Joseph's Alabaster Box

How greatly I enjoy the humming birds coming to the feeder on my front porch, just outside my study window, but sometimes they distract me a little bit. I can hear their wings as they hover, and it nearly always causes me to look up. And they are there quite a lot now. I get angry with them, though, because they are so territorial. There are four little perches on the feeder where four birds could feed at the same time, but not these little buggers. They chase each other all over the place. Very antisocial.

It amazes me what I am finding on the internet. On the subject of evolution the most outstanding thing is the complete lack of documentation or evidence given for what people write for the attention of others.

Psalm 104 is another in our study of the psalms having in them references to the creation. In this psalm there is a verse which evolutionists have used to prove their assertions that the Bible teaches that the sky overhead is a metal canopy, or a canopy of some other material. Verse 2 says, “Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain.“ The Bible is at once a book for the simple and the scholar alike, but it seems to me like that statement could be made of many books which are well written and have substance. Shakespeare is studied by high school children as well as the post graduate student, and their teachers. All the various elements of good writing are found in Shakespeare: metaphors, irony, metonyms, and other types. The Bible, more so, is a literary product of supreme excellence, using all the various elements of good writing. Though the Bible was written for the simple and the unlearned, it seems obvious that the more educated one is, the more he can glean from it.

 Of course, we understand and appreciate what the writer is saying. It is necessary, however, to know enough to know that when the Bible says, “And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.“, it is not saying that Jesus Christ is a shaggy-mained, four footed cat on an African plain.

It also helps if the reader understands that the Lion of the tribe of Judah is not the same lion as the one in I Peter 5:8 who “. . . as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:. . . .” That lion, of course, is Satan. Or the lion in II Timothy 4:17, “Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.“ Some say that refers to wicked men, and it may, but I believe it refers to an actual lion Paul fought with in Ephesus. Evolutionists know full well that the Bible, as a superior piece of literature (and they also admit that), that the reader must distinguish between the literal language and the metaphorical. Evolutionists, and I speak of the evolution philosophers, or evolution priests (super aggressive evolutionists), are educated enough to know that such a statement as Psalm 104:2 is a metaphorical statement, and not a statement to be taken literally. The statement is one of beauty and elegance, and poetically speaks of the creation work of the Lord God. The Bible is not primarily a science book. It was not intended to be. The Bible is intended to prepare man for eternity. Yet the Bible is always accurate when it addresses matters of science, or any other discipline. The Bible is especially poetic in the book of Psalms because the psalms are hymns.

On the internet, a lady named Sarah Oleszycki stated that the Bible is allegorical. Let me read her full statement. She said, “Personally, I do not see how anyone could not believe in evolution. The bible (sic) is allegorical. How can you see the process of natural selection and not believe in evolution? Do you think new species or cross breeds just come out of thin air?” This statement raises quite a few thoughts in my mind that deserve comments, but what I wanted you to note is that she says the Bible is “allegorical.”

 It is not honest to state that the Bible is allegorical, without some qualifying words. It would probably be more accurate to say “It is ignorant” rather than to say “not honest.” It is true that there are a number of allegories in the Bible, but these are easily recognized even by people who cannot define the term “allegory.” Pilgrim’s Progress is an allegory. Some of my own books are allegories. Allegories can be very valuable and effective teaching tools. Allegories are not dishonest, and they are not misleading. Genesis 49:11 and 12 are an allegory. They make absolutely no sense if taken literally. Let me read these words from old Jacob as he lies a-dying, surrounding by his twelve sons, to whom he is giving their blessings. These words are Judah’s inheritance, or blessing. “Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes; His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk,“

It was from Judah’s line, of course, that Messiah came, and these words are prophecies of Messiah, veiled in allegory. The Bible is not understood by the natural mind, no matter how brilliant it might be. The Word of God is spiritually understood, as I Corinthians 2:14 reveals: “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” The Word of God can never be fully understood by any mortal. The Bible is the eternal Word of God, and has width and depth and height that no man can measure. It is like standing beside a great ocean with a tea cup. We glean little drinks from it – yes sometimes, we are overwhelmed by it and feel we are about to drown – but to drink it dry is beyond any man. Some of the passages that are as dark as midnight may contain some of the most glowing truths if we could only enter into them. Most diamonds are deep in the earth.

