PLANETARY SCIENCE SUPPORTS A YOUNG COSMOS

Posted on by

Creationist scientist Dr Russell Humphreys shows a young-age creation perspective has real explanatory power for understanding magnetic fields of planets, moons, and other objects in space. The Ganymede moon of Jupiter has been shown to have its own magnetic field which should not be the case if the Cosmos is billions of years old. Humphreys became famous because he successfully predicted the magnetic field of Uranus before Voyager 2 flew by the Uranus system in 1986. The strength of the magnetic field was a complete surprise to evolutionists, though not to creationists, as creationist physicist Dr. Russell Humphreys, using Biblical assumptions, had accurately predicted the strength two years previously!

This is a complex article but at least make sure you read the Conclusion.

Ganymede is the largest moon (Jupiter) in the solar system (figure 1). With a radius of 2,634 km, Ganymede is slightly larger than the planet Mercury. A unique feature of Ganymede is that it possesses its own intrinsic magnetic field. To planetary scientists, it has been a challenge to explain how an object of Ganymede’s size could still possess its own magnetic field after over 4 Ga. After billions of years, an object of Ganymede’s size would be expected to have cooled down so that there would not be adequate heat to drive a magnetic dynamo. A dynamo requires a molten iron core that can have a convection motion of the fluid, which carries an electric current. But for Ganymede, the iron core is only approximately 700–800 km in radius. Ganymede may not have a solid iron core but has a liquid iron core surrounded by a silicate mantle, and then layers of water ice over the mantle.

Ganymede is influenced by the strong magnetic field of Jupiter, but there is a good consensus among scientists that it possesses its own intrinsic field. The Galileo spacecraft conducted magnetometer measurements which have been analyzed in relation to Jupiter’s field. Ganymede’s main dipole field was measured as 719 nanotesla (nT) and is tilted 176° in relation to its own spin axis. This makes it roughly antiparallel to Jupiter’s magnetic field.

The magnetic field model of Dr. D. Russel Humphreys has been more successful than old-age magnetic dynamo theories. Humphreys applied his model to the magnetic fields of Earth, Uranus, Neptune, Mercury, our Sun, and bodies in our solar system. Mercury is slightly smaller than Ganymede but possesses a larger iron core with both solid and liquid layers. Humphreys’ model proposed that when God created the planets he initially made them out of water in the manner described for Earth in Genesis 1 and 2 Peter 3, “out of water”.

This model has significant advantages over the old-age dynamo model. The dynamo model requires a molten conducting core such as liquid iron. It also requires convection motion of the fluid and is very dependent on the size of the core and the rate of rotation of the planet. But in Humphreys’ model, the core need not actually be melted, it just needs to be a conductor. The initial magnetic field from creation decays to the present. This has been described as ‘free decay’ because the field decreases in intensity over thousands of years. Humphreys’ model assumes a young age for the Earth and solar system and leads to realistic values for the magnetic dipole moment for Earth, Mercury, and the other planets. This makes Humphreys’ model more broadly applicable than dynamo theories. Thus, it can be applied to Ganymede as well, as Humphreys has done.

In Humphreys’ model for the creation of magnetic fields, the exact composition of the iron core after creation is not known, but this does not create a problem in applying the model. The core’s composition is estimated by interior structure models that attempt to match the overall density of the moon to gravity measurements taken by spacecraft (the Galileo mission). Today, Ganymede is believed to have an ice shell of roughly 200 km, then a silicate mantle of about 1,700 km, and this leaves the core as roughly 700–800 km in radius. However, these are only rough approximations. If the core is smaller, it needs to have a composition closer to pure iron in order to generate the measured magnetic field. But if the core is larger, then it could have a composition more in a light element such as sulfur (in FeS). In Sohl 2002, an analysis was done of the Galileo gravity data for the Galilean moons of Jupiter. They describe Ganymede’s magnetic field thus:

“Magnetometer measurements of the Galileo spacecraft have shown that Ganymede possesses an intrinsic magnetic field with equatorial and polar field strengths at the surface of 750 and 1,200 nT, respectively.”

