God vs. Science

This is too good not to share here, so I am posting it here with a Hat Tip to Larry H. from the TEA Party Community.

God vs: Science

The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand up.

'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'

'Yes sir,' the student says.

'So you believe in God?'

'Absolutely.'

'Is God good?'


'Sure! God's good.'

'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'

'Yes'

'Are you good or evil?'

'The Bible says I'm evil.'

The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible! He considers for a moment. 'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?'

'Yes sir, I would.'

'So you're good...!'

'I wouldn't say that.'

'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't.'

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?'



The student remains silent. 'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. 'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'

'Er..yes,' the student says.

'Is Satan good?'

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'

'Then where does Satan come from?'

The student falters. 'From God'

'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?'

'Yes, sir..'

'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'

'Yes'

'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'

Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'

The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'

'So who created them?'

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. 'Who created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized.





'Tell me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?'

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'

The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?'

'No sir. I've never seen Him.'

'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'

'No, sir, I have not..'

'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'

'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'

'Yet you still believe in him?'

'Yes'



'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist... What do you say to that, son?'

'Nothing,' the student replies.. 'I only have my faith.'

'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.'

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. 'Professor, is there such thing as heat? '

' Yes.

'And is there such a thing as cold?'

'Yes, son, there's cold too.'

'No sir, there isn't.'

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 'You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit down to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.'

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'

'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation.. 'What is night if it isn't darkness?'

'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'

'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can you explain how?'

'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains.. 'You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.' 'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.' 'Now tell me, professor.. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?'

'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.'

'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. 'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.' The student looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?' The class breaks out into laughter. 'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.' 'So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?'

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I Guess you'll have to take them on faith.'

'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?' Now uncertain, the professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it Everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in The multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'

To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.'

The professor sat down.






Now people, if you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when you finished, mail to your friends and family with the title 'God vs. Science'

PS: By the way, the student was Albert Einstein who wrote a book titled 'God vs. Science' in 1921.  [Update:  Albert Einstein's name was incorrectly attributed to this essay.]

Interesting News About The Lord's Prayer

It doesn't happen very often, but sometimes a secular magazine shares some good news about Jesus and the power of prayer.

The following is a brief article found in the January 2, 2012 issue of FIRST magazine:

The Lord's Prayer Activates the Happiness/Energy Area Of the Brain

When Danish researchers at Aarhus University asked 20 devout Christians to offer up a personal prayer, recite the Lord's Prayer, recite a rhyme and wish to Santa Claus while having MRI scans of their brains, they discovered some surprising differences. While both prayers activated a part of the brain called the dorsal striatum, which is associated with the release of dopamine (a neurotransmitter that fights tiredness, depression and cravings), the Lord's Prayer had more than double the positive effect.

Why? In the paper, the researchers speculate that it could be due to the fact that the Lord's Prayer "according to Christian tradition, is sanctioned by Jesus as encompassing all important aspects of life. This God-given authorization may reinforce practitioners' expectations of reciprocity in comparison with the often more idiosyncratic and individual requests in personal prayers." As for rhyme and wishing to Santa Claus? Both decreased the activation of this dopamine-releasing part of the brain.

I often chuckle when I read scientific studies that claim to find something that the faithful in Christ already know via God's Word, the Bible!  Nonetheless, it is extremely telling that the power of prayer - specifically, The Lord's Prayer - has double the positive effect on the brains of individuals who recite it.  It just goes to show that the Lord Jesus Christ provided the most perfect prayer for us; and it is to be used as a model for our own individual prayers.

As I have stated many times at this blog, "science is always trying to catch up to God." 

The fear (meaning reverence) of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. -

The Lord's Prayer

Our Father, who art in heaven.  Hallowed be thy name.  Thy kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth as it is in heaven.  Give us this day, our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.  And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, now and forever.  Amen.

Says it all...doesn't it?

I would like to take this opportunity to wish all members, readers, and guests a very Merry and Blessed Christmas!

Keep Christ in Christmas!

In Christ's service,
 ~ Christine

Creative Thinking and the Invisible and Eternal God

It's very late for a new post, but since I fell asleep on the couch while watching T.V. earlier this evening and then awoke a few hours later, I decided to read some email before closing my browser for the night.

One of my favorite Christian bloggers has a new essay up. I found it in my email box tonight and I encourage readers here to go check it out! Charlie at Another Think has written and excellent and thought-provoking essay entitled "An Uncertain Reality"

Brief excerpts:

The great scientific project at the dawn of the twentieth century was to expose the hidden mysteries of the atom.

[W]hat made this investigation remarkable, and maddening, was the inaccessibility of the systems they were trying to understand. Using only the crudest experimental devices combined with ingenious thought experiments and audacious hunches, these young scientists tested theories and conducted their research in the blind. To make matters worse, Werner Heisenberg theorized that the nature of atomic particles was such that they could never be measured or probed by any traditional methods, because the very act of observing them would change them in unpredictable ways.

His insight was roundly dismissed at first, but grudgingly came to be accepted and formalized as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Quoting Bernice Eiduson again: "Creative thinking demands seeing things not seen previously... and taking risks by departing from reality."

Faced with an unknown and uncertain reality at the sub-atomic level, these scientists dared to depart from accepted conventions and imagined a world that broke the known rules, something the scientific establishment of the day did not quickly accept.

As I've been thinking about this remarkable scientific era, I have noticed similarities between the challenges and creative demands required to uncover the secrets of the atom, and the creative leaps and risks inherent in belief in the invisible and eternal God.

Read the entire essay HERE



I wrote a comment there, but must have copied the text in the spam preventing box wrong so I got an error message when I tried to post the comment!

*Sigh*

Anyway, here is a copy of the comment:

Hi Charlie,

What an excellent and fascinating essay! As usual, you make the connections that a non-believing scientist might want to ignore or even shun (because of purposeful disbelief in God), and turn it into a better explanation of reality because of your skill as a scientist utilizing your faith in the God of the universe, Jesus Christ!

What you have written triggered some thoughts I recently contemplated.

My 86 year old mom has often stated how wonderful the "discoverers" of prescription drugs are in sustaining and prolonging the lives of people who might have suffered more, and/or died at younger ages without the use of such drugs.

We know that many drugs can be used for good (and helpful) purposes - as well as for evil (and addictive) purposes.

I was thinking the other day that since we are always only "catching up to God" in the scientific realm of this life on earth, how awesome it might be to one day discover (in eternity) that we probably had the "tools" here on earth all along to cure any and every physical, mental, and emotional ailment? Yet, because of our fallen, sinful nature such discoveries had been made by scientists in a gradual and incomplete way? Hope those last two sentences made some sense!

One example. A relative of mine succumbed to Alzheimer's disease and her mind deteriorated at such a rapid pace back in the 80's because no drugs were yet created to halt the progression of that devastating disease. Today, there are drugs that considerably slow down the progression of the disease and patients often get to live close to normal lives for many, many more years than previously ever imagined. That's not a small or insignificant miracle!

Your entire essay displays the "wonders of the Lord" and I love your final paragraph:

So too with faith. God invites us not to abandon reason, but to give up our iron grip on what we think we know, what we think must be true. The Christian faith invites us to open our minds to the possibility of a different reality than we have ever imagined.

Beautiful!

God bless,
Christine

Hat Tip:

Another Think

Update:

Yay! Tried to post the comment two more times over at Another Think and the third try (currently in moderation) was the charm! ;-)

Bolden and Barack's Islamophilia Borg

Oh my...there is a great post up over at American Spectator: Obama's Milky Way.

Excerpt:

The Islamophilia of the Obama administration at this point is well beyond the parodies of The Onion. This week NASA administrator Charles Bolden announced that the space program has adopted a new mission -- to serve as a self-esteem project for global Islam. He informed a reporter with Al Jazeera that when he took the NASA job Obama made it clear to him that "perhaps foremost he wanted to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

So, apparently, radical Muslims who consider science intrinsically blasphemous are going to help us get to Mars once their egos are sufficiently massaged. Or perhaps Bolden is saying that NASA has become a kind of learning annex for the scientifically illiterate throughout the world. In any case, the comment is staggering. This is an administration which looks at terrorists and sees misguided peace activists, looks at radical imams who issue death edicts against scholars and sees budding space engineers.

Earth to Bolden and Barack: These imams don't "feel good" about Islam's centuries-back contribution to science; they feel ashamed of it. As Robert R. Reilly chronicles in The Closing of the Muslim Mind, mainstream Islamic theology today views science as impious/useless because it presupposes that God created the world rationally, a presupposition which is an affront to God (under the twisted metaphysics of Islamic theology) since it is seen as a limitation on his freedom and transcendence.

Continue reading HERE.

Even the comments over there are quite educational - and some are hilarious (especially the ones written by ObamaBot "Nate" and the replies made to him)! Some bad language and offensive comments by guess who? (Hint: He's an ObamaBorgBot!) Just thought I'd warn readers who happen to venture over there and read them.



