The fear of the LORD is the begining of wisdom

The man who thinks he can carry on his business life, or his political life, or his social life, without God is to that extent an irreligious person. The teacher who thinks that his relation to God does not affect his teaching of chemistry, or his interpretation of European history, is to that extent an irreligious person. The consistent Christian will realize that his religion is the ruling principle of all his life, and that there is nothing in life which can be isolated from his relation to God. - Johannes Geerhardus Vos

The Creation, The Flood . . . is that possible pt 2

We know that the Genesis description of Creation is accurate, because it is a description coming from the Creator, himself. And His word is a trustworthy account of what happened.

So then the question is, are the proposed "scientific" explanations consistent with the Genesis account? Because if they are true they must be consistent with Genesis. And if they are not, then they are faulty, and we must keep looking.

I talked about the Flood earlier, because I think this is a good example of where science has definitely failed. We know the Flood happened, the scripture is clear on this, and yet the scientist in general refuse to acknowledge it in their study, research, or theories, not even allowing it in the field. They insist the Flood never happened. Is the scripture faulty or is their refusal to accept the scripture and repress the truth faulty. Their refusal to accept the Flood shows that their science is faulty (well at least on the level where the Flood is concerned). The scientists make observations and theories with blinders on. And just as there is a fault with their view pertaining to the Flood so there is a fault with their view toward Creation.

So if our (the ones created) "scientific" explanations differ or are in conflict with the description given by the One who created the world, the One who has all the observations, time, and facts before him, should we believe Him, or should we insist on relying on our own observations, which come from a very limited and minute point of view. . . . God's ways are far above our own. Humbly we should trust Him at His word. . . . The scripture says,

"All these things my hand has made,

and so all these things came to be,

declares the Lord.

But this is the one to whom I will look:

he who is humble and contrite in spirit

and trembles at my word."

And so as we come to understand this world that God has made, we must do so with a contrite and humble spirit that trembles at God's Word.

And maybe sometimes, what we observe from our vantage point throws us off and confuses us, and that's ok, and we can be honest about what we see and observe, because we don't have the full vantage point, and perspectives can change when you are so small. We are learning and trying to understand things from where we are.

So this does not do away with what we observe, and it is ok to continue to be scientists and to give the best explanation we know and to be honest with what we find, but it is a humble approach realizing we still have much to learn, and just as throughout history, we have found that our observations have been limited or faulty, so today, we need to realize that are present theories are as well.

When we don't, we are like those who insisted that the world was flat, or that the sun revolved around the earth, because that is what they knew from their limited point of view and observations. Or we can become like the church, who insisted on holding to an Aristotle view of science, even though it was secular, and conformed the scriptures to fit that secular explanation.

We may have leaped in bounds in science compared to those days, but we are still limited and do not see the whole pictures and definitely not as much as God sees. And we are still sinful in how we interpret the findings. Romans 1 shows are sinful bent in looking at nature and suppressing the things of God. Because of are sinful tendency, we must be humble in what we learn. There is a danger of trembling at science, over and above, trembling at God's Word, allowing science to conform are mind, more than God's Word.


“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding."


Other things may fade away, like scientific theories, but God's word does not.

Unlike us, God, however, does see the whole picture, and has no need to be ashamed of His account of creation. He created the world as He saw fit. He didn't have to allegorize it, because He could do anything, and did do it. He created the world how He wanted to, to represent what He wanted it to represent, to bring about a story He wanted, not one of fairy tales, but one that is real. So when God, describes the way He created the world it is not a fantasy but a real account of the story, history.

The question then comes what does Genesis and the rest of the scriptures say about Creation. What does the Lord say about what happened. Where the scripture is sure, we can trust it and we don't have to waver. And we shouldn't let our fears color our interpretation, trying to fit it in with what we know. Let it speak for itself. Scripture works better that way. It is not meant to be caged in, but instead it is living, penetrating our hearts and conforming our minds to its truth. It is to shape us in God's image, we are not to shape it into ours.

I for one choose to believe God and to tremble at His word, instead of insisting on my own perspective. We continue to be scientists, honest and objective. And science will follow along, if it is willing to be objective, honest, and humble, for true Science always obeys God's voice.

 The Creation, The Flood pt1

The Creation, The Flood . . . is that possible

"The waters prevailed and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered. The waters prevailed above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep."