They go on to give a range of values on the size of the Ganymede core: “The ice shell was suggested to be about 800 km thick. The core may have a radius between 400 and 1,300 km.” All these values are consistent with Humphreys’ model.

Conclusions

At creation, should we assume that the composition of the core was uniform throughout? This is a simplifying assumption but not really a requirement. If there was a composition gradient in the core initially where it was closer to pure iron at the core-mantle boundary but possessed more FeS at the bottom of the core, this would be unstable and so sinking iron ‘snow’ and rising FeS would be possible. Such a composition gradient could alter how rapidly the magnetic field decays for some period of time until the core reached a more stable uniform composition. So, to this author, it seems the ‘iron snow’ concept is possible, but it would not drive a dynamo in Ganymede, and it would not invalidate Humphreys’ magnetic model. Thus, a young-age creation perspective has real explanatory power for understanding magnetic fields of planets, moons, and other objects in space.

This article by Wayne Spencer The iron snow dynamo theory for Ganymede is taken from The Journal of Creation 2022 Volume 36, Issue 3 in the section Perspectives.

The Journal of Creation is the Technical Journal produced by Creation Ministries International (CMI). They also produce the excellent Creation Journal for nontechnical people. Go to http://www.creation.com to subscribe.

WHY ARE YOUNG PEOPLE DEPARTING FROM A BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW?

Posted on by

Why are younger people departing from a Biblical worldview? How did this happen?

Satan developed a strategic plan to destroy God’s Word and he took aim at the foundational book of the Bible – Genesis.

Take God out of the creation story and you destroy the Biblical foundations: man and woman made in God’s image, marriage, supernatural beings, angels, including enemies of God – a fallen angel called Satan and his demons, The Fall of mankind, a worldwide flood of Noah’s Day, confusion of languages (Tower of Babel) that established the nations, and God established His nation, Israel for His purposes. All leading to God, JESUS, entering history at the appointed time.

Evolution has been Satan’s most successful strategy. If Darwin’s evolution is true, God is not necessary to explain the existence of the Cosmos. It evolved over billions of years. To do that you have to make Noah’s Flood a myth and yet just about all people groups around the world have a flood story in their foundational history and numerous geologists of today recognize that there is abundant evidence in the rocks and fossils that speaks of water-related rapid catastrophic deposition, just as would be expected with Noah’s Flood. Sadly, the growing number of neo-catastrophists still cling to millions of years by assuming many sequences of catastrophes separated by millions of years.

Schools and universities now teach evolution and the Big Bang as fact. The U.S. District Court on December 20, 2005, charged that even teaching intelligent design (ID) was an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Even many theological schools have now accepted evolution and billions of years as scientific fact which has destroyed Biblical history and belief in an inerrant Bible.

Once God was removed from history then it was only a matter of time before God’s commandments were also jettisoned from every area of life: government, law, sex, marriage, family, life (abortion and euthanasia), and finally lawlessness abounds.

The institutional church has abandoned God’s word and lost its power. It is no longer relevant and in fact considered a danger that must be controlled by legislation.

Most parents still try to teach Christian values to their kids: how to be kind and generous and hardworking, etc. They have disciplined their kids in life skills like keeping a clean room and working hard at school and being polite. But at school, they are taught evolution and therefore the Bible and the God of the Bible are myths. The Bible and its God are no longer relevant, and “SIN” what is that? We can make up our own rules. Hence, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, gay marriage, and transgenderism are all acceptable lifestyle choices.

