Biblical Relevance in Modern Culture: Atheists, Genesis, and Facebook

Scripturosity is my vehicle for sharing the beautiful compatibility of world discovery and experience with the ancient record preserved in the Bible (reference “About” tab). My wife has used her savvy in the communication medium of Facebook to serve up my articles to her growing community of “friends” as well as various “pages” whose name suggests a potential interest in or objection to my newly published topic. From time to time, a “comment” dialogue will be generated from an article that is so profound that it is worth reviving for the benefit of the readers. Such is the case now.

After promoting my recent article, “Evidence of God,” to her friends and usual list of pages-with-a-cause, Sheila decided to post it on a couple of pages identified as atheistic. A remarkable dialogue erupted that aptly represents the shameful information deficit left by our esteemed institutions of learning and worship.

The first to respond was Brandon. Brandon is what I would regard as a true seeker – a seeker that is the product of respected, academic influences and a painfully anemic church. As you will see from his testimony, he was drawn away from the church and converted to atheism.

Brandon – “The problem with the arguments being made by people like the good pastor (he assumed that I was a member of the clergy) in the article is that they rely heavily on scripture from the bible to underline their premise. That presents a problem because the bible is the claim of god (sic), not the evidence of god. In other words, the pastor’s argument presumes the existence of an entity that has not been proven to exist at all. The argument is based on faith and personal incredulity, not any type of evidence that can be observed, tested, and verified by anyone that wishes to see such evidence.

The pastor makes reference to other works as well, but those works are also heavily faith-based and presume an existence that hasn’t been proven to exist in reality. It would be a good argument if it didn’t rely so heavily on disputed claims and presumptions.

I was a devout Christian for over 20 years. You will find that most people that are atheist have similar stories to mine. Many of us grew up with the church, worshipped God, followed the teachings of Jesus, and lived our lives in service to him (sic). I was that way for a long time. There was a time when anyone that had the audacity to question the existence of God was considered a ‘malignant fool’ by me, because nothing could be possible without God.

But, then I began looking at the world around me and all over and questions started sneaking into my head. I looked to the bible for answers, but mostly what I found was either obsolete or extremely vague. So, I started asking my pastor and other pastors and various other people of the cloth my questions. And the answers I received were either also vague or left me more confused than I was before I asked the questions. So, I decided to do research myself.

The more I researched my questions, the more doubt crept into my mind. I went, in a matter of weeks, from being rock solid in my faith, to incredibly shaky in my faith. With continued research and reflection, I came to the realization that god wasn’t an actual entity, but a manifestation of something that had been drilled into me from the time I was born. I realized that god didn’t create man; man created God. Man created God to be a catchall for explanations that weren’t understood at the time. God didn’t center around eternal life, but mortal death.

It’s all an illusion. It’s all a fairy tale. It’s complete and total fiction. And I bought it hook, line, and sinker for years. Christianity is just as big of a hoax as every other religion.

That being said, if I were asked if I thought there could be some powerful entity somewhere that could possess qualities that humans would consider “god-like,” I would have to say, I don’t know. I think it’s likely there are other species in the universe and some of them may be more advanced than us, I don’t know. But, I do not believe that the Christian God exists, the Muslim God exists, the Jewish God exists, or any other man-made construction of religion has merit to propose the existence of any God of scripture from a position of faith.”

The next contributor was Kyle. Kyle was converted to Christianity from a churchless upbringing. The following is his response and testimony to Brandon.

Kyle – “Brandon, I respect your experience. I think what is a shame is when there are people of faith who criticize those who don’t have faith in what they believe. That, to me, is the biggest crime or falling-out of our generation. You and I have had two different experiences on this soil. You mentioned that you were brought up in the church and were brainwashed. I didn’t go to a church service until I was 19 years old. I didn’t meet God in church. I actually met him (sic) or had my first interaction with God right after my 6^th brain surgery in my early teens. I understand that it’s hard to believe what I am saying is true since it was my experience and from my view.  If anyone has reason to second-guess the existence of God, I think I would be one of those people.

I have witnessed so many make statements like, ‘If God exists, why does he allow bad things to happen to good people?’ I was one of those good people that bad things were happening to. I even grew bitter for a time. I didn’t understand why God would allow such suffering to come to me like he did. I can tell you that I fully understand your statement about being shaky in your faith. I questioned a lot of things much like Job did. In fact, I often feel like Job from the old testament (sic). Now, as far as my experience, I felt God was pursuing me through my trials. He was using my challenges to gain my attention. For me, it wasn’t the afterlife; it was more about this life. The future I had wanted couldn’t be accomplished now. My plans were changing and I never asked them to change. If he really cared, he would have kept me from going through what I was going through (15 brain surgeries in 3 years and subsequent PTSD).

The only reason, when the storms of life hit me, I was able to stand and not fall away or give up was because of the engagement I had with Jesus, the Christ – “this Christian God.”

But, let me tell you something that I do respect about you. Many people are so determined to make you see things their way; they don’t care about their approach. So, my hat is off to you. Thank you for sharing your story and I wish you the best, my friend.”

When Sheila told me that there was some chatter on one of the atheist, Facebook pages in response to my article, I asked her to copy and email the dialogue to me (I don’t have a Fb page). After reading in amazement, I sent her a response to post back. The following is that reply and the subsequent volley.

Marc @ Scripturosity – “Kyle and Brandon, this is the kind of civility that is often lacking in the debate of worldviews. I want to commend both of you for an intellectual and productive exchange of ideas and experience.

Brandon, keep in mind that Scripturosity makes no apologies for its philosophical axiom (hence the name). You may also be interested to know that I am not a pastor, but an executive at an oil and gas exploration company. We have to rely heavily on science, particularly geology, in our various exploration and production endeavors. Approaching the evidence from an historical perspective that aligns with the ancient narrative of Genesis has no effect on our observational conclusions or practical successes. There is no intellectual deficit or practical disadvantage to a biblical worldview.

Sure, I am a man of faith. But so are you. Predisposition biases both of us.  If you take my article to the conclusion, you will see my explanation of this claim (see Scripturosity article “Evidence of God”).

Your testimony is quite profound, but not uncommon. The difficulty that many good people have reconciling the world around us with the preserved Revelation is primarily because of a misinterpretation of the early chapters of Genesis. Because of your background, let me challenge you re-evaluate your worldview in light of an historical Genesis rather than the allegorical designation often assigned to its detail of early earth events. Take some time to read my 5 part article series entitled “Where Did the Billions of Years Come From” (Part 1,  2,  3,  4,  5).

My only point is there may be another way to look at this thing and it just happens to reconcile beautifully with purpose and redemption.

Kyle, your journey has been remarkable. I appreciate your candor regarding thoughts of innocent suffering and a good God. I have a 3 part article series in Scripturosity entitled “Innocent Suffering and a Loving God.” Let me encourage you to check it out and feel free to share with me your thoughts in the blog comments (Part 1,  2,  3).”

Brandon – “Marc, I read your article on the “billions of years.” Let me say that I respect your position and that your article is well written and certainly thought provoking to be sure. Thank you for showing it to me.

I still remain unconvinced. However, I will give your position additional consideration, particularly as it pertains to Genesis as I find that aspect of your premise fascinating. I have not considered Genesis from that perspective and in the course of due diligence, I should attempt to understand where you are coming from instead of just dismissing your position out of hand.

I shall give you another opinion soon.”

Marc – “Thanks Brandon. I admire your spirit of honest inquiry.

