The Fall of Jericho with Dr. Bryant Wood

Dear friends:
Please click the embedded You Tube video for a fascinating journey of Dr. Bryant Wood.
or click this You Tube link below for full screen viewing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=16&v=e5Fjth9T12U
You may also get into more details of Jericho Chronology dispute by clicking the link below
http://www.conservapedia.com/Jericho_chronology_dispute

In the biblical version of the event, Joshua and his men lay siege on the fortified city for seven days. On the seventh day, they blow their trumpets and its walls come crashing down. The Israelites raze the city, killing every man, woman and child. Today, the city of Jericho lays claim as one of the oldest cities in the world. Here, archaeologists have unearthed the remains of over twenty settlements, including an ancient city dating to the late Bronze Age that shows clear signs of destruction.

However, the widely accepted scholarly opinion was that it was destroyed in 1550 BC—long before the time of the Israelite conquest. If there was no city at the time of Joshua, is the story mere fiction? For Bryant Wood, Jericho is an archaeological puzzle waiting to be solved. On re-examining the evidence that was excavated, Wood, an expert in Canaanite pottery, dated its destruction to ca. 1400 BC—the time of the Israelite Conquest.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2015/03/19/Secrets-of-the-Bible-The-Fall-of-Jericho-with-Dr-Bryant-Wood.aspx

Critique of Wood's research

Wood's landmark 1990 BAR article called for a new evaluation of the date for Jericho's City IV based on the four considerations: pottery, stratigraphy, scarab evidence from the tombs, and the radiocarbon dating from a sample excavated by Kenyon. The first three considerations continue to be viable and have never been adequately refuted.^[4] But Wood's fourth argument, the radiometric, is now rejected. Wood correctly reported that the British Museum dated the wood sample from Jericho City IV at 1410 BC. However, it was later found that the calibration system and instrumentation of the British Museum's radiocarbon apparatus were giving wrong answers. This, of course, was no reflection on Wood's scholarship; he was reporting the results that everyone assumed to be correct when he wrote the BAR article. These radiocarbon results were superseded by a later study that examined various pieces of wood from Jericho and, more importantly, samples taken from the grain supply. The results of this later analysis now provide the main reason that the majority of scholars reject the Garstang/Wood date for Jericho City IV, even though this contradicts the other three types of evidence. Is there any explanation for this seeming contradiction between the date derived from archaeological evidence and that given by radiocarbon (C¹⁴) analysis?

...

Either solution—that of the Egyptologists or that of the physicists—cannot be supported by Kenyon's conclusion that Jericho fell at about the time of the beginning of the New Kingdom, whether that was in the middle of the 16th century BC (unadjusted date) or 160 years earlier (adjusted date). This is the consequence that seems inescapable once the dilemma posed by the current controversy over C¹⁴ dating in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC is fully grasped. Kenyon's conclusion that Jericho fell at about the time the 18th Dynasty began cannot be reconciled with either solution to the dilemma. Currently the only solution that seems to have any semblance of credibility is the Biblical solution: Jericho fell to the armies of Israel in the latter part of the 15th century BC, and the C¹⁴ evidence, properly interpreted and adjusted, now supports the Biblical account.

Tacoma Bridge & the Walls of Jericho Falling down!

Dear friends:


As I have recently watched DVD of Patterns of Evidence: Exodus. It also showing the Archaeological records of the falling down of the walls of Jericho-- a sudden crashing down of its walls like earthquakes. That reminds me of a page in the text book of "Differential Equation and Application"

In that page, the author asks this question "Did the power of acoustic resonance cause the walls of Jericho to tumble down? " This is the conjecture of some contemporary scholars. 

The above question is a very intriguing question, right?
Now let me type a few paragraph from P.200-201 and paste below for you to think about. You may also watch Youtube to see Tacoma Bridge was falling down!

The original Tacoma Narrows Bridge roadway twisted and vibrated violently under 40-mile-per-hour (64 km/h) winds on the day of the collapse

...You may be aware that soldiers usually do not march in step across bridges. The reason for breaking stride is simply to avoid any possibility of resonance occurring between the natural vibrations inherent in the bridges structure and the frequency of the external force of a multitude of feet stomping in unison on the bridge.

Bridges are good examples of vibrating mechanical systems which are constantly being subjected to external forces, either from people walking , cars and trucks driving on them, water pushing against their foundations, or wind blowing against their superstructures. On Nov.7,1940, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge at Puget Sound in Washington collapsed. However, the crash came as no surprise since this particular bridge was famous in the local community for a vertical undulating motion of its roadway which gave many motorists a very exciting crossing. On Nov.7, only four months after its grand opening the amplitudes of these undulations became so large that the bridge failed and a substantial portion was sent splashing into the water below. In the investigation that followed, it was found that a poorly designed superstructure caused the wind blowing across it to vortex in a periodic frequency of the bridge, large upheavals of the road resulted. In a word, the bridge was another victim of the destructive effect of mechanical resonance. Since this disaster developed over a matter of months, there was sufficient opportunity to record on film the strange and frightening phenomenon of a bucking and heaving bridge and its ultimate collapse.

Acoustic vibrations can be as equally destructive as large mechanical vibrations. Operatic and jazz singers sometimes take pride in their ability to inflict destruction on the lowly water glass. The sound from organs and piccolos have been known to crack windows.

“As the horns blew, the people began to shout. When they heard the signal horn, they raised a tremendous shout. The wall collapsed….” (Joshua 6:20 )

Did the power of acoustic resonance cause the walls of Jericho to tumble down? This is the conjecture of some contemporary scholars. (p.201 Differential Equation and Application)

Are 4 Consecutive Blood Moons Just Coincidences?

:

Dear friends:

A friend CH sent me a few recent blood moon photos taken by her friend's friend Peter from Toronto, Canada on Sept. 27 Sunday. They are so gorgeous so I posted 2 here for you to enjoy.
I also ran into an interesting article talking about watching blood moon movie made by Pastor John Hagee.

...The movie ended with a panel discussion with astrophysicist Hugh Ross, rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg, pastor John Hagee, and history revisionