Creation;Fully Mature & Complete - Talk Jesus

yort · 08-26-10

Troy a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

I think it's safe to say that the lie that the universe as we know it today evolved is the most sophisticated, complex and highly educated lie in existence. It has, for all intents and purposes, captivated the entire world. It is believed by the greatest mass of humanity, at least in the western world. And even though it is impossible and irrational, it is nonetheless perpetuated with great force and with great academic effort.

Modern evolutionary theory has demanded and received almost universal acceptance in the world. The theory that no one created the universe as it is, but that it came into being by chance and it progresses through constant changes, mutations and transitions upwardly from simplicity to complexity completely through a random process basically rules human thought.

And I suppose we expect those people who reject God and those people who reject the Bible, those people who do not love the Lord Jesus Christ, who do not know Him, those people who love sin, those people who don't want a moral judge or a moral law, we expect those kind of people to be happy with such a convenient explanation of the way things are. And I suppose that's why it's so shocking that this evolutionary lie has dominated the evangelical Christian community as well. Theologians and exegetes and Bible commentators have felt it necessary to take the simple explanation of creation in Genesis chapter 1 and basically deny it.

I was reading this afternoon a very established and well-known commentary on the book of Genesis in which that is precisely the view of the author who says this really doesn't mean what it says. God really didn't mean that He did this in six days, He obviously meant something else because science has told us that couldn't be the way it is.

Frankly it's not easy to impose evolution on Genesis 1. It's a very difficult task for any commentator or any exegete because there is absolutely nothing in that section of Scripture, or for that matter any other place in the Bible to allow for such a bizarre interpretation as evolution. There is absolutely nothing in the text of Genesis 1:1 to 2:3 where you have the creation account that in any way, shape, or form describes anything evolutionary. Consequently to impose evolution on Genesis 1 these people have to deny the simple straightforward unmistakable clear historical account of creation. And they have to reclassify that creation account as allegory, or as myth, or as legend or as a non-literal literary poetic style.

They do that to accommodate the Bible to godless, irrational and impossible evolution. And again I say, there's nothing in the text to make anyone conclude this is an allegory. There's nothing in the text that is in any way poetic in the Hebrew language. There's nothing there that sounds like myth or legend. And so they invent those things to impose godless evolution on the Scripture.

And you ask the question, "Why do they do that? Why do people who claim to be Christians do that?" Well there are several reasons.
Number one is to be accepted in academic circles. It's very important if you're in a university setting, if you're in an academic setting, that you not be a creationist if you want to maintain your position, if you want your job.

Secondly, people do that because they're ignorant of true science. They don't really understand science and where science can go and where it can't go. And they have basically been deceived by science, falsely so-called.

And thirdly, I think they may be compelled the same way that Darwin was compelled, and that was by the illusion of appearance. Darwin developed his whole system on illusory observations that had nothing to do with DNA, nothing to do with genetics, nothing to do with really was going on.

So for those reasons, being intimidated by the academic community, being intimidated by false science, and being somewhat intimidated by observational illusions that have been passed down, they acquiesce and buy into the idea of evolution which is built on the concept of uniformity. It is what we call a uniformitarian concept. That is that everything just continues the same way in this long, multi-billion year process, everything progressing at the very same rate. They observe uniformity. They observe things going at a certain pace and they extrapolate out of that that they've always gone at that pace and that they therefore had to have started with something very simple and pace themselves at that same speed all the way through until we arrive at today. That process they assume would have taken up to 20 billion years.

However, the Bible doesn't allow for any such thing, any such illusion. In 2 Peter chapter 3 it tells us that mockers come and mockers say this, "Ever since the fathers fell asleep, every since antiquity, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation." And those mockers who there are basically denying the Second Coming say nothing changes. Everything goes along in the exactly the same uniformitarian way. Nothing changes. Obviously they affirm creation, but they say since creation nothing has violated a uniformitarian process.

But verse 5 says, "When they maintain this, when they say that everything continues the same, it escapes their notice that by the Word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water." And he's referring to creation here through which, he says, "The world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His Word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of godly men."

He says people who say everything has always continued as it was from the very beginning have forgotten that there was a time when the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water and another time when it was destroyed by being flooded. In other words, Peter is pointing to the fact that everything has not continued through a uniformitarian process since the beginning but rather there have been two cataclysmic events...one, creation, and the other the universal global flood. There have been immense alterations in the earth as we know it. Creation itself was cataclysmic. Originally the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water...and we'll comment more on that when we go back to Genesis. And there was a time when the entire globe was destroyed, being flooded with water which had immense cataclysmic impact on the surface of the earth.