Unless parents tackle the creation/evolution issue and therefore the historical accuracy of God’s Word they will have little to no impact on their children’s evolutionary worldview which allows them to live the life they choose. Why would they choose all the constraints the God of the Bible requires? However, God’s Word is true; fulfilled Biblical prophecy proves it to be an accurate record of God’s dealings with His world. Parents need to teach this truth so their children will submit to their Creator and reject the lies of their enemy Satan who is out to destroy them. To help parents teach biblically, God has raised up ministries like Creation Ministries International (CMI – http://www.creation.com) and Answers in Genesis both with Ph.D. scientists who can clearly show evolution as a failed theory and that the Bible’s “young earth” history is supported by scientific evidence. They have excellent resources for Christians to use. Also, discipleship must be daily, and not just in life skills, but apologetics, theology, prayer, the power of God, and missions.

Also, Children need to be taught how to become born-again Christians with the Holy Spirit indwelling their spirit. We cannot live the Christian life without the Holy Spirit. We are told the Holy Spirit is the one who produces the fruit of the Spirit in our lives: love, joy, peace, patience, faithfulness, gentleness, goodness, kindness, and self-control. He is the one who will make us Christ-like (sanctification). He is the one who provides all nine gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-11) of the Spirit for ministry. Much of the institutional church teaches that God the Father sent Jesus to provide the way back to the Father by His sacrifice for us on The Cross but they do not teach that Jesus made it possible for the Father to send the Holy Spirit to enable us to live the Christian life and all that entails. It is the power of God.

PRAYER

Father, we thank you for ministries like CMI that are addressing the attack on the inerrancy of your Word. Bless them we pray and show us how we can play our part in supporting their efforts, particularly with churches in our area of influence. We pray for Christians in schools and universities that they may be able to bring your truths to light in their sphere of influence. Equip them with the correct materials to use by guiding them to websites like http://www.creation.com. Heavenly Father we ask you to raise up churches that will operate like the early churches described in the Book of Acts in the power of the Holy Spirit to do what you called us to do:

“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely, I am with you always, to the very end of the age” Matthew 28:19-20

“ You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” 2 Timothy 2:1-2

“Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Proverbs 22:6

DARWIN’S ABOMINABLE MYSTERY

Posted on by

In 1879, some twenty years after the publication of his famous Origin of Species, Charles Darwin wrote a letter to botanist Dr Joseph Hooker. One sentence, in particular, underscored a vexing problem for evolutionary theory:

“The rapid development as far as we can judge of all the higher plants within recent geological times is an abominable mystery.” By ‘higher plants’ Darwin had in mind the plants he viewed as being the most ‘highly evolved’, i.e. the Angiosperms—plants with flowers (with seeds produced inside the female reproductive organ). As BBC Science put it, “The famous naturalist was haunted by the question of how the first flowering plants evolved. Why are they so beautiful, many have gorgeous scents for us to appreciate

Evolutionarily ‘out-of-place’

Little wonder evolutionary theorists are ‘allergic’ to Precambrian pollen

Buggs refers to “our knowledge of the fossil record” but this has to be selective knowledge. Evolutionists have to ignore or try to explain away various ‘out-of-place’ angiosperm fossils from beneath their supposed first appearance in Cretaceous rocks. For example, fossil “pollen of the Compositae” (the daisy family), which is found all the way down in the Precambrian, is presumed by evolutionists to encompass the time that life first evolved., This would mean flowering plants preceded the allegedly ‘more primitive’ plants, such as algae, mosses, ferns, and pine trees. Little wonder evolutionary theorists are ‘allergic’ to Precambrian pollen!

Flowers from the beginning

The Bible actually places the origin of all plants—algae, mosses, ferns, pine trees, and flowering plants—on Day 3 of Creation Week; not billions of years ago, but only about 6,000. And from the Bible we can conclude the ‘fossil record’ does not display the order of evolution over long time periods, but rather the order of burial during and since the global Flood of Noah’s day, about 4,500 years ago.

How come our schools and universities that teach evolution as fact do not present the many impossible facts such as flowers and DNA (complex information that controls all the machinery in cells) that evolution cannot explain.

