of the reliable evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the universe is young, just as the Bible says. Before considering the Biblical account in more detail, we need to determine how the universe came into existence. There are really only four possibilities:

- It is an illusion. No one lives emotionally or morally as if the universe or their life is an illusion. It is not The Matrix.
- It is eternal. Scientific evidence shows a beginning and constant decay toward an end.
- It evolved from nothing. Science has never observed anything to support the lie of evolution.
- It was created by an eternal being. Evidence supports this fact beyond a reasonable doubt.

The creation account in the Bible, traced through Biblical genealogies to the first human, Adam, transpired about 6000 years ago. Biblical creation occurred around 4200–4000 B.C. Not surprisingly, we do not observe in archaeological findings any remnants of human civilization authentically dated before this time.

What does the Bible really mean when it gives the creation account? Some people argue the Bible’s words are not to be taken literally regarding the creation account; how to interpret the Bible is an issue among Bible believers. Do we take the text completely literally? Should we look at certain parts of the text in a figurative manner? Does a particular verse in one Bible version say the same thing as that same verse in another? Taking individual verses out of context allows all sorts of variation from intended meanings.

Many liberals believe the Bible should not be taken literally, that every part of the Bible, with perhaps the exception of the Gospel, is simply meant as allegory. The Catholic Church maintains it exists to determine answers to these questions through its tradition and the pope’s infallible authority. We have certainly seen throughout history that the pope is not infallible; much of Catholic tradition, as we will see in chapter eight, is un-Biblical. The Protestant Church has divided into many denominations over Scripture interpretation issues. God wants none of these things.

The most important themes in the Bible include: God’s creation of man, man’s sin and the consequence of death, God’s love for man and desire to redeem him, Jesus Christ’s perfect life, death, and resurrection as a sacrifice to provide forgiveness of sin, man’s reconciliation to God through Christ’s atonement, the free gift of salvation by God’s grace through our faith in Christ, God’s judgment of sinners at the end of time, and the restoration of all things in the creation of a new heaven and new earth (see Isaiah 65:17, 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1). God wants His people to agree on those points and study the lesser points together. According to Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, Kentucky, the Bible should be taken literally whenever possible and figuratively when obvious. We are free to have our own opinions on issues where the Bible is silent, so long as they are consistent with Biblical teachings.

Many fundamentalist Christians take the Bible literally regarding the creation account. This means creation took six days, each approximately twenty-four hours in length. When we look in the Bible at the original Hebrew word for day, which is yom, we see it used primarily to mean a standard twenty-four hour day, but it is also used occasionally to refer to an unspecified period of time. Yom, preceded by a number as in Genesis 1, is used over 400 times in the Bible; each time it refers to an ordinary twenty-four hour day. Despite this fact, in the past 150 years or so, with the rise of Darwin’s evolution theory, many theories besides Darwin’s have popped up trying to get Biblical history to fit with evolution theory.

One popular explanation describing creation is the Gap Theory, which says God performed the activities in verse one of Genesis billions of years ago—in the beginning. Then, according to the Gap Theory, God came along and formed the earth, added light, and performed all of the other creation activities during the Biblical six day creation, which begins in verse two of Genesis with the word now. So the Gap Theory says the earth itself is billions of years old, but the formed earth, similar to the way we know it today, is 6000–10,000 years old. While this notion attempts to make Biblical creation conform to evolutionist ideas that the universe is 10–16 billion years old and the earth itself is 4.6 billion years old, the evidence does not support its claims.

There is another theory attempting to support the six day creation story in the Bible. This theory is commonly referred to as either old earth creation or progressive creation10. It says the six day creation actually occurred over billions of years, with a Biblical day being equal to thousands or millions, even billions, of years. As I previously mentioned, the Hebrew word for day, yom, is meant to say a single day when a number precedes it.

Although this important detail seems to get overlooked, the main argument against this theory is destruction, disease, death, and decay before sin. Old earth creationism supports dinosaur extinction and other deaths having taken place long before man existed. The Bible is clear there was no death before Adam’s sin. God pronounced His creation very good. A universe with billions of years of death, decay, pain, and suffering would not be very good to God.