This earth has not gone on in a uniform kind of existence, rather two immense cataclysms have effected its current condition, one being creation itself, and the other being the Flood. Uniformitarians claim that the strata in rocks, the strata sediment, the fossils and the companion chemistry of geologic dating based on uniformity demand an earth that is billions of years old. During the early nineteenth century, the central presupposition of uniformitarianism was that the present is the key to the past. That is that everything went always the way it's going now, popularized by James Hutton and Charles Lyle who in turn influenced Darwin.

Uniformitarianism is the belief that the origin and development of all things can be explained exclusively in terms of the same natural laws and processes seen operating today. Uniformitarianism has been the backbone of modern historical geology and is responsible for the current widespread assumption that the earth is billions of years old. The uniformitarians insist that all geologic features and formations once attributed to geologic cataclysms can now be satisfactorily explained by ordinary processes functioning over immensely long periods of time. That's basically their view. Scott Hulse(?) writing in The Collapse of Evolutiongave us that definition.

Creationists, however, have argued against that saying that geological evidences support not uniformity but cataclysm, and in particular, the surface of the earth demonstrates massive universal hydraulic cataclysm. That is to say cataclysm related to water. And at creation there was literally a water-engulfed earth that was reshaped cataclysmicly and at the time of the Flood there was a Flood that covered the earth, again having an immense effect on its formation. Two very outstanding theologians and scientists, Henry Morris and John Whitecomb, marshalled evidence from known natural processes including the hydro-dynamic drag of flood water to demonstrate the necessity of a universal flood to explain the present geological structures of the earth which cannot be explained from present slow processes. Frankly, folks, science, true science is not at all on the side of evolutionists. Widespread geologic phenomenon such as a heavy preponderance of sedimentary rocks and structures all across earth's surface, including seashells on the tops of the highest mountains, rapid, almost sudden deposits of fossils and extremely large and deep fossil graveyards, as well as the pressurized formation of coal and gas, all point to a watery catastrophe, not some slow natural process. And more and more recent studies are confirming this.

Scott Hulse summarizes some of this evidence, just give it to you briefly. "Creationists maintain the uniformitarian principles simply cannot account for most of the major geological features and formations. For instance, there's the vast Tibetan plateau which consists of sedimentary deposits which are thousands of feet thick, located presently at an elevation of three miles above sea level. The Carou(?) formation of Africa contains an estimated 800 billion vertebrate animals. The herring(?) fossil bit of California contains approximately one billion fish within a four-square mile area. The uniformitarian concept is equally incapable of explaining the Columbia plateau in northwestern United States which is an incredible lava plateau several thousand feet thick covering an area of 200 thousand square miles. Uniformitarianism also fails to offer a reasonable explanation for important geological concepts such as mountain building," and it goes on and on and I won't bore you with it.
All of these things require sudden and dramatic change, rapid burial and lithophycation(?), as its called, are essential to the formation and preservation of fossils. The only possible way you can have seashells on the top of mountains thousands of miles from the sea is if there was once water there.

Douglas Kelley(?) writing in his book, Creation and Change, says, "The uniformitarian assumption that millions of years of geological work extrapolating from present, slow, natural processes would be required to explain structure such as the American Grand Canyon, for instance, is called into serious question by the explosion of Mount St. Helens in the state of Washington on the eighteenth of May, 1980. Massive energy equivalent to 20 million tons of TNT destroyed four hundred square kilometers of forest in six minutes, changing the face of the mountain and digging out depths of earth and rock, leaving formations not unlike parts of the larger Grand Canyon. Recent studies of the Mount St. Helens' phenomenon indicate that if attempts were made to date these structures which were formed in 1980 on the basis of uniformitarian theory, millions of years of formation time would be necessarily postulated. Ironically, one of the center pieces used to demonstrate uniformitarian chronology, the geologic column on closer inspection actually witnesses to catastrophism." And so it goes.

There are some other interesting indicators of a young universe. One that I find fascinating is the issue of moon dust. Before man reached the moon it was assumed by some scientists who were committed to the paradigm involving a moon probably 3.5 billion years old that there would therefore be a very thick layer of dust on the moon. One writer, R.A. Littleton(?), an astronomer and consultant to the U.S. Space Program wrote this, "The lunar surface is exposed to direct sunlight and strong ultra-violet light and x-rays can destroy the surface layers of exposed rock and reduce them to dust at the rate of a few ten thousands of an inch per year. But even this minute amount could during the age of the moon be sufficient to form a layer over it several miles deep. And so his theory was that the moon was several miles deep in dust.

Now we are told that astronaut Neil Armstrong read about this and was very concerned that when he stepped out of the spaceship he might sink forever into a suffocating morass of deep dust. On the other hand, he found very little dust at all. If the calculations indicating the rate of dust accumulation were accurate, there was not a billion years worth of dust, there wasn't even a million years worth of dust, there was in fact only a few thousand years worth of dust if dust is formed in that way by ultra-violet light from the sun.