So, for those who despite the evidence and the Bible’s eyewitness account want to cling doggedly to evolutionary ideas, Darwin’s “abominable mystery” remains. For Bible-believing Christians, however, there is no mystery.

THREE PILLARS OF EVOLUTION DEMOLISHED

Posted on by

Jerry Bergman is a well-known creationist author who has extensively published over many decades and who has taught at several universities. He has taught biology, biochemistry, anatomy and physiology, genetics, and other courses for over 40 years. He has over 1,700 publications in both scholarly and popular science journals and monographs.

The three pillars of evolution identified by Bergman are abiogenesis (aka chemical evolution), natural and sexual selection, and mutations. The author of this book finds all three of these pillars defective as evidence for evolution.

Bergman has examined claims of abiogenesis, the nature of mutations, and the explanatory power of natural selection. As in the title of this book, he has thoroughly demolished them. The monopoly of the theory of evolution, in academia, is all the more irresponsible. In fact, it is puzzling.

Naturalistic origin of life assumed, not demonstrated

Bergman is especially critical of Miller–Urey ‘chemical soup’ explanations for the putative abiogenesis of life, not so much because they are grossly inadequate, but because they are not even seriously examined.

“Producing even simple amino acids and functional proteins requires highly laboratory-controlled experiments. Even under these ideal conditions, the very conditions hypothesized to create amino acids also rapidly destroy proteins” (p. 60).

Finally, ‘chemical soup’ experiments very much confuse the issue. Forming the building blocks of life, by abiogenesis, is the trivial part. The hard part is accounting for the information content necessary for even the most rudimentary form of life. Evolutionistic origin-of-life hypotheses do not even begin to do this!

Most ‘neutral mutations’ are not neutral after all

The next pillar of evolution, examined by Bergman, is that of mutations. The term ‘neutral mutation’ refers to a mutation that neither enhances nor reduces the fitness of the organism bearing it. Evolutionary orthodoxy long held that most mutations are neutral. Bergman challenges this and shows that most ‘neutral’ mutations are mildly deleterious. This creates a new problem for evolution. ‘Neutral’ mutations are not innocent, as previously believed. They do not kill the bearer outright, but, because their harm is subtle, they accumulate with other ‘neutral’ mutations in the genome. Bergman warns, “Even mutations that have ‘little effect’ on health can accumulate both in somatic and germ cells, eventually causing major damage” (p. 120)

Natural selection—an amorphous and misleading term

The third pillar of evolution is identified as natural selection. Bergman has a way with analogies. He compares the claims of natural selection with the statement, “The man is rich because he has money.” Others have characterized the natural selection explanation as a ‘survival of the survivors’ statement.

One must make a clear distinction between the arrival of the fittest and the survival of the fittest. The two, though often conflated, are most certainly not the same. The confusion goes back to the very beginning, as pointed out by Bergman:

“Darwin … portrayed natural selection as equivalent to artificial breeding, thereby making it more difficult to refute natural selection by arguing that it was a real physical force. Claiming that nature does the selecting avoids the requirement of discussing the actual factors involved in the causation events attributed to natural selection. Such obfuscation may have been excusable in Charles Darwin’s day, but is inexcusable in ours” (p. 165).

Natural selection does not even have theoretical explanatory power in many cases. Bergman comments: “Human life consists of many activities that are mentally pleasurable, none of which natural selection convincingly explains. Walking in forests, listening to music, creating poems, doing scientific research, aesthetic enjoyment of nature, and myriads of other activities are often not related to survival, or adaptation in a Darwinian sense. Some writers have struggled in vain to explain the existence by natural selection of our human ability to create music and art, all of which involve extremely complex body and brain systems” (p. 213).

Get the book from Creation Ministries: http://www.creation.com

CREATIVITY IN THE MILLENNIAL KINGDOM PART 1

Posted on by

What does the Bible say about our ability to create? First of all, it says we are made in the image of the greatest creator of all things, God our Father. We are then told that Adam’s rebellious son Cain built at least one city.

“Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch” Genesis 4:17

Just seven generations down Cain’s line we then learn that Jabal was a farmer who raised livestock, his brother Jubal’s family played musical instruments (lyre and pipe) and Tubal-Cain forged instruments of bronze and iron.

What does this say about evolution and stone age people?

“Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. Zillah also bore Tubal-Cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron.” Genesis 4:20-22

Despite the dreadful judgement of God with the worldwide flood of Noah’s day resulting in eight survivors, just a few generations on we learn that God judges the world again with the confusion of their language at the Tower of Babel. With just one language God says that nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. What does that say about our creative ability? Hence God creates the nations each with its own language.

“Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.”

Once God had decided to establish His own nation, Israel, we learn that God gifted and called Bezalel to be a skilled laborer, a master craftsman, and a God-glorifying artist. Bezalel and Oholiab were not only to create works of art but also to train apprentices to do so. The gifting and calling were from God:

“He has filled them with skill to do all kinds of work as craftsmen, designers, embroiderers in blue, purple and scarlet yarn and fine linen, and weavers—all of them master craftsmen and designers” Exodus 35:35

What about today: with the development of the internet, the communication problem that God initiated at Babel is now largely overcome and new technology is being developed at lightning speed in energy, healthcare, agriculture, communication, transport, and in fact every area of activity.

I believe there is no reason why this will not continue during Jesus’ reign in the Millennium. However, its development will be controlled by Jesus and the Saints who the Bible says will be ruling in this transition era with a rod of iron.

“The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron,” Revelation 2:26

“She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” Revelation 12:5

“From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron.” Revelation 19:15

In this post let us look briefly at ENERGY and TRANSPORT

ENERGY: NUCLEAR FUSION

A UK-based company called First Light Fusion came up with an idea to build a nuclear fusion reactor that hits nuclear fuel pack with a projectile, having a speed 200 times more than that of sound and releases enormous heat, which gets absorbed by lithium that transfers heat to water through the heat exchanger. The reactor will repeat the process of hitting the fuel pack with the projectile every 30 seconds, resulting in generating a pulse of energy that could generate 5800kWh of electric energy. They plan to put the first commercial nuclear fusion technology power plant within a budget of $1 billion, generating 150MW power.

A major group of American scientists has agreed to work toward opening a nuclear fusion plant by the 2040s. The timeframe is intentional, letting scientists work on and learn from giant projects like Europe’s ITER and China’s EAST before designing a prototype of a fusion plant for the United States.

TRANSPORT: FUEL CELLS

Like batteries, fuel cells generate electricity, meaning that any car that runs off a fuel cell is actually an electric car. Also, like batteries, fuel cells mix two chemicals that react to produce an electric current. However, the important difference with fuel cells is that, unlike batteries, they do not store energy internally. Rather, they have their “fuel” fed directly into the battery “cell”, thus the term fuel cell.

The most likely fuel cell is the Hydrogen Fuel Cell. There are others in development. In the case of the hydrogen fuel cell, the two chemicals that react together are stored hydrogen and atmospheric oxygen. When reacted together they produce water. So if you have a hydrogen car, you can drink its exhaust. Also, fuel cells aren’t limited to smaller vehicles, they can power buses and, even, tractors. Whilst many fuel cells are under development the Polymer Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMF) is one of the big favourites.

The Einride Pod driverless truck will begin operating for the first time on a U.S. public highway. The vehicles will have to stick to a defined route during a limited test program.

WHY RADIOMETRIC DATING GIVES AGES OF MILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF YEARS

Posted on by

A young age for ‘ancient’ granites

When physicist Dr Russell Humphreys was still at Sandia National Laboratories (he now works full-time for the Institute for Creation Research), he and Dr John Baumgardner (still with Los Alamos National Laboratory) were both convinced that they knew the direction in which to look for a definitive answer to the puzzle of why radiometric dating consistently gives ages of millions and billions of years.

picture – Linear accelerator used in radiometric dating.

