|
|
No one can deny that our complex
universe is an astounding, majestic marvel. But how did it get here?
Where did we come from? Does it really matter? Can it be, as so
many contend, that this all just "happened" by some fortuitous cosmic
accident? Or did it come about as the result of the careful design
of an infinite God? Here are the facts you need to know!
Part 1: What the Experts Say...
Evolution and Creation: the Contrast
What
an age we live in! Ours is an age in which godless evolution is
taken for granted and taught to our children as though it were scientific
fact. The Bible, on the other hand, is regarded by many as though
it were myth, theory, and conjecture. Nothing could be further from
the truth. The public is being bombarded daily from nearly every
avenue with the notion that the universe began with a cosmic accident—sometimes
referred to as "the big bang"—and slowly evolved
into the universe we see today including all life in it. The current
standard operating assumption of naturalism is that nature is "all
there is." Is this a scientific fact, as some would have us believe,
or is it a gigantic theoretical hoax? It is time we looked at the
theory of evolution from a commonsense—and from a biblical—perspective
instead of gullibly believing everything that is neatly packaged
and delivered to us by those with an antisupernaturalistic bias.
Those
who view science as the new Messiah often look down upon those who
believe in the Bible account of creation and portray them as being
naive, uneducated, and unenlightened. Evolutionistic pronouncements
have priority over biblical statements. The Bible, it seems, must
be reinterpreted whenever and wherever it contradicts the present
evolutionary worldview. It is often alleged that Bible—believing
Christians have nothing but blind faith to hold onto. Is this the
case? Come, let us reason together. Would it be fair to ask evolutionists
what they have to hang onto? Is it true that non—living
elements were able to endue themselves with life and, once bringing
themselves into being, to change themselves from one genesis kind
to another, all the while climbing up an evolutionary ladder? By
what observable laws of science have they done so? Have earth's
myriad life forms—plants, insects, birds, animals, and mankind—all
evolved from one common ancestor? Is there evidence to support this
notion? Or is our generation being taken in by the greatest hoax
of all time—the theory of evolution?
No
realistic person can deny that life on planet earth exists. But
where did it come from and how did it get
here? Everything had a beginning. There are only three ways to explain
life on this planet: 1) Life has always existed. 2) Life came from
non—life by some "natural" process. 3) Life was suddenly created
by a higher power.
The
first law of thermodynamics informs us that energy can be neither
created nor destroyed and that energy or matter cannot be naturally
created from nothing. It may be changed from one form to another,
but never created nor destroyed. Yet, the evolutionary premise demands
the initial creation of matter and energy from nothing.
The
second law of thermodynamics, stated quite simply, is that spontaneity
causes degradation—the tendency to run down. In other words, the
universe runs just one way: it is like a great watch that is running
down, not evolving to a higher state. The second law of thermodynamics
describes a universal law of decay and disintegration over time.
This is the diametric opposite of the evolutionary concept. Material
things are not eternal. Nothing stays as fresh as it is the day
one buys it; material items ultimately rot, rust, and return to
dust. Everything ages and wears out. The effects of the second law
of thermodynamics are all around us, touching everything in the
universe. This second law of thermodynamics is, in fact, one of
the major reasons many evolutionists have dropped their theory in
favor of creationism. The logic is inescapable.
The
second law of thermodynamics attests to the inevitable heat death
of the universe and proves that there has been no past eternity
of matter. Since this degradation of matter can be measured, we
know that not enough time has gone by for all matter to
run down since it was created. Thus, we can eliminate the first
hypothesis that all mater has always existed. This leaves two—and
only two—remaining possibilities. One is the theory that life
somehow "migrated" from alien beings from somewhere "out there."
However, this theory does not explain beginnings but is merely an
attempt to obfuscate matters by pushing it further and further into
the past.
If
evolution is true, there must be an extremely powerful force or
mechanism at work in the cosmos that can steadily overcome the powerful,
ultimate tendency toward "atrophy" brought by the second law of
thermodynamics. If such an important force or mechanism exists,
it would seem it should be a demonstrable fact and obvious to all
scientists. The fact is, no such force of nature has been found
because it does not exist.
The
pure theory of evolution teaches, in effect, that everything that
exists resulted from mechanistic, naturalistic processes without
the intervention of any outside agency. Natural selection and mutations,
its proponents claim, can explain everything.
By
contrast, the Holy Bible teaches that God created the heavens and
the earth by divine fiat. Although some attempt to meld both claims
together as one, they are truly irreconcilable if one takes the
Bible literally. Huxley, the noted evolutionist, once admitted,
"It is clear that the doctrine of evolution is directly antagonistic
to that of creation. Evolution, if consistently accepted, makes
it impossible to believe in the Bible."
What Is the Theory of Evolution?
Evolution
is essentially a philosophical theory designed to explain how life
came from non—life by some peculiar intrinsic process. More
specifically, it maintains that there is a gradual process in which
things change from one genesis kind to another genesis
kind by the unseen hand of "resident forces." In the field of biology,
it is the theory that groups of organisms change with passage of
time, mainly as a result of natural selection, resident forces,
mutations, and profound "leaps" so that descendants differ morphologically
and physiologically from their ancestors. Where, we ask, is the
proof of such an affirmation? What are these mysterious "resident
forces" and where did they come from and what makes them work? Are
they still working today and, if so, where is the evidence?
Going
further, common usage of the word "evolution" conveys the idea that
living things in our world have come into being through a long unguided
naturalistic process starting from a primeval mass of subatomic
particles and radiation over a period of approximately 1520 billion
years (give or take a few billion depending upon your authority).
If evolution be true, the burden of proof is on its proponents,
not creationists. In truth, the theory of evolution is an attempt
to explain the creation without a Creator.
A
more precise understanding of the evolutionary theory divides the
act of conveying "atoms to people" into four categories: 1) cosmology,
2) abiogenesis, 3) micro-evolution, and 4) macro-evolution.
Cosmology
is the branch of astronomy which deals with the origin and formation
of the general structure of the universe. The belief that the atoms
of a "big bang" eventually produced people ALL BY THEMSELVES
(that is, without any intelligent guidance) is contrary to the well—proven
second law of thermodynamics, which demonstrates that the universe
is known to be "running down." Yet evolution postulates it is "building
up and changing through time." While many try to push beginnings
back into the undiscoverable past, we must still ask the fundamental
questions of where these first atoms come from, and to
what laws did they conform, and where did these laws come
from? Something cannot come from nothing
either g-r-a-d-u-a-l-l-y or suddenly.
By
analogy, if you were to cup your hands together and peek through
your fingers—imaging that the space between your hands was
a total vacuum (no matter!)—HOW LONG would you have
to wait until "something" appeared out of "nothing"? Answer: an
eternity. How much longer would we have to wait until all the matter
in all the vast universe appeared in a materialless universe? When
put into such simple terms, one wonders how one's mind can seriously
entertain the idea.
Abiogenesis
refers to first life—the production of living organisms from
non—living matter. "Atoms—to—people" evolution
resembles a religious belief more than scientific fact. With all
his technological skills today—even after "cracking" the gene
code—man cannot create a single living cell—not a worm
or a mosquito—let alone demonstrate the premise of evolution.
Whether conscious of the fact or not, many today harbor an anti—supernaturalistic
bias which prevents them from believing that God literally created
our universe, earth, plants, animals, and people just as described
in the book of Genesis. We will see that there is really no sound
reason not to believe in a literal creation just as the
Bible presents it, while the mind reels at the evolutionary concept.
Microevolution
(small adaptations): No one, including creation scientists, disputes
that so-called "microevolution"— which is variation within
a type of organism caused by natural selection—occurs and
may be responsible for the large number of species found within
a type. This is not real evolution and yet nearly all touted
evidences for evolution are of this category. Actually, "microevolution"
is a misnomer because it implies that "a little" evolution is continually
taking place and that, over eons of time, these add up to big changes.
In actuality, NO evolution is taking place at all because
there is no increase in complexity, such as the development of a
new organ or species, but merely the accentuation of some already
present feature over others. A change in eye or hair color, for
example, is not an evolutionary change, but merely a variation within
the same genesis kind.
A
classic example of natural selection is the peppered moth changing
its predominant color in response to recent environmental pollution
in an industrial area in Britain. Before pollution darkened the
landscape, it is claimed, both light and dark moths were equally
present. It is claimed that within the past one hundred years the
moth has been "evolving" from a light color to a dark color. This
darker coloring, it is claimed, provides protective camouflage from
predatory birds and other enemies because it now blends in with
pollution-darkened surroundings. Such clever reasoning has deceived
many. This adaptation is not, however a change in kind
or species where one life forms develops into another kind or species.