God’s Word is settled in Heaven, and I believe that there we will spend a great deal of time being fed from its rich and lively truths that we could not, or at least did not, see here in this present world. The wide blue curtain that stretches from horizon to horizon during the day was put there by the Creator’s hand. Of course, we shoot rockets through that curtain, but anyone on board that rocket would declare, “There is no curtain up here!” because that space man could not tell when he went through the blue from daylight on Earth to the darkness of space.

Verse 5 speaks again of the “. . . foundation of the earth . . . , “ and adds “. . . that it should not be removed for ever.“ The universe is running down, slowing down, wearing out, but it is sustained by the voice of the Son of God, according to Hebrews 1:3 and Colossian 2:17. Though Earth will be burnt to a crisp some day, it will be right here for ever. It is going to be made new by the Creator so that it can once again be inhabited. I am wondering if it will be the same size. Something tells me it may be a whole lot bigger. After all, the new Jerusalem will have a foundation of about fifteen hundred miles square (Revelation 21:16).

The curtain of the sky does not cut from man’s view or access, the person and work of God. When the vail, or curtain, in the temple was rent down when Jesus died, the priests went in and sewed the thing back together, and hung it back up. God opened the way to Himself, and man closed it back up. So it has been from the beginning. Man erects curtains for himself and others, and God will not tear down another curtain in this world. In our world today there is mass confusion. There is a thing on public TV about seeking God in America. What a jumble of voices! It sounds like Babel all over again.

Many times I have observed my dear wife as she hung curtains on her windows in a house we had just moved into, or after she had washed them. It was a simple thing for her to run a rod through the curtain, and then hang them up, and with a stroke of her hand stretch them out and smooth them out. The room would suddenly be more attractive and liveable.

Even more easily did the Lord Creator stretch out the heavens like a curtain to make the world more attractive and liveable. The heavens are still being stretched out. Scientists have perceived this, and credit the stretching to a “big bang” rather than to the Creator.

That great expanse above the head of every human wherever he may be on Earth makes his life much more liveable, and reminds him that there is a God in Heaven.

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 1,500 times in 2011. If it were a cable car, it would take about 25 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.

The God particle? When I heard that term at the first, I was startled, then offended. Many physicists are offended by the nick name, but not for the same reason. There are many atheists among physicists, though it is difficult to understand why. If God were any sort of scientist, I think He would be a physicist. I think physicists come closer to God without recognizing Him than any sort of people. I have a fuzzy notion that God could put the entire universe into a physicist’s formula if He chose to, and it would be perfect.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

With old scratchy chalk and an old chalkboard, physicists can do marvelous things. From William Gilbert  and Galileo Galilei  to K. Eric Drexler, Stephen Wolfram, and Albert Einstein these homely, unkempt men made unintelligible scrawls on chalk boards that no man in his right mind could make sense of, and at last give humanity quantum mechanics and the atomic bomb. Who can argue their theories when their theories explode with such a big bang (pun, you know). Incidentally, the theory of evolution was the biggest explosion of all – it destroyed a good society.

 When I was a young man back in the Dark Ages, I worked at Y-12 in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. That’s where the stuff for the atomic bomb was manufactured. An old guard told me that at the first when there were many scientists there that sometimes a scientist would call for a car in the middle of the night to bring him to the plant. By the time they got to the plant the scientist would have often forgotten where he was, and forgotten what he wanted to come for. They had to take him back home to bed, or maybe he remembered what he wanted, and was returned to the plant. I heard about a professor at a college who was a favorite of his students. One night some of them jacked up his car, and put it on blocks. The next morning the professor came out; got in his car, and drove to the college. He got out and went into his house, and wondered why in blazes he was home in the middle of the morning. I guess you’ve heard that before. One track minds can be a disadvantage.