Others had tried to find an answer in geological processes—e.g. the pattern was caused by the way the magma was emplaced or how it crystallized. This is indeed the answer in some cases.2,3 But Drs Humphreys and Baumgardner realized that in other cases there were many independent lines of evidence that suggested that huge amounts of radioactive decay had indeed taken place. (These include the variety of elements used in ‘standard’ radioisotope dating, mature uranium radiohalos and fission track dating.) It would be hard to imagine that geologic processes alone could explain all these. Rather, there was likely to be an answer that concerned the nuclear decay processes themselves.

From the eyewitness testimony of God’s Word, the billions of years that such vast amounts of radioactive processes would normally suggest had not taken place. So it was clear that the assumption of a constant, slow decay process was wrong. There must have been speeded-up decay, perhaps in a huge burst associated with Creation Week and/or a separate burst at the time of the Flood.

There is now powerful confirmatory evidence that at least one episode of drastically accelerated decay has indeed been the case, building on the work of Dr Robert Gentry on helium retention in zircons. The landmark RATE paper,4 though technical, can be summarized as follows:

  • When uranium decays to lead, a by-product of this process is the formation of helium, a very light, inert gas, which readily escapes from rock.
  • Certain crystals called zircons, obtained from drilling into very deep granites, contain uranium which has partly decayed into lead.
  • By measuring the amount of uranium and ‘radiogenic lead’ in these crystals, one can calculate that, if the decay rate has been constant, about 1.5 billion years must have passed. (This is consistent with the geologic ‘age’ assigned to the granites in which these zircons are found.)
  • However, there is a significant proportion of helium from that ‘1.5 billion years of decay’ still inside the zircons. This is, at first glance, surprising for long-agers, because of the ease with which one would expect helium (with its tiny, light, unreactive atoms) to escape from the spaces within the crystal structure. There should surely be hardly any left, because with such a slow buildup, it should be seeping out continually and not accumulating.
  • Drawing any conclusions from the above depends, of course, on actually measuring the rate at which helium leaks out of zircons. This is what one of the RATE papers reports on. The samples were sent (without any hint that it was a creationist project) to a world-class expert on helium diffusion from minerals to measure these rates. The consistent answer: the helium does indeed seep out quickly over a wide range of temperatures. In fact, the results show that because of all the helium still in the zircons, these crystals (and since this is Precambrian basement granite, by implication the whole earth) could not be older than 14,000 years. In other words, in only a few thousand years, 1.5 billion years’ worth (at today’s rates) of radioactive decay has taken place. Interestingly, the data have since been refined and updated to give a date of 5,680 (± 2,000) years.
  • The paper looks at the various avenues a long-ager might take by which to wriggle out of these powerful implications, but there seems to be little hope for them unless they can show that the techniques used to obtain the results were seriously flawed.

The Bible clearly tells us that God created a mature universe: Adam was a man, not a baby, the trees and plants mature and on day six Adam could see all of the stars in heaven. God tells us that He stretched out the heavens at creation on day four. The Cosmos could only have been created by a being outside of His creation with miraculous powers.

Big Bang from nothing does not explain the complex ordered universe that is so evident, it is certainly not good science.

Taken from an article by Dr. Carl Weiland “Radiometric dating breakthroughs” http://www.creation.com

4. Humphreys, D. et al., Helium diffusion rates support accelerated nuclear decay, icr.org, 16 October 2003. Return to text.

COMPLEXITY OF THE GENOME

Posted on by

Although evolutionary theory says all creatures descended from a common ancestor, when one looks at animals today (or in the fossil record), they appear to be unique creations with the ability to change to fit their environments. 