Regardless which variety survives best in a given environment, they
do not change into a different kind or family of organism. A moth
is still a moth and nothing "new" is formed. Adaptation has limits
beyond which no more change is possible. A horse and a donkey can
produce a hybrid mule, for example, but the mule is sterile. It
has reached the limits of its "kind."
Macroevolution
(giant leaps), or general evolution, refers to the progression from
simple to more and more complex forms of life. Though much debated,
the popular explanations for microevolution are via "mutation" and
"natural selection." Large-scale change from one type of organism
into another, or so-called "macroevolution," is far beyond the ability
of mutation or natural selection to produce. Most evolutionists
dodge this issue by acknowledging this is still a "research question."
Even non-creation scientists such as Denton and Behe have written
books documenting why this is impossible. The "geologic column,"
or layers of strata, which has been cited as proof of evolution
occurring in the past, is better explained as the result of a devastating
global flood as described in the Bible. Virtually all evolutionists
acknowledge that the fossil record consists of already fully formed
creatures that abruptly appear. There are no "half-formed" or transitional
fossils of any kind.
Mutations
("blunders" and happenstance) are suggested to have altered or provided
new genetic material used for reproduction. Some suggest that exposure
to radiation altered isolated life forms into other, more advanced,
life forms. Since this theory was first introduced it has been demonstrated
that naturally occurring mutations are very rare, and that all known
mutations are harmful. Various arguments supporting evolution are
just as irrational and illogical. Two-headed frogs or snakes do
not evolve into a new species of reptile or warm-blooded animal.
Natural
selection does just what is says. It only "selects"
from what is already present—it cannot change or
create anything new! Natural selection states that those individuals
which posses some advantage in the environment such as being camouflaged,
more fierce, or a faster runner are more likely to leave behind
more offspring, thereby increasing the probability of passing the
advantage on to future generations. This may be true, but it does
not cause any biological changes in the genesis kind and is not
evolution.
Upon
examination, we see that two of the most obvious weaknesses of the
theory of evolution are:
1)
There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from non—living
elements or chemicals.
2)
The fact remains that even the simplest life form is tremendously
complex.
When
we examine the fossil record, which is the only alleged support
of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, we find that
it lacks any transitional forms. All animals, birds, reptiles, and
fish appear suddenly, already fully formed and fully functional
when first present, just as they are today. If evolution was a fact,
there should be billions upon billions of transitional evidence—half-formed
mammals that did not evolve far enough to "make it" and therefore
reproduce. Our museums should contain more half— or partially
formed fossils than fully formed ones. To repeat: there are no such
transitional fossils on the face of the earth today. Not one. The
law of "each after his kind" proves itself day-by-day to be in full
force and effect. The evidence that "pre-men" existed is speculation
based upon unproved speculation at best. So called pre—man
fossils have turned out in every case to be those of wholly man,
contemporary or extinct apes, or historical frauds. The patriarch
Job spoke of base men driven by want and famine into the caves and
rocks of the earth (Job 30:36), but these were coexisting men,
not half-man, half-beast. True science has never yet produced the
so-called "missing link" between species.
It
may come as a surprise to some that there is no single view of evolution.
There are nearly as many views as there are evolutionists to expound
them. The majority of hardcore evolutionists, however, still concurs
that, "somehow," all life must have evolved through billions
of years in all its complexity of its own accord. God is
left totally out of the picture because such beliefs are not deemed
by some as "scientific." Coached in impressive pedantic terminology
and illustrated in breath-taking step-by-step art forms, the theory
of evolution is dropped into our children's minds as though
it were fact. Once the seed idea is planted it is difficult to dislodge.
It has been said that it is ten times harder to unlearn error than
to learn new truth. We need to get to the crux of the matter. Nothing
can be more important.
Contrary
to what many would have us believe, the Bible is not "against" true
science. The very word "science" is from the Latin word scientia,
meaning "to know." The biblical mandate to "subdue" the earth in
Genesis 1:28 requires us to understand it, which is what science
is all about. We are cautioned, however, in 1 Timothy 6:20 to "avoid
profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely
so called." The implication is that there is true science and there
is pseudo—science, just as there is true religion and false
religion. "Creation science" is simply the admission of science
coupled with the acknowledgement that there is a Creator God. Let
us go on to prove all things and hold fast that which is good (1
Thessalonians 5:21).
What the Experts Say
Many
media-driven television programs would have us believe that nearly
all scientists, paleontologists, geologists, astronomers, chemists,
physicists, mathematicians, cosmologists, zoologists, geneticists,
and physicians are in near complete harmony and agreement about
the theory of evolution. The truth is just the opposite. Behind
closed doors heated debates take place between scientists as to
the mechanisms of the various proposed theories. Shortly, we shall
list a few eye-opening quotations by some of the most prominent
thinkers of our time concerning some of the various aspects of evolution.
They are worthy of our consideration. Though many more quotations
could be given, lest we exhaust the reader, the ones listed should
be enough to convince any open-minded truth-seeker that all is not
well in the realm of evolutionary hypotheses. Those listed below
will suffice to show why hundreds of scientists are distancing themselves
from the theory of evolution every year.
Cosmology: What the Experts Say Concerning the 'Big Bang' Theory
Cosmology
is the theory concerning the origin, structure, and development
of the material universe.
Let
us all agree upon one thing: we exist. (For anyone who denies that
this world is real and that we exist, it is recommended that he
resort to the old "hatpin test." He will soon suspect that we do
exist!) We live in a material universe consisting of the basic ninety-two
natural elements. Matter is defined as physical substance that occupies
space and can be perceived by one or more of our five senses; something
that has mass and exists as a solid, liquid, or gas; a physical
body. Truly, matter does exist, but the question arises, where did
matter come from? The universe as a whole is composed of matter,
but how did it permeate the universe in the form of planets, stars,
and galaxies? Where did the complicated and delicately balanced
solar systems and heavenly bodies come from? What keeps them in
balance? And how did the laws that govern matter originate?
Science
has repeatedly demonstrated that there has been no past
eternity of matter. It had to have a beginning. It came
from somewhere. For millennia, philosophers and scientists have
set forth their best theories and reasonings to explain creation
without a Creator. The result has been a hopeless hodgepodge of
conflicting hypotheses, conjecture, assumptions, and guesses.
It
is relatively easy for the would-be evolutionary protagonist to
speculate that this or that might have occurred if...and
then go on to orchestrate a visionary scenario as to how he thinks
these things could have "accidentally happened." We would
like to point out that those who dismiss "beginnings" can be likened
to those who would come into the middle of a movie, as it were,
and wish to move aside the former director, producers, and performers
to direct and alter the happenings as they see fit. How convenient
to begin with an already created, fully-functioning, law-abiding
universe! It is as intellectually dishonest to dismiss true beginnings
and interject one's own interpretation somewhere in the
middle as it is to lift a scripture out of context to "prove" one's
own slanted point of view. Beware of such skullduggery!
The "Big Bang" Theory
It
is only logical that before evolutionists can even tackle the issue
of the transmigration of species, they must first explain how matter
and the universe came to exist in the first place.
As
a substitute for divine revelation, evolutionists have devised a
framework of theories in the 1920s through the 1940s which they
call cosmology, to explain how matter in general, and stars
in particular, could have come into existence. An extraordinary
theory was invented called the "big bang" theory, which declares
that, since there has been no past eternity of matter, in the beginning
there was nothing. Zilch. Zero. Nada. Nothing. The logic is that
when much of this "nothingness" gathered itself into one place it
became so greatly compressed that it exploded and blew itself into
hydrogen gas from which the entire universe evolved. Then somehow
during this fantastic explosion, we are led to believe, the laws
of thermodynamics invented themselves and caused the gas to congeal
into "clumps." So, the theory continues, as indeterminable periods
of time elapsed, these clumps of gas billowed outward and congealed
themselves into stars. From there all the stars began exploding
themselves into supernovas, but instead of these explosions destroying
as they do today, these explosions "created." Laws of physics,
energy, light, gravitation, momentum, action and reaction, and so
forth, are said to have manifested themselves and acted upon the
matter, forcing it into far-flung galaxies and the vast universe
we see today. Clothed in pedantic scientific rhetoric and impressive
mathematical formulas, the theory was later christened "scientific."
Those who believed in it were called "enlightened." It is reasoned
that if enough time passes anything can happen. And so, in order
to adapt the theory and make it seem plausible, the supposed age
of the universe has been pushed back to a theoretical age of 15-20
billion years (give or take a few billion), when the big bang is
said to have occurred.
Science Versus the Big Bang
True
science and common sense, however, refute the fallacy that "something"
can explode out of nothing and organize itself into an intricate,
law—abiding universe. If such a hypothesis were accepted, consider
the following logical fallacies:
1)
At the risk of sounding trite, we must ask the question: Which came
first, the laws of physics, or the physical matter that they operate
upon? If there had been "nothing" in the beginning, there would
have been nothing for such laws to act upon. If "something" grew
gradually—or even "instantly"—out of nothing, where did the laws
come from and what caused them to act upon matter? Law demands a
lawgiver and is a proof of God.
2)
"Nothingness" is not squeezable or compressible. All the "nothingness"
in the pre-universe could not pack itself together into "something."
It is an observable fact that the gas in outer space is millions
of times more rarefied (thinner) in density than any fog on earth.
Can you imagine trying to pack a valley of fog into a ball? Yet,
by mere chance, according to some, such a metamorphosis is supposed
to have accomplished this magic billions of times on an unimaginable
scale throughout the universe!
3)
If there were no laws of physics, there was no way to compress free
hydrogen gas—assuming it came into existence by itself in the first
place—into a solid or semisolid form. There would be no action or
reaction.
4)
Assuming that such a solidification of nothingness could have occurred
anyway, there would be no mechanism to congeal it into a single
point, and then stop it there.
5)
Assuming further that a universe—filling pre-atom did
assemble itself, either once or—according to the "oscillating
universe" theory—billions of times, out of nothingness and
compact itself, there would have been nothing to explode it. Atoms
do not just explode. There would be no combustion, no fire to ignite
the nothingness—assuming that it was combustible—that
had just assembled itself. Even a match will not ignite in a vacuum.
6)
Without the laws of physics there would have been no way to cause
such a hypothetically compacted and ignited ball of matter to expand.
There would be no way to propel this congealed nothingness outward.
A total vacuum can neither contract nor expand. According to the
laws of physics, it takes energy to do work, and there is no energy
in emptiness.
7)
Once set into motion, even if the expanding nothingness could explode
outward, there would be no way to later slow it down in frictionless
space.
8)
There would be no way to clump it. It is impossible for gas to pack
itself together on earth, much less in outer space without gravity.
Gas disperses from high density to low density—not the other way
around—with no way to produce heavier, more complex atoms and elements.
9)
There would be no way to produce stars because there would be no
gravity. There is no way by which gas could form itself into stars,
planets, and galaxies. Only after a star has been formed
can it hold itself together by the law of gravity.
10)
There would not be enough time for the exploded gas to reach the
edge of a universe of more than 20 billion light-years, and then
convert itself into billions of stars, before the theoretical explosions
were supposed to have stopped.
"It
is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable
for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing,
and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn
itself into anything" (G.K. Chesterton in The Quotable Chesterton).
In
Isaiah 1:18, the God of the Bible says, "Come, let us reason together."
Think for a moment: Do highly ordered systems emerge from
disorder automatically? Do explosions in print shops produce encyclopedias?
If you were to throw a mass of metal and glass into the air enough
times, would it fall to earth as a fully assembled, perfect time-keeping
wristwatch? No, random explosions do not produce encyclopediasor
intricate planetary orbits. And haphazard explosions in the neither
regions of space could never produce gravity, stellar rotations,
or intricate orbits.
Scientists Speak Out
Theories
come and theories go. Numerous scientists now agree that the "big
bang" did not, and could not, occur. Scientists have illustrated
why the theory is unworkable in many professional books and journals;
yet, because of media hype, news coverage, and "nature programs"
often aired on TV, the public is largely unaware that scientists
disagree sharply upon their diverse speculations. For every theory
advanced by man, someone else has advanced facts to prove that theory
wrong. Let us look briefly at what some of the scientists themselves
say about the big bang theory.
- "The French Mathematician, Lecompte de Nouy, examined
the laws of probability that a single molecule of high dissymmetry
could be formed by the action of chance. De Nouy found that,
on an average, the time needed to form one such molecule
of our terrestrial globe would be about 10 to the 253 power
billions of years. "But," continued de Nouy, ironically,
"let us admit that no matter how small the chance it could
happen, one molecule could be created by such astronomical
odds of chance. However, one molecule is of no use. Hundreds
of millions of identical ones are necessary. Thus we either
admit the miracle or doubt the absolute truth of science"
(Quoted in "Is Science Moving Toward Belief in God?" by
Paul A. Fisher, The Wanderer, Nov. 7, 1985; cited
in Kingdoms In Conflict, C. Colson, p. 66).
- "Probably the strongest argument against a 'big bang'
is that when we come to the universe in total and the large
number of complex condensed objects in it [stars, planets,
etc.], the theory is able to explain so little" (G. Burbidge,
Was There Really A Big Bang in Nature?, 233:36-40).
- "This persistent weakness has haunted the big bang theory
ever since the 1930's. It can probably be understood most
easily by thinking of what happens when a bomb explodes.
After detonation, fragments are thrown into the air, moving
with essentially uniform motion. As is well known in physics,
uniform motion is inert, capable in itself of doing nothing.
It is only when the fragments of a bomb strike a target—a
building for example—that anything happens... But
in a big bang there are not targets at all, because the
whole universe takes part in the explosion. There is nothing
for the expanded material to hit against, and after sufficient
expansion, the whole affair should go dead" (Fred Hoyle,
"The Big Bang in Astronomy," in New Scientist,
92, 1981, pp. 521, 523).
- "The Big Bang is pure presumption. There are no physical
principles from which it can be deduced that all of the
matter in the universe would ever gather together in one
location or an explosion would occur if the theoretical
aggregation did take place... Theorists have great difficulty
in constructing any self-consistent account of the conditions
existing at the time of the hypothetical Big Bang. Attempts
at mathematical treatment usually lead to concentration
of the entire mass of the universe at a point. The central
thesis of Big Bang cosmology,' says Joseph Silk, 'is that
about 20 billion years ago, any two points in the observable
universe were arbitrarily close together. The density of
matter at this moment was infinite.'This concept of infinite
density is not scientific. It is an idea from the realm
of the supernatural, as most scientists realize when they
meet infinities in other physical contexts. 'If we get infinity
[when we calculate], how can we ever say that this agrees
with nature?' This point alone is enough to invalidate the
Big Bang theory in all its various forms" (Dewey B. Larson,
The Universe of Motion, 1984, p. 415).
- "The naive view implies that the universe suddenly came
into existence and found a complete system of physical laws
waiting to be obeyed" (W.H. McCrea, "Cosmology after Half
a Century," Science, Vol. 160, June 1968, p. 1297).
|
Still MORE Quotes Concerning Cosmology—Origins
of the Universe
- "If a watch proves the existence of a watchmaker but the
universe does not prove the existence of a great Architect,
then I consent to be called a fool" (Voltaire).
- "The choice is simple: one chooses either a self-existent
God or a self-existent universe—and the universe is
not behaving as if it is self-existent" (A.J. Hoover).
- "The statements of people who do not believe do not outweigh
the circumstantial evidence that suggests the universe was
the intelligent design of a Creator" (Russell DeLong).
- "I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall
now hangs over the big bang theory" (Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer,
cosmologist, mathematician, and evolutionist, Cambridge
University).
- "The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate
matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it It
is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution...
if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore
have been the product of purposeful intelligence" (Sir Fred
Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist and mathematician, Cambridge
University).
- "When I make an incision with my scalpel, I see organs
of such intricacy that there simply hasn't been enough time
for natural evolutionary processes to have developed them"
(C. Everett Koop, former US Surgeon General).
- "The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are
trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove"
(Dr. Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize winner and eminent evolutionist).
- "The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which
are more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer
square with practical scientific knowledge" (Dr. A. Fleishmann,
zoologist, Erlangen University).
- "It is good to keep in mind...that nobody has ever succeeded
in producing even one new species by the accumulation of
micromutations. Darwin's theory of natural selection has
never had any proof, yet it has been universally accepted"
(Prof. R Goldschmidt Ph.D., DSc Prof. Zoology, University
of Calif. in Material Basis of Evolution, Yale
Univ. Press).
- "The theory of the transmutation of species is a scientific
mistake, untrue in its facts, unscientific in its method,
and mischievous in its tendency" (Prof. J Agassiz, of Harvard
in Methods of Study in Natural History).
- "Evolution is baseless and quite incredible" (Dr. Ambrose
Fleming, President, British Assoc. Advancement of Science,
in The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought).
- "Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent
design lie around us.... The atheistic idea is so nonsensical
that I cannot put it into words" (Lord Kelvin, Vict. Inst.,
124, p. 267).
- "It is possible and, given the Flood, probable that materials
which give radiocarbon dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon
years could have true ages of many fewer calendar years"
(Gerald Aardsman, Ph.D., physicist and C-14 dating specialist).
- "We have to admit that there is nothing in the geological
records that runs contrary to the views of conservative
creationists" (Edmund Ambrose, evolutionist).
- "The best physical evidence that the earth is young is
the dwindling resource that evolutionists refuse to admit
is dwindling... the magnetic energy in the field of the
earth's dipole magnet... To deny that it is a dwindling
resource is phony science" (Thomas Barnes Ph.D., physicist).
- "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not
produce any kind of evolution" (Pierre-Paul Grasse, evolutionist).
- "It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form
gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages
should be favored by natural selection. But such stories
are not part of science, for there is no way of putting
them to the test" (Luther D. Sutherland, Darwin's Enigma,
Master Books 1988, p. 89).
- "Is it really credible that random processes could have
constructed a reality, the smallest element of which—a
functional protein or gene—is complex beyond anything
produced by the intelligence of man?" (Molecular biologist
Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis,
London: Burnett Books, 1985 p. 342).
- "Modern apes...seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They
have no yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin
of modern humans...is, if we are to be honest with ourselves,
an equally mysterious matter" (Lyall Watson, Ph.D., evolutionist).
- "Although bacteria are tiny, they display biochemical,
structural and behavioral complexities that outstrip scientific
description. In keeping with the current microelectronics
revolution, it may make more sense to equate their size
with sophistication rather than with simplicity. Without
bacteria life on earth could not exist in its present form"
(James A. Shipiro, "Bacteria as Multicellular Organisms,"
Scientific America, Vol. 258, No. 6, June 1988).
- "Eighty to eighty-five percent of earth's land surface
does not have even three geological periods appearing in
'correct' consecutive order... it becomes an overall exercise
of gargantuan special pleading and imagination for the evolutionary-uniformitarian
paradigm to maintain that there ever were geologic periods"
(John Woodmorappe, geologist).
- "That a mindless, purposeless, chance process such as
natural selection, acting on the sequels of recombinant
DNA or random mutation, most of which are injurious or fatal,
could fabricate such complexity and organization as the
vertebrate eye, where each component part must carry out
its own distinctive task in a harmoniously functioning optical
unit, is inconceivable. The absence of transitional forms
between the invertebrates' retina and that of the vertebrates
poses another difficulty. Here there is a great gulf fixed
which remains inviolate with no seeming likelihood of ever
being bridged. The total picture speaks of intelligent creative
design of an infinitely high order" (H. S. Hamilton MD,
The Retina of the Eye—An Evolutionary Road Block).
- "My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment
carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed"
(N. H. Nilson, famous botanist and evolutionist).
- "None of five museum officials could offer a single example
of a transitional series of fossilized organisms that would
document the transformation of one basically different type
to another" (Luther Sunderland, science researcher).
- "The entire hominid collection known today would barely
cover a billiard table, but it has spawned a science because
it is distinguished by two factors which inflate its apparent
relevance far beyond its merits. First, the fossils hint
at the ancestry of a supremely self-important animal—ourselves.
Secondly, the collection is so tantalizingly incomplete,
and the specimens themselves often so fragmented and inconclusive,
that more can be said about what is missing than about what
is present. Hence the amazing quantity of literature on
the subject ever since Darwin's work inspired the notion
that fossils linking modern man and extinct ancestor would
provide the most convincing proof of human evolution, preconceptions
have led evidence by the nose in the study of fossil man"
(John Reader, "Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?" New
Scientist, Vol. 89, No. 12446, March 26, 1981, pp.
802805).
- "The evolutionist thesis has become more stringently unthinkable
than ever before" (Wolfgang Smith, Ph.D.).
- "The only competing explanation for the order we all see
in the biological world is the notion of Special Creation"
(Niles Eldridge, Ph.D.., paleontologist and evolutionist,
American Museum of Natural History).
- "A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting
from the evolutionist camp... moreover, for the most part
these 'experts' have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis
of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on scientific
grounds, and in some instances, regretfully" (Wolfgang Smith,
Ph.D., physicist and mathematician).
- "As yet we have not been able to track the phylogenetic
history of a single group of modern plants from its beginning
to the present. The more scientists have searched for the
transitional forms that lie between species, the more they
have been frustrated" (John Adler with John Carey: "Is Man
a Subtle Accident," Newsweek, Vol. 96, No. 18,
November 3, 1980, p. 95).
- "Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides
means of 'seeing' Evolution, it has provided some nasty
difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which
is the presence of 'gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution
requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology
does not provide them" (David Kitts, Ph.D., "Paleontology
and Evolutionary Theory," Evolution, Vol. 28, Sep.
1974, p. 467).
- "Hundreds of scientists who once taught their university
students that the bottom line on origins had been figured
out and settled are today confessing that they were completely
wrong. They've discovered that their previous conclusions,
once held so fervently, were based on very fragile evidences
and suppositions which have since been refuted by new discoveries.
This has necessitated a change in their basic philosophical
position on origins. Others are admitting great weaknesses
in evolution theory" (Luther D. Sutherland, Darwin's
Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th Edition, Santee,
California: Master Books, 1988, pp. 7,8).
- "The fact that a theory so vague, so insufficiently verifiable,
and so far from the criteria otherwise applied in 'hard'
science has become a dogma can only be explained on sociological
grounds" (Ludwig von Bertalanffy, biologist).
- "Micromutations do occur, but the theory that these alone
can account for evolutionary change is either falsified,
or else it is an unfalsifiable, hence metaphysical theory.
I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune
if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false
theory. But this is what has happened in biology... I believe
that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest
deceit in the history of science. When this happens many
people will pose the question: How did this ever happen?"
(S. Lovtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth,
London: Croom Helm, p. 422).
- "If one allows the unquestionably largest experimenter
to speak, namely nature, one gets a clear and incontrovertible
answer to the question about the significance of mutations
for the formation of species and evolution. They disappear
under the competitive conditions of natural selection, as
soap bubbles burst in a breeze" (Evolutionist Herbert Nilson,
Synthetische Artbildung Lund, Sweden:Verlag CWK
Gleerup Press, 1953, p. 174).
- "In all the thousands of fly-breeding experiments carried
out all over the world for more than fifty years, a distinct
new species has never been seen to emerge... or even a new
enzyme" (Gordon Taylor, The Great Evolution Mystery,
New York: Harper and Row, 1983, pp. 34, 38).
- "The uniform, continuous transformation of Hyracotherium
into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook
writers, never happened in nature" (George Simpson, paleontologist
and evolutionist).
- "Evolution is unprovable. We believe it because the only
alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable"
(Sir Arthur Keith, evolutionist).
|
What the Experts Say Concerning Fossils
Three
of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are: 1) There is
no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals.
2) The alleged process cannot be duplicated even with the best minds
under the strictest laboratory conditions. 3) Even the simplest
life form is tremendously complex.
The
fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually
occurred, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully
formed when first present. If the theory of evolution were
true, we would expect to find many more transitional forms of life
than fully formed ones, and yet we never find "half-formed" hands,
feet, flippers, fins, eyes, ears, noses, or feathers. The hypothesis
that "pre-men" existed is an ambiguous conjecture at best. Upon
investigation, virtually all so-called "missing links" turn out
to be bones of apes, men, or historical frauds.
- "Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory
and offer strong support for the concept of Creation" (Gary
Parker, Ph.D., biologist/paleontologist and former evolutionist).
- "...most people assume that fossils provide a very important
part of the general argument in favor of Darwinian interpretations
of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly
true" (Dr. David Raup, curator of geology, Field Museum
of Natural History in Chicago).
- "As is well known, most fossil species appear instantaneously
in the fossil record" (Tom Kemp, Oxford University).
- "The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely
known that those who insist on positive declarations can
do nothing more than jump from one hazardous surmise to
another and hope that the next dramatic discovery does not
make them utter fools... Clearly some refuse to learn from
this. As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and
popularizers today who have the temerity to tell us that
there is 'no doubt' how man originated: if only they had
the evidence..." (William R. Fix, The Bone Pedlars,
New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984, p. 150).
- "The curious thing is that there is a consistency about
the fossil gaps; the fossils are missing in all the important
places" (Francis Hitching, archaeologist).
- "The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning
in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date
rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good
reply" (J. O'Rourke in the American Journal of Science).
- "In most people's minds, fossils and Evolution go hand
in hand. In reality, fossils are a great embarrassment to
Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept
of Creation. If Evolution were true, we should find literally
millions of fossils that show how one kind of life slowly
and gradually changed to another kind of life. But missing
links are the trade secret, in a sense, of paleontology.
The point is, the links are still missing. What we really
find are gaps that sharpen up the boundaries between kinds.
It's those gaps which provide us with the evidence of Creation
of separate kinds. As a matter of fact, there are gaps between
each of the major kinds of plants and animals. Transition
forms are missing by the millions. What we do find are separate
and complex kinds, pointing to Creation" (Dr. Gary Parker,
biologist/paleontologist and former ardent evolutionist).
- "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species
and paleontology does not provide them" (David Kitts, paleontologist
and evolutionist).
- "...I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil
record of plants is in favor of special creation. Can you
imagine how an orchid, a duckweed and a palm tree have come
from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this
assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer,
but I think that most would break down before an inquisition"
(Dr. Eldred Corner, professor of botany at Cambridge University,
England: Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought,
Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p. 97).
- "So firmly does the modern geologist believe in evolution
up from simple organisms to complex ones over huge time
spans, that he is perfectly willing to use the theory of
evolution to prove the theory of evolution [p.128]...one
is applying the theory of evolution to prove the correctness
of evolution. For we are assuming that the oldest formations
contain only the most primitive and least complex organisms,
which is the base assumption of Darwinism... [p.127]. If
we now assume that only simple organisms will occur in old
formations, we are assuming the basic premise of Darwinism
to be correct. To use, therefore, for dating purposes, the
assumption that only simple organisms will be present in
old formations is to thoroughly beg the whole question.
It is arguing in a circle [p.128]" Arthur E Wilder—Smith,
Man's Origin, Man's Destiny, Harold Shaw Publishers,
1968, pp. 127,128).
- "It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical
standpoint, geologists are here arguing in a circle. The
succession of organisms has been determined by the study
of their remains imbedded in the rocks, and the relative
ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of the organisms
they contain" (R. H. Rastall, lecturer in economic geology,
Cambridge University: Encyclopedia Britannica,
Vol. 10, Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1956, p. 168).
- "I admit that an awful lot of that [fantasy] has gotten
into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance,
the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in
the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on
horse evolution prepared fifty years ago. That has been
presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now,
I think that that is lamentable, particularly because the
people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may
be aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff.
But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we've
got science as truth and we have a problem" (Dr. Niles Eldredge,
paleontologist and evolutionist).
|
What the Experts Say Concerning DNA
Science
has recently unraveled one of the most amazing facts of all concerning
heredity. DNA, a shortened name for deoxyribonucleic acid, has been
found to be the carrier of the inheritance code in all living things.
It constitutes a built-in memory, blueprint, or biogenetic law that
keeps all forms of life within their basic kinds. Your personal
DNA is scattered throughout your body in over 60 thousand billion
specks and determines everything from your eye color and height
to your fingerprints. The DNA barrier insures that neither mutations
nor natural "selection" nor any other factor proposed by advocates
of evolution could result in the forming of a different kind of
life from a previous kind.
- "The chance that useful DNA molecules would develop without
a Designer are apparently zero. Then let me conclude by
asking which came first—the DNA which is essential
for the synthesis of proteins or the protein enzyme DNA—polymerase
without which DNA synthesis is nil?... there is virtually
no chance that chemical 'letters' would spontaneously produce
coherent DNA and protein 'words'" (George Howe, expert in
biology sciences).
- "The set of genetic instructions for humans is roughly
three billion letters long" (Miroslav Radman & Robert
Wagner, "The High Fidelity of DNA Duplication," Scientific
America, Vol. 259, No. 2, August 1988, pp. 4046).
- "DNA and the molecules that surround it form a truly superb
mechanism—a miniaturized marvel. The information is
so compactly stored that the amount of DNA necessary to
code all the people living on our planet might fit into
a space no larger than an aspirin tablet" (Paul S. Taylor,
The Illustrated Origins Answer Book, p. 23).
- "...Life cannot have had a random beginning... The trouble
is that there are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance
of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part
in 10 to the power of 40,000, an outrageously small probability
that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted
of organic soup. If one is not prejudiced either by social
beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction
that life originated on the Earth, this simple calculation
wipes the idea entirely out of court..." (Fred Hoyle and
Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution From Space).
- "...An intelligible communication via radio signal from
some distant galaxy would be widely hailed as evidence of
an intelligent source. Why then doesn't the message sequence
on the DNA molecule also constitute prima facie evidence
for an intelligent source? After all, DNA information is
not just analogous to a message sequence such as Morse code,
it is such a message sequence" (Charles B. Thaxton, Walter
L. Bradley, and Robert L. Olsen: The Mystery of Life's
Origin, Reassessing Current Theories, New
York Philosophical Library, 1984, pp. 211, 212).
- "Generation after generation, through countless cell divisions,
the genetic heritage of living things is scrupulously preserved
in DNA... All of life depends on the accurate transmission
of information. As genetic messages are passed through generations
of dividing cells, even small mistakes can be life—threatening...if
mistakes were as rare as one in a million, 3000 mistakes
would be made during each duplication of the human genome.
Since the genome replicates about a million billion times
in the course of building a human being from a single fertilized
egg, it is unlikely that the human organism could tolerate
such a high rate of error. In fact, the actual rate of mistakes
is more like one in 10 billion" (Miroslav Radman and Robert
Wagner, "The High Fidelity of DNA Duplication...," Scientific
America, Vol. 299, No 2, August 1988, pp. 4044, p.
24).
- "In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe
that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the
magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection—quite
unaware of the fact that random mutations turned out to
be irrelevant and natural selection a tautology" (Arthur
Koestler, author).
- "Evolution lacks a scientifically acceptable explanation
of the source of the precisely planned codes within cells
without which there can be no specific proteins and hence,
no life" (David A. Kaufman, Ph.D., University of Florida,
Gainesville).
- "Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating
at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd,
it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties
of physics on which life depends are in every respect deliberate...
It is therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of
intelligence must reflect...higher intelligences...even
to the limit of God...such a theory is so obvious that one
wonders why it is not widely accepted as being self—evident.
The reasons are psychological rather than scientific" (Sir
Fred Hoyle, well—known British mathematician, astronomer,
and cosmologist).
- "Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more
nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth
century" (Michael Denton, Evolution, A Theory in Crisis,
p. 358).
- "Any suppression which undermines and destroys that very
foundation on which scientific methodology and research
was erected, evolutionist or otherwise, cannot and must
not be allowed to flourish... It is a confrontation between
scientific objectivity and ingrained prejudice—between
logic and emotion—between fact and fiction...In the
final analysis, objective scientific logic has to prevail—no
matter what the final result is—no matter how many
time—honored idols have to be discarded in the process...
After all, it is not the duty of science to defend the theory
of evolution and stick by it to the bitter end—no
matter what illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers...
If in the process of impartial scientific logic, they find
that creation by outside intelligence is the solution to
our quandary, then let's cut the umbilical chord that tied
us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us
and holding us back... Every single concept advanced by
the theory of evolution and amended thereafter is imaginary
as it is not supported by the scientifically established
probability concepts. Darwin was wrong... The theory of
evolution may be the worst mistake made in science" (I.
L. Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong—A Study in Probabilities,
PO Box 231, Greenvale, New York 11548: New Research Publications,
Inc., pp. 6-8, 209-210, 214-215. I. L. Cohen is a member
of the New York Academy of Sciences and officer of the Archaeological
Institute of America).
- "The notion that...the operating program of a living cell
could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here
on earth is evidently nonsense of a high order" (Sir Fredrick
Hoyle, evolutionist).
- "The theory of Evolution...will be one of the great jokes
in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel
that so flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted
with the incredible credulity it has" (Malcolm Muggeridge,
well—known philosopher).
- "We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy. It is time
that we cry: 'The emperor has no clothes'" (K. Hsu, geologist
at the Geological Institute at Zurich).
- "Far from being an established fact of science that it
is so typically portrayed to be, evolution is, in reality,
an unreasonable and unfounded hypothesis that is riddled
with countless scientific fallacies" (Scott M. Huse, The
Collapse of Evolution, Baker Book House: Grand Rapids,
Michigan, p. 127).
- "Unfortunately many scientists and non—scientists
have made Evolution into a religion, something to be defended
against infidels. In my experience, many students of biology—professors
and textbook writers included—have been so carried
away with the arguments for Evolution that they neglect
to question it. They preach it...College students, having
gone through such a closed system of education, themselves
become teachers, entering high schools to continue the process,
using textbooks written by former classmates or professors.
High standards of scholarship and teaching break down. Propaganda
and the pursuit of power replace the pursuit [of] knowledge.
Education becomes a fraud" (George Kocan, "Evolution Isn't
Faith But Theory," Chicago Tribune, Monday, April
21, 1980).
- "Scientists who go about teaching that Evolution is a
fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling
may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining Evolution we
do not have one iota of fact" (Dr. T. N. Tahmisian, a former
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission physiologist).
- "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown—ups. This theory
has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless"
(Dr. Louise Bounoure, director of research at the French
National Center for Scientific Research, director of the
Zoological Museum, and former president of the Biological
Society of Strasbourg).
- "I, as a scientist, must postulate a source of information
to supply the teleonomy or know-how, I don't find it in
the universe, and, therefore, I assume that it is transcendent
to this universe. I believe, myself, in a living God who
did it. I believe that this God, who supplied the information,
revealed Himself in the form of a man—so that man
could understand Him. We are made to understand. I want
to understand God. But I can only do it if He comes down
to my wavelength, the wavelength of man. I believe that
God revealed Himself in the form of Christ, and that we
can serve Him and know Him in our hearts as the source of
the Logos—all information is necessary to make the
universe and to make life itself...Look at the beauty of
nature around us. When you consider that it all grew out
of matter injected with information of the type I have been
describing, you can only be filled with wonder of the wisdom
of a Creator, who, first of all, had the sense of beauty
to do it, and then the technical ability. I am filled with
wonder as I look at nature, to see how God technically did
it and realized the beauty of His own soul in doing it.
The Scripture teaches perfectly plainly, and it fits in
with my science perfectly well, that the One who did called
Himself The Logos. That Logos was Jesus. Jesus called Himself
the Creator who made everything—'for Him and by Him'.
Now, if that is the case, then I am very happy and filled
with joy that He made the Creation so beautiful and that
He also valued me enough to die for me, to become my Redeemer
as well" (Arthur E. Wilder—Smith, Ph.D., D.Sc., Dr.
es. Sc., The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution,
Santee, California: Master Books, p. 154).
|
Charles Darwin's Own Admission
Finally,
let us notice what Charles Darwin himself admitted about his own
the theory of evolution.
- "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed
which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive,
slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down"
(Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, New York University
Press, 6th ed., 1988, p. l54).
- "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances
for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting
different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical
and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural
selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest
degree" (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, chapter:
"Difficulties").
- "Not one change of species into another is on record...
we cannot prove that a single species has been changed"
(Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters).
|
Two Antithetic Views
In
review, basically there are only two antithetic views of the origin
of the universe. There are no others. Either Almighty God created
all matter, the physical laws of the universe, and life itself in
all its myriad forms, or there is no God in the universe, no supernatural
Being, and all matter, laws, and life came into existence out of
nothing of their own accord.
Either
there is a Creator or there isn't. It's as simple as that. Millions
have settled for the first option—special creation. Sadly,
special creation is rarely taught in the schools and institutions
today. Millions have opted for the second option—evolution—where
it is taught in most colleges and classrooms as though
it were fact.
The
theory of evolution remains unproved and unprovable. Though special
creation also cannot be proved in a laboratory, the lack of
evidence in the fossil records and the DNA code of living creatures
should lead the unbiased mind to the inevitable conclusion that
of the two possibilities, special creation is the more rational.
Which
viewpoint society bases its faith upon eventually determines the
behavior of that society. If the youth are taught that they came
from apes, then the "law of the jungle"—the survival of the fittest—will
predominate and no one should be surprised at the moral collapse
of society, particularly amongst the youth. They are merely living
out the "law of the jungle" as taught to them by their elders.
If,
on the other hand, we were made after the God kind, "in His own
image," then we are accountable to Him for our actions. We cannot—yea
we dare not—live as we please. The God of your Bible declares
that there is coming a Day of Judgment when He will judge the world
in general—and you in particular. On that awesome
Day every man, woman, and child will have to give account of his
thoughts, words, and deeds.
An
author prints his name on his book. An artist writes his name upon
his painting. A musician copyrights his song. If God made the heavens,
the earth, and all that is in them, it is only natural that He would
reveal something of Himself. Let us look briefly at some Bible passages
that speak of God's revelation of Himself.
Part 2: What the Bible Says
Either
the unproven and unprovable theory of evolution is false, or the
Bible is in gross error and there is no God. "Theistic evolution"
is not a viable alternative, as it asserts that God "jump started"
creation by creating all matter, laws, and primitive life, and then
stepped back and let it evolve as the proponents of evolution affirm.
Let
us begin at the beginning, since that is where God starts. The first
four words in the Bible state, plainly and simply, "In the beginning
God..." and the remainder of the sentence tells what God
did in the beginning: "created the heavens and the earth."
Nothing alluding to a gradual evolution of matter and animals is
even hinted at. Creation is the proof that God exists! It is His
signature, His copyright, His lawful claim of ownership.
The
Bible is clear. The teaching that everything made itself and is
accountable only to itself instills doubt, corrupts morals, devastates
lives, and separates people and nations from the true God.
Evolution
is the "eyeglasses" through which many scientists—and even "theistic
evolutionists"—view things. Everything they see in nature is either
consciously or unconsciously interpreted as having "evolved." One
philosopher once commented with tongue—in—cheek, "Evolution is the
descent of man from monkey, which some people forgot to make."
The Everlasting Gospel
One
of the last messages to be preached to mankind is the glad tidings
that the everlasting Kingdom of God is about to appear. The book
of Revelation describes this message as the everlasting gospel.
It is everlasting simply because the truth it encompasses will never
cease to be relevant.
"And
I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting
gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every
nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud
voice, 'Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment
is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the
sea, and the fountains of waters'" (Revelation 14:6,7).
The
word gospel is derived from the Anglo—Saxon word which meant
"the story concerning God." In the New Testament the Greek word
euaggelion, translated "gospel," means the "good news"
or glad tidings of deliverance from sin, the setting up of the Kingdom
of God, and the record of the life of Jesus Christ embracing all
His teachings (Mark 1:1,14). The "everlasting" gospel is not a new
or different gospel, but a perpetual gospel, without beginning
or end.
This
above mentioned angel's call to repentance is not merely a call
to "fear God" but is also a call to "worship the Creator of the
mighty universe, the One who made the heavens, the earth the sea
and the fountains of waters." In other words, the everlasting gospel,
as preached in these last days by a mighty angel, is calling upon
mankind to jettison the popular notion of evolution and to accept
the fact that the Almighty made the universe in six literal days
as the Bible teaches. The doctrine of special creation is a foundational
teaching of Scripture which true science will always verify. The
first two chapters of Genesis and the last two chapters of Revelation
are about the Almighty's creative powers, and the everlasting gospel
is a call to humanity to accept what the Bible says about it and
to reject the false ideologies of man.
It
is important that we acknowledge the truth that acceptance of the
everlasting gospel is directly linked to faith in a Creator
God. Multiple millions of people today refuse to accept the
gospel call to faith and obedience because
their minds are steeped in the fallacious theory of evolution that
casts doubt upon the plain Bible statement that God created the
world in six literal (24—hour) days. Many deliberately hide
their eyes to the precious truths presented here. The unspoken reason?
If God did not create all He said He did—if God does not exist—there
is no incentive to obey Him.
Yet,
God's Word thunders that ignorance is no excuse. "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 that they are without excuse" (Romans
1:20).
Those
who accept that God created the heavens, the earth, the sea, and
the fountains of waters in six literal days will worship Him gladly
by keeping the day that He divinely appointed as a memorial or reminder
that He is the Creator God—the seventh—day Sabbath. The Sabbath
identifies who God is—the Creator.
God's
Word commands, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days
shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God...For in six days the Lord made heaven
and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh
day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it"
(Exodus 20:811).
The
everlasting gospel is a call to repentance, faith, and obedience.
This includes obedience of the seventh—day Sabbath command
that testifies that He is the Creator God. It is so important to
God that He used it as a sign between Him and His people (Exodus
31:13,17). "And hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign
between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God"
(Ezekiel 20:12,20). One of the very first things Jesus Christ will
do upon His return to earth is to reinstitute His Sabbath and holy
days which point to Him as Creator, and His plan of salvation for
all mankind (Isaiah 66:23; Zechariah 14:16). Be sure to send for
our free brochure, Sunday, Saturday—What Difference Does
It Make?
Creation: A Basic Bible Doctrine
The
sum and substance of the raging "creation versus evolution" issue
revolves around one thing and one thing only: whether or not the
God of the Bible is the Creator and Sustainer of life and the universe.
Let us see what the Bible clearly claims:
"Thus
saith the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker,
Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the
work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created
man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and
all their host have I commanded" (Isaiah 45:11,12).
This
is a remarkable claim to say the least. It is either true or it
is a colossal falsehood. God either created the heavens and the
earth and their entire host or He didn't. These scriptures demand
that we treat the matter of the creation as the foundational doctrine
in the Bible. All other scriptural doctrines, laws, prophecies,
and instructions hang on this single fact that the entire universe
came into being by the Word of the Almighty God. We repeat:
The Lord's claim is that He created the universe is either
true or it is a monumental lie. There is no other conclusion one
can arrive at.
The
Bible pulls no punches. It informs us straight out that Satan has
the whole world deceived (Revelation 12:9). Almost daily we are
blitzed by brilliantly produced TV documentaries—coming in
the name of "science"—claiming "Mother Nature," of her own
accord, by some inexplicable, innate power, produced our grand universe
and all its myriad life forms. Millions are duped by it. The Bible
forewarns us of such deception: "O Timothy, keep that which is committed
to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions
of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred
concerning the faith" (1 Timothy 6:20,21). True science and biblical
revelation exposes the theory of evolution for what it really is—a
fantastic fallacy, a fallacy that is now being rejected by thousands
of scientists and other intellectuals as well as believers in the
Word of God. The Psalmist came to the same conclusion many centuries
ago when he wrote, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no
God" (Psalm 14:1).
Was
the Psalmist right? Is there a God or isn't there? These
are vital questions and the answers you arrive at will not only
govern your current behavior, but also will determine whether you
will ultimately be in the Kingdom of God or perish in a lake of
fire. Yes, it is just that important.
Faith Is Needed
Since
it is not possible to scientifically demonstrate either evolution
or special creation, faith is required to accept either teaching.
But faith in the right thing is not wrong. The Bible says, "But
without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh
to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them
that diligently seek Him" (Hebrews 11:6). "Now faith is the substance
of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1).
A British wit once described "evil lution" as "the substance of
links hoped for, the evidence of fossils not seen." How right he
was!
Broadly
speaking, people fall into one of three categories:
Creationists:
Those who believe that a supernatural Being (God) made the universe
as recorded in Genesis chapter one. The Church of God International,
along with millions of Bible—believing Christians and Jews, falls
into this category.
Evolutionists:
Those who believe that the universe came into existence billions
of years ago and that life on earth evolved of its own
accord by some inexplicable power. One does not have far to look
to find many who hold this view.
Theistic
Evolutionists: The theistic evolutionists attempt to integrate the
two doctrines. However, the doctrines of creation and evolution
are so strongly divergent that reconciliation is totally impossible.
Theistic evolutionists believe that God was involved in the creation,
but that He took thousands—perhaps millions or billions (do we hear
"trillions"?)—of years to do so. Although many hold this view today,
such syncretism reduces the message of the Bible to insignificance.
The conclusion is inevitable: There is no biblical support for theistic
evolution.
Does It Really Matter What One Believes Concerning the Origin of the Universe?
It
matters a great deal what we believe concerning the origins of the
universe and of life itself because if the universe and
life on earth evolved over billions of years, then:
The
Genesis account of creation and the hundreds of Bible verses that
refer to the creation are pure fiction. In other words the so—called
Holy Bible is, itself, riddled with the very thing it strictly forbids:
lies, suppositions, and superstitions.
Virtually
all the Old and New Testament writers were deluded—because they
all believed in the creation. This would include all the prophets
of old, all the apostles, and even Jesus Christ Himself.
If
life on earth evolved of its own accord, it would mean that man
is not accountable for his actions to a supernatural Being, and
that we could make or break so-called "moral laws" with impunity.
After all, "if there is no God, there cannot be a Judgment Day.
So why bother about moral behavior: let us eat, drink, and be merry
for tomorrow we die."
In
the final analysis, if evolution is true and the Bible is false,
there would be no sin, since there would be no God, no Lawmaker,
and no laws to break. It follows that, if there were no laws to
break—and the Bible defines sin as "the transgression of the law"
(1 John 3:4)—there would be no sin. If there is no sin, we would
not need a Savior to redeem us from the penalty of breaking those
laws (Romans 6:23) and Christ would have died in vain. In short,
evolution is a complete denial of everything the Bible stands for.
These
are the inevitable conclusions that will flow in the wake of a society
that rejects the basic teaching that God created the universe. The
matter of origins is very important because society's behavior and
destination depend upon it. In his book, Evolution or Creation?
(page 2), Henry M. Morris, Ph.D., confirms this point. He writes:
"Each
person needs, more than anything, a sense of his own identity and
personal goals, and this is impossible without some sense of his
origin. What a person comes to believe about his origin will
inevitably condition what he believes about his destiny."
Lenin
is quoted as saying that religion is the opiate of the people, but
the truth is that evolution is the opiate of the atheist!
What Does the Bible Teach Concerning Creation?
Before
we answer this question let us review a few facts about the universe
we live in.
Our
earth is a tiny planet, about 8,100 miles (13,000 km) in diameter,
which circles the sun, an average-sized star some 93,000,000 miles
away.
The
sun is about 870,000 miles in diameter. It forms part of a medium-sized
spiral galaxy called the Milky Way that contains some 200 billion
stars. Nearly all of the 6,000 stars we are able to see with the
naked eye are part of the Milky Way. Some scientists speculate there
may be literally trillions.
A
light year is the time light, traveling at over 186,000 miles per
second, takes to travel in one year.
"The
nearest galaxy to the Milky Way is approximately 200,000 light years
away, which is a distance of 1,175,722 trillion, 568 billion, 640
miles... And there are approximately 100 billion galaxies, each
containing 100 billions stars! Does your head spin with these numbers?
Can your mind comprehend such figures? Is not our God an awesome
God?" (When Day and Night Cease, p. 34, published by Shikinah
Books Ltd., Box 846, Keno, OR 97627 USA).
Now
let us examine some basic Bible texts that affirm divine creation.
The prophets, psalmists, apostles, and God Himself all testify to
the fact that the universe was created.
"In
the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1;
read the entire chapter).
"Thus
the heavens and the earth were finished, and all 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. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because
that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and
made" (Genesis 2:13).
"These
are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were
created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the
heavens" (Genesis 2:4).
"Thou,
even thou, art Lord alone; Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of
heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are
therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest
them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee" (Nehemiah 9:6).
Proverbs
3:19 tells us, "The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding
hath He established the heavens."
Psalm
86:9 says, "All nations whom thou hast made shall come
and worship before thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name."
Isaiah
40:26 encourages, "Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who
hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by
number."
Isaiah
41:20 says, "That they may see, and know, and consider, and understand
together, that the hand of the Lord hath done this, and the
Holy One of Israel hath created it."
Isaiah
42:5 repeats, "Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the
heavens, and stretched them out; He that spread forth the earth,
and that which cometh out of it; He that giveth breath unto the
people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein."
Isaiah
45:8 says, "Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies
pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring
forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I
the Lord have created it."
Isaiah
45:12 quotes God as saying, "I have made the earth, and created
man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens,
and all their host have I commanded."
John
1:1-3 describes, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with
God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any
thing made that was made."
Mark
10:5,6 affirms, "And Jesus answered and said unto them...But from
the beginning of the creation God made them male and female."
Acts
4:24 testifies, "And when they heard that, they lifted up their
voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God,
which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in
them is."
Acts
14:15 repeats, "...unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth,
and the sea, and all things that are therein."
Acts
17:24 goes on, "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."
In
Ephesians 3:9 Paul prays, "And to make all men see what is the fellowship
of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been
hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ."
Colossians
1:16 affirms, "For by Him were all things created, that are
in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether
they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all
things were created by Him, and for Him."
Revelation
10:6 foretells, "And sware by Him that liveth for ever and ever,
who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and
the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the
things which are therein, that there should be time no longer."
Christians
must either accept these Bible passages as fact or they should not
classify themselves as true believers! The Bible is either
God's Word or it isn't. God is either telling the truth
or He is telling lies. There really is no other logical conclusion
one can arrive at.
Why Was the Universe Created?
But
why did God create mankind and the mighty universe in the first
place? While man spends billions on examining the universe
in an attempt to find out if there is life "out there" somewhere,
the Bible provides the answer! "For thus saith the Lord that created
the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it; He hath
established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be
inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else" (Isaiah 45:18).
No idols or man-made gods can equal Him and His creative powers.
"Even
every one that is called by my name: for I have created him
for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him" (Isaiah
43:7).
"Thou
art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou
hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were
created" (Revelation 4:11).
In
summary, the vast universe was created to be inhabited by beings
who will glorify God and bring Him pleasure. Furthermore, God's
plan of salvation involves adding sons and daughters to His divine
family. "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named"
(Ephesians 3:14-15). Be sure to send for our free booklet, Man's
Awesome Destiny, for deeper understanding on this subject.
The New Universe
The
Bible tells us that new heavens and a new earth that will endure
forever will soon replace this old universe. Here is a prophecy
of this coming event:
"But
the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which
the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements
shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that
are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things
shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all
holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the
coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall
be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless
we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new
earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Peter 3:10-13).
The
Almighty's power to create will then be demonstrated before our
very eyes, and as previously, He will not need billions of years
to complete His work then, just as He did not need billions of years
to create it in the first place. He will create a new universe just
as He did the present one—by His Word. He will once
again speak creation into existence: and the new universe will come
into being.
"For
as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make,
shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your
name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to
another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to
worship before me, saith the Lord" (Isaiah 66:22,23).
"I
saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the
first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And
I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out
of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 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. And
God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be
no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be
any more pain: for the former things are passed away.' And He that
sat upon the throne said, 'Behold, I make all things new.' And He
said unto me, 'Write: for these words are true and faithful.' And
He said unto me, 'It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning
and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain
of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all
things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son'" (Revelation
21:17).
Where Do We Fit Into This Picture?
The
Bible makes it perfectly clear that all who accept God's offer of
mercy and salvation through His Son Jesus Christ will inherit and
inhabit the new universe for His pleasure, glory, and the expansion
of His Divine Family. We shall be kings and priests ruling under
Jesus Christ (Revelation 1:6; 5:10). How awesome! Are you willing
to accept that fact? It is speculated by some that the entire universe
will one day teem with life and the redeemed of the Lord will inhabit
it.
"And
He that sat upon the throne said, 'Behold, I make all things new.'
And He said unto me, 'Write: for these words are true and faithful.'
And He said unto me, 'It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning
and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain
of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all
things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son'" (Revelation
21:5-7).
Summary
The
God of your Bible is known by many names, titles, and descriptions—such
as Lord, the Almighty, I Am, the Most High, Everlasting God, Mighty
God, Lord of hosts, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God
of Israel, the Holy One of Israel, and numerous others, according
to the function He is fulfilling at the time. It is noteworthy that
He also refers to Himself as the Creator of the mighty universe.
Isaiah 45:11,12 tells us, "Thus saith the Lord, the Holy One of
Israel, and his Maker, 'Ask me of things to come concerning my sons,
and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made
the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched
out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.'"
Creation
is a basic Bible doctrine. The credibility of all the prophets of
old, the apostles, and Jesus Christ Himself depends on whether the
creation account in Genesis is true because they all taught and
wrote of it. Indeed, the Bible is either God's Word or a monumental
array of lies.
The
evidences pointing to special creation are legion. The amazing wonders
of the natural world and the wonders of the heavens all tell of
the glory and power of a Creator.
"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 that they are without excuse: Because that,
when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were
thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish
heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became
fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image
made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts,
and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies
between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and
worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is
blessed forever. Amen" (Romans 1:2025).
It
matters a great deal what we believe because all our subsequent
actions are influenced by our beliefs. If there is no God, then
moral standards mean very little in a "dog-eats-dog world." But
if we must all one day stand before the Judgment Seat of a Creator
God, then how we live our lives matters a great deal!
The
Bible contains scores of texts concerning the creation. Nearly every
Bible writer refers directly or indirectly to the creation.
The
Almighty Creator God created the universe to be ultimately inhabited
by humankind who will finally be born—resurrected by metabolic
change—into His Family at Christ's Second Coming and will
be His companions for all eternity. Can your mind fully
grasp the significance and excellence of this fact?
The
gospel of Jesus Christ, the ageless message commissioned
to be proclaimed to all the world in the last days, calls upon all
men and nations to: "Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour
of His judgment is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth,
and the sea, and the fountains of waters." Those who accept this
end—time message will begin to turn their lives around and
to keep God's commandments, including the Fourth, which is to revere
the seventh—day Sabbath (Saturday) as an act of faith and
worship of our Creator.
The
Lord has committed Himself to make new heavens and a new earth.
Only then will we fully appreciate His creative powers. We now "see
through a glass darkly," but then face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12).
In that coming paradise there will be no more pain, suffering, sickness,
or death. All are invited to be there. This booklet may well be
part of that invitation to you! Think about it.
As
the Master so truly said in Matthew 16:26, "For what is a man profited,
if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul [life]?
or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" That is a question
that every person must answer for him- or herself. No issue is more
important than your personal salvation. Where do we fit into this
picture? We are admonished in Philippians 2:12 to "work out your
own salvation with fear and trembling."
We
affirm not only belief in God the Father and in Jesus Christ as
Creator, Designer, and Lifegiver, but in the Holy Bible as the inspired
revelation of Almighty God (Psalm 12:6,7; 119:89; 2 Timothy 3:16).
You must now choose whom you will believe and obey: the speculations,
ideas, and theories of menor the inspired Word of God. Our earnest
prayer is that the Lord God of Israel, the Almighty Creator of the
infinite universe, will grant you wisdom to make the correct decision
and the faith to believe and obey His Word.
—End—
Extra, Extra!
Gallup Poll
A
recent Gallup Poll found that the greatest number of Americans (47%
of those expressing an opinion) hold strict creationist view, that
God created man pretty much in his present form within the last
10,000 years. Most other Americans believe in some combination of
evolution and creationism, and only nine percent of Americans believe
in strict evolution (Christian News, May 1992, p. 3, from
the Evangelical Press).
Here, Here, and Here
Countless
Bible passages speak of God's revelation of Himself and His creation.
For your quick reference the Scriptures listed in the following
table substantiate—either directly or in passing—the
plain statement in Genesis 1:1, that God created the heavens and
the earth. Please take the time to look them up for yourself and
ther will then be no doubt as to what the Bible plainly says.
|
What the Bible says about God and His creation: |
| |
Genesis 1:1 |
|
Exodus 20:11 |
|
Exodus 31:17 |
|
I Chronicles 16:26 |
| |
Nehemaih 9:6 |
|
Job 26:13 |
|
Job 38:4 |
|
Psalm 8:3 |
| |
Psalm 33:6 |
|
Psalm 33:9 |
|
Psalm 89:11, 12 |
|
Psalm 96:5 |
| |
Psalm 102:25 |
|
Psalm 104:24 |
|
Psalm 104:30 |
|
Psalm 115:15 |
| |
Psalm 121:2 |
|
Psalm 124:8 |
|
Psalm 134:3 |
|
Psalm 136:5 |
| |
Psalm 146:6 |
|
Psalm 148:4, 5 |
|
Proverbs 3:19 |
|
Proverbs 8:22-29 |
| |
Isaiah 37:16 |
|
Isaiah 40:26 |
|
Isaiah 40:28 |
|
Isaiah 42:5 |
| |
Isaiah 44:24 |
|
Isaiah 45:18 |
|
Isaiah 51:13 |
|
Isaiah 51:16 |
| |
Isaiah 65:17 |
|
Jeremiah 10:12 |
|
Jeremiah 32:17 |
|
Jeremiah 51:15 |
| |
Zechariah 12:1 |
|
Matthew 11:25 |
|
Acts 4:24 |
|
Acts 14:15 |
| |
Acts 17:24 |
|
Romans 1:19, 20 |
|
Romans 11:36 |
|
I Corinthians 8:6 |
| |
Ephesians 3:9 |
|
Colossians 1:16, 17 |
|
Hebrews 1:2 |
|
Hebrews 3:4 |
| |
Hebrews 11:3 |
|
2 Peter 3:5 |
|
Revelation 4:11 |
|
Revelation 10:6 |
| |
Revelation 14:7 |
|
Revelation 21:6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|