I have been reading an article out of the Tampa Bay Online by Michael Gerson in a column distributed by the Washington Post Writers Group. http://www2.tbo.com/news/opinion/2011/dec/16/meopino1-the-god-particle-the-case-for-wonder-in-t-ar-335241/   

According to Mr. Gerson “Modern physics can explain just about everything except why anything has mass” (or gravity). “Mass” means weight, more or less.. Mass is caused by the number of particles in an atom, or how many atoms there are in an element.

Let’s starts over. The particle in question (I will call it the “soul particle” since soul is what gives life to living things) was found by mathematics about forty years ago, but its existence hasn’t been confirmed. In other words, it’s still just a theory after about forty-five years of investigation.  It’s real name is the Higg’s boson. Ordinary people use an equal symbol to designate an equality. For example 5 + 5 = 10. Suppose we wrote the equation like this        5 + ? = 10. We still have an equation, but one of the factors is unknown. We know there is a factor there because 5 does not equal 10. The equations of physicists don’t look like that. In their simplest form, they look like this:   . The more complicated equations can consist of hundreds of “jots and titles” written on chalk boards. How did Einstein know his equation was actually equal? He didn’t. It’s still  a theory, but it destroyed two Japanese cities at the end of WW II thanks to Harry Truman and Paul Tibbets. When we supply the missing factor (5) in our formula (equation), we still do not know if it is right. We have only a theory. We must set out to prove our equation is an equation:  5 + 5 = 10. The simplest, most efficient, cost effective way I know to prove our theory is to count our fingers and thumbs.

To find the soul particle somebody is spending 6 billion euros  (1 dollar = 1.318499 euros on 12 17 11) to build the largest machine ever built. The Large Hadron Collider accelerates particles to high speed, and smashes them together. Then they look through the rubble to find the soul particle. But how will they know it when they find it? Good question. Truth is, they will never “see” it, so I have no idea how they will find it or identify it.Gerson writes: “In 1928, theoretical physicist Paul Dirac combined the mathematical formulas for relativity and quantum mechanics into a single equation and predicted the existence of antimatter.” A physicist, Ard Louis, teaching at the University of Oxford, tried to falsify Dirac’s equation, but finally gave up. Gerson quotes Louis, “When I finally gave up and saw that there was no way around Dirac’s result, it gave me goose bumps. I remember thinking that even if I never used my years of physics training again, it would have been worth it just to see something so spectacularly beautiful.”      

That gives me goose bumps, but the bumps go away very quickly. I quote Mr. Gerson once more: “The wild improbability of a universe that allows us to be aware of it seems to demand some explanation. This does not require theism.” Amazing! Man can come so close to the great Creator of the universe, and dismiss Him as “theism.” Mr. Gerson speaks of “the laws of the universe,” but fails to recognize the Law Giver and Judge. He speaks of “a glorious improbability,” but all these laws are the work of a glorious Actuality. Science is a grand voyage of a sea of knowledge, but its required materialism should not prevent a scientist from recognizing and honoring the Creator of everything he discovers. A man can study the physical universe, and recognize Him who is the Creator of it all. In fact, a man of integrity is compelled by his integrity to give credit where credit is due. It would be a miracle if I could understand science, but science can explain that miracle. Scientific equations can be written with miracle in them, for example: dead body + miracle = life, or water + miracle = wine. My grossly unscientific thoughts might subject me to much scoffing, but they can’t be denied. Higgs could have put “miracle” in the place of the missing soul particle, and it would have been exactly correct.