In order to be a supporter of ObaMARXIST anymore, I surmise that one just has to have had his/her mind taken over by a Star Trek - The Next Generation type of Borg mentality. Except in the case of BHO zombies, it's specifically a "Marxist-Islamo-Fascist Borg" mindmeld.

Hat Tip:

The American Spectator

P.S. Do you suffer from ObamaBorgBotitist? There is still hope (the true kind - not the propaganda of the Liar) for you!

From Wikipedia page:

In Star Trek, attempts to resist the Borg become one of the central themes, with many examples of successful resistance to the collective, both from existing or former drones, and assimilation targets. It is also demonstrated that it is possible to survive assimilation (most notably Jean-Luc Picard), and that drones can escape the collective (most notably Seven of Nine), and become individuals, or exist collectively without forced assimilation of others. They are notable for being a main antagonist race in more than one series who never appeared in the original Star Trek.

Norway Spiral Light Mystery

While reading online tonight, I noticed a comment written at a blog on the subject of the Norway Spiral Light claimed that g00gle erased photos from its search engine of the recent sighting of the Norway Spiral in the sky. However, if you use Bing, you get several photos of it!

g00gle search: Norway Spiral Photos

Bing search: Norway Spiral Photos

I found an interesting page on the subject:

LugaLuda.com: Norway Spiral Light/ Norway Spiral Light Video.

What could it be? There is much speculation about this. Has anyone gotten any final confirmation about this?

Strange...

It's also weird that g00gle chose to eliminate links to photos of it...isn't it? What's up with that?

P.S. Warning: Avoid clicking on any "now public" links within the search links above. I get a red check mark next to each link to that site with a "computer threats, site is unsafe" security warning about from my anti-virus software.

*******
Update:

Found a page with more information:

New Scientist.com: Strange Norway Spiral was an out-of-control missile

Excerpt:

Update: The Russian Defense Ministry confirmed on Thursday that it launched a Bulava missile on Wednesday and that the missile's third stage failed

It looked like a time-travelling vortex fit for Doctor Who, but a strange spiral observed in the skies above Norway on Wednesday morning was actually a failed Russian missile launch, says a Harvard astrophysicist who monitors space launches.

The giant, glowing white spiral was reportedly visible all over northern Norway between about 0645 and 0700 GMT. "It consisted initially of a green beam of light similar in colour to the aurora with a mysterious rotating spiral at one end," eye witness Nick Banbury of Harstad said, according to Spaceweather.com. "This spiral then got bigger and bigger until it turned into a huge halo in the sky with the green beam extending down to Earth."

Speculation that it was a bright meteor was quickly dismissed – in part because the apparition lasted for too long to be an incoming space rock. Suspicion then turned to an out-of-control missile.

That is exactly what it was, says Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and author of Jonathan's Space Report, a fortnightly email newsletter about space launches. "It's definitely a missile launch failure," he told New Scientist.

But some comments written by people under the article at the site aren't buying that explanation.

Hat tips to all links.

Temple at the Center of Time

This is certainly fascinating! See this article and video review of the Temple at the Center of Time at WorldNetDaily.

Author David Flynn has written a book called Temple at the Center of Time: Newton's Bible Codex Deciphered and the Year 2012.

A belief that the ancients held unusual scientific knowledge, of which only fragments remain today, was held by many great philosophers and scientists who participated in the "scientific revolution". Though research by these men led to great discovery, many were convinced that they were merely scratching the surface of an immense but lost pristine knowledge (prisca sapientia) somehow reflected in the architecture and remains of ancient civilizations.

In "Temple at the Center of Time: Newton’s Bible Codex Deciphered and the Year 2012”, David Flynn uncovers what is sure to be heralded as one of the greatest discoveries of all time.

Many books have investigated whether Newton believed that an original and pure knowledge existed. Some conclude that he did in fact search for it, but that is the whole of their investigation. A few have written that Newton actually discovered ‘something’ and try to fit his existing research into a prisca sapientia of their own design, claiming his beliefs fit modern realms of philosophy or eastern religions, but these speculations are not upheld by the body of his work. Although Newton had solved riddles of space, time, gravity, light and invented mathematics to predict the motion of objects, this was not the "priscia sapient". Since the time of Newton, no one has revealed the true form and nature of the original knowledge, or from whence it came… until now.

For the first time in history, "Temple at the Center of Time" uncovers what Newton was looking for and, in so doing, proves that pivotal events in history are unquestionably connected in time and space to Jerusalem.

Newton didn't know it. The key was right in front of him.

HT: WorldNetDaily

Signals of Jesus' Return?

Found an article this morning that is quite interesting and intriguing. I'm sure that many Christians will be debating the validity of it all.

Blood moon eclipses: 2nd Coming in 2015?
Minister uses NASA forecasting to study signals of Jesus' return

Who says that science and faith can't be complimentary to each other?

Article excerpt:

Will Jesus Christ return to Earth in the year 2015?

And can studying NASA's website provide evidence for such a scenario?

A minister who promotes the Old Testament roots of Christianity suggests a rare string of lunar and solar eclipses said to fall on God's annual holy days seven years from now could herald what's come to be known as the "Second Coming" of Jesus.

"God wants us to look at the biblical calendar," says Mark Biltz, pastor of El Shaddai Ministries in Bonney Lake, Wash. "The reason we need to be watching is [because] He will signal His appearance. But we have to know what to be watching as well. So we need to be watching the biblical holidays."

In a video interview on the Prophecy in the News website, Biltz said he's been studying prophecies that focus on the sun and moon, even going back to the book of Genesis where it states the lights in the sky would be "be for signs, and for seasons."

"It means a signal, kind of like 'one if by land, two if by sea.' It's like God wants to signal us," he said. "The Hebrew word implies ... not only is it a signal, but it's a signal for coming or His appearing."

It is important to read the entire article. Of course, not all Christians will accept and/or agree with Blitz's analysis of the data.

The discovery of "tetrads" was especially exciting for me. I had not heard of them before!

Article excerpt:

Thus, Biltz began focusing on the precise times of both solar and lunar eclipses, sometimes called "blood moons" since the moon often takes on a bloody color. He logged onto NASA's eclipse website which provides precision tracking of the celestial events.

He noted a rare phenomenon of four consecutive total lunar eclipses, known as a tetrad.

He says during this century, tetrads occur at least six times, but what's interesting is that the only string of four consecutive blood moons that coincide with God's holy days of Passover in the spring and the autumn's Feast of Tabernacles (also called Succoth) occurs between 2014 and 2015 on today's Gregorian calendar."The fact that it doesn't happen again in this century I think is very significant," Biltz explains. "So then I looked at last century, and, believe it or not, the last time that four blood red moons occurred together was in 1967 and 1968 tied to Jerusalem recaptured by Israel."He then started to notice a pattern of the tetrads."What's significant to me is that even before 1967, the next time that you had four blood red moons again was right after Israel became a nation in '48, it happened again in 1949 and 1950 ... on Passover and Succoth. You didn't have any astronomical tetrads in the 1800s, the 1700s, the 1600s. In the 1500s, there were six, but none of those fell on Passover and Succoth."When checking the schedule for solar eclipses, Biltz found two – one on the first day of the Hebrew year and the next on the high holy day of Rosh Hashanah, the first day of the seventh Hebrew month. Both of these take place in the 2014-2015 year.

The sun's corona becomes visible during a solar eclipse

Biltz says, "You have the religious year beginning with the total solar eclipse, two weeks later a total lunar eclipse on Passover, and then the civil year beginning with the solar eclipse followed two weeks later by another total blood red moon on the Feast of Succoth all in 2015.""If you think that this is a coincidence, I want you to know that it's time!" exclaimed Prophecy in the News host J.R. Church. "There are no more of these for the rest of the century."

Wow! That's quite impressive! However, I realize that it is extremely important not to focus on anything that might not be biblical.

Article excerpt:

The prospect of eclipses pinpointing the time of Jesus' return is getting mixed reaction in Christian circles.

The article states that Hal Lindsey disagrees with Blitz. Plus, it is well known that Christians are not supposed to set specific dates and times.

Article excerpt:

During a second video interview, Biltz was presented with Bible quotes that many think suggest Jesus' return will be a complete surprise, or at least not specifically known.

The 25th chapter of Matthew features a parable where Jesus likens His kingdom to ten virgins all waiting for the arrival of their bridegroom.

Jesus said in the story, "ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." (Matthew 25:13)

Biltz says people need to examine the quote in its proper context."When He says you don't know the day or the hour, He's speaking to the foolish virgins, not the wise virgins," he explained.

Biltz was also asked about the famous statement in Matthew 24:36 when Jesus was discussing the signs of His "coming, and of the end of the world": "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36)

He responded by referring to the annual Feast of Trumpets holiday, saying Israelites never knew the precise moment it began, "because it was based on the sighting of the new moon."

"When He (Jesus) says you won't know the day or the hour, He's telling you it's the Feast of Trumpets because that was known as the feast where no one knew the day or the hour that it would begin," said Biltz. "So it's kind of like if I told you, 'I'm not going to tell you when I'm coming, but "Gobble, gobble, gobble,'" [pointing to] Turkey Day."