There are hundreds of additional arguments against progressive or old earth creation; they are best discussed in Creation and Time: A Report on the Progressive Creationist Book by Hugh Ross, written by Mark Van Bebber and Paul Taylor. (Call Eden Communications at 1-800-332-2261 or order online at www.christiananswers.net/catalog/bk-ct.html.) One of the most easily seen arguments, besides the meaning-of-yom and death-before-sin concerns, is that plants were created in day three, but neither the sun nor insects were created until days four and five respectively. If the days were millions of years, then plants could not have survived without the sun for that long and certainly not without insects for pollination. In fact, a simple ecology lesson shows how entire ecosystems rely on the entire unit to function in unison to thrive and even survive.

Next we come to the theory of evolution. Many people today think the universe and life just produced themselves. They think, “In the beginning, nothing became dirt, which slowly grew to be alive by chance over billions of years.” Charles Darwin (1809–1882) formed this theory of evolution. While evolution is the most widely held belief on both the origins of the universe and life, it is not scientifically valid, because there are no evidences or observations of the kind of evolution required to create life from non-life or enhance pre-existing life. The theory of evolution basically teaches that the world and everything in it are getting better (evolving), but this teaching, the first of many flaws, violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which, as we mentioned earlier, essentially says that the world and everything in it are deteriorating (devolving). Scientific observation has clearly proven the Second Law of Thermodynamics, yet many scientists consistently support evolution theory as fact, despite observing nothing concretely supporting it. What a flaw! As we will see, the twisted, illogically extrapolated evidence many scientists use to support evolution actually supports creation.

Can something come from nothing all by itself? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Which came first, the male or the female? We could ask all sorts of questions like these. Remember, science is knowledge that comes from observing and testing. Science has never observed life forming naturally from non-life; but it has observed things deteriorating at an increasing rate. Evolutionists say all the matter in the universe was densely packed into a tiny dot smaller than the size of an atom; they are strangely silent when asked about the origin of all this matter. Nevertheless, the dot containing all the matter in the universe, which apparently exists without cause, exploded with a Big Bang and formed everything we have in the universe today, including life.

Evolutionists go on to say this Big Bang occurred approximately 10–16 billion years ago. Then over the next 6–12 billion years, the universe formed itself with galaxies, planets, suns, stars, comets, moons, black holes, etc., all rotating and moving at incredibly rapid speeds in perfect order and unison. The earth formed itself, situating itself at a perfect distance from the sun (which had formed itself) with a moon (which had formed itself) revolving around it! Then, a couple billion years later, life formed. Of course, the atmospheric content and the water content, among literally trillions of other conditions, had to be perfect for this to happen. (Even under perfect laboratory conditions, life coming from non-life has never been observed.) Evolution has been explained, “From goo to you by way of the zoo!”

Over the next several billion years, the life that formed itself became grass and trees, dolphins and snakes, dinosaurs and owls, donkeys and humans—in that order! I say again, there has never been an observation of anything remotely close to this! That is because it is impossible! The chances are zero! Consider the chances of a tornado ripping through a junkyard and assembling a fully operational 747 in the process. There is no chance! But the odds for that strange event are better than for evolution! Science has let itself down and been corrupted by supporting this theory of evolution, which is not in any way true to science.

To the credit of Charles Darwin, he certainly got the ball rolling on studies of natural selection, mutation, and fossils. Many scientists who study the evidence for natural selection, mutation, and fossils extrapolate the evidence to show evolution is possible, but even the top evolutionists admit this extrapolation is neither logical nor rational. For the name of science, they have agreed natural selection and mutation do not support evolution; instead, they actually support creation!

Natural selection, the concept of survival of the fittest, is most often shown by an example involving black and spotted moths. This case in point is found in most textbooks as an illustration to support evolution. The study shows how spotted moths were naturally selected to thrive in a region where trees had moss to camouflage them from predators. The black moths in that region were selected out, because they were not camouflaged from predators. In other words, the black moths died and the spotted moths survived on account of their environment.

However, in a different region of the country, the black moths thrived, because the trees had no moss. The black moths blended in with their environment, and predators had a difficult time finding them. In that same region, the spotted moths were selected out, because they were easily recognizable to their predators. This simple example in no way helps prove evolution. It supports creation, as the variations in the moths better suit them to fill the whole earth according to God’s will. Moths of different colors and styles can thrive throughout the world, not just where the trees have or lack moss.