 Physics is “The science of matter and energy and of interactions between the two.”   I challenge the following statement as science, “…some other force that seized the massless particles produced by the Big Bang and sucked them into physicality.” The statement is a statement of preconceptions, not science, and it is precisely here that  physics ultimately fails as do all other evolution-based sciences. When a scientist subjects his conclusions to his preconceptions, he disqualifies himself as a scientist. Evolution is the chief preconception. When I taught sixth grade science, the books taught that the definition of matter is “it has weight and takes up space,” so I was surprised to see the term “massless particles.” While mass and weight are not exactly the same thing, it is difficult for me to understand the difference. It is easier for me to understand Genesis 1:1 – 5:

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.  And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness.”

 Psalm 33:9  “For he spake, and it was [done]; he commanded, and it stood fast.”

Matter was created when “the glorious Improbability” decided it was time to create it. God spoke and created matter. Evidently, these atoms (matter) were not in motion when God spoke them into existence with the power of His words. Neither was there light (energy). This great stock pile of atoms (earth) must have been much colder than  -459.67 °F. Then in verse three He commanded the light to appear, and the particles of the atoms began to spin around their nuclei. I read somewhere that the particles of an atom revolve around the nucleus about 7 billion times per second. This happened on the first day of Creation. Creation occurred no more than about ten thousand years ago. Whether or not there is a particle that gave mass to all the other particles is yet to be determined. Ard Louis believes there must be. He said the idea was “spectacularly beautiful,” and that is certainly the way we can refer to all the works of God, even if Mr. Louis didn’t mean exactly that.

In fact, the most spectacularly beautiful sight ever seen was that bloody horror on the brow of Calvary when God’s Son hung there in agony and shame. When I imagine that scene I see all the aversion and antipathy of my wicked life. That horrible sight is also beautiful because it is there in that condition that God’s Lamb paid in full my sin debt. How much more beautiful can anything be than that thing that saves your life? I am glad I know more about Jesus than I know about physics, though I yearn to know more about both. But I don’t need to know about “massless particles,” or how the earth was created, or how water was turned to wine, or how the dead were raised to life to go to Heaven. In the immortal words of Augustus M. Toplady, “In my hand no price I bring, simply to thy cross I cling.”, I will joyfully stand in the Creator’s presence someday soon, and give Him finally my blood-washed soul, and I hope, my crown.

I hope you, too, have the blessed hope of the resurrection. There’s nothing better in this life than to know that you are loved by our Creator. In every condition of life, He is a Companion. Personally, I suffer such remorse when I think of the sins and failures of my past, and their consequences, that I could not bear the sorrow if I did not have the assurance of God’s forgiving love. Of course, if you have no cause for sorrow in your life, I rejoice with you. If my life were blameless, I would have even greater reason to thank God and worship Him than I do now, because I would recognize (I hope) that He has given me the character and integrity to live blamelessly.  

I don’t understand the idea of a “massless particle,” but I do understand the grace of God.

Blessings.

Henry M. Morris was the prince of Creaionists. The mover of the modern Creation movement, Dr. Morris was a Bible scholar, scientist, intellectual, teacher, and author of many books. He founded the incomparable Institute for Creation Research. The following is copied from “Acts and Facts,” a monthly publication of the institute.¹

“There are three basic tests by which the two theories (Creation and Evolution, ed.) can be compared – the scientific test, the ‘fruit test,’ and the biblical test.

“As far as science is concerned, the scientific evidence is precisely what would be predicted from creationism. There is no known case of macroevolution (from one distinct ‘kind’ of organism to another) in all the thousands of years of recorded history. Secondly , in the fossil record of the past, there is no known transitional series of fossils from one kind to another among all the billions of known non-transitional fossils. Finally, the universal scientific law of entropy specifies the ‘downward’ tendency of all things toward decrease of organized complexity. Thus, all the real scientific evidence (as distinct from similarities and other circumstantial evidences) strongly favors creation over evolution.