In the span of about of 40 days, the earth was covered by waters, then for more days the earth water prevailed over the earth, and then the water receeded and dry land appeared once again. All this, both the Flood and the ending of the Flood, occurred in about the span of a year. This is a major geological feat in a very short period of time, and its suddenness shows the vastness of the event. We get a small glimpse of it in the Bible, "on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. And rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights." We don't know all the details or all that happened geologically during the Flood and the Bible doesn't go into great detail, but we can know that it happened, and that it was a significant event.

We live in a day and age where something like this would be considered an impossibility. However, the Flood is a biblical certainty. It did happen. And there is no reason to doubt it. And it happened in the time allotted by the Bible, whether we can explain it or not.

Genesis 1 and 2 describes creation. The Bible also says, "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day". This, too, would be considered impossible, but it is a biblical certainty.

When we put human philosophy above the words of the Bible, the Bible looses, because it doesn't make sense to us, not if we look at it with human wisdom. But the scripture says, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." and again it says, "Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God."

These accounts were written through the Holy Spirit, not through someone who was looking back at an event that they were not apart of. The scripture says that Moses talked with God face to face. He got these accounts from an eye witness of the events, God himself. An eyewitness who is faithful and true. And these accounts in Genesis or accounts we can rely on. So is our wisdom wiser than God's? Are His ways so much higher than ours, that we choose to trust Him at His word?

If we continue to look at these events with a worldly philosophy, we will continue to be foolish, we will not be able to understand science fully. But perhaps if we start looking at these accounts as given by someone who is faithful and true, perhaps, we will grow in our understanding of our world and what we see. Perhaps we will see the wisdom in it after all. And perhaps we will have a better understanding of science.

Exodus 20:11 - In six days . . .

Exodus 20:11

¹¹"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exodus 31:17

¹⁷"It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed."

The Theology of Creation - John MacArthur

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the people of old received their commendation. By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

The Mysterious Islands

A few basic false assumptions about origins

• The Evolution (Darwinian) Theory of the origin of man based on science. In reality it is based on inference. It is a more excepted inference, but only an inference.
  
• Time is constant everywhere at all times. It is probably was and maybe is not.
  
• Environmental conditions have been the same on Earth throughout time. Evidence shows that something significant possibly has changed. (And I am not talking about ice ages, etc.)
• Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other. This is a misconception of scope. Genesis 2 is a description of Eden, a special garden made for man on the 6th day. (There is always a People, Place, and King). A careful reading will show that there are no contradictions.
  
• Genesis 1 contradicts science, for me it challenges my understanding of science. I find it quite fascinating to read.
  
• It takes a long period of time for certain geologic features to occur, this depends on the conditions.The Bible records geologic events that indicate that significant changes could have occurred.
• God has no place in science, God only has no place in science if we can prove He has no place in science. If a God exist, that God will have a significant impact on nature and must be considered objectively. So the assumption that there is no God rules out a significant possibility. This does not mean we do not do science with integrity, but we also cannot interpret the facts or make inferences from the bases on the idea that there is no God, if that is not the only interpretation. We must allow for both possibilities in our inferences. What this means as for as the integrity of science is that we need to be honest that there are some things that we don't know and that what is being taught is only educated guesses or inferences based on the data that we have at this time.
  

The Laws of Science

We have a God who over and over again proves that science obeys Him and not the other way around. And yet we have a hard time believing this. Often He uses science, but also often the Bible records Him doing miracles that contradict the laws of science.

The fall into subjective science

Darwinist claim that they have the only scientific explanation to how this universe got here. There is one fatal flaw with this. Darwinism is not science. Darwinism is a subjective perception of the evidence that we have so far. Science on the other hand is an attempt at an objective perception of the evidence. Much of which we are yet to gain. Instead of looking at the evidence objectively Darwinist forces the scientist to fit their findings with in a model. It frustrates me when scientist fail to be scientists and fail to explore objectively, because they are constrained by the subjective ideas of Darwinism.

As a Christian, I fully believe in the account of Creation in Genesis. The account was given to Moses face to face by someone who was there. And Moses's source is reliable. I believe God's account of Creation. There is no better source. And because I believe it, I have no fear, and I can encourage scientist to be scientist and to be objective, because I know real science won't contradict God. It can't.