In the same way, people groups are better suited to live in certain environments. There is clearly no gain of genetic information in these variations, as we will continue to see. The Sherpa people of Nepal would not flourish as nomads in the Sahara Desert. The reverse is also true; Sahara Desert nomads would not thrive high in the Himalayan Mountains. As human and, more obviously, animal populations filled the earth according to God’s command, natural selection allowed certain people and animals to survive in specific locations better than others. In time, these creatures lost genetic information that their ancestors had. In other words, the genetic information for particular traits was selected out as creatures continued living in certain regions of the world. The spotted moths living where the trees had moss lost the ability to produce offspring with no spots, thereby limiting their survival to a particular ecological region. They became incapable of survival anywhere else. Furthermore, they did not evolve to produce grasshoppers or birds. They were and still are reproducing as moths.

Mutations, although rare, do occur in all forms of life and are, like natural selection, also used as an attempt to prove evolution. It is critical to note mutations do not promote evolution, as they neither allow new and beneficial genetic information to be introduced nor enable the creature to change into another kind of living thing! In fact, the mutations scientists observe are usually detrimental to those mutated creatures, causing such nasty diseases as sickle cell anemia, diabetes, and cystic fibrosis, among over 3000 others. In other words, mutations keep the creature from doing what it needs to do to survive in its environment.

Using my own intuitive example, say a mutated frog was born without a sticky tongue. It was unable to catch flies, so it died of starvation. Had the mutated frog mated with a normal frog before dying, it would have only a slim chance of having offspring without a sticky tongue. Even then, the offspring would have starved to death. Because a frog without a sticky tongue cannot survive, we know the frog’s sticky tongue did not come from mutation. That would require a gain of genetic information, which is and always has been impossible. The frog’s genetic code has always contained information for the sticky tongue. God created that creature with the sticky tongue for the purpose of survival. Furthermore, a mutation never makes a frog become an elephant or any other type of creature! Mutated frogs are still frogs. Mutations, like natural selection, in no way support the theory of evolution.

Those human cultures that marry only inside their own groups, such as the Pennsylvania Amish or Australian aborigines, are far more susceptible to mutations than the rest of the human population. Every human gets two sets of chromosomes—one from the mother and one from the father. If both parents have corrupt chromosomes, rather than only one or neither parent, for any given trait (i.e. skin shade), then their offspring has a greater chance of inheriting the mutation (i.e. albinism).
After several generations of human existence, God commanded humans not to marry a close relative, because the chances for mutation were greater (see Leviticus 18). Information is eventually lost when making a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy, etc. The table below shows an example of what Adam and Eve’s children may have looked like. They could have had a child with any skin shade, because their genetic code contained all possible human traits! Humans have the same skin color demonstrated in lighter and darker shades based on the melanin in their genes.

(The following Punnett Squares are my own simple creations and represent only two genes, A and B, contributing to skin shade with two alleles each, Aa and Bb, for dark and light characteristics. The letters in each cell within the tables represent the alternative genotypes: Homozygous dominant, homozygous recessive, heterozygous, etc. The descriptions for each shaded cell are the phenotypes: Very dark, medium dark, neutral, medium light, very light, etc. These tables depict a very basic reality, but they convey neither the enormous amount of detailed information each cell and each gene contain, nor the vast numbers of genes actually contributing to skin shade.)


Notice there are also semi-dark and semi-light alternatives in the table above. This next table shows the possibilities of two light skinned parents. They will only have light skinned offspring. A similar table would show that two dark skinned parents will only have dark skinned offspring.

The final table shows how one dark skinned parent and one light skinned parent will pass on their genetic information. With each generation, we see only a maintaining or a loss of genetic information.

There is never a gain of previously absent genetic information. Evolution cannot be supported by natural selection or mutations. If you need a different example, take ice cream. You can start with just about any flavor of ice cream and lose ingredients to get to plain vanilla. You cannot start with vanilla and get other flavors without adding ingredients. God started the world by creating an amazing abundance of unique life forms—lots of flavors of ice cream. In time, natural selection has caused many of these wonderful creatures to go extinct. The fossil record, discussed below, elaborates on this idea.

Darwin, despite admitting fossil evidence “may truly be urged as a valid argument against the theory of evolution,” certainly encouraged scientists, paleontologists, and archaeologists to dig in and learn more about fossils. Fossils are abundant throughout the world, and in the past 200 years, fossil evidence has shown amazing creatures, including dinosaurs, that roamed this earth in the past. But ninety-five percent of all fossils are marine invertebrates, mostly clams; only one-eighth of one percent (.00125) of all fossils consists of more than a single bone of a vertebrate creature. Nevertheless, the fossil record has been used as the strongest support of both evolution and creation! How can this be? What does the fossil record really show us?