A creature’s ability to live and change is programmed at the deepest levels of the genome in ways we do not fully understand. It is inconceivable that it could have evolved by random chance.

What we can now see with an electron microscope is that the human genome works as a four-dimensional ‘computer’: our three billion letter sequence of DNA is able to turn sections of itself on and off; it is coiled into 3D fractal spheres where sections folded near each other combine to create new levels of information; it changes shape over time to expose different areas of DNA needed to create tens of thousands of different proteins.

This level of complexity is not just limited to the genome, but can be seen in the interdependent relationships between living creatures throughout every ecosystem. Such highly-engineered structures and relationships can only exist if they are created simultaneously in a short space of time — which is exactly how Genesis says God created in six normal days.

MANKIND AND CREATION’S VASTNESS

Posted on by

God in His Word reveals why He created human beings. We are meant to be in a relationship with Him.

Genesis 1:27 states: “God created mankind in his own image.”

Psalms 8:1–5 says: “O Lord … What is man that You take thought of him … Yet You have made him a little lower than God, And You crown him with glory and majesty!”

John 3:16 explains God gave humans His son to redeem us out of His love for us.

The vast expanse of space

These texts show that God is human-oriented: human beings are like God, and he values us highly.

“When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands” Psalms 8:3-6

Note the contrast between vv. 3–4 and v. 5. Looking at the stars causes the psalmist to ask why He (God) cares for us. And yet in verse 5, He crowns us with glory and honour. The psalmist is clearly capable of meditating on his own insignificance in the light of the sky, and yet he also acknowledges God’s care for us in the way He made us.

Solomon makes a similar observation, this time concerning God dwelling in the temple he has just built.

“But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built! 1 Kings 8:27

Solomon prayed these words after God had manifested his special presence in the temple (1 Kings 8:10–11), so he wasn’t questioning whether God would care enough to dwell in the temple. Rather, he was marvelling that God would condescend so far and fill the temple with His glory. This is even more evident in the Incarnation, where the eternal Word of God “tabernacles among us” (John 1:14) as the human Jesus of Nazareth.

The vastness of the universe impresses on us God’s sheer immensity. Even the cosmos, as large as it is, can’t contain God! But we’re so small. Little dots on a single speck of a planet floating in some nondescript place in the vast cosmic dark. Does it make God feel immense? Of course, it does!

And yet, we are right at the centre of God’s spiritual concerns. The Incarnation proves that. But this disjunct is precisely what we’d expect of God.

“For thus says the One who is high and lifted up, who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: ‘I dwell in the high and holy place, and also with him who is of a contrite and lowly spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite.’” Isaiah 57:15

God is a God of loving condescension. He voluntarily descends from His transcendent dignity to care for us “mere specks of dust”. What better way for God to create a context for that impression than to create a vast universe in which we’re alone on a tiny speck in the vast cosmic dark? He fills all things, yet concerns himself with us so much that He sends His eternal Son to become one of us to bring us into eternal communion with Him by making it possible for our Heavenly Father to send the eternal Holy Spirit to indwell our spirit.

“Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

Our spirit was always meant to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, as this verse shows, our spirit is the lamp of the Lord which needs the Holy Spirit to function as God intended.

“The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord, searching all his innermost parts.” Proverbs 20:27

Extract from the article “Why did God make such a big universe?” by Shaun Doyle 19th July 2022 http://www.creation.com

DIVINE DESIGN

Posted on by

A clinical look at life’s complexity, design, and ultimate causation

The universe, our planet, and life itself have the appearance of being designed. Even many atheists acknowledge this. But they are quick to dismiss it as an illusion—the product of time, chance, and the laws of nature. They say the science is settled: Everything just evolved; there was no intelligent input, and no design.

However, the scientific consensus is terribly wrong, as distinguished surgeon, David Galloway, shows in this new book about intelligent design. Drawing on extensive clinical experience with the human body, Galloway examines its complex, integrated systems, demonstrating that intelligent design is the only reasonable explanation. Galloway goes on to show how the idea that life and consciousness arose spontaneously is deeply unscientific and contrary to the evidence. He also helpfully explores the question, How can ‘science’ get things so terribly wrong?

Filled with fascinating examples (both from history, and Galloway’s own long medical experience), illustrated in full colour, and with a short ‘take home message’ at the end of every chapter, Design Dissected is an engaging read. It is written from an Intelligent Design perspective (i.e. it doesn’t directly discuss God or the Bible), and comes highly recommended by some of the biggest names in the Intelligent Design movement.

OVERVIEW (excerpt from the Introduction)
The structure of the book is built around three sections. Firstly, in Enigmata, I have outlined the means by which the great questions of science have been tackled. We will see how scientific truth has sometimes even been ridiculed before finding acceptance. We’ll discover how scientific conclusions can be contaminated by presuppositions of various kinds and consider reductionism as an enterprise to uncovering causation. To put it another way, we need to address the question of whether we can support the idea that natural processes are entirely sufficient to produce what we find in the living world, or not. I also offer a warning about the dangers of scientism – that is, the assumption that science is equipped to answer every ultimate question.
The second section, Layers of Perplexity, aims to reveal why the conventional understanding of the origin of life and of biological complexity fails to carry the intellectual weight it is required to bear. I have used examples from human systems and even considered the discipline of origin of life chemistry. Each of these demonstrates that a naturalistic understanding offers a completely inadequate explanation for the intricate and nuanced systems that underpin our existence.
The final section, Thinking about Thinking, opens the mystery of the origin of consciousness and asks the questions of ultimate reality that, for many, seem to be just too difficult and are therefore consigned to the ‘consider it later’ pile!
RECOMMENDATIONS
“[Galloway] argues that explaining the origin of such systematic organization [in the human body] as a result of purely unguided natural processes stretches the limits of credulity. Instead, he makes a compelling case that this integrated and informational complexity provides powerful evidence of real, not just apparent, design. A fresh and original discussion of the evidence of intelligent design in the living system. Highly recommended.” — Dr. Stephen C. Meyer
“By far the strongest evidence that a system was deliberately designed is the very structure of the system itself. … David Galloway regales the reader with tale after tale of the wonders of the human body—and of the disasters that result when a part fails. By the end of the book, his conclusion that the body was purposely designed becomes self-evident.” — Dr. Michael J. Behe
“I strongly recommend this most impressive and thought-provoking book.” — Prof. Frank G. Dunn
 AUTHOR – David Galloway is a Scottish surgeon who trained in Glasgow, London, and New York City. He conducted original research in the causes and cellular mechanisms of some common cancers and developed a specialist practice in their surgical treatment. He was a Consultant Surgeon in Glasgow and a Former President of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow. He is also a Fellow of numerous medical and surgical Colleges and has held academic appointments in Glasgow, Kuala Lumpur, and Hong Kong.

Available from Creation Ministries International – http://www.creation.com

NO EVIDENCE FOR APE TO MAN TRANSITION

Posted on by

We are all familiar with the iconic ape-to-man image, which shows a smooth evolutionary progression from stooped ape to upright man. But what is the scientific evidence for the various transitional species in this evolutionary ‘march of progress’?

In this short video, you will find out. Contents: Introduction 00:34 Homo neanderthalensis (‘Neanderthal Man’) 01:01 Homo erectus 01:21 Australopithecus afarensis (e.g. ‘Lucy’) 02:02 Homo habilis 02:56 Summary.

RELATED VIDEOS: Did Humans Evolve From Ape-like Ancestors? https://creation.com/media-center/you… The ‘ape to man’ evolutionary image is a fraud. https://creation.com/media-center/you… Making sense of ‘ape-man’ claims https://creation.com/media-center/you… Neanderthal Man looks like you and me https://creation.com/media-center/you