Risking information overload – you may find my articles “Who Wrote Genesis” (Parts 1  &  2) and “How to Read Genesis” (Parts 1  &  2) helpful in your research.”

Kyle – “Brandon, in regards to seeing things through your point of view (even though I haven’t walked in your shoes), I have been on the other side or on the side of believing, at one point, some things that I can no longer validate to be true. Again, my experience and research led me to change my point of view and adopt faith in my life. I, like Marc, am a logical thinker. So, that is why I have respect for others who use logic.”

At this point another atheist entered the conversation. But unlike Brandon, Josh was an unreserved scoffer.

Josh – “Kyle, I’d like to ask what non-ad hawk (sic) logic do you use to believe in god. It’s simple. If you erased your memory (and this is impossible) to try on the world with a blank, logical approach, without any argument, you would more likely be an atheist. Unless you can somehow say logically how you can come to the conclusion of god, I find it hard to believe that you are being logical. Marc, why are people allowed to have different interpretations of the bible? Why would god make people who have the freewill to interpret the bible as they deem fitting? It’s an illusion because of preference.”

Kyle – “Josh, you have no idea what you say. It appears to me that you are more interested in arguing than you are in a real debate where two people come together to share their opinions and show mutual respect. As for memory (after 18 brain surgeries), in some aspects of my working memory or short-term memory, it is a blank slate for me each day. Josh, you are young and engaged and for that I commend you. However, if you are really seeking the truth, do it with respect for others.”

Marc – “Josh, interestingly, you accuse Kyle of ad hoc logic and then make an ad hoc claim yourself regarding the worldview tendency of a blank cultural and moral slate. In fact, I make the point in the Scripturosity article that kicked off this discussion (“Evidence of God”), that there is a “candle” inherent to humanity that gives everyone a nudge toward the Divine. One must suppress or snuff this light to peacefully coexist with a conscience apart from God. The proof is there. Only you can settle this with yourself. If you are satisfied, in the quiet of your pillow-pondering, that your intellect has honestly and adequately reconciled with your conscience, then stay on your present path. But if the spark still flickers, seek on.

Concerning your observation of biblical interpretation, sadly there is a lot of truth to that. Some seekers approach Scripture for the purpose of rationalizing a philosophical or practical predisposition. We should all leave our biases at the binding. Just as science is dependent on sound methodological principle, so is literary interpretation based on a sound hermeneutic.”

I know this piece was longer than is recommended for the blogosphere, but I thought it was important to demonstrate the real-world importance of coming to grips with an historical Genesis (see Scripturosity article series “An Historical Genesis – Why Does It Matter” Parts 1,  2,  3). Brandon promised to reconsider the faith of his youth because of it; Kyle can assign context to his suffering from it; and with it Josh can be reasonably challenged that he may have settled too quickly.

Read Full Post »

Biblical Relevance in Modern Culture: Evidence of God?

Atheists are having a field day with a recent Youtube video-clip from a debate between Eric Hovind (creationist) and Bernie Dehler (secular humanist) at Portland State University. The highlight is a question posed by Bernie’s son, a sixth grader, who asked for Eric to produce evidence for God. “How do you know that God exists” was essentially the question. Eric responded with an appeal to logic suggesting that unless you know everything you cannot be sure of anything. Therefore it is irrational to discount the presence of God. After watching the clip and witnessing the difficulty Eric had making his point, I began to wonder how I would answer the same question.

The answer, I believe, is quite simple though intensely contemplative and personal. The best place to start is a review of the 3 endowments at Creation’s finale – The Image, The Breath, and The Mandate. In these we can begin to appreciate our purpose in and sense the anticipation of the great cosmic symphony.

In the 5 days and several hours preceding man’s entrance, the creative episodes were initiated with impersonal mandates such as “Let there be…Let the waters be gathered…let the dry land appear…Let the waters bring forth…and Let the earth bring forth.”

Then, for the first time, creation gets personal. “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness (Genesis 1:26a).” This endowment signals the Creator’s original intent for man.

John MacArthur expounds on the significance of divine image in his book The Battle for the Beginning.

“Above all, the image of God can be summed up by the word personhood. We are persons. Our lives involve relationships. We are capable of fellowship…We know what it is to share thoughts, convey and discern attitudes, give and take friendship, perceive a sense of brotherhood, communicate ideas, and participate in experiences with others.”

I think Henry Morris gives the best defense of human purpose in his book Many Infallible Truths.

“Communication and fellowship between man and God not only are possible but must actually have been a part of God’s very purpose in creation…since this is the ultimate consummation toward which time is moving, then there can be no doubt that this was God’s primeval purpose when time began. He created men for fellowship with Himself.”

The inevitable result of the obvious compatibility was fellowship.

Another unique endowment was The Mandate from the Creator to fill and subdue (1:28). Sometimes referred to as the Dominion Mandate, this declaration clearly establishes mankind as Creation’s superior.

The Bible presents man as the epicenter of God’s creative power and genius, charged with its mastery. “Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands; Thou hast put all things under His feet (Psalm 8:6).”

This is by no means a license to abuse the earth and its creatures, but rather a sanction for careful responsibility in management.

Henry Morris addresses our sovereign assignment this way in his commentary The Genesis Record.

“The cultural mandate, as some have called it, is clearly a very expressive figure of speech for, first, intense study of the earth (with all of its intricate processes and complex systems) and, the, utilization of this knowledge for the benefit of earth’s inhabitants, both animal and human. Here is the primeval commission to man authorizing both science and technology as man’s most basic enterprises relative to the earth.”

It is the endowment of The Breath, however, that is key to evidential witness of the Divine. In my attempt to rationalize the uniqueness of The Breath, I originally posed that it must have been the particular exercise that made man eternal giving him the ability to navigate concepts beyond his time-space-matter existence (see Scripturosity article “Mankind – Favored Not Fortunate”).

But there was a flaw in that supposition. If death had not yet intruded the Creation (Romans 5:12), then all creatures would have had eternal intent in the beginning. What, then, did the breath of God uniquely signify of man in the “very good” Creation?

Genesis 2:7 chronicles that “God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.”

There are two Hebrew words in this verse that warrant definitive clarity. The first is nephesh translated “living soul” here. This is the same word used to describe the compatibility of all creatures with earth’s biosphere. It has also been explained as consciousness. By biblical comparison and cross-referencing, it is technically referring to that which bleeds and breathes (see Scripturosity article “Plant-ing Seeds of Doubt”). The other word is neshamah which is translated “breath of life.” While all conscious creatures “brought forth” from the impersonal creative mandates processed oxygen from their environment for functionality, none of them received the neshamah – the breath from God. This was given only to man. One commentator referred to it as the Divine spark.

Could this blast of pure Spirit, while initiating the nephesh or conscious elements of his existence, also been the primordial endowment of man’s conscience – his unique co-knowledge with God?

Proverbs 20:27 articulates that “The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly.”

The young philosopher, Elihu defended his qualification to intervene by telling Job, “There is a spirit in man: and the inspiration (neshamah) of the Almighty giveth them understanding (Job 32:8).”

In the context of “the beginning,” John the Apostle wrote, “In Him (God the Son) was life; and the life was the light of men…That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world (John 1:4,9).”

The great Apostle Paul wrote of a specific human reality that makes all men accountable before the holy Judge of heaven despite excuses of ignorance. “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead: so they are without excuse (Romans 1:19-20).”