“Consider also the fruit test. Jesus said, ‘By their fruits ye shall know them’ (Matthew 7:20). The fruits of evolution include atheism, communism, fascism, and all kinds of harmful behavior and evil philosophy, but no one good fruit in the form of real scientific advance in either living standards or altruistic behavior. Belief in primeval supernatural creation, on the other hand, was the motivating conviction of practically all the founding fathers of modern science, of the American nation, and of the original education system of this country. All the basic doctrines of Christianity are founded on the truth pf primeval special creation. Creationism certainly scores much higher than evolutionism on the fruit test.

“Finally, there is not a hint anywhere in Scripture of evolution or the long ages necessary for evolution. On the other hand, the very first chapter of the Bible teaches the special creation of the space/mass/time universe and everything in it. This teaching is emphasized all through the Bible. See my book, Biblical Creationism,² for a discussion of every biblical verse dealing with origins and earth history. There is an abundance of documentation for these conclusions in the three volume Modern Creation Trilogy³ (‘Science and Creation,’‘Scripture and Creation,’‘Society and Creation’) and also in many other books published or distributed by ICR and numerous other publishers. The evidence for the truth of creation and the falsity of evolution truly is overwhelming.”

Creation and Evolution are both theories held by people with preconceptions. Neither theory can rise above the faith stage because neither can be proved by empirical science. Empirical science requires observation, and no one has observed the creation for more than a hundred years or so. The preconceptions are based on two sources. Evolution is based on The Origin of the Species by Natural Selection: or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life published by John Murray on November 24, 1859 in England.

Mr. Darwin’s motivation for writing this book was not for scientific advancement, but for the destruction of theism which he hated (refer to The Dark Side of Charles Darwin by Jerry Bergman, Master Books, 2011).

Creation is based on the Bible, and has been believed by Creationists for 6,000 years. The Bible was written by forty or more writers who claimed divine inspiration over a period of 1600 years. The Bible has been recognized by millions of people as the Word of God for four thousand years. The Bible in its final form was given to us 400 years ago by divine influence, and has been the motivation for every good thing that has happened to the human race since that time.

If Evolution is science, so is Creation. If the Scope’s Trial were held today, Creationists would offer overwhelming extra-biblical scientific evidence against Evolution. Just as in 1925 people who believe the Bible and Creation are mocked for their “ignorance.” However, when Evolution scientists faced Creation scientists thirty years ago in debates on college campuses, they soon learned that mocking Creation scientists could not win debates. Creationists came to the debates prepared to offer scientific, indisputable evidence to support Creation theory. Evolutionists soon stopped debating Creationists because they could not offer real evidence for Evolution except myths and fantastic tales.

In my own limited experience, I went to a church near Indiana University to give Creation lectures. The pastor approached the science department of the university and challenged them to debate me. In the pastor’s own words, “They ran for the hills.”

Like Islam, Evolution cannot stand the light of truth. Therefore, it must exclude other faiths, opinions, and philosophies. With the power of the NEA and the Department of Education behind them, as well as the History channels, Evolutionists have succeeded in excluding evidence for Creation.

The Second Law of Thermodynamic and the laws of entropy demand that things fall apart eventually; so we are not surprised that the world will get no better until the Saviour returns, no matter how hard we try to improve it. Our hope is that some evolutionists will recognize the light of truth; eschew their false preconceptions, and make arrangements meet their end safely and joyfully.

I regret the red popups that have been placed on this site. They were not my doing, I assure you. Everything today must be “profitized,” and advertisers have no compunction about slamming you in the face with ads.

 ______

1. Subscription is free. Available from ICR at 1 800 628 7640, www.icr.org/store, or P.O. Box 59029, Dallas, Texas 75229. Article begins on pg. 10.

2. Not free, but ordering information is the same as above.

3. Not free, but ordering information is the same as above.

Note: I do not write foot notes according to college handbooks, but rather to give useable information and encouragement.