Church stressed despite the information suggesting 2015 could be a pivotal time, "We don't know that that will be the concluding year of the tribulation period ... so we're not setting a date and saying this is a warning. We're introducing the possibility of a watch."

Jesus himself told us to "watch" for His return! So, there is nothing wrong with "introducing the possibility of a watch."

In fact, haven't we been doing just that ever since Jesus' ascension to the Father?

Mat 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Mar 14:60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what [is it which] these witness against thee?


Mar 14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?


Mar 14:62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

We can trust that Jesus will fulfill His promises!

1Cr 1:4 ¶ I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;


1Cr 1:5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and [in] all knowledge;


1Cr 1:6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:


1Cr 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:


1Cr 1:8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, [that ye may be] blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.


1Cr 1:9 God [is] faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

1Th 2:19 For what [is] our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? [Are] not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming?


1Th 2:20 For ye are our glory and joy.


*******
What are your thoughts about the anticipated Second Coming of Jesus Christ?

I believe He could come at any time – I'm always watching for Him to return 40.32% (1279)


The Bible says no one knows the day or the hour – I sure don't 38.11% (1209)


Obsession over the Second Coming is a distraction from the weightier issues of living a righteous life and serving others 7.12% (226)


The minister's theory is an interesting one and worth further scrutiny 5.93% (188)


There have been countless theories throughout history about Jesus returning – and they've all been wrong 3.09% (98)


Jesus was a great teacher who showed us how to live and die – but He was just a man and He's not going to miraculously return 2.18% (69)


God doesn't exist – there was no first coming and there's not going to be a second one either 1.29% (41)


The minister who says lunar eclipses point to a 2015 date has nailed it correctly 0.88% (28)


I have no thoughts about it – I'm not a Christian so it doesn't affect me 0.66% (21)


Since the phrase 'Second Coming' is not found in the Bible, this is all meaningless speculation 0.41% (13)



TOTAL VOTES: 3172




*******
HT: World Net Daily

Preliminary Review of "Expelled"

The movie was excellent!!! It is my desire, and plan, to prepare a much more detailed review of "Expelled." I definitely want to see it again!!!

[Note: This post might contain what some would consider as "movie spoilers."]

This preliminary review does not contain all of my personal feelings and reactions to everything that was covered in the movie. As I had previously stated, I will reserve most of that for my next detailed review. However, I must share some of my feelings, today, about a few parts that demonstrated how stunningly cruel Godless mankind can be.

The good part about this film is its honesty and humor. There were many scenes where I found myself laughing out loud! Ben Stein did a marvelous job with this documentary! He masterfully injected lots of humor throughout the beginning of the film.

Closer to the conclusion...my eyes welled with tears. The portion on Eugenics being inflicted upon the "sick," "mentally ill," and/or other "undesirables" during the Nazi era (at the place were such people were experimented on and exterminated) was so emotionally gripping! It is appalling to realize that such evil was inflicted by the Nazis who were intent on creating a "superior race." It is truly a frightening example of how history proves that Godless, unrestrained man has a natural penchant for evil, criminality and brutal inhumanity.

The entire theater was so quiet at that point. I could tell that many, if not all of the people were having an extreme emotional reaction to what they were seeing and hearing.

We can clearly see that the current 'culture of death' here in America, as well as in many places around the world, often emanates from atheism (or, in the case of radical Islam - belief in a false god) that many proponents (I'M NOT SAYING ALL SO DON'T SCREAM AT ME!) of Darwinian philosophy hold.

Though, only mentioned briefly, the abortion philosophy of Eugenics adherent, Margaret Sanger, reflects many today who hopelessly and maddeningly manage to just shrug their shoulders at child murder in the womb. To me, abortion is just as unconscionable as the Eugenics mentality of the Nazis. But the abortion industry earns many people and organizations millions of dollars. Apparently, money is more important than the lives of unborn children. We have our own shameful American 'Holocaust of abortion' perpetrated by evil groups like Planned Infanticide.

Of course the horrendous history and description of Nazi Germany's Holocaust tore me up as it usually does any time that the topic comes up.

As I had previously mentioned, it is difficult to review this film without giving away a lot of its content. When I post my detailed review, it will have many more movie spoilers...so I hope that you will go out and see the movie before you read it!

Today, I would like to share where my interest in this very important subject began.

Starting in 1999, I attended a series of lectures on Intelligent Design at BIOLA University (mentioned in the film). Here is a portion of what I had learned back then that was finally exposed in this excellent movie!!

In “First Things,” Phillip E. Johnson wrote, “Those in scientific leadership cannot afford to disclose that commitment (to materialism) frankly to the public. Imagine what chance the affirmative side would have if the question for public debate were rephrased candidly as ‘Resolved, that everyone should adopt an a priori commitment to materialism.’ Everyone would see what many now sense dimly: that a methodological premise which is useful for limited purposes has been expanded to form a metaphysical absolute.”

“People who define science as the search for materialistic explanations will find it useful to assume that such explanations always exist. To suppose that a philosophical preference can validate a cherished theory is to define ’science’ as a way of supporting prejudice. Yet that is exactly what the Darwinists seem to be doing when their evidence is evaluated by critics who are willing to question materialism.”

Many scientists and philosophers think that a dedication to materialism is the defining characteristic of science. If design in biology is real, then the designer also might be real, and scientific materialists contemplate this possibility (if at all) with outright panic. The concept that the universe is the product of a rational mind provides a far better metaphysical basis for scientific rationality than the competing concept that everything in the universe, including our minds, is ultimately based in the mindless movements of matter.

As Phillip E. Johnson had stated seven years ago, if the commitment to such materialistic explanation were exposed to the public, then people would realize the REAL reason that Intelligent Design is being rejected by scientist elitists in academia today.


"Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" was far better than I thought that it would be. Far better than I even could have hoped it would be!! It gets to the heart of the controversy, and how one side is not only dominating its presentation of its particular worldview, but also firing people (i.e. university professors, journalists) who don't "toe the line" towards Darwinism exclusivism. Its like a dogma! It is "political correctness" taken to an unnecessary extreme! It is, in fact, a type of "religion"!

It will be difficult to write a review without giving away the most important facts that Stein uncovered and exposed to the public via this film!! Everyone in the theater yesterday clapped at the end!!

Mike wrote a comment that had this thought:

"perhaps the bigger question, though, is why is populating all of creation by evolutionary means such a threat?"

This film poses, and answers this question:

"perhaps the bigger question, though, is why is populating all of creation by intelligent design means such a threat?"

This film answers that question...precisely...and exposes how one side (Darwinism elitists) have used the universities, media, and the courts to erect a "Berlin Wall" preventing the free speech, presentation of a worldview, and ideas of those who hold counter scientific views (with evidence to support such views) against the "sacred cow" of Evolution (particularly macro-evolution which is really an extrapolation of the evidence for micro-evolution used to create a long-held but worthless fairy tale portion of the theory).

What is most obvious in all of this is the fact that intelligence in science matters!! However, it is being squelched by those who fear that a competing theory might have some measure of merit. ID is currently only able to chip away at that Berlin Wall, but when more of the public find out the REAL MOTIVES of why such a Wall is up in academic circles, they will most likely protest and work to change what is going on!

Those who have lost their jobs because of speaking out against the "powers that be" in science academia are the real heroes - because they have determined to follow the evidence where it is now leading - despite being forced to lose such things as tenure/jobs in their fields of expertise.

Everyone, please go out and buy "The Privileged Planet" to help support one such science professor (Guillermo Gonzalez) who was denied tenure because the book he co-wrote showed SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that our planet is, indeed PRIVILEGED because of evidence of design (and because of such design - a purpose for our lives) in the Cosmos!

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

I am really looking forward to seeing Ben Stein's movie, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." What a great title! Can you see the irony in that statement?

If not, then I invite you to view the movie trailer:


Click here to view trailer.


It will be interesting to see how the Darwinists try to spin their intolerance once people have seen the truth via this movie. Intelligent debate is being blocked by the elites whose shenanigans are a dismal attempt to try and silence those who want to expose them for who and what they are - fearful Darwinists.

Expelled the Movie opens April 18th, 2008

HT: Duane's Mind

Neil's Comments on Comments

Intriguing blogpost title, isn't it?

Since I ended up being way to busy to write a new post here at Talk Wisdom today, I thought that I would link to Neil's and draw your attention to his latest blogpost called, Comments on comments. It's truly excellent!

I confess, I didn't take the time to read through all of the comments over there yet, but I will get to it eventually.

Meanwhile, go over and read Neil's post. It is written to the "gaggle of atheists" who invaded from atheism's guru, Richard Dawkin's site.

Had to chuckle at that term "gaggle." Looked it up, too. I think that the third definition fits:

gaggle - 3. an often noisy or disorderly group or gathering: a politician followed by a gaggle of supporters.

Ha! Such a funny word, but highly descriptive!

When I decided to add to the comments there, I couldn't resist replying to the last one (at the time).

Here was the comment:

Mike Goldthorpe, on December 17th, 2007 at 9:53 pm Said:
“They are just a bunch of molecules on an evolutionary path”
“And God formed the man [of] dust of the earth”
Not that different then
OK, really, I’m off. Bye all! Catch you all next year!

