SEA LEVEL DURING THE FLOOD
Genesis 7:19-20
“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.”
“You can’t possibly believe that there was a worldwide Flood. If the Ark was floating above Mount Everest, the air would be so thin that they would not be able to breathe.”
This objection to the Flood is a very common one that I hear frequently. It is also one that is most easily disproved. In fact, I am always very surprised that so many people think this must be a valid argument.
The statement contains two incorrect presuppositions. Let’s deal with the easiest false presupposition first. This is the idea that an Ark floating above Mount Everest would suffer from thin air. But if the Earth’s oceans were all combined and at that height, they would have displaced the atmosphere. Therefore, the surface of the Flood would be the new sea level and the air would not be thin; the surface would be the new sea level, and the air would be as dense as at the coast.
The second incorrect presupposition is that Mount Everest existed before the Flood. Psalm 104 shows us that the mountains were raised and the valleys, or rather ocean deeps, were lowered at the end of the Flood. Therefore, pre-Flood mountains would have been quite a lot lower than post-Flood mountains.
It is always interesting to notice that questions designed to ridicule our belief in the literal truth of Genesis are often based on faulty presuppositions. It is not a surprise to us that genuine science is consistent with God’s word.
We love Your word, Lord, and we love that it always speaks truth. We pray that You will guide us as we seek to witness to the truth of Your word to the world around us. Amen.
Genesis 7:19-20
“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.”
“You can’t possibly believe that there was a worldwide Flood. If the Ark was floating above Mount Everest, the air would be so thin that they would not be able to breathe.”
This objection to the Flood is a very common one that I hear frequently. It is also one that is most easily disproved. In fact, I am always very surprised that so many people think this must be a valid argument.
The statement contains two incorrect presuppositions. Let’s deal with the easiest false presupposition first. This is the idea that an Ark floating above Mount Everest would suffer from thin air. But if the Earth’s oceans were all combined and at that height, they would have displaced the atmosphere. Therefore, the surface of the Flood would be the new sea level and the air would not be thin; the surface would be the new sea level, and the air would be as dense as at the coast.
The second incorrect presupposition is that Mount Everest existed before the Flood. Psalm 104 shows us that the mountains were raised and the valleys, or rather ocean deeps, were lowered at the end of the Flood. Therefore, pre-Flood mountains would have been quite a lot lower than post-Flood mountains.
It is always interesting to notice that questions designed to ridicule our belief in the literal truth of Genesis are often based on faulty presuppositions. It is not a surprise to us that genuine science is consistent with God’s word.
We love Your word, Lord, and we love that it always speaks truth. We pray that You will guide us as we seek to witness to the truth of Your word to the world around us. Amen.
A LESSON FROM THE BEEKEEPER
Psalm 119:103
"How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!"
When I was in my twenties, I had a friend whose father, Peter, kept bees. One day, he invited me to help collect honey. I was fascinated by the paraphernalia that goes with this activity – the costume, the hood, the smoker, and the hives. Peter had ten hives. His bees were very distinctive. They had a deep brown abdomen with a single yellow stripe across the middle of it. After collecting the combs and spinning out the honey, we went for a walk. We walked a couple of miles across meadows filled with willowherb – a flowering plant which is known in the US as fireweed. Bees were collecting nectar. Many of the bees looked like those in Peter’s hives. They were, indeed, his bees.
Peter explained that when the bees return to the hive, they will do a little dance. These dances are quite sophisticated and give information to others in the hive about the distance and direction of the nectar flowers. For example, the bee imparting the information will include a part of its dance at an angle to the vertical. The angle of the bee to the vertical is exactly the same as the angle between the nectar flowers and the sun. Information like this is then used by the worker bees so that more of them can find their way to the food source.
Such complex behavior could not have arisen by evolutionary chance. It is far more logical to suppose that this was a feature deliberately designed by the Creator.
Your word, Lord, is sweeter than honey Thank You for providing us with Your word which gives us everything we need for life, learning, and salvation. Amen.
Psalm 119:103
"How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!"
When I was in my twenties, I had a friend whose father, Peter, kept bees. One day, he invited me to help collect honey. I was fascinated by the paraphernalia that goes with this activity – the costume, the hood, the smoker, and the hives. Peter had ten hives. His bees were very distinctive. They had a deep brown abdomen with a single yellow stripe across the middle of it. After collecting the combs and spinning out the honey, we went for a walk. We walked a couple of miles across meadows filled with willowherb – a flowering plant which is known in the US as fireweed. Bees were collecting nectar. Many of the bees looked like those in Peter’s hives. They were, indeed, his bees.
Peter explained that when the bees return to the hive, they will do a little dance. These dances are quite sophisticated and give information to others in the hive about the distance and direction of the nectar flowers. For example, the bee imparting the information will include a part of its dance at an angle to the vertical. The angle of the bee to the vertical is exactly the same as the angle between the nectar flowers and the sun. Information like this is then used by the worker bees so that more of them can find their way to the food source.
Such complex behavior could not have arisen by evolutionary chance. It is far more logical to suppose that this was a feature deliberately designed by the Creator.
Your word, Lord, is sweeter than honey Thank You for providing us with Your word which gives us everything we need for life, learning, and salvation. Amen.
EVOLUTION LACKS LOGIC
Isaiah 43:26
“Put me in remembrance: let us plead together: declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.”
Logic can sometimes be a little difficult to follow without seeing pictures. But if we take this carefully, it should make sense. There is a type of logical sequence called a syllogism, where two premises are made, followed by a conclusion. The conclusion should be based on those premises. For example:
Premise 1: If it is raining, the streets are wet.
Premise 2: It is raining.
Conclusion: Therefore the streets are wet.
This is logically sound. But suppose we swapped the second premise and conclusion.
Premise 1: If it is raining, the streets are wet.
Premise 2: The streets are wet.
Conclusion: Therefore it is raining.
This is logically unsound. This is because there are other possible reasons why the streets might be wet, such as a burst hydrant. Now, here is a typical evolutionary syllogism, using comments about similar animal structures.
Premise 1: If evolution were true, we would expect to see similar skeletal structures in mammals.
Premise 2: We do find similar skeletal structures in mammals.
Conclusion: Therefore evolution is true.
The idea behind this syllogism is that many animals have five bone systems in their hands or front feet.
The syllogism is logically unsound because there are other reasons why there might be similar structures, the most obvious being that these similar structures were created by the same designer – God.
Thank You, Lord, for giving us Logic, whereby we can discern good from evil. Thank You also for providing for us during these difficult times. Amen.
Isaiah 43:26
“Put me in remembrance: let us plead together: declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.”
Logic can sometimes be a little difficult to follow without seeing pictures. But if we take this carefully, it should make sense. There is a type of logical sequence called a syllogism, where two premises are made, followed by a conclusion. The conclusion should be based on those premises. For example:
Premise 1: If it is raining, the streets are wet.
Premise 2: It is raining.
Conclusion: Therefore the streets are wet.
This is logically sound. But suppose we swapped the second premise and conclusion.
Premise 1: If it is raining, the streets are wet.
Premise 2: The streets are wet.
Conclusion: Therefore it is raining.
This is logically unsound. This is because there are other possible reasons why the streets might be wet, such as a burst hydrant. Now, here is a typical evolutionary syllogism, using comments about similar animal structures.
Premise 1: If evolution were true, we would expect to see similar skeletal structures in mammals.
Premise 2: We do find similar skeletal structures in mammals.
Conclusion: Therefore evolution is true.
The idea behind this syllogism is that many animals have five bone systems in their hands or front feet.
The syllogism is logically unsound because there are other reasons why there might be similar structures, the most obvious being that these similar structures were created by the same designer – God.
Thank You, Lord, for giving us Logic, whereby we can discern good from evil. Thank You also for providing for us during these difficult times. Amen.
DINOSAURS AND FEATHERS
Genesis 1:25
�And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.�
I am a long-time fan of the BBC science fiction show Doctor Who, having watched it since the mid-1960s when the show was in black and white with no computer graphics and Daleks were upturned trash cans with sink plungers attached. One of my favorite episodes of the modern era was entitled Dinosaurs on a Spaceship. The title said it all.
A lost craft was traveling through space with a cargo of untethered dinosaurs. But not everyone enjoyed the episode. Some well-known evolutionary biologists in Britain complained about one scene which featured a couple of tyrannosauruses. Their complaint was that the T. Rexes should have been covered in feathers.
In practice, the idea of feathered dinosaurs still does not have solid fossil evidence to back it up. Most of the fossils found with evidence of feathers are clearly birds. A small number of others are doubtful but could easily be assumed to be birds.
In 2016, it was announced that a dinosaur feather had been found entrapped in amber. However, the feather was not attached to an animal. Later the same year, other amber-clad feathers were discovered that were definitely attached to a bird. Some have claimed that there are fossil T. Rexes that show signs of feather follicles.
Again, these patterns are open to interpretation. Now, it is possible, perhaps, that some dinosaurs could have had feathers, but this does not provide proof that birds evolved from dinosaurs. What we actually find in the fossil record is evidence of kinds of animals, just as the Bible states. It does not make sense to impose an evolutionary worldview on any of these findings.
When You finished creating, Lord God, You looked at all You had made and declared it to be �very good�. Thank You that all we understand about dinosaurs and other animals is consistent with Your word. Amen.
Genesis 1:25
�And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.�
I am a long-time fan of the BBC science fiction show Doctor Who, having watched it since the mid-1960s when the show was in black and white with no computer graphics and Daleks were upturned trash cans with sink plungers attached. One of my favorite episodes of the modern era was entitled Dinosaurs on a Spaceship. The title said it all.
A lost craft was traveling through space with a cargo of untethered dinosaurs. But not everyone enjoyed the episode. Some well-known evolutionary biologists in Britain complained about one scene which featured a couple of tyrannosauruses. Their complaint was that the T. Rexes should have been covered in feathers.
In practice, the idea of feathered dinosaurs still does not have solid fossil evidence to back it up. Most of the fossils found with evidence of feathers are clearly birds. A small number of others are doubtful but could easily be assumed to be birds.
In 2016, it was announced that a dinosaur feather had been found entrapped in amber. However, the feather was not attached to an animal. Later the same year, other amber-clad feathers were discovered that were definitely attached to a bird. Some have claimed that there are fossil T. Rexes that show signs of feather follicles.
Again, these patterns are open to interpretation. Now, it is possible, perhaps, that some dinosaurs could have had feathers, but this does not provide proof that birds evolved from dinosaurs. What we actually find in the fossil record is evidence of kinds of animals, just as the Bible states. It does not make sense to impose an evolutionary worldview on any of these findings.
When You finished creating, Lord God, You looked at all You had made and declared it to be �very good�. Thank You that all we understand about dinosaurs and other animals is consistent with Your word. Amen.
HOW NATURE SELECTS
Genesis 1:24
�And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.�
Evolutionists often use a language all of their own. Frequently that language involves reification. Reification is a logical fallacy whereby an abstract concept is treated as if it were something real or concrete. Evolutionists frequently refer to selection of genetic information by nature � the so-called Natural Selection. Nature is an abstract concept. Too often, values, actions, or even moral choices are ascribed to this abstract nature.
When evolutionists refer to natural selection, they are implying that this is the mechanism by which evolution occurs. Of course, they refer to natural selection with modification, but we have talked about modification before and will do so again. As for the natural selection part, what is being selected? The answer is that genetic information is being selected. It is selected by means of the environment making alternative selections less likely. For example, long-haired dogs living in hot climates are not going to survive as easily as short-haired dogs. Therefore, the short-hairs are more likely to breed and pass on their short-hair genes to the next generation. In future generations, it is possible that the long-hair genes could be eliminated. But we should notice that this natural selection has only selected from what is already there. The dogs may develop into dogs with shorter hair, but they do not turn into cats or anything else. No new genetic information is created by this selection process, so Darwinian evolution has not occurred. Dogs give rise to dogs, and cats give rise to cats because this is how their biblical kinds work.
Once again, Lord, we see that Your word is true. Thank You that we can always rely on Your word. Amen
Genesis 1:24
�And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.�
Evolutionists often use a language all of their own. Frequently that language involves reification. Reification is a logical fallacy whereby an abstract concept is treated as if it were something real or concrete. Evolutionists frequently refer to selection of genetic information by nature � the so-called Natural Selection. Nature is an abstract concept. Too often, values, actions, or even moral choices are ascribed to this abstract nature.
When evolutionists refer to natural selection, they are implying that this is the mechanism by which evolution occurs. Of course, they refer to natural selection with modification, but we have talked about modification before and will do so again. As for the natural selection part, what is being selected? The answer is that genetic information is being selected. It is selected by means of the environment making alternative selections less likely. For example, long-haired dogs living in hot climates are not going to survive as easily as short-haired dogs. Therefore, the short-hairs are more likely to breed and pass on their short-hair genes to the next generation. In future generations, it is possible that the long-hair genes could be eliminated. But we should notice that this natural selection has only selected from what is already there. The dogs may develop into dogs with shorter hair, but they do not turn into cats or anything else. No new genetic information is created by this selection process, so Darwinian evolution has not occurred. Dogs give rise to dogs, and cats give rise to cats because this is how their biblical kinds work.
Once again, Lord, we see that Your word is true. Thank You that we can always rely on Your word. Amen
PLEASE VISIT MY WIFE'S WEBSITE. SHE RUNS "YOUNG LIVING" WHICH PROVIDES ALL NATURAL OILS THAT CAN BE USED INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY INCLUDING A DIFFUSER WHICH PUTS AN AMAZING ODOR IN THE AIR. THIS PRODUCT IS SO AMAZING AND KNOW THAT YOU WILL GET YEARS OF ENJOYMENT FROM IT. GO TO HTTP://WWW.YOUNGLIVING.ORG/CDROSES
No comments:
Post a Comment