|
We
Believe:
 |
Academic science of today often
does not abide by true scientific law, but propitiates slanted study
that under its own scrutiny fails. Most study on ultimate
origins has been done with the intent of denying intelligent design, treating
the "Theory of Evolution" as fact even though it has been proven
scientifically impossible.
It takes more faith to believe in the absence of a divine hand than
it does to recognize the intricate balance of all things physical
and appreciate the scientific reasoning that it could not
have happened by chance, that "Intelligent Design" had to be
involved.
Imagine putting the pieces of a million fine wrist watches in a
paper bag (a big bag). Now shake this bag for 6 billion years
and expect the watches to be running and on perfect time when you
are finished. Preposterous, isn't it? Yet we are to have
faith that our intricately designed universe came about by a "Big
Bang," a feat that is statistically impossible without "Intelligent
Design" as part of the equation.
|
It is more probable
statistically that lightning struck in the bog next to the landing pad
at Cape Canaveral resulting in the creation of the Space Shuttle, than
it is for simple life to have come into being as the Theory of Evolution
claims. One DNA molecule is a million times more intricate than the most
advanced computer that man has created. It is absolutely not possible
for one of these molecules to have been created by chance, and modern
science has admitted this as fact. Yet we see continued
presentation of these untruths by the established scientific community.
The Theory of Intelligent Design actually holds more
rational evidence than does the Theory of Evolution, yet there is a
concerted effort to deny it as even a possibility.
Why?
Firstly, it would require
rewriting and rethinking most of what today's educators have been taught.
Secondly, today's humanistic
science of Evolution (Macroevolution) and Natural Selection as slanted
toward Darwinism (Microevolution and Natural Selection in themselves
are valid sciences) was devised with the intent of finding a replacement
for the science of Intelligent Design.
Thirdly, when man denies the
existence of a supreme being, a creator of all the miracles of life, it is
many times done to release himself of all responsibility to the creator.
Such a man wants responsibility to man alone and usually maintains that
this type of faith is a crutch and a weakness. The basis of thinking that
often follows is; "after all, who could possibly be greater than man?"
Why do many scientists and
educators continue to make every effort to prove that Darwin was correct?
The fact is that most past scientific study has been done with the
presupposition of evolution and was bent on proving something that was
flawed for the primary purpose of providing an alternative to the teaching
of a marvelously created universe. Humanism and Darwinism can be
considered the religion of the man-god.
Is Evolution a Religion? Click
Here
Other thoughts to
consider:
Radiometric dating methods have no real scientific basis when the
standard for age is assumed and not proven. Normal scientific law
requires this proof before a standard can be set. Every time we
hear the statement "6 billion years ago" we should realize this
conclusion to be based on the same reasoning that produced the Theory of
Evolution. The reasoning being "after all, given enough time
anything is possible." This is mere speculation and humanistic
hopefulness that natural miraculous forces were involved rather than a
Creator. What are natural miraculous forces anyway, other than a
poor substitute for the overwhelming evidences of Intelligent Design?
If it is statistically impossible that it happened by chance, then what
is more realistic, that it was purposefully fashioned and designed or
that mother nature caused it to happen? Humanism (man is god), 6
billion years ago, mother nature, happened by chance, evolution, carbon
dating, man came from a monkey who came from a reptile who came from a
fish who came from an amoeba. This is taught in our schools in
most cases as fact and one is made to feel as a fool for questioning
these areas.
Unbiased archeological studies prove the Global Flood Account over and
over again. Most past study has been done with the purpose of proving
the Old Earth Theory with total slant toward that intent.
Study of the more than 300 fulfilled prophecies and scientific evidences
in scripture gives credence to the new earth claim as well as the
Biblical account of creation.
Answers to All Your Science
Related Questions
Click Here
"Intelligent Design" Scientist
Bios:
Click Here
With the recent terrorism and
global catastrophe, we see a glimmers of man possibly turning toward God.
Even the staunchest of atheists muster some hope for a creator in the worst
of times. Is it right that we do good things, help and care for
one another and strive to together overcome this type of awful situation?
Absolutely, but man so easily forgets, finds comfort in his own goodness and
pushes God aside for possibly the next catastrophe.
The heavens declare the glory of
God. Science declares the glory of God. Our souls were created with an
intense desire to cry out; "Abba Father, thank you for the privilege of
breath and now Lord, what can I do to serve You?"
Can mankind have a daily, minute by minute relationship/friendship with the
creator of the universe?
Can persons know that they
have eternal life?
What does it mean to be born again?
For answers to these questions...Click Here
WRONG ON TWO COUNTS
“Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures,
nor the power of God” ( Matthew 22:29 ).
When the Sadducees, who were the theological, philosophical, and
scientific elite of the day, came to Jesus with a trick question in an
attempt to discredit Him, He responded with the stinging rebuke in our
text. While His response dealt specifically with the fact of resurrection
and the nature of the after-life, His two-fold evaluation of self-reliant
scholars still fits today, particularly in regard to evolutionary
speculations.
By
the time Darwin had published his book, Orgin of Species, attributing
evolutionary progression to natural selection, he had probably become an
athesist and so set about to ascribe creation to natural causes. He
attributed to nature, abilities which clearly belong to God alone. He
knew something of the Scriptures, but his memoirs show that he had little
understanding of basic Biblical teachings. He felt that if there was a
God, He had little power or had not been involved in the affairs of this
earth. Most atheistic evolutionists today follow Darwin’s intellectual
footsteps.
But
what of Christian intellectuals, theistic evolutionists, progressive
creationists, or advocates of the framework hypothesis, who claim to know
god but deny His awesome power in creation? They too reject the clear
teaching of Scripture regarding creation, regulating God to the mundane
task of overseeing the evolutionary process, reducing His power to
something potentially accomplishable by man. Peter aptly describes this
attitude when he calls it willful ignorance (II Peter 3:5).
It
has been suggested by some that all human error can be traced to one or
both of these categories: not knowing ( and/or believing) the Scriptures
and understanding the power of God.
John
D. Morris
THE BUILDER OF THE
HOUSE
“He who hath builded
the house hath more honor than the house. For every house is builded by
some man; but He that built all things is God.” (Hebrews 3:3-4)
Perhaps
the single greatest category of evidence for supernatural creation is in
the nature of the creation itself, which everywhere shows such intricate
design that it could not have come by random chance. Consider the earth:
Its size, mass, distance from the moon, rotational wobble, chemical
make-up, ect., are critical within very narrow limits. Any significant
deviation in any of these, or other characteristics, would make life
impossible.
But inorganic molecules, planets, galaxies are simpler by several orders
of magnitude then even the tiniest living organism. The marvelous genetic
code which regulates life, growth, and reproduction, is so unthinkably
complex, so obliviously designed, that it would take a “willingly
ignorant” (II Peter 3:5 ) mind to conclude a naturalistic origin for it.
Life at every stage and at every level of investigation shows symmetry in
its order, purpose in its function and interdependence between its parts;
all of these are clear marks of design by an intelligent designer.
The evidence speaks so eloquently that even “the invisible things of Him
from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the
things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are
without excuse”( Romans 1:20) if they choose not to believe, and therefore
to merit and face His wrath (v. 18 ).
“All things were created by Him and for Him” ( Colossians 1:16 ). Mankind
can take no pride in it nor rebellious solace in the idea of naturalistic
origin, for “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and
power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are
created” ( Revelation 4:11).
John
D. Morris
|