My reply:


Wow Neil, from the volume of comments here you really must have hit some nerves with this post! Your comment on "comments" is excellent!

I just skipped down to the end of this very long comment thread to tell you that! I will come back to read through them all when I have more time.

But, now I can't resist replying to Mike Goldthorpe's last comment above.

He wrote: "They are just a bunch of molecules on an evolutionary path”
“And God formed the man [of] dust of the earth”
Not that different then.

I beg to differ...they are EXTREMELY different.

Evolution claims, "in the beginning, were the particles."

The Bible tells us "In the beginning, God..."

Evolution borrows inferences from the Creator without being willing to give Him credit. Go find your own dust!

The Bible tells us, "In the beginning, God created..." He spoke the universe into existence. Did you know that there is even a legitimate scientific hypothesis and experiment about this?

God is outside of our current, mere scientific boundaries. And yet, there are those "intellectual elites" that arrogantly attempt to claim to "know better." Hmmm....seems to me that such arrogance (from atheists/agnostics/skeptics a.k.a. "intellectual elites") is much more snooty and smug than anything that Neil has shared.

Evolution tells us, "In the beginning, these mindless movements of matter created..."

What is the most important difference?

You (Mike Goldthorpe) forgot to add that God breathed life (His spirit) into the man and he became a living being.

What does the concept of evolution offer as an alternative to this?

Conclusion?

There is a world of difference...

HT: Eternity Matters

*******
Update: Just went back and read the first two comments. Notice the Freudian slip typo in this one:

Mike Goldthorpe, on December 16th, 2007 at 9:25 pm Said:
Being one of those baffling people, I’ll just reiterate that I am NOT angry! Just an athiest Nice guy too - fatehr of a beautiful little daughter, scientist and part time mechanic (perils of running a British car). I just need someone to explain things to me as I really can’t understand how one can be religious.
See, not only us that baffle - it works both ways At least here I may be able to understand and hopefully make you understand people like me. In the nicest possible way, of course…

fatehr....makes me sad for the fate of this daughter who will be raised not to believe in Jesus. Her fate is in the hands of this atheist dad who "really can't understand how one can be religious." How truly sad...

Darwin Challenged, Research Censored

Christian university removes professor's website, data from public view. A professor whose research could be the foundation for a major challenge to Darwin's theory of evolution and his historically Christian employer are at odds over that work, with Baylor University ordering Professor Bob Marks' work taken off the Internet.

read more digg story

Earth...Thousands, Not Billions of Years Old

Makes you wonder just what are they so afraid of???

*******
Update 10/6/07

More articles to read from a discussion between seeker and Paladin at Two or Three.net on the subject of "scientists as priests."

Paladin: So, you can call scientists "priests" if you like, but all that does is betray your skewed perception of the differences between how they operate versus how your side does.

Paladin: They see scientists as simply part of another religion

Seeker: Actually, as a former scientist, I don't consider ALL scientists as such priests - only the ones who are claiming that evolution is some kind of proven fact. Additionally, any scientist who denies the philosophical, ethical, and religious implications and impact of evolutionary theory are clearly not being honest with themselves or us, and are therefore obviously under the sway of the theory as part of their own world view, without being aware of it - hence my post Mass Delusion - 10 Reasons Why the Majority of Scientists Believe in Evolution

Paladin: The problem with that, of course, is that it is exactly what science is NOT.

Seeker: Actually, I think you are missing the problem. It is not a problem with science itself that modern "politically incorrect" thinkers have a problem with - it's with the contemporary *practitioners* of science who are no longer being true to science, but instead, have confused their science with their philosophy of science, their operational science with historical sciences, and their assumptions with facts.

In fact, there are many reasons to be skeptical of modern science, despite it's excellenct track record - it's not that science has suddenly become unsound, but that the modern practitioners have succumbed to human nature and formed an "orthodox hegemony of evolutionary priests" - by confusing science with their belief (or unbelief) systems.

I have written a few posts on the subject of modern science, see these:
Separation of Science and State
Why I Trust Science in Principle, but not in Practice
How the Media Spins Science
The Politicization of Scientific Research
Science as Salvation - A Cautionary Tale

Paladin: In fact, you're welcome to overturn the current theories or conventional wisdom.

Seeker: Actually, what we are contending is that this is NOT possible when you have a hegemony of insecure atheistic materialistic evolutionary believers who won't hear of any questioning. The growing evidence of ridicule, loss of status, and other bullying is what we are complaining about.

Seeker: Anyone who claims that evolution is as sure as gravity not only proves that they don't understand the difference between operational and historic science, they show that they fail to understand the difference between real science and philosophy of science. IOW, they are duped shills, not people of reason. (see Mass Delusion - 10 Reasons Why the Majority of Scientists Believe in Evolution).

HT: Two or Three.net

Exposing the Dogma of Darwinism

My daughter and her roommate are taking a college biology course together this semester. Both are Christians and her roommate, in particular, became upset when the professor bashed any and all who believe that our world has been intelligently designed. In fact, the professor apparently complained about the structure of the eye as being indisputable "evidence" against the concept of design. She questions, "how can we believe that the eye is designed when it has a "blind spot?"

Anyone want to take a crack against that silly reasoning? Hint: just do a search on "eye blind spot" and you will gain your answer instantly.

My daughter's roommate knows that I have been critical of Darwinism's extrapolated theory of macro-evolution for several years now. She asked for information and links about Intelligent Design.

I am thrilled to read today that Actor-commentator Ben Stein stars in 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed!' which is a major film that battles and exposes the elitist strangehold of Darwinism proponents upon scientific inquiry and hypotheses.

Excerpts:

That's right. Evolution – and the explosive debate over its virtual monopoly on America's public school classrooms – is the focus of the film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed."

In the movie, Stein, who is also a lawyer, economist, former presidential speechwriter, author and social commentator, is stunned by what he discovers – an elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma. Even worse, say publicists for the feature film, "along the way, Stein uncovers a long line of biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their reputations destroyed and their careers ruined by a scientific establishment that allows absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin's theory of random mutation and natural selection."

"Expelled" documents how teachers and scientists alike are being ridiculed daily, denied tenure and even fired believing there is evidence of "design" in nature and challenging the current orthodoxy that life is entirely a result of random chance.

For example, Stein meets Richard Sternberg, a double Ph.D. biologist who allowed a peer-reviewed research paper describing the evidence for intelligence in the universe to be published in the scientific journal Proceedings. Shortly after publication, officials from the National Center for Science Education and the Smithsonian Institution, where Sternberg was a research fellow, began a coordinated smear-and-intimidation campaign to get the promising young scientist fired. The attack on scientific freedom was so egregious that it prompted a congressional investigation.

Yep...it's certainly about time that, as the article accurately states, the "elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma" gets exposed!

HT: WorldNetDaily

DNA, Devolution, and You

An article in the August issue of Impact magazine (from Coral Ridge Ministries) caught my eye today. It is entitled, "DNA, Devolution, and You."

I attempted to find it online so that I could just link to it, but wasn't able to locate it. During my search, however, I did find a few interesting articles.

1. Why Intelligent Design will change everything.

The article was written in 2006. Since then, the amount of scientists who have signed a document entitled "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" has increased from 400 to over 700.

2. Another interesting article is “Can the theory of evolution be harmonized with the Second Law of Thermodynamics?”

Perhaps this helps explain why many more scientists are coming on board to sign the Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.

Excerpt:

The entropy law, therefore, applies to open systems as well as isolated systems. This is why no machine or process is 100 percent efficient and why perpetual motion machines are impossible. This is why everything eventually wears out, runs down and dies.

Even those systems which seem to show increasing order for a time eventually lose out to the principle of decay. The crystal finally disintegrates, the adult finally dies, the population eventually stabilizes and finally disappears, the species becomes extinct, even great civilizations sooner or later perish as the result of outside conquest or famine or, perhaps, a nuclear holocaust. Thus, every apparent increase of order and complexity is, at best, only local and temporary, and at the cost of greater disorder to the environment from which it extracts its ephemeral ordering energy.

And even such a local and temporary increase of order can be accomplished only by means of some intricate process provided for the system for this purpose. The remarkable process of photosynthesis enables plants to utilize the sun’s energy and thus to grow. The fantastic processes of blood circulation, digestion, respiration, and others of similar complexity enable animals and men to grow. And both plant and animal life require the intricate coding and template structure of the genetic system for the maintenance of the species itself.

The infinitely greater increase of order implied in the evolutionary process must obviously require a far more wonderful and complex mechanism than any of these if it is to be even temporarily successful. But even after a hundred years of intensive study by thousands of scientists spending millions of dollars of research grants, the mechanism of evolution is still elusive.

The pathetic suggestion of mutation (basically a disordering mechanism operating in full accordance with the Second Law) and natural selection (a conservative principle which tends to maintain the status quo in nature) as the driving mechanisms for the organic phase of evolution illustrates the desperate extreme to which men will go to escape the clear and satisfying evidence, both in nature and in Scripture, of the fact of a completed creation.