Another interesting thing is about oil gushers. When oil reservoirs are tapped by drilling, the immense pressure in the reservoir forces up the oil through a kind of spouting geyser. The great pressure that is still surrounding oil formation is thought by some geologists to testify to a young earth. A scientist by the name of Dickey and others have published the results on this matter in their research in a volume called Science. This is what they write. "Studies show that any pressure built should be dissipated, bled off into surrounding rocks within a few thousand years. The excessive pressures found within oil beds, therefore, refute the notion of their age being on the order of millions of years and argues for the youthful age, something less than ten thousand years of the rock formation and the oil trapped in it."

And then I really like this one. Henry Morris wrote something called Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science. And chapter six is on the subject of world population and the Bible chronology. And with painstaking detail and the aid of mathematical equations, he shows how the world population is an indication of the age of the earth.

In a later work called
Scientific Creationismhe shows that an extremely conservative average population growth of one half a percent per year, which is a fourth of our present rate, but let's for the benefit of the doubts split it down to just a fourth and say the population grows at a half percent a year, that would add up to the present population of the earth in only four thousand years. And according to biblical chronology, that's right because four thousand years ago was the Flood.

He writes, "It begins to be glaringly evident that the human race cannot be very old. The traditional biblical chronology is infinitely more realistic than is the millions of years history of mankind assumed by the evolutionists." He says, "If they were right, and there were millions of years, the population of the earth now would be ten to the five thousandth power. And if we eventually were able to colonize all the other worlds in the universe and to build space cities everywhere in the inter-stellar spaces, it can be shown that a maximum of no more than ten to the one hundredth power people could be crammed into the entire known universe."

You can look at this issue from the standpoint of honest science and have all of the affirmation you want for a young earth. Various physical chronometers, chemical measuring items used to establish the earth's and heavens age, you can see real science will yield you an accurate answer if you understand this one thing. That when God created the earth, He created it as it is. He created it mature. He created it with the appearance of age.

What do I mean by that? Well on the first day He made light and darkness. On the second day He made the heavens. On the third day He made the earth. On the fourth day He made the heavenly bodies that provide light. On the fifth day He made fish and birds. And on the sixth day He made land creatures and man. And He made them all mature, fully developed. He didn't create seeds and cells, He didn't send out one little cell programmed to split itself over and over again over millions of years. There were no seeds, no embryos and there was no egg, there was a chicken full grown. He didn't start with partial light and partial gas and partial electromagnetic field and partial nuclear energy. He created a fully-mature universe with the appearance of age. When Adam was made, he wasn't an embryo, he wasn't a newborn, he was a full-grown man. Everything was full grown, fully developed. The cataclysmic creation of the universe yielded a mature creation with the appearance and the reality of age.

If you found an oak tree in the Garden, and you were a botanist, you might get your little saw and saw that little oak tree and you might start counting rings and you might find that according to the rings in that oak tree it was 400 years old, but it was actually one-day old. It was created fully mature. And if there were some eagles flying around, they might appear to be 30 years old, but they were one-day old. If there were elephants roaming around, they might have appeared to be many years old, 50, 60 years old, but the fact is they were one-day old. And if there were mountains around and you saw those mountains, you might have assumed that the mountains and the canyons alongside of them and the valleys and the hills were formed by years of wind and water and eruptions and earthquake, and the fact is it was all made in one day. And if you looked up into the heavens like Adam did and you saw the incredible expanse above you, and you wondered how long they had been there, the answer was 48 hours. It was sort of like Jesus turning water into wine and there was no process. He just turned water into wine...instant creation in a split second.

Now as we noted all through this series, evolution is impossible because nobody times nothing equalling everything is impossible. It's not only impossible, it's ridiculous. And there are no transitional forms and genetics makes devolution, not evolution. An alteration in genetics can only be negative, it can only fulfill the entropy, the second law of thermodynamics, and lessen and it can't make anything greater. There isn't any kind of genetic code that can make a transition. Any living thing is subject to the genetics that it has and nothing beyond that. As we have seen, honest geology cannot support an old world, or an evolving world. The fossil record doesn't prove age, it proves cataclysm, and so it goes.

Now I'm only giving you that just because I'm asking science to be honest in this situation. But with all of that background, let's go to Genesis 1 and let's get the straight story here.

Amen

Troy

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Complete In Christ	complete	Bible Study Hall	6	09-24-09 09:43 PM
Restoration Complete	Story-Teller	Daily Devotionals	0	08-25-09 11:28 AM
Becoming Mature	rjones	Daily Devotionals	0	01-17-08 10:18 AM
Complete with out "true love"?	Jesus's always	Soulmate	6	07-10-07 09:45 PM
The Lord made us and He will complete that which concerns us...	shortlady	Lounge	0	04-20-06 10:42 AM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)