Evolutionists say that man is 'part of nature' and 'has emerged as a result of a continuous process. So where do they draw the line between humans and animals.?
In an article in CREATION magazine Vol 32. No.2. 2010 Tas Walker writes." The Bible says man is distinct from animals,created supernaturally by God." "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life: and man became a living being" Genesis 2:7.
What makes us human? How we answer affects us profoundly: the way we view ourselves, how we treat others and the laws of our land.
If we emerged through a continuous process then what qualifies us to be human? The Spanish Parliament wrestled with this in June 2008 when their environmental committee approved rights and freedom.... for great apes...rights previously restricted to people.
In April 2008 a conference of scientists, philosophers and academics discussed this question for two days in Los Angeles. Does our humanness come from our capacity to communicat,our artistic skills, our poetry or our tool making? Is it our ability to laugh and cry?
These evolutionary ideas about superior skills, superior abilities and the struggle to survive have led the world into (numerous conflicts) and when Charles Darwin observed the limited abilities of the indigenous people of South America he found it hard to believe they were fellow humans see article by Russell Grigg in same CREATION MAGAZINE page 42 "Darwin and the Fuegians" (ask me for a copy)
A humanity decided on ability is a shaky foundation indeed. When do babies who cannot speak or feed themselves, qualify? What about those who are handicapped, by an accident, say, or with Down's syndrome? Do they miss out?
With the rise of evolutionary philosophy in the West, the sanctity of human life has been unravelling. In 2001 the Netherlands was the first country to legalize "euthanasia" ...the medical killing of the terminally ill. In 2008 the Dutch doctors preside over more than 3200 deaths including 550 deaths "without request." Now there are calls to allow physicians to euthanize"defective" or "unwanted" newborns"
Creation affirms we are descended from Adam and Eve, whom God made in His own image. Our humanity does not depend upon our abilties but upon our heritage. We are human from the moment we are conceived. So human life must be cherished and children raised to know the Creator.
Some dismiss the story of Adam and Eve as myth. But the scientific evidence supports the biblical account, not the idea that we are related to apes. Respect for human life comes from the Christian view of man's origin. People are valuable because we bear God's image, as God stressed to Noah after the Flood." Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning."
"Whoever sheds the blood of man by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God has God made man." Genesis 9:6. Noah's Flood is not a myth either, as massive amounts of evidence reveals to any who are willing to read and discover. More next time
Yours Aye
ROY
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
AFFIRMING AND DEFENDING SCRIPTURE
One of the most common caricatures made of Creation Science is that, because it begins with the Bible, it has nothing to do with Investigative Science. Science asks questions, they say, then looks for answers. So if you start with answers how can you do the science?
However we are obviously not claiming that God has revealed all possible knowledge in His Word. We do claim,though, that where he has clearly revealed certain facts relating to reality (science, history) these are true as opposed to untrue. This has nothing to do, incidently, with 'wooden headed literalism,' 'bibliolatry', or a 'failure to appreciate the nature of the literature.'
Creation Ministry websites have already published evidence that virtually all top Hebrew language scholars at world class universities (some non believers among them) understand that the meaning of Genesis (ie.the obvious intention of the writer) is to give us a simple yet factual account of the origins and history of man and the universe. Just as is it obvious to any straightforward reading by even a child. Holding to the recent creation by order or decree, in six earth days, having a globe covering Flood etc. is not peculiar invention of any 21st century movement but inevitably results from an honest scholarly dealing with the text itself.
Such matters merely give us the outline, the corner posts as it were, for a framework of understanding within which to interpret and correlate the facts of the real world. They do not give us all the answers. Rather they prevent us wasting time looking in the wrong direction while trying to establish the fascinating subjects of man and his world.
While the evolutionist and anti creationists, accuse the biblical creationists, of having to remain within their biblical framework.They tell everyone that they are open minded and are objectively searching for the truth. NOT SO. There are rigid rules in evolution/science.
While you may openmindedly discuss and consider all possible mechanisms of evolution you are only allowed to conclude with explanations that, 'matter,' is responsible for its own order and complexity. That is, that there has never ever been any supernatural creation . So much for openmindedness and objectivity.
In all of this we must remember that (origin science) of whatever flavour is inherently different from (operation science ) which covers how the universe presently works -gravity, physics, chemistry, etc. becasue we cannot directly test, or observe stories about the past.
Because of these misunderstandings it is vital that we consider carefully which are the fundamentals of the biblical origins framework. The clear unmistakable issues which demand no compromise (e.g. global Flood ) must be carefully separated from issues of a secondary construct upon which we must be prepared to, 'hang loose' if necessary. An instance of which is the idea of a pre-flood vapour canopy, which is not a direct teaching of scripture, but is only implied and while solving some problems, creates more. Another is the deep frozen mammoth' scenario which is popular but not biblical They are not worth the anguish and are best held 'lightly'.
So 'softly softly' on the indirect teachings of the Word but full affirmation and defence if necessary of the fundamental truths of scripture. (Thanks to Dr Carl Wieland CMI'Hanging Loose')
Yours Aye
ROY
However we are obviously not claiming that God has revealed all possible knowledge in His Word. We do claim,though, that where he has clearly revealed certain facts relating to reality (science, history) these are true as opposed to untrue. This has nothing to do, incidently, with 'wooden headed literalism,' 'bibliolatry', or a 'failure to appreciate the nature of the literature.'
Creation Ministry websites have already published evidence that virtually all top Hebrew language scholars at world class universities (some non believers among them) understand that the meaning of Genesis (ie.the obvious intention of the writer) is to give us a simple yet factual account of the origins and history of man and the universe. Just as is it obvious to any straightforward reading by even a child. Holding to the recent creation by order or decree, in six earth days, having a globe covering Flood etc. is not peculiar invention of any 21st century movement but inevitably results from an honest scholarly dealing with the text itself.
Such matters merely give us the outline, the corner posts as it were, for a framework of understanding within which to interpret and correlate the facts of the real world. They do not give us all the answers. Rather they prevent us wasting time looking in the wrong direction while trying to establish the fascinating subjects of man and his world.
While the evolutionist and anti creationists, accuse the biblical creationists, of having to remain within their biblical framework.They tell everyone that they are open minded and are objectively searching for the truth. NOT SO. There are rigid rules in evolution/science.
While you may openmindedly discuss and consider all possible mechanisms of evolution you are only allowed to conclude with explanations that, 'matter,' is responsible for its own order and complexity. That is, that there has never ever been any supernatural creation . So much for openmindedness and objectivity.
In all of this we must remember that (origin science) of whatever flavour is inherently different from (operation science ) which covers how the universe presently works -gravity, physics, chemistry, etc. becasue we cannot directly test, or observe stories about the past.
Because of these misunderstandings it is vital that we consider carefully which are the fundamentals of the biblical origins framework. The clear unmistakable issues which demand no compromise (e.g. global Flood ) must be carefully separated from issues of a secondary construct upon which we must be prepared to, 'hang loose' if necessary. An instance of which is the idea of a pre-flood vapour canopy, which is not a direct teaching of scripture, but is only implied and while solving some problems, creates more. Another is the deep frozen mammoth' scenario which is popular but not biblical They are not worth the anguish and are best held 'lightly'.
So 'softly softly' on the indirect teachings of the Word but full affirmation and defence if necessary of the fundamental truths of scripture. (Thanks to Dr Carl Wieland CMI'Hanging Loose')
Yours Aye
ROY
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)