Thus evolution can be defended against the Second Law of Thermodynamics by metaphysical speculations, but all the solid scientific and Biblical evidence is against it.

Now we move on to the Impact magazine article:

DNA, Devolution, and You

You're not getting older - you're getting better. We'd all like to believe that about ourselves, but when it comes to the human race, it's just not true.

Entropy, the process of all things going from order to disorder, is a universal reality. We can observe it not just in the state of our children's bedrooms, but in the world around us. Even DNA, the chemical structure that contains the blueprint for life, is subject to entropy.

Devolving, Not Evolving

The information encoded in DNA molecules is declining at a rapid rate due to mutations. The consensus among geneticists is that our genetic code is being increasingly corrupted over time as succeeding generations both inherit and acquire harmful mutations that are passed down to the next generation. We are devolving, not evolving.

Dr. J.C. Sanford, a Cornell University professor and geneticist believes that because of the accumulating "genetic load" of mutations in our DNA, we humans are becoming weaker and weaker over time.

[Note from Christine: Kinda explains why Barry Bonds had to take steroids to break Hank Aaron's home run record, doesn't it?]

In his book, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, Sanford states that genetic information is currently being lost quickly and that the decline in our fitness as a species is thought to be taking place at a phenomenal rate. So, if the human genome is declining with each passing generation, can upward evolution be true?

Molecules to Man?

"Genetic entropy is an insurmountable barrier to the idea of evolution from molecules to man, " said Tom DeRosa, Executive Director of Creation Studies Institute. "The evidence clearly shows us that man, or any other living form, absolutely has no mechanism for evolution." This certainly provides a clue to understanding all the new diseases, including rare forms of cancers that have emerged, because of the genetic stress on mankind, DeRosa said.

[Note from Christine: I can vividly recall a particular brief, but profound incident during the question and answer period at the debate between two atheists vs. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron. A grief-stricken woman in the audience stood up and demanded to know why "God allows cancer" in the world. The following paragraph gives her the answer.]

Cure for the Fall

Entropy is a consequence of man's fall when all things, including DNA, were subjected to the "bondage of corruption" (Romans 8:21 NKJV). Jesus Christ is the only remedy. He bore the curse of sin for us. If we trust in Him for salvation, we will be delivered from the penalty of death and, as Paul states in Romans 8, "the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God" (Romans 8:21 NKJV).

Gary DeMar

In the sidebar next to the article, Tom DeRosa writes:

All Creation Sings

I recently participated in an online chat room where members of the National Science Teacher Association taked candidly about professional concerns.

One teacher made it clear that when it comes to evolution, dogmatic certainty is the only option: "We have to provide a 'united fron' as scientists and not show any doubt. I make sure I never use the word 'believe' during this unit. It's not a belief. It just IS."

Some 700 scientists disagree. In 2001 they signed the following statement found online at www.dissentfromdarwin.org:

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

I'm convinced this teacher won't be telling her students that reputable scientists harbor doubts about Darwin.

Nevertheless, Creation Studies Institute exists to combat this pro-Darwin indoctrination taking place in public schools. Our resources help individuals understand the reasons to believe God's Word versus Darwin.

Tom DeRosa

News Roundup

While running errands yesterday, I heard about Senator Voinovich self-destructing on Hannity's radio show.

It's truly a sad day to realize that a conservative radio talk show host knows more about two key issues (the amnesty bill and the re-emergence of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" which is code word for silencing conservative voices in America) than an active Senator!

Excerpts from article:

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, misunderstood the results of a vote on an amendment to the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill being debated in the upper house today.

The key sticking point in the conversation was Hannity's question as to whether the senator had done a cost analysis on the bill. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, estimates the bill would cost the American taxpayers $2.5 trillion.
Voinovich said he didn't believe the cost would be that high because a third of those eligible for a path to citizenship would never take it.

"How do you know that?" Hannity asked. "Where does that figure come from?"

Voinovich did not provide any supporting evidence for his contention and admitted he had read neither the bill itself or the Heritage Foundation analysis.

So, a Senator who was elected to represent the people didn't bother to even read the amnesty bill nor the Heritage Foundation cost analysis? What the &%@# has this guy been doing up on Capitol Hill? Feeding the pidgeons on the steps??

The senator complained that some of his constituents have attempted to "intimidate" him by saying they would oppose his re-election if he voted for the bill.

Well...yeah...DUH!! Why SHOULDN'T THEY COMPLAIN IF THEY ARE AGAINST THE BILL AND OPPOSE IT MOSTLY BECAUSE THEY ARE PROBABLY MORE INFORMED ABOUT THE BILL THAN THEIR OWN SENATOR?

Sorry to have to say this folks...but what an idiot he is!

But it gets worse.

We find out the real reason why Voinovich wants to press this bill through; regardless of how much the public does not want it!

When Hannity began making the case against the "amnesty" bill, Voinovich interrupted, asking: "Are you happy with the current legislation? Our current laws stink!"

Our current laws stink? But why do they stink? Hannity has the exact answer:

"No one is enforcing those laws, senator," said Hannity. "That's the problem. It's been five and half years since 9/11, and the border is still not secure."

Now, on to the subject of the "Fairness Doctrine" which is anything but the promotion of "fairness."

The conversation began with a question from Hannity about whether the senator supported the Fairness Doctrine, currently a hot topic among Voinovich's colleagues.

"Fairness Doctrine – I'm all for it, whatever it is," he said. "I think everyone should be open to show the other side. That's what you do every night on Fox. That's great!"

When Hannity reminded Voinovich that the Fairness Doctrine would establish government regulatory bureaucracies to enforce this balance, Voinovich quickly retreated.

Voinovich: I'm all for it, whatever it is?? He doesn't even know what it's about and he's for it?

This guy lives in the Twilight Zone!

And, the final "nail in the coffin" of Voinovich's ignorance was this:

Voinovich also asserted efforts in the Senate earlier in the day were successful at amending the immigration bill to require illegal aliens to return to their nation of origin before getting on a path for a green card. When Hannity pointed out the measure failed in a 53-45 vote, Voinovich seemed stunned.

This makes me shudder, people. Our nation is in serious trouble if this is what goes on in Congress on a regular basis.

"He doesn't even know what the Fairness Doctrine is," exclaimed Hannity. "He doesn't even know the outcome of a vote in the Senate today. And he gets mad at me when I try to explain it to him!"

Yep!!

HT: WorldNetDaily

*******

Conservative Calls and Emails Working for Stopping the Amnesty Bill!

HT: The Loft

*******

The New Eugenics Experiments Of The Future?

This is just absolutely bizarre!

I wonder if this will turn out to be a misguided experiment like the cloning of "Dolly" the sheep (who died a young death).

Will unethical experiments lead to the artificial insemination of sperm derived in this way? Will a normal child be born or will it turn out to be just another hideous experiment?

Scary article title, too.

"Will science render men unnecessary?"

So much for God's Word which tells us that a "man shall leave his mother and father" and "cleave unto his wife", and "the two shall become one."

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.



Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?


Mar 10:7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.


(Thanks to Sothenes at Talkwisdom message board for alerting me to this article.)

HT: MSNBC.MSN.com

*******

Update @ 8:57 a.m. PT:

Immigration Bill Cloture Vote Fails!

Time to celebrate!

HT: LGF

Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism?

Jury duty this morning...isn't that special? But I did find a great article that all should read!

Linda Kimball asks: Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism?

Linda writes:

Next, materialist epistemology and metaphysics dispossesses man of soul, free will, conscience, mind, and reason, thereby dehumanizing (animalizing) man and totally destroying not only the worth, dignity, and meaning of human life, but the possibility of freedom. The essence of this annihilation is captured in the following quotes:



Man is “but fish made over…” declared biologist William Etkin (Pushing the Antithesis, Greg L. Bahnsen, p. 224). And his life is but a “partial, continuous, progressive, multiform and continually interactive, self-realization of the potentialities of atomic electron states,” explained J.D. Bernal (1901-1971), past Professor of Physics at the

University of
London (The Origin of Life, Bernal, 1967, xv). Furthermore, “The universe cares nothing for us,” trumpets William Provine, Cornell University Professor of Biology, “and we have no ultimate meaning in life.” (Scientists, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible,” The Scientist, Sept. 1988)



Man... “must be degraded from a spiritual being to an animalistic pattern. He must think of himself as an animal, capable of only animalistic reactions. He must no longer think of himself…as capable of ‘spiritual endurance,’ or nobility.” By animalizing man his “state of mind…can be ordered and enslaved.” (Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics, “Degradation and Shock,” Chapter viii)



Finally, Evolutionary Humanism posits the notion that despite the fact that man is “but fish made over…” there are in fact, some exceptions to this rule. For it happens---by chance of course---that some lucky ‘species’ and ‘races’ of the human animal are more highly evolved (superior) and therefore enlightened than the others, who are---unluckily for them---less evolved and as a consequence, subhuman. Paired to this view is the idea that if a species or race does not continue to evolve (progress up the evolutionary ladder), it will become extinct. Together, these ideas lead logically to the deadly conclusion that in order to preserve the fittest of the species---or the spiritually evolved, as is the case with Spiritual Communism--- it is morally incumbent upon the superior to replace (via the science of eugenics and population control) and/or liquidate the subhumans. In his book, “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex,” (1871) Charles Darwin foresaw this eventuality:



“At some future period…the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world…the anthropomorphous apes…will no doubt be exterminated.” (Descent, 2nd ed., p. 183)



In practice, the materialist worldview is a hellish recipe for catastrophe, as was amply demonstrated by the 20th century’s two most blood-soaked political movements--- pagan Nazism and atheist Communism. Both rejected God, and both were animated by Darwinism

HT: MND

Where's The Academic Freedom?

Articles of interest:

Academia's Assault on Intelligent Design

Excerpt:

What is the state of academic freedom when well qualified candidates are rejected simply because they see God's fingerprints on the cosmos? Isn't the Academy supposed to be a venue for diverse views? Aren't universities supposed to foster an atmosphere that allows for robust discussion and freedom of thought? Dr. Gonzalez's fate suggests that anyone who deigns to challenge conventional orthodoxy is not welcome in the club.

In the future, will scientists who are up for tenure be forced to deny that God could have played any role in the creation or design of the universe? Will Bible-believing astronomers be forced to repudiate Psalm 19, which begins, "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands"? Will faithful Catholics be required to reject the teaching of Vatican I, which said that God "can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason..." Just where will this witch hunt lead?

The amazing fact is that, even as many science departments are working overtime to forbid professors from positing that there is evidence for intelligent design in the universe, more and more scientists are coming to this conclusion. The Discovery Institute has compiled a list of over seven-hundred scientists who signed the following statement: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged." The list of scientists who find good reason to doubt the strictly materialistic Darwinism that is currently scientific orthodoxy is growing every day.

It seems that many scientists and academicians who hold views contrary to Dr. Gonzalez have concluded that the best way to avoid debate about the evidence for intelligent design is to simply deny jobs to those who will not affirm their atheistic worldview. The fact that these scientists, who are supposedly open to following the evidence wherever it leads, have resorted to blatant discrimination to avoid having this conversation speaks volumes about the weakness of their position. They realize their arguments are not sufficient to defeat the intelligent design movement and they must, therefore, shut their opponents out of the conversation. All the evidence suggests that it is unjust that Dr. Gonzalez was denied tenure and that this ruling should be overturned on appeal. Nevertheless, what happened to Dr. Gonzalez is a reflection of the growing strength of the intelligent design movement, not its weakness.

Darwinism: Still Improvable

Excerpt:

The Darwinian account of the origins of life, he insists, does not begin to qualify as scientifically verifiable by the standards that science itself demands. In a recent Pennsylvania case, for example, the National Academy of Sciences spelled out these standards. "In science," it said, "explanations are restricted to those that can be confirmed from the confirmable data – the results obtained through observations and experiments that can be substantiated by other scientists. Anything that can be observed or measured is amendable to scientific investigation. Explanations that cannot be based upon empirical evidence are not part of science."

On these grounds the court ruled out intelligent design as scientific. But on exactly the same grounds, Grose's book contends, Darwinian theory should also be ruled out. "Pray tell," he demands, "where are the specific, observable, testable, confirmable data – obtained through observations and experiments – concerning [Darwin's view of] origins? There are none. And there never will be."
This was the assertion that first vaulted him into the public eye in October 1969, when the California State Board of Education came under fire for refusing to present Darwinian theory as scientific fact. Grose defended the board and in subsequent months found himself denounced by 19 Nobel laureates who signed a petition against him, while the National Academy broke its own rules by plunging into the political affairs of a single state. News media around the world portrayed him as advocating Genesis for public school textbooks. Cartoons ridiculed him as a scientific ignoramus.

The California board backed him nevertheless, empowering him to edit the state's science texts from which he excised 218 statements, many of them sheer myth, to reclassify Darwinian theory from fact to dogma. The Genesis explanation of origins is "a belief, not a fact," Grose reiterates, "and so is Darwin's." In the end, the Board of Education voted unanimously to uphold him, and even the Academy came around. "The search for knowledge must be conducted under conditions of intellectual freedom," it said, "without religious, political or ideological restriction."

This inhibits the religious. It should, and perhaps one day will, inhibit the irreligious as well. Grose's long-suppressed book may be purchased at AuthorHouse.com.

ISU Bias - Coincidence or Design?

It should come as no surprise that with the success of Guillermo Gonzalez' book The Privileged Planet and his appreciation for the Intelligent Design hypothesis, that the elites at Iowa State University would deny him tenure.

At first they would not admit that Gonzalez' book and ID promotion was the reason to deny him tenure. Then, they had to face the fact that Guillermo had an exemplary research record, including many scientific, peer reviewed articles for several of the major science journals.

Uh oh!

Guess they had to come clean and finally admit the real reason he was being rejected for tenure. I guess you could say at least they did, finally, admit it!

Breaking News: Iowa State Department Faculty Acknowledge ID Played Role in Gonzalez's Tenure Denial

Author John West writes:

According to a story to be published in the May 26 edition of World Magazine (already available online here), two faculty members of the department that denied tenure to Guillermo Gonzales at Iowa State University have admitted that his work on ID played a role in the denial. While Prof. Eli Rosenberg, Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy, insisted to the magazine that intelligent design "was not an overriding factor" (emphasis added), he then conceded according to the magazine that Gonzalez's pro-ID book The Privileged Planet "played into the decision-making process. He also explained that the reputation of a professor among others in his field is a significant factor." Of course, if "reputation" is used as a code word for whether one's views are popular among fellow scientists, then this is another way anti-ID bias entered into the decision.

But Rosenberg is not the only department member who admitted that intelligent design played a role in the tenure decision.

ISU astronomy professor Curtis Struck told World that he was not surprised at the denial of tenure to Gonzales because "[h]e includes some things in his astronomy resumé that other people regard as taking a coincidence too far." Struck was obviously referring to Gonzalez's arguments for intelligent design.

Struck's comments mean that at least three of the five tenured astronomers in Gonzalez's department have now been tied to anti-ID bias. As noted earlier this week, another tenured astronomer in the department signed a statement circulated by the National Center for Science Education denouncing intelligent design as "creationist pseudoscience," while the husband of a third astronomy professor signed the same statement.

Despite his own admission, Prof. Rosenberg tried to do damage control by claiming that there was something deficient about Dr. Gonzalez's sterling research record: "You take a look at somebody's research record over the six-year probationary period and you get a sense whether this is a strong case. Clearly, this was a case that looked like it might be in trouble." Really? Was Gonzalez somehow derelict in publishing 350% more peer-reviewed publications than his own department's stated standard for research excellence? Or in co-authoring a college astronomy textbook with Cambridge University Press? Or in having his research recognized in Science, Nature, Scientific American, and other top science publications?

It is worth pointing out that in early 2004 Gonzalez's department nominated him for an "Early Achievement in Research" award for an outstanding record in research. So what changed between 2004 and 2006 when Gonzalez submitted his tenure application? Well, 2004 was the year The Privileged Planet was published. Dr. Gonzalez continued to publish peer-reviewed journal articles, and even co-authored the Cambridge University Press textbook in 2006, but his department seems to have soured on him just as the controversy over intelligent design heated up on the ISU campus and around the nation.

Coincidence... or design?

Isn't the answer obvious?

*******

Update: 5/18/07

ID The Future — www.idthefuture.com

ISU Faculty Admit ID Played Role in Gonzalez Tenure Denial

On this episode of ID the Future we take a look at Iowa State University’s decision to deny tenure to astronomer and professor Guillermo Gonzalez, despite the fact that he exceeds his department’s standard of research by 350%. Two faculty members at ISU have admitted that the denial of tenure to Dr. Gonzalez had to do with his support for intelligent design, a clear violation of Dr. Gonzalez’s academic freedom. Listen in and learn more about Guillermo’s research record and how you can help support his right to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Click here to listen.

*******
Update 5/21/07 - Email from Nota Bene

Action Item:
Help Guillermo Gonzalez in his fight for academic freedom.
Contact ISU President Gregory L. Geoffroy at (515) 294-2042 or email him at president@iastate.edu and let him know that you support academic freedom for Dr. Gonzalez to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

The big story this week was the denial of tenure to widely-published pro-ID astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez at Iowa State University, despite the fact that he exceeded by 350% his department’s standard for research excellence in peer-reviewed publications. A quick recap of the key developments in the case:

1. Two tenured professors in Gonzalez’s department publicly admitted that his work on intelligent design played a role in his tenure denial.

2. Two additional faculty members in Gonzalez’s department were found to be connected to a national statement denouncing intelligent design as “creationist pseudoscience.”

3. Tenure statistics were obtained showing that 91% of faculty who applied for tenure this year at ISU received it, refuting the university’s claim earlier in the week that its tenure standards are “so high, that many good researchers have failed to satisfy the demands of earning tenure” at ISU.

4. Tenure standards for ISU's Department of Physics and Astronomy were released showing that outside research funding was not a stated criterion for tenure decisions in the department.

5. ISU continues to pretend that nothing is wrong while ignoring the hostile work environment for Gonzalez.

*******

About Nota Bene
Nota Bene -- Latin for "mark well"-- is the periodic e-lert newsletter for the Center for Science & Culture. The goal of Nota Bene is to quickly disseminate information regarding important events, activities and milestones related to the scientific theory of intelligent design and about efforts to fully and completely teach Darwinian evolution theory, including both its strengths and weaknesses. Please forward this e-mail to friends and family you think would be interested in this important issue.

Know Where Donation Money Goes

Think you know where the funds that you donate to a specific cause go? Think again! Things are not always as they appear to be. For example, take a look at this unfortunate news:

3-29-2007

'Race for Cure' Continues Funding Planned Parenthood

The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation's "Race for the Cure" is coming to Waco, Texas, on Saturday, and a state pro-life group wants everyone to know where their money is going.

John Pischiotta of Pro-Life Waco is spreading the word that the foundation donates large sums to Planned Parenthood.

"We're trying to raise awareness on the link between abortion and breast cancer, and point out that it is totally inappropriate for the Susan G. Komen Foundation to be making grants to the country's No. 1 abortion provider," Pischiotta told OneNewsNow.com.

HT: Citizenlink

*******

Doesn't it seem like this "Race for the Cure" for breast cancer is absolutely EVERYWHERE these days? I see donation sponsors on products at the grocery store, in clothing stores, in ads in the newspaper and coupons, on websites, in ads on TV, newspapers and magazines. It seems like they have an endless reach towards the public! But when I found out that some funds are often funneled to abortion providers liked Planned Parenthood, I was totally disgusted!!

I have brought this issue up many times on this blog. Past posts here include:

A Dilemma At The Checkout Stand

The Issue That Won't Go Away

Unafraid of Condemning the Death of Innocents

Choose Life, Your Mother Did

Abortion Kills Babies, Hurts Women

It is amazing to me that a breast cancer research group would raise funds to fight it; yet donate funds to organizations that support and perform abortions. Science is showing that women who have abortions are more at risk for developing breast cancer!

What are we to make of all of this?

The Susan G. Komen foundation is a money making machine that doesn't even care that it is funding abortion providers with the money it makes via these "races for the cure" for breast cancer. That's deceptive and fraudulent, in my book of ethics.

I recently completed reading WND's Whistleblower Magazine on Ending Abortion: How the pro-life side will win the war. It was certainly very encouraging to read! One particular article, which is an excerpt from a book written by Jack Willke, M.D. "Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of the Pro-Life Movement," included the failures, the successes, the future and the conclusion that will eventually lead to a future victory for life.

Here are some of the successes:

Abortion remains the central social issue of our time.

Abortion in the U.S. is still a dirty word. An abortionist in the U.S. is still an outcast, especially within the medical profession. This is not true in many other nations, and it is an important deterrnet to abortion in this country.

Few U.S. hospitals still do abortions, which are largely confined to freestanding facilities staffed by abortionists, who are, again, not part of the respected medical community.

Is this a baby? This is no longer a question. Ultrasound and other medical advances have been incredibly important in this, but the pro-life movement was of central importance in teaching the nation, beyond any question of scientific doubt, that human life begins at fertilization.

Dr. Willke goes on to describe how religious groups have been able to work together on this issue. Religious radio is totally pro-life and a shining triumph in the U.S.

Here's the best part:

Willke writes:

Our movement has not just survived, but grown in the face of a militant, dedicated and powerful pro-abortion media and academia. It has grown, too, in spite of the much greater financial resources of the abortion industry.

One of the best tools being used today at counseling centers is the 4-D ultrasound machine which produces a crystal clear image of a mother's preborn baby. Sidewalk counseling is bringing in hundreds of women who see their unborn baby and realize that the pro-death crowd has lied to them. It is not a "bunch of cells," or a "blob of tissue," ITS A BABY!!

The myths of the pro-death crowd are being exposed,and refuted, as well. Prominent converts to the pro-life cause (Dr. Bernard Nathanson; Norma McCorvey) have become important leaders in the movement.

Dr. Willke concludes:

In the end, it will be the commitment and dedication of those within the pro-life movement that carry the day. Their devotion and perseverence are far beyond those within the pro-abortion movement. Without the media, the government and money, the pro-abortion movement collapses. Their strength is a mile wide but only a yard deep.

Yes! Changing hearts and minds on this issue is the key to making abortion unthinkable. It is my hope and prayer that the new scientific tools we have (such as the 4-D real time imaging of pre-born babies) will reveal how horrific abortion really is and thus, finally break through the calloused minds and hearts of anyone and everyone involved in the awful business of killing pre-born children.

Understanding the Trinity

At another blogsite, a commenter named Bob said:

"Now, for the Holy Trinity. As I understand it, the Trinity refers to God the Father, God the Son, and God of the Holy Spirit. I realize the importance of it from the standpoint of the Christian Teaching. What I cannot understand is the concept of three persons being ONE."

Bob is certainly not alone in his difficulty to understand the concept. Many people have felt that way too.

I would like to encourage fellow Christians to post comments that might help in the understanding of the Trinity.

I have done a lot of study on it and have read several books and pamphlets that I have found to be quite helpful. Maybe what I (and other participating Christians here) share will give a better understanding of the concept. Of course, it is a matter of faith, first and foremost.

I have gotten into discussions about this with Jehovah Witnesses. The one portion of scripture that I refer them to is:

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.

Mat 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Mat 28:20 "teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.


Notice the singular of "name" used in the Mat. 28:20 verse.

Plus, how could Jesus be with us always? Through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the heart of each believer.

Plus, where does Jesus' authority come from? God the Father.

Now, keeping this in mind, I will share one of the most intriguing analogies of the Trinity (Triune nature of God) that I have read so far.

The following essay is a portion of a booklet called "Understanding the Trinity: Evidence for God in Three Persons" from Coral Ridge Ministries. Most of the booklet is written by D. James Kennedy. He uses lots of Scripture to back up the evidence. However, there was a portion that contained an excerpt from a book written by Dr. Nathan Wood.

The first few pages of the booklet discusses various Biblical references to the "God in Three Persons" nature of God. I can post this later if anyone here is interested in a more detailed explanation. [Bob - If you venture over here, perhaps that portion of the booklet might more specifically answer your questions. Please let me know if you would like me to include it in this post.] For now, I will just share a few brief points:

1. The first verse of the Bible we read, "In the beginning God [Elohim] created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). In Hebrew the word for "God" is Elohim. That word is plural. El is singular, but Elohim is plural. We know it is plural because it contains within it the personalities of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

2. We also read where God said, "Let us make man in our image....and in the image of God created he him"...in his own image (Genesis 1:26-27). "Us," "Our," "His." And so over and over again, even in the Old Testament, when God speaks, He goes back and forth between the singular and the plural, the plural to singular, because He is the singular-plural God.

3. The facts of the Triunity of God are clearly seen in these four facts within the Bible:

* The Father is God, said thousands of times.
* The Son is God, said hundreds and hundreds of times.
* And the Holy Spirit is God (Spirit of God in OT) is said dozens of times.
* Finally, there is but one God.

In Dr. D. James Kennedy's booklet entitled "Understanding the Trinity; Evidence for God in Three Persons," Dr. Kennedy describes that the universe itself explains the Trinity.

Dr. Nathan Wood, formerly president of Gordon College of Theology and Missions, wrote a magnificent book called, "The Secret of the Universe." In it he spells out for us the result of years of searching in the natural realm for some kind of analogy that was correct for the Trinity. He finally came up with the universe itself.

It is so simple. It is right there in front of us. We can never get away from it. It is always there. We ought to see it very clearly. He points out that any man who manufactures anything or makes anything with his hands is going to inevitably leave his fingerprints upon it. If you were to create a table or chair or something in your workshop, it would contain your fingerprints.

Dr. Wood says that the universe is covered with fingerprints of the Trinity because it was made by the Triune God. The Bible says that the Father created the universe, the Son created the universe, and the Holy Spirit created the universe - the Triune God created the universe. What does Dr. Wood mean by that? Well, there are fingerprints everywhere. We just don't see them.

I would suppose that there are literally millions of fingerprints in this very sanctuary. Did you see any today? Not a one. We are blind as a bat when it comes to fingerprints. We just don't see them. First of all, we're not looking for them. Now you might see them at home on a mirror or something like that, but ordinarily, we don't see fingerprints. However, if a detective were to come in here and begin to dust the wood on the pew in front of you, he would find thousands of them. So let's put on our Sherlock Holmes cap, get out our dusting brush, and see if we can see the fingerprints of Him who made all things.

What does the universe consist of? If you were to ask a scientist, he would tell you it consists of space, time, and matter. Now amazing to tell, we find all of those three things everywhere in the universe - not that we have a universe where some of them exist sometimes and not at other times. It is also true that each of the triune parts of the universe is, in itself, triune.

SPACE

Let us look at each one of them. For example, consider space. What is space composed of? It is composed of length and breadth and height. Always. There is nothing you could name that is not composed of all three of those things. If you were to simply take a pencil and draw a line on a piece of paper, it would have length, it would have a little bit of width, and if you looked in a powerful microscope, you would discover it has quite a bit of height. You can't see it with your naked eye; however, it's always there.

Something that I think is amazing about this is that God always consists of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - not one or the other. It is not a piece of the pie; it's the whole thing, always. Imagine a square block that a child would play with. Draw a picture of it in three dimensions. Then you could take that picture, and with a pencil and using all length, you could make a bunch of lines and fill in that entire block with nothing but length. I have done that sometimes in fancy lettering. Maybe some of you have as well. Or you could take the same block and make the whole thing out of width, or out of height. The fact of the matter is that it is all length, it's all breadth, it's all height all of the time. That's a perfect illustration of the Trinity.

TIME

Or take the matter of time. Of what does time consist? Obviously, it consists of the past, the present, and the future - those three. Any time we have ever known in this universe always consists of those three. Usually we have the idea that we come out of the past, that that really is first, because that is where we came from. The fact of the matter is, time comes from the future, and we meet it head on.

For example, today, yesterday was called tomorrow, and now it's today. A week ago it was called next week, and now it is today. A year ago, it was called next year. So as time approaches us and we move through it, that is what always happens. Anything is first in the future, then in the present, and then it disappears into the past. That is the way time always works. That in itself is an amazing story when you examine it carefully. Past, present, and future.

Dr. Nathan R. Wood gives a fascinating quote that is so remarkable I would like to share it with you. I would challenge you to try to see if you can follow his drift.

He is going to give a long paragraph. Then he is going to give it again, only this time he is simply going to change four words. These four words are "time," "future," "present," and "past". They are going to be changed into "God," "Father," "Son," and "Holy Spirit." You are going to find out something some of you never knew before - that time, which you live by, which you look at constantly in the way of clocks you wind up every day, and which you make your lives run by, is an incredible illustration of the divine Trinity. Read carefully:

"The Future is the source. The Future is unseen, unknown, except as it continually embodies itself and makes itself visible in the Present. The Present is what we see, and hear, and know. It is ceaselessly embodying the Future, day by day, hour by hour, moment by moment. It is perpetually revealing the Future, hitherto invisible.

The Future is logically first, but not chronologically. For the Present exists as long as Time exists and was in the absolute beginning of Time. The Present has existed as long as Time has existed. Time acts through and in the Present. It makes itself visible only in the Present. The Future acts and reveals itself through the Present. It is through the Present that Time, that the Future, enters into union with human life. Time and humanity meet and unite in the Present. it is the Present that Time, that the Future, becomes a part of human life, and so is born and lives and dies in human life.

The Past in turn comes from the Present. We cannot say that it embodies the Present. On the contrary, Time in issuing from the Present into the Past becomes invisible again. The Past does not embody the Present. Rather it proceeds silently, endlessly, invisibly from it...

The Present therefore comes out from the invisible Future. The Present perpetually and ever-newly embodies the Future in visible, audible, livable form; and returns again into invisible Time in the Past. The Past acts invisibly. It continually influences us with regard to the Present. It casts light upon the Present. That is its great function. It helps us to live in the Present which we know, and with reference to the Future which we expect to see."

That is an exact description of the way time operates. It is a perfect analogy. I'm using "analogy" not in the common sense of the word that something is like something or a simile or metaphor, but in the mathematical meaning of the word, which means it is an exact replica as far as every line, every angle, every corner is concerned.

SUBSTITUTE FOUR WORDS

Now let us replace the words. "Time" is replaced by "God"; the "Future" by the "Father"; the "Present" by the "Son"; and the "Past" by the "Holy Spirit" (every word the same but these four). You will see that perfect analogy and you will see the divine Trinity you have been swimming in all of your life!

The Father is the source [every word the same, but those four]. The Father is unseen except as he continually embodies Himself and makes Himself visible in the Son. The Son is what we see, and hear, and know. He is ceaselessly embodying the Father, day by day, hour by hour, moment by moment. He is perpetually revealing the Father, hitherto invisible.

The Father is logically first, but not chronologically, For the Son exists as long as God exists, and was in the absolute beginning of God. The Son has existed as long as God has existed.

God acts through and in the Son. He makes Himself visible only in the Son. The Father acts and reveals Himself through the Son. It is through the Son that God, that the Father, enters into union with human life. God and humanity meet and unite in the Son. It is in the Son that God, that the Father, becomes a part of human life, and so is born and lives and dies in human life.

The Spirit in turn comes from the Son. We cannot say that He embodies the Son. On the contrary God, in issuing from the Son into the Spirit, becomes invisible again. The Spirit does not embody the Son. Rather He proceeds silently, endlessly, invisibly from Him...

The Son therefore comes out from the invisible Father. The Son perpetually and ever-newly embodies the Father in visible, audible, livable form, and returns into invisible God in the Spirit. The Spirit acts invisibly. He continually influences us with regard to the Son. He casts light upon the Son. That is His great function. He helps us to live in the Son whom we know and with reference to the Father whom we expect to see.

That, my friends, is an exact mathematical analogy that each of the portions of the triunity of the universe are in themselves triune.

MATTER

What about matter? What is matter? Ask the scientist and he will tell you that matter is very simply energy in motion producing phenomena. Energy is composed of atoms which are made up of tiny electrical charges with the electrons whirling around the nucleus at speeds anywhere from one trillion to one quadrillion miles per second - at such incredible speeds we can't even imagine what they are. Of course, if you look at an atom, it's very much like the solar system, and the solar system is made up primarily of...nothing - space. And so it is with every atom.

If the chair you are sitting on could suddenly stand still and you could see with microscopic eyes what it really is made of, you would have the feeling that you are sitting on air. You see, this evergy in motion is producing phenomena, such as the hardness of the chair you are sitting on, the chair in front of you, the softness of your coat or dress, and the color of your tie. Everything we know - from aromas to colors to concrete skyscrapers - is made up of those same little atoms whirling about at tremendous speed and producing these various phenomena.

So we see that space is made up of length, breadth, and height. Time is past, present, and future, and matter also is triune in that it is energy in motion producing phenomena. Not only is the universe triune, but it is made up of three different things, which are each in themselves triune. We see that the fingerprints of God are everywhere about us.

This is my Father's world. He made it, and it bears His fingerprints, if we only have the eyes to see or to consider or to think about it. Surely the book of nature reveals in an unmistakable way to anyone who has the eyes to see that this is a divinely created world, created by the Triune God.

RELATIONSHIPS

What are some other things we can learn from that? I think one other thing the Trinity teaches us is the importance of relationships. God has not been sitting, as I said, singularly, solitarily alone forever in darkness, but rather He and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have been carrying on intimate communion among themselves forever. So we see that relationships are very important. They are important to God; they should be important to us, and thus God has set us in families. He has set the solitary in families.

We see that families are important. Marriage is important. We live in a time when there are millions of people who don't take those things to be very important. We have more unmarried people than we have ever had before in this country.

UNITY

Secondly, we see also that in that relationship there is the importance of unity. We are to reflect God in our family, in relationships, and in the unity of our family. When there is discord or strife or faultfinding or argumentation, we can see that we are, indeed, bringing discord into the picture that God would have us to know of the Triune God.

Not only relationships and unity are important, but thirdly, also, purpose. This, I think, is really astonishing. I don't think I ever really saw this as clearly as I did this week, but we don't know what God was doing before He created the universe. He didn't just come into being; He has existed eternally. For all we know, before this universe, there was another one, and before that one, another one, and before that another one and another one. We don't know. That is mere speculation.

But one thing we do know, and that is what He is doing in this universe, that His principal work, as revealed to us in Scripture, is that the Father elects and predestinates a people for Himself. This is repeated over and over again as the purpose and the task of the Father in what is called the economic Trinity. It has nothing to do with money, but about the various functions the members of the Trinity have divided up among themselves for their own purposes.

* We see that the Son has the purpose of being incarnated in human life, living a perfect life in our stead as our substitute, dying an atoning death upon the Cross to pay for our sins, rising from the dead to show that that sacrifice was accepted, and there is life beyond the grave and ascending to the Father, where He now makes intercession for us;

* And that the purpose of the Holy Spirit is not only to inspire the Scriptures for our edification, but also to regenerate and quicken us that we might be born anew by the Spirit, and to sanctify us all through the life of our Christian experience, until finally He glorifies us when the last vestiges of sin are removed and we are made perfect in the sight of God.

All of these tremendous activities occupy the time and the thought and the energy and the emotional output of the great Triune God. Astonishing as it may be, we are the center of their purpose.

What can we learn from that? Scripture tells us that "this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God" (John 17:3). God tells us that we should become more like Him. Dear friend, if you want to become more like Christ, I am going to tell you how. Apart from this, it is not possible. You can't enter into a sympathetic union with the Triune God without entering into what is the passion and purpose of that God, which is, astonishingly, the salvation of the world.