Chapter 2 - The Beginning (1)

This post begins Chapter 2 of my book, Biblical Glasses, part 1 of 4. The topic is creation / evolution. If you're going to read my blog selectively, this is the series I'd hope you would read.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters (Genesis 1:1-2).

What a great opening scene! Picture total darkness—maybe you can hear the sound of rolling waves as the wind blows across the water. Is it true? Does God really exist? How do we know? Did He create the universe? If God did create the universe, when did He do it? Can we know for sure?

What happened?

As we investigate the evidence for the beginning of the universe and life on earth, every version of the Bible says God created the heavens and the earth in the beginning. That should be good enough for us after looking at the evidence for the Bible’s truth and divine inspiration; but since doubt and skepticism exist within our culture, we need to look closer at the evidence for the intelligent design of the universe. We also need to examine the claims of the various theories of evolution to see if they can tread water.

First, the Biblical creation account (see Genesis 1) tells us God made everything in six days. After creating the heavens and earth, God made light and separated it from darkness to finish day one.

On day two, God separated the waters below from the waters above, creating a sky. Creation experts agree the earth was much different before the flood of Noah. Keep in mind that God separated the waters below from the waters above, as we will revisit this issue later to examine the earth and its pre-flood geology.

On the third day, God brought up dry land and created basins of water called seas. God also created plants with seeds and trees with fruits with seeds to grow from the ground and reproduce according to their kind. According to their kind is a critical statement, because it limits trees from producing llamas or alligators. Trees could only reproduce as trees!

On day four, God created the stars to serve as markers of the various seasons. He created the sun and moon to govern the day and night and more distinctly separate night from day.

God created sea animals and birds on the fifth day. Then He created land animals on day six and allowed them to reproduce according to their kind. Again, according to their kind prevents apes from producing human offspring! Later on day six, God crafted man from the dust of the ground and breathed life into him.

God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, in Our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them (Genesis 1:26-27).

These verses are significant; they show God as multi-personal. Us means Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit were with God the Father. Possibly the most difficult doctrinal point to understand within Christianity is that God is a triune God (elohim). He is three eternally distinct Persons, yet One Being; He is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Though inadequate and far from describing the perfect nature of God, the structure of H2O can help us see the Trinity. Steam, water, and ice are equally H2O, yet they are separate and distinct. The explanation is inadequate primarily because the Three Persons of the Godhead are immutable, infinite, and eternal, bound by neither time nor space restrictions. On the other hand, the three forms of H2O, created by God, cannot co-exist while remaining unchanged in the same temperature environment. Water exists in the form of ice below 32° F (0° C), steam above 212° F (100° C), and liquid at temperature ranges in between.

God created man in His image, unlike the rest of creation. Perhaps that explains our morality, our spirit, our soul, and our knowledge of self. The Eden story of Genesis 2-3 is a detailed description of the sixth day of creation, showing how we are made in the image of God. Our ability to know good and evil certainly sets us apart from other creatures. “And the Lord God said, ‘The man has now become like One of Us, knowing good and evil’” (Genesis 3:22).

Animals are naked and do not care; plants are alive, but unaware. You could argue that some humans walk around naked without care or that they are alive and unaware, but be realistic. Humans are alive, aware, and often embarrassed when naked! God gave mankind dominion over His creation, the right to reign over the animals and other created beings. After the six days of creation, “God saw all that He had made, and it was very good” (Genesis 1:31, emphasis added). On the seventh day, He rested.

Why did God rest? Was He tired? No. God rested on the seventh day to give us the seven day week and set up the idea of the Sabbath Day. One of God’s Ten Commandments is to honor the Sabbath Day. We are to rest one day per week to worship God and enjoy His creation. Originally, this day was Saturday, but most Christians celebrate the Sabbath as Sunday, because Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the morning after the Hebrew Sabbath, Easter Sunday.

Whew! What a week! The universe was created ex nihilo—out of nothing. The earth went from formless, dark, and empty to full of vibrant color, action, and life! Could it have really happened in one week? How can we explain it? Well, the word universe literally means a “single spoken sentence,” “and God said, ‘Let there be … ’” (Genesis 1:3,6,14). I think that is an adequate explanation! Why else would the universe be called the uni-verse if it was not spoken into existence by its Creator, God?

Noah's Ark

This post is just to offer a couple images (from Answers in Genesis) displaying the actual size of Noah's ark, the multitude of flood accounts from cultures throughout the world, and the ability of the ark to stay afloat amidst the swirling and turbulent waters of a worldwide flood. For more information on this topic, click on Answers in Genesis above.