I propose that it was The Breath of God that enlivened man’s essence with the innate ability, yea necessity, to connect with the Divine. While man has a free will to act in harmony with or resistance to this conscience, God has, nevertheless, given every child of Adam’s race a divine nudge toward Himself. This is why all men are “without excuse (Rom. 1:20).” It is this internal “candle” or spirit-connectedness with the Creator that shines on the natural world and it’s First Cause.

My answer to the skeptic or seeker appealing to sense or reason in the pursuit or denial of God’s presence is that the evidence is within them. Every individual is endowed with a compass that points the way to true North – a candle to dispel the shadows of error.

The best evidence to the atheist that there is a God is the intellectual and emotional energy consumed in snuffing this inherent light. Be honest with yourself in a moment of sincere introspection and retrace your steps toward naturalism. How did you get here? Did you have to deny any premonition of purpose along the way? Did your intellect eventually overcome your conscience at the feet of academia (see Scripturosity article “Conscience and Intellect”)? Are you satisfied that you have not been influenced by agenda-driven zealots (see Scripturosity article “Intellectual Invention”)? Have you ever given yourself the intellectual latitude to observe and consider the evidence from a paradigm that invites the supernatural and aligns with your essence (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”)?

What it boils down to is the direction of one’s faith. Faith is not exclusive to proponents of the supernatural. Faith is requisite to a naturalistic cosmogony as well (see Scripturosity article “Answering Skeptics – Part 5”). The worldview disparity is not in the evidence, but rather in the axiom – the philosophical starting point from which the evidence is observed (see Scripturosity article “Fact and Theory”). Creationists presuppose the history of earth and humanity as chronicled in the book of Genesis; while evolutionists regard every observation through the notion of deep time and the doctrine of geologic uniformity (see Scripturosity article series “Deep Time Warp” – Part 1 & Part 2). These initial assumptions shape the direction of every interpretation. To decry faith is either open ignorance or pure hypocrisy.

Before one can reject a Creator or a redeeming Sovereign, he must first deny the very essence of his own humanity. Does God exist? Perhaps the better question is – Should anyone really have to ask?

Read Full Post »

Biblical Relevance in Modern Culture: Making Sense of Sandy Hook

People all over this country and the world paused and looked on in horror as the details of the Newtown, Connecticut shooting began breaking across the air-waves just over a week ago. Unfortunately, when it comes to philosophically processing violent acts within the human family we are too well rehearsed, but this one was different – even for a school shooting.

In the course of a life or even a generation, there are influences, of the most profound nature, that cause us to reassess what we know and who we are. Nationally, we can point to Pearl Harbor and 9/11. But while these certainly live in our memories as days “in infamy,” they are easily contextualized as acts of war in the struggle over ideals and supremacy in the global theater. Events such as these do change life as it was previously known. We rally. We legislate. We awaken faith. The response is clear and unanimous. God is central to our restoration and healing.

Happenings such as the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary and our collective attempt to make sense of them are painfully distinct from other tragedies. The two glaring elements that set these apart from the others are the irrational depths of human depravity and our inability to deflect suffering from the most innocent among us. As with other tragedies, the bowed will not be broken. America will embrace its suffering. Washington will evaluate its role in a remedy. But unlike most, faith is cross-examined and God is subpoenaed.

An Associated Press article entitled “Questions of Why and How Fill Pews in Connecticut Town” represented the collective cry of the “postcard-perfect New England town” and the wonder of a nation: “How could a merciful and just God allow something like (this)?”

The media has reached out to clergy and religious leaders for answers, but the offered resolutions in this culture of correctness have been tremendously disappointing, philosophically unsatisfying, and biblically anemic. The AP article quotes Rabbi Shaul Praver who offered, “This is not an act of God. This is an act of a crazy man.” While I agree with the statement completely, it gets no one any closer to a right context of the brutality or the suffering. In fact, his answer can also be technically satisfying to the atheist. In the same article, Reverend Kathleen Adams-Shepherd counseled with a quote, “Not to give simple solutions to life’s tragedies like the school massacre. It is inexplicable in human terms.”

Why is it inexplicable? Why must seekers be left without clarity?

Answers like these are the unfortunate, yet predictable, destination of a theology that has compromised the primordial veracity of history’s premier text for credibility among conceptually “enlightened” dissidents. If the early chapters of Genesis are reduced to an allegory, then human nature, innocent suffering, and destiny become starkly incomprehensible.

But if we read Genesis as the historical narrative that it is (see Scripturosity article “How to Read Genesis” – Part 1), we understand that these present conditions in which we live were not God’s architectural intent (see Scripturosity article series “Innocent Suffering and a Loving God” – Part 1,   Part 2,   Part 3). The clearly favored pinnacle of the Creation Week, mankind, failed in his opportunity to reciprocate love to the Creator when he used his free-will to defy sovereign standard (see Scripturosity article “In the Beginning…Love”). Since then, the earth and its inhabitants have been navigating a detour of separation from primordial perfection known as the Curse (see Scripturosity article “The Curse of Eden – Part 3”). At the time of the sentencing following Adam’s offense, God engaged a plan to restore the intended fellowship and destroy the intruded evil – interestingly involving the “seed” of humanity (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”).

This prophesied “seed” was manifest when God entered our world as a baby in “the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4).” The angels declared to the shepherds that his coming would bring “peace” to the earth (Luke 2:14). We celebrate His coming this week at Christmas.

But if the “Seed-remedy” has come, then where is the peace?

First, the embodiment of peace did come to earth at that moment in history when Jesus was born. The prophet Isaiah forecast His coming calling Him “Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6).” For a moment, the collective “groan” of Creation was silenced in anticipation of immediate restoration. But as time moved forward, it was obvious that the grand renovation would have to wait. Peace was embodied on earth, but its perfected “increase” was still to come.

Secondly, His peace was not imposed with force from a palace without; it was to be instilled with faith from each person within. Christ explained to his disciples, “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you (John 14:27).” The world around us can rage in utter chaos as we live in perfect peace. This is why the great Apostle Paul was able to write of a “peace…which passeth all understanding” while imprisoned in Rome (Phil. 4:7).

Finally, total world peace is coming. At the consummation of all things, when the sin-cursed detour has run its course, the Creator’s original intent of symphonic symbiosis in nature (Isaiah 11:6-9) and perfect fellowship with mankind (Rev. 21:3) will be realized only a few mere millennia from His “very good” appraisal of the first earth. The Apostle John was given a vision of God’s ambition and wrote from Patmos, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away…And He that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new (Rev. 21:1,5).”

The unimaginable horror in Newtown is a stark reminder that nothing in the human condition has changed since Cain slew his brother Abel in the shadow of Eden. Today, just as then, humanity’s intrinsically fallen state is amplified and the need for a Deliverer confirmed. We can find context and direction from this history as so eloquently stated by the brilliant commentator Matthew Henry. “O that our hearts were deeply affected by this record! For we are all nearly concerned in it; let it not be to us as a tale that is told.”

Also see Reasons for Hope article “Why Does God Allow Pain and Suffering,” written by Shari Abbott, Communications Director and author of the new book “Why the Butterfly?”

Read Full Post »

Biblical Relevance in Modern Culture: Bill Nye – The Unscientific Guy

Last week several friends e-mailed me about a YouTube video-release featuring public television personality, Bill Nye. Many of you may remember his PBS spots known as “Bill Nye – The Science Guy.” His science lessons were brilliantly laced with wit and humor disarming the unsuspecting, after-school audience into embracing one more academic session for the day. The programs always left me fascinated with science and more inquisitive about the world around me.

You might imagine how disappointed I was viewing his recent video entitled “Creationism Is Not Appropriate for Children.” It was difficult to watch for two reasons. First, he was no longer the jovial, master of timing that I came to appreciate as a teenager. In fact, his quasi-coherent rant portrayed a very annoyed and even, to a degree, agitated man.

And secondly, there was nothing scientific about his claim. Dr. Nye used his iconic status of champion of the scientific method as a warrantable basis for a philosophical diatribe against creationism. As is often the case with such attempts, he exposed the weaknesses of his very best objections.

Speaking of the long-term, national dangers that creationism poses, “The Science Guy” said, “The United Sates is where most of the innovation still happens. People still move to the United States. And that’s largely because of the intellectual capital we have, the general understanding of science. When you have a portion of the population that doesn’t believe that, it holds everybody back…really.”

He must be referencing the way Johann Kepler held back the field of astronomy, or Isaac Newton held back physics, or Carolus Linnaeus held back biology, or Louis Pasteur held back organic chemistry, or Gregory Mendel held back genetics.

In a follow-up radio interview with Scott Paulsen, a popular morning personality on WDVE in Pittsburgh, Bill reiterated his belief that “creationism stifles innovation and ingenuity.”

“Without innovation you’re not going to have jobs,” he explained. “Without science, you’re not going to have innovation – engineers and scientists. Creationism is not going to be able to help you with that. There is no information there.”

In the course of his lament, he mentioned several inventors and scientists from America’s strong, innovative past, failing to realize that half of them acknowledged God as the Creator of all things.

In the YouTube video he warns, “Your world just becomes fantastically complicated when you don’t believe in evolution. The idea of deep time, of this [sic] billions of years, explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your world view just becomes crazy, just untenable, itself inconsistent.”

Skeptics love to accuse creationists of not believing in evolution and then cite evidences of horizontal change (based on genetic predisposition for adaptability) within organisms. This type of change is what Darwin observed on the Galapagos Islands and is scientifically verifiable. The problem comes at the point of the philosophical leap that proposes vertical change (based on the belief that anything is possible with enough time) from one organism into a distinct, new creature on the conceptual Tree of Life.

Those who regard the Genesis account as historical, embrace adaptation and speciation within the established boundaries of Creation’s Orchard of Life, with each trunk representing a distinct “kind.” So, in that sense, we do “believe in evolution,” but the opposition is certainly not inclined to debate within the frame of a clear definition of terms.

I’m glad that Bill Nye refers to “deep time” as an idea, because that is the extent of its legitimacy. According to Harvard professor, Stephen J. Gould (Time’s Arrow, Time’s Cycle), “When we finally discard the empiricist myth that turned (James) Hutton into his opposite (a field-work fraud), we can properly seek the discovery of deep time in those a priori concepts that Hutton viewed as the rational basis for his or any theory of the earth. He did not find deep time or cyclicity in rocks…deep time is the essential ingredient of unbounded cycles, established by logical necessity prior to confirmation in the field.”

So while (Charles) Lyell expanded on Hutton’s work under the assumption that it was genuinely empirical, Charles Darwin discovered in Lyell’s work (Principles of Geology) the deep time that would be required to lend credibility to his theory of the transmutation of species and his phylogenic “tree of life.”

In each case, observation was preceded by theory. Data was contextualized by assumptions. Science has not proven “deep time”; but proponents of evolution still embrace this notion as an indisputable, doctrinal authority (see Scripturosity articles “Deep Time Warp” Part 1 & Part 2).

The gulf between evolutionism and creationism is not over data or discovery. The great chasm is conceptual. Creationists approach the evidence on display around the world from the philosophical axiom of the ancient, Sacred Text. What most evolutionists don’t acknowledge is that they, similarly, have a contextual starting point – deep time. Any forensic summation of the evidence is inevitably filtered through the philosophical bias of the observer. The truth is representatives from both worldviews can advance good science. One’s origins paradigm does not influence their work in the science lab or the inventor’s bench.

Rather than “untenable” or “inconsistent,” the biblical worldview draws tremendous clarity to our observations and reveals unequivocal purpose for our existence (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”). Perhaps Bill Nye’s vexation with creationism is more about the validity that any physical compatibility might convey on the spiritual lessons and prophetic claims of its documented source than anything else. From the standpoint of implied, personal vulnerability, his sense of alarm makes perfect sense.

Read Full Post »

Divine Origin and Sacred History: Tale Lights

Just as today, ancient man was fascinated by the heavens. This appeal is well-placed since its purpose from the beginning was to benefit the earth-bound observer. In the Creator’s accounting of the events He expresses that the host of lights inset against the deep blackness of space (as diamonds enhanced on velvet), were “for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years (Genesis 1:14).” Universal time measurement was ordained on Day 4.

While standard time measurement was obviously an expressed purpose of heaven’s luminaries, the book of Job bears out a deeper stellar appreciation related to the “signs” denoted in history’s opening record.

In Chapter 9, Job credits God with the placement and design of pictorial star groupings (vv.4-9). Later on in Chapter 38, God Himself references these “heavenly congregations” (vv.31-33).  God intimates that these groupings are more than just random clusters of plasma smattered across the heavens. Though tens-of-thousands of light years apart, they have been divinely manipulated with an assigned place and purpose in order to affect the terrestrial occupant.

The “ordinances” of verse 33 are interpreted literally as order or arrangement, rendering the following as a reasonable paraphrase: “Job, can you fathom the order and arrangement of the stars and their relevance to the observer?”

We are instructed in Scripture that the priority or role of Creation is to declare the magnificence of the Creator and direct the observer to Him.

Psalm 8 – “Oh Lord our Lord, how excellent is Thy name in all the earth! Who (not a question but an allusion to His prime seating and interest in His investment) hast set Thy glory above the heavens…When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy finger, the moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained; What is man, that Thou art mindful of Him…Oh Lord our Lord, how excellent is Thy name.”

Psalm 19 – “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth His handiwork.”

Acts 17 – “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though He needed any thing, seeing He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;…That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel (grope) after Him, and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us…”

Acknowledgement of this profound direction offered in the heavens and relevance to the observer is found in the dialogue between Job and his friends. Zophar uses the observable yet incomprehensible expanse of the heavens to stress the infinitude of God. “Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection? It is as high as the heavens…what canst thou know (11:7-8)?” Eliphaz uses the height of heaven to illustrate God’s unobstructed perspective of all man’s activities; particularly those which he assumed Job was trying to hide. “Is not God in the height of the heaven? And behold the height of the stars, how high they are! And thou sayest, How doth God know (22:12-13)?”

Dr. Henry Morris believed that it is most “significant that this oldest book of the Bible contains more specific references to the constellations than any other book, suggesting that God-fearing men of that age were very much aware of the divine significance of these God-ordained star groups.”

When David wrote the 19^th Psalm, what was the declarative extent of the handiwork to which he referred? Was the appreciative “knowledge” (v.2) general and declaring of His glory or specific and directing to His person?

Concerning these heavenly declarations, Dr. Morris suggests the following in his book The Remarkable Record of Job (p. 45).

“In some way…these constellations must have symbolized to the ancient patriarchs God’s purposes in creation and His promises of a coming Redeemer. This primeval message has been corrupted satanically into fantasy messages of the astrologers, but, since we now have God’s written Word, it is no longer needed. To the early generations, however, it may have served as a memory device, perpetually calling to mind the primeval promises given to Adam, Enoch, and Noah…”

Genesis 15 relates an encounter between the Lord and a likely contemporary of Job, the man Abram. The result of the encounter was a declaration of a righteous credit to Abram’s spiritual account after believing something clarified by the Lord in the night sky.

“Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and He said unto him, So shall thy seed be (v.5).” In order to understand this passage, two words must be defined. The words “tell” and “number” are translated from the Hebrew word sāpar which has multiple usages in Scripture primarily determined by context. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon favors two definitions – to count things (as in learning the number) and to take account of or to reckon (as to carefully observe and consider). Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words also assigns contextual meanings – to number, count, proclaim, declare, to take account of (as being aware and concerned about each detail). While most commentators interpret a redundant definition of “counting to learn the number” for both words, this does not satisfactorily answer how righteousness was imputed to Abram as a result of his faithful agreement.

A well-reasoned, biblically consistent interpretation of this passage could read like this. “Look now toward heaven, and take account of the stars, if thou be able to recognize the declaration in their appointed sequence: and He said unto him, I will accomplish this through your lineage. And he had faith in what the Lord told him; and he counted it to him for righteousness.”

Most scholars agree that this was Abram’s faith-defining moment. “Even as Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness (Galatians 3:6-9). And the scripture (affirming the canonical authority of Genesis), foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with (in the same manner as) faithful Abraham.”

Perhaps Abram’s faith was initiated “before the gospel,” at the Lord’s direction, upon recognition of God’s curse-defying redemptive plan as depicted in the star groupings. Similarly, it may be that Job’s awareness of the constellations carried much deeper meaning for him and may have been instrumental in his faith as well.

Salvation is and has always been by grace, through faith in the sacrificial, shed blood of our innocent substitute, Jesus Christ. Old Testament believers looked ahead. New Testament believers look back. We find the account in the pages of Scripture (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”). Perhaps to the ancients, it was revealed in the stars.

Read Full Post »

Biblical Relevance in Modern Culture: Defending Eden

Since his cosmic rebellion, Satan’s obsession has been to disrupt God’s fellowship with the apple of His creative eye; the very focus and pinnacle of time’s explosive, opening week – mankind.

His tactics of impediment are of record for the sake of informed, counter-combat.

The Garden Tactic – Confuse God’s Mandate (Genesis 3:1)

Satan’s initial disruption involved Woman (Eve) and her understanding of God’s expectation (“Yea, hath God said?”). He is careful not to ridicule her spiritual sensitivities, only to cast doubt on her limited perspective (see Scripturosity article “Yea, Hath God Said?”). “Can you be confident that the words are preserved rightly as given by God (Eve was not created when God explained the ground-rules to Adam) and, beyond that, are you satisfied in your interpretation and practical application of those words?”

If he can cast doubt on the authorship, the preservation, or the expectation, then the Record becomes far less authoritative and relevant.

The Desert Tactic – Confound Christ’s Meaning (Matthew 4:1-11)

Much has been written and spoken concerning this 3-phase assault that started and ended in the wilderness with an intermediate clash at the Jerusalem temple. The stake in the encounter is amply measured and condensed in the words of Matthew Henry. “That which Satan aimed at, in all his temptations, was, to bring him (Jesus) to sin against God (To despair of His goodness, ‚To presume upon His power, and ƒTo alienate His honour), and so to render him forever incapable of being a Sacrifice for the sins of others.”

Satan has never been dissuaded, even in light of his forecast bruising at the hand of woman’s seed (Genesis 3:15), from the prospect of a perpetually cursed race and a foiled reconciliation. Now with the Seed-remedy fully clarified in the flesh, Satan approached his Adamic nemesis face-to-face in brazen desperation. Though weakened in the flesh, Jesus never wavered unsheathing and brilliantly flashing the sword of the eternal Word in response to Satan’s advances.

“This is observable,” Matthew Henry comments, “that Christ answered and baffled all the temptations of Satan with It is written. He is himself the eternal Word, and could have produced the mind of God without having recourse to the writings of Moses; but he put honour upon the scripture, and, to set us an example, he appealed to what was written.”

Satan’s attempt to draw the Last Adam into sin, as the first, was disappointed, but he still efforts to marginalize Christ and his role in the lives of men and women. While Jesus maintained focus on His passion and fulfilled the Edenic prophecy offering Himself in innocence for the whole of Adam’s guilty race, the Devil continues to deter mankind by muddling Christ’s person and purpose.

The Reckoning Tactic – Condemn Man’s Motives (Job 1:9)

The first two devices of disruption were to affect man toward God. This final maneuver is intended to agitate God toward man.

It seems that Satan’s “going” previously included a visit to the Job estate since he was keenly familiar with Job’s good life – both internally and materially. When God, in full awareness of Satan’s motives, referenced Job as a template of faithful integrity, Satan was cocked and locked with an accusatory query. “Doth Job fear God for nought (1:9)?”

Respected 17^th century author and scholar Matthew Henry offers this insight into this devilish device.

“He (Satan) could not deny that Job feared God, but suggested that he was a mercenary (one serving merely for wages) in his religion, and therefore a hypocrite. See how slyly he censured him as a hypocrite,” Henry points out, “not asserting that he was so, but only asking, Is he not so?”

Satan’s purpose was to demonstrate to God that His love was wasted on mankind. Job was simply the representative case-in-point. If he could demonstrate that Job only responded with affection because of his good life (“Hast not thou made an hedge about him?”), then perhaps all followers are disingenuous and self-serving in their faith.

The cosmic accuser was trying to get God to question His prophesied commitment to and continued investment in humanity’s restoration (Genesis 3:15).

We see in John’s Revelation of things to come, that Satan will continue to employ this tactic even after the Seed of woman has long been victorious over the Curse through His bruising and until the moment he is finally barred from presenting himself before the Lord with the other sons of God. “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of the brethren is cast down, which accused them before God day and night (Revelation 12:9-10).”

It is not out of the realm of possibility that a personal hardship may represent your moment in the cosmic batter’s box to prove your faith and pronounce God’s goodness (see Scripturosity article “Innocent Suffering and a Loving God” – Part 3).

Do not fall victim to the enemy’s devices. 1) Elevate the Scriptures – your purpose lies therein. 2) Esteem the sacrifice – your rescue is in Christ. 3) Embrace the scrutiny – your adversity can be the Creator’s praise.

Though Eden was buried under the Flood waters (2 Peter 3:6), the purposed, Garden fellowship (see Scripturosity article “Mankind – Favored Not Fortunate”) is accessible to the seeker today. Sons and daughters of Adam, fulfill Creation’s purpose and courageously defend Eden’s fellowship.

Read Full Post »

Divine Origin and Sacred History: The Dark Cherub

An important part of preparation in sports, as well as in military strategy, is to know your opposition. To many, the Devil has been reduced to a shoulder-perched, conscience-clashing, figment clad in a red suit and armed with a pitchfork. The Scriptures, however, reveal something quite different from this popular caricature.

What can we know biblically about this villainous, historical figure?

1) He was created (Ezekiel 28:13).

In this passage, the prophet Ezekiel is instructed by the Lord to write a song or poem, for posterity, of the rise and fall of the king of Tyre. As we will see, the details provided to the prophet strongly intimate that the message for this earthly king carried with it a direct address from the Creator to another – the king’s possessor.

2) He was part of the “very good” six day creation of Genesis (Exo. 20:11, Ps. 104:4, Ps. 148:2-5, Col. 1:16-17).

Chapter 1 concludes, “And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” The second chapter division begins (still part of the opening toledoth entry) with, “Thus the heaven and the earth were finished, and the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made.”

3) He was special – “the sum” of Creation’s splendor embodied (Ezekiel 28:12). Whether he was given a special cloak or his beauty rivaled the glimmer of “every precious stone,” his glamour and abilities were distinct among all others (v.13).

4) He was appointed to a prominent place in Creation’s theocracy (Ezekiel 28:14).

His installation was a position of guardianship; that is what is meant by the word “covereth” in this verse (different from the word translated “covering” in v.12). It may be inferred that his commission had something to do with the Garden of Eden (v.13), the climax of Creation – mankind, or both. Speaking of the angels and their comparative inferiority to the Son, the writer of Hebrews gives what might be insight into original, angelic purpose. “Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation (1:14)?”

5) He served obediently in his appointed role with right motive (Ezekiel 28:15).

The dichotomous address recounts a time when this anointed cherub was perfect in his ways. Not only was he faithful to his commission of protector, but his heart was right.

6) His heart became lifted up in pride corrupting every created attribute (Ezekiel 28:15b, 17). Another account of a host-dignitary being condemned through the words of a prophet with a direct heavenly message to the possessor-foe is found in Isaiah 14:9-15. The “time-dimension” context of this passage is the prophetic collapse of the great Babylonian empire. The warning is directed toward the sitting king of Babylon (14:4), perhaps Nebuchadnezzar, as well as his dark spirit-guide. “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning…For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God…I will be like the most High.”

7) He was sentenced with no hope of reparation or appeal.

“Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee…How art thou cut down to the ground…thou shalt be brought down to hell (Isaiah 14:9,12,15).

“I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire (perhaps a reference to his attire or decorated appointment)…All they that know thee…shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more (Ezekiel 28:16,19).”

“I will put enmity between thee and woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it (the Seed-Remedy) shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel (Genesis 3:15).”

8) He maintains access and accountability to God despite his rebellion (Job 1:6-7).

To observe the depravity and violence that seems to define our world, one might get the impression that God has lost His grip on creation. According to this inspired peek into the third heaven, God has relinquished no measure of His authority. Satan, like all else, is a subject of sovereign reign. Everything is orchestrated toward Edenic fellowship with mankind – including the exploits of Satan. The unfortunate condition of the world around us is the inevitable result of sin’s entrance and creation’s Curse. These are evidences of divine code, not diminished control. This detour will eventually arrive at the original destination of reciprocal love and free-choice fellowship with mankind, having preserved every facet of His divine character. “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the earth were passed away…And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God (Rev. 21:1-3).”

9) He is obsessed with mankind (Job 1:7-8)

In these verses, the reader can easily conclude that Satan’s pacing was not out of boredom or without purpose. It is obvious from God’s response that mankind was central to Satan’s goings.

The truth is, since the Garden, Satan has had an obsession with mankind. At some point in the performance of his duties as the “covering cherub,” he determined that his service to mankind would no longer define him. In his heart he resolved that he deserved better than his appointment. The impetus of his revolt may be clarified in the book of Hebrews (2:5-18) where the writer draws a distinction between men and angels.

1)      Only man has been authorized with dominion over the earth, both primeval and post-millennial (v.5, 7-8).

2)      Only man was and is the subject of divine visitation both primeval and post-Curse (v. 6-10).

3)      Only man has been given the intimate familial identification of “brethren” with the Son of God (v. 11).

4)      Only man was the subject of God’s mercy and restorative action (v. 14-17).

This obvious favor given to man may have been the catalyst for the great angelic rebellion, the initial Edenic assault (see Scripturosity article “The Genesis Serpent”), and subsequent destructive preoccupation led by Satan. Everything focused on mankind from the earth itself to the affection of the Architect. And to compound the insult, when Satan was finally able to accomplish the separation in Eden, God engaged an immediate action plan (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”) to restore the fellowship that man had forfeited (a provision not afforded the fallen angels)! One more small detail of the reclamation blueprint that was of vital interest to Satan – not only would he be destroyed, but mankind would be key to his ruin (Gen. 3:15).

No wonder he paces the earth “walking up and down in it.” Perhaps the Apostle Peter had this passage in mind when he described our “adversary…as a roaring lion” who “walketh about, seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet. 5:8).”

Read Full Post »

Divine Origin and Sacred History: Earth’s Flat and Fixed Past

Over the years, skeptics of biblical authority have tried to marginalize the influence of the Sacred Text and the subscribing faithful by contriving conflicts between the assertions of the Word and the actualities of the world. Two such exercises in error are concerning the shape and universal orientation of the earth.

One popular straw-man label still used to discredit any non-conformist, political or scientific group is the term “flat-earther.” The idea is that uninitiated, biblical literalists once conceived a table-flat earth with precipitous limits based on passages describing earth as having four corners (Isaiah 11:12; Revelation 7:1 – elegantly descriptive of the four directional orientations also referred to as quarters – Revelation 20:8). This “Dark Age” conflict had both a villain and a hero. The villain was the superstitious, ignorant Church and the hero was Christopher Columbus and other brave men of maritime science. The story, of course, plays out with Columbus proving that the earth was round, contradicting the Scripture, and thereby disassociating it from reality.

In the ancient book of Job (edited from a journal approximated at 2,000 BC), God Himself proclaims His origination and management of the daily dawn and likens it to the relationship of clay to a cylinder impression or seal (38:14). Seals were impression templates used by ancient craftsmen to decorate pottery or flat-surface clay fixtures. As the seal turns on the clay leaving its impression for the reader, so the earth rotates revealing the dawn to the observer. The prophet Isaiah referenced the “circle of the earth (40:22)” in his writings dated around 700 BC.

Those who are familiar with the Scriptures and use even the most basic hermeneutic principles recognize that the notion of a flat earth is not remotely intimated.

In refreshing, academic candor, Harvard Professor Stephen J. Gould wrote of the conflict in his book entitled Rocks of Ages; Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life calling it “the silliest and most flagrantly false of all tales…the best example I know for exposing the harm done by the false model of warfare between science and religion (p.111).”

“Christian scholars never proclaimed a flat earth against the findings of science and the knowledge of antiquity, and Columbus fought no battles with ecclesiastical authority over this nonissue (p.125).”

Another straw-notion used to dismantle the authority of Holy Writ was the astronomical conceptualization known as geocentrism – the model of cosmic motion that places the earth in a fixed, stationary position in the center of the universe. While the story has been presented, once again, as a pivotal conflict between religion and science, the truth is they were never at odds (see Scripturosity article “Where Did the Billions of Years Come From? (Part 2) – The Galileo Affair”).

What is interesting, though, is that some Bible students remain insistent on a fixed and centered galactic position for planet earth; one in which our immediate solar system, the distant constellation groupings, and the rest of the universe revolve around it. While they invoke the mathematical parallels between competing motion-models, they must completely ignore the clear observations of astronomy.

I understand and respect the motivation of these zealots, but in actuality the result of their crusade fosters far more scrutiny and ridicule toward the very Divine Document that they are trying to advance.

The reason for proposing such a notion is because some believe that a heliocentric model of cosmic motion (one in which the earth moves around a stationary sun) does harm to the concept of our favored place in the universe. They also believe that references in Scripture to the world not being “moved” are speaking of earth’s motionless status in space. What they fail to recognize is that in space the appearance of stasis is relative within the context of a very dynamic universe.

The eloquent Psalmist, David had knowledge (either through inspiration or ancient astronomy) of this orchestrated heavenly motion when he wrote of the sun’s great circuit going forth unto the ends of it declaring the glory of God (19:6).

Dr. Henry Morris points out in his devotional book Treasures in the Psalms (p.179) that “as the sun moves in a gigantic orbit through the Milky Way Galaxy (an orbit that would require 230 million years for one circuit, at a speed of 600,000 miles per hour), and the galaxy moves in an unknown path relative to the other galaxies of space, its circuit seems truly to be from one end of the heavens to the other.”

Not only that, but the earth is orbiting the sun at a speed of approximately 67,000 miles per hour at a rotational speed of just over 1,000 mph at the equator.

How can those who insist on a literal, motionless earth based on passages such as 1 Chronicles 16:30, or Psalm 93:1, or Psalm 96:10 explain the clear evidence of earth’s motion based on its indisputable position within one of the spiral arms of our galaxy?

The word “moved” has nothing to do with being motionless, but rather steadiness in motion and permanence within its divinely appointed, cosmic course.

They also like to point out that biblical references to the sun rising and setting ought to be taken literally in order to preserve the authority and integrity of the Scriptures. This is clearly an unnecessary attempt to shoehorn a biblical passage into a presumption.

One of the wonders of this miraculous book we call the Bible is that it was authored by omniscient, eternal, Sovereignty for the purpose of being understood by finite, fallen humanity. What would be the point of composing a message for the purpose of directing mankind back into the fellowship for which he was created and then encrypting it in code?

Infinite perspective accommodated finite capacity with a perspicuous message (clearly written – easily understood) of restoration. Keeping in mind the limitations or perspective of his target audience, the Author often uses accommodative or phenomenal language. These verses are referring to the apparent motion of the sun to the observer and not its absolute motion in the cosmos.

In Genesis 1:5, God assigns names to light and darkness. This assignment involves a declaration and an intimation.

The declaration was that the “light time” would be “day” and the dark periods would be “night.”

The intimation is that a cycle had been initiated. From this time forward, earth would be regulated by light/dark…day/night cycles (Genesis 8:22; Job 26:10).

Question: What was the mechanism for these recurrent periods of day and night? Was the light being turned on and off? No…the earth had begun rotating on its axis.

The first day was the impact of a stationary light source, other than the sun (not yet created), on a rotating earth.

These passages seem to be offering context for a right understanding of the earth’s rotational and orbital relationship to the sun that would be created on Day 4.

For the purpose of an accurate description – planet earth is fixed in a heliocentric relationship with the sun in this solar system and seems to be galactocentric in relation to the universe.

In the book of Job, the main character makes the case for his continued God-ward confidence when he wrote, “He hath stretched out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth on nothing (26:7).”

The reference “empty place” comes from the Hebrew word tōhû which was also translated “without form” in Genesis 1:2. The tōhû of Genesis is communicating the formless assembly of the perfectly created elements from which all else was made in the week following. It was Day 1 in which God called time, space, and matter into existence. “In the beginning (time) God created the heaven (space) and the earth (matter).”

Why is Job 26:7 significant? While it is not necessary to be dogmatic about it, this verse seems to place the Day 1 earth at the center of universal orientation.

Why do some feel the need to “dig in” and defend a geocentric universe? 1) A love and respect for the Bible as inerrant and authoritative. 2) A poorly administered hermeneutic. 3) A misconception of cosmic motion. 4) A misunderstanding of history.

These well-intentioned regents are under the impression that they are maintaining the “ancient landmarks” of biblical traditionalism by taking a geocentric stance. The truth is the notion has been contrived to represent a rationalistic chasm between matters of faith and reason – religion and science. With good intention, geocentric stalwarts are actually legitimizing the straw-man of a faith-based opposition to science.

Read Full Post »

Divine Origin and Sacred History: Majesty in the Mundane

Rather than ignorantly credit observable, geophysical phenomena to “mother nature,” the book of Job makes it very clear that the processes to which the earth is subject have been sovereignly assigned by the universe’s Great Engineer.

“God understandeth the way thereof, and knoweth the place thereof. For He looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven; To make the weight for the winds; and He weigheth the waters by measure. When He made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder: Then did He see it, and declare it; He prepared it, yea and searched it out. And unto man He said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding (28:23-28).”

Dr. Henry Morris offers the following in this regard in his book, The Remarkable Record of Job.

“Throughout Job we…find a strong emphasis on the dependability of the laws and constants now controlling God’s completed creation. Unlike other ancient books, Job has no hints of magical acts or any other occult practices. There are not any divine miracles recorded (except for Job’s eventual healing, if that is considered miraculous), although both Job and Elihu mentioned their faith in the future resurrection of the body (Job 19:26; 33:28). This is especially surprising in view of the many miracles recorded in the Mosaic writings of the Pentateuch. Job records one demonic visitation, as well as God’s personal revelation (Job 4:12-21; 38:1-42:8), but throughout the book there is repeated emphasis on the reliability of God’s providential – rather than miraculous – control of his creation.”

While many rationalize their spiritual disillusionment and dullness with the absence of the “spectacular” in their lives, the book of Job underlines God’s presence in the “mundane.”

Why are we so dependent upon the sensational to satisfy our craving for the presence of God?

The early chapters of the book of Job make it clear that the spectacular events that changed Job’s life were discharged by Satan. Was Job privy to the heavenly dialogue and grand experiment that opened the floodgates to his suffering? Of course not.

Despite the ferocity of the extraordinary and the hush from heaven, Job remained convinced of God’s presence and providence. “But He knoweth the way that I take…and performeth the thing that is appointed for me: and many such things are with Him (23:10,14).”

How could Job say this? From where did he draw his certainty? Though “He (God) holdeth back the face of His throne (26:9),” Job found evidences of God’s engagement all around him. He saw God in the deep, dark magnificence of the night sky (26:7), in the brilliant hydrologic maintenance of the post-Flood world (26:8), in the uncompromised bounds of the post-Flood oceans (reflecting his knowledge of God’s promise to Noah – Gen. 9:11), and in the purposeful placement of and tidings in the stars (26:13 – particularly the “crooked serpent” known today as Draco the Dragon who’s head is interestingly about to be crushed by the club of Hercules).

Job was saying, “Despite heaven’s silence (v.9), nature’s evidences satisfy my search for God’s presence. Lo, these are parts of His ways: but how little a portion is heard of Him (26:14)? Yet, it is a portion! I may not understand everything that results under His governance, but these evidences testify of His presence and sustain my faith.”

Of the 6,000 years represented in Scripture, the moments of miraculous intervention can be encapsulated into a mere 3% of earth history (Creation, Moses, Joshua, Elijah/Elisha, Jesus, the Apostles). Because of the immediate and historical impact of such events that defied natural law, much of our attention is committed to them. The overwhelming majority of the sacred timeline, however, defaults to a grossly unspectacular history. Sovereignty is not amplified in the supernatural, but rather in the mundane. Yes, God is in the miraculous and we should be in awe of His creative power. But God is also in the maintenance processes decreed to preserve this planet through its useful tenure.

The relative absence of divine spectacle throughout history necessitates a faith that is sustained in God’s unimpressive disclosure of Himself in both special (Scripture) and general (nature) revelation. Unfortunately, some scholars have spoiled faith by presenting “inconsistencies” between God’s Word and God’s world. Any proposed disparity between the Word of God and the work of God is because of a philosophical misplacement of eminence.

Many Christian academics agree with the English politician and philosopher Francis Bacon (a contemporary of Galileo), who promoted nature as the requisite context to unlocking the truth of Scripture. In his 1605 book entitled Advancement of Learning, Francis Bacon made this statement.

“For our Saviour saith, ‘You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God;’ laying before us two books or volumes of study, if we will be secured from error; first the Scriptures, revealing the will of God, and then the creatures expressing his power; whereof the latter is key to the former: not only opening our understanding to conceive the true sense of the Scriptures, by the general notions of reason and rules of speech; but chiefly opening our belief, in drawing us into a due meditation of the omnipotency of  God, which is chiefly signed and engraven upon his works.”

The problem with this position is it presupposes that humanity’s fallen nature will be able to rightly interpret fallen nature.

A superior axiom is the one presented by Andrew Kulikovski in a 2005 Technical Journal article entitled “Scripture and General Revelation.”

“The scriptures, unlike general revelation, are presented in the words of ordinary human language…they have a perspicuity (clear expression, easy understanding) that is not found in the book of nature. In a way, therefore, the Scriptures are like a verbal commentary on the dimly perceived sign language of creation. For this reason, the special revelation of Scripture should always take priority over both general revelation in the natural world and the conclusions of modern science. The revelation of Scripture is the filter through which all else should be interpreted.”

Scripture provides interpretive clarity for our observations of the natural world and nature is a signpost pointing to the truth of Scripture. King David understood this relationship when he penned the 19^th Psalm (vv.1-11). As the observed regularities of nature imply a universe maintained within structural confines, so is the reliability of the Lord’s written Testimony.

Another Psalmist made a similar connection in Chapter 119 (vv.89-91). The constant governance of natural law amplifies the consistency of Divine Charter.

Regularity in nature is not only a fundamental premise of modern science it also offers illustrative validity to every ordinance “settled in heaven.”

• The Law of Faith – Romans 3:23-28 (Faith activates justification)
• The Law of Sowing and Reaping – Galatians 6:7 (You procure what you plant)
• The Law of Liberty – James 1:25 (The choice to administer God’s principles liberates the believer in appreciable blessings)
• The Law of Sin and Death – Romans 5:12 (Death is the result of original sin and is the inevitable appointment of all mankind)

Because God did create, curse, and destroy “In the beginning” as recounted in the book of Genesis, the details of redemption and resurrection and restoration in the pages that follow are thereby esteemed authentic and authoritative!

When God finally breaks His silence, the answer to Job’s physical loss and suffering was not an explanation, but a revelation of Himself; first in a brief detail of earth’s spectacular creative and catastrophic past and then in a thorough exposition of His subtle superintendence over His creation.

While God has the power and genius to absolutely “wow” us into submission, the impression given by His response to Job is that He prefers attentive recognition in the mundane. The intimation is that God wants to be pursued, discovered, and appreciated. If we recognize God’s hand in sovereign maintenance, then we can see Him every day and react to His presence in humility and praise. If we are only looking for Him in the sensational, we may miss Him and His pleasure altogether.

May we reach the fresh awareness of Job when he prayed, “I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee (42:5).”

Read Full Post »

Divine Origin and Sacred History: Radioisotope Dating – Rocking the Ages

The previous article series addressed the scientific age-assessment of ancient organics (see Scripturosity articles “Carbon Dating – The Basic Measurement & The Biblical Model”). What about the popular measurement practice used to date the rocks themselves?

Scientists seem quite satisfied that the earth is billions of years old. Have these modern dating techniques closed the book on the age of the earth? Should the literal rendering of world history as presented in the book of Genesis be revisited in light of the dating claims of modern science?

Was Job just making an uninformed leap of faith when he declared that the earth itself would attest the Lord’s hand (12:8-9)? Let’s turn over a few rocks and see if there is more to these measurements that seemingly validate uniformitarian geochronology.

In addition to radiocarbon or Carbon-14 dating, another form of radiometric dating is “radioisotope dating.” Just as with radiocarbon dating, radioisotope dating measures the spontaneous decay of unstable, radioactive atoms within a sample. In radiocarbon dating, the measurement depends on the natural transition of radioactive carbon to stable nitrogen. In radioisotope dating, the calculation relies on the radioactive decay process of other elements like unstable uranium to lead or potassium to argon.

Meaningful radioisotope dating starts with igneous rocks such as granite and basalt which were formed from cooled and solidified molten material. Sedimentary rock like sandstone, shale, and limestone cannot be directly dated using this method.

The dating “clock” starts when the molten rock cools. As with Carbon-14 dating, the unit of measure is the “half-life.” In this case, it is the length of time for half of the parent element (uranium) in a sample to degrade to its daughter element (lead). The age of a rock is then determined by the known rate of decay and the present amount of a daughter element. Half-lives that are extremely slow, representing billions of years, are still very accurate due to statistical proration.

The problem with modern dating claims is that scientists approach the investigation with a bias linking multiple assumptions to the equation before applying the real science.

There are 3 basic assumptions that direct the “dating” of rock samples.

1) The initial conditions of the sample are known accurately. They assume that when the sample originally crystallized from magma, the only atoms that were present were parent atoms. Because parent atoms decay into daughter atoms, they assume that no daughter atoms were present at the time of crystallization. They don’t even allow for the possibility of daughter atoms because that would imply a lack of maturity rather than an emphatic statement of long age.

2) The sample has remained uncontaminated in a closed system during its history. It is necessary to assume that the rock has not exchanged any atoms with its surroundings from the time it crystallized to the time the sample was extracted for measurement. If the system was not closed, atomic migration would invalidate the age.

3) The nuclear decay rate or half-life of the parent isotope (reference to elemental uniqueness within a chemical family) atoms has remained constant since the rock was formed. Accuracy in dating is dependent on the consistency of radioactive decay. If there is data suggesting that radioactive decay is not a non-negotiable constant, then the age of the earth becomes scientifically unsettled.

Based on multiple lines of objective evidence, a group of scientists known as the RATE team (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth) are now suggesting that radioactive decay was accelerated at some point in earth history. These evidences include the abundance of a nuclear decay by-product (Uranium to Lead) called Helium. The diffusion or escape rate if helium from zircon crystals tells a far different story regarding the age of the earth; suggesting thousands rather than millions of years.

In his book entitled Thousands…Not Billions challenging the deep-time conclusions of modern dating methods, Dr. Don DeYoung resolves the following.

“The RATE research does not challenge, but rather affirms the existence of billions of years’ worth of the daughter products of uranium decay in these zircons. But RATE also finds in the zircons a large fraction of the helium generated by this same uranium decay. The RATE helium diffusion measurements show that such high concentrations of helium simply cannot be sustained for more than a few thousand years. The only way we can reconcile the observed amount of uranium decay with the observed levels of helium retention is with one or more periods of accelerated nuclear decay in the earth’s recent past. We conclude that the RATE helium diffusion experiments give strong evidence for accelerated decay of the uranium atoms inside zircon crystals, and a young age for the earth.”

Radioisotope dating is not the clear-cut, evidential champion of deep-time as the scientific elite would have the “uninitiated” public believe. In fact, some within the secret society are even calling into question the categorical constancy of elemental nuclear change – a former non-negotiable (see Scripturosity article “The Age of the Earth – What Do the Rocks Say”).

In one instance of radioisotope dating error, documented in a June 2001 Creation magazine article entitled “Radio-dating in Rubble” (Keith Swenson), scientists extracted a 15 lb. block of igneous, dacite rock from the reforming lava dome at Mount St. Helens. The reputable Massachusetts lab to which the sample was taken used the potassium-argon method and dated the 11 year-old rock between 340,000 years to 2.8 million years old!

General revelation (nature) is ever validating the narrative of special revelation (Scripture) offering the open-minded seeker a worldview rife with clarity and purpose (see Scripturosity article “The Gospel Message”).

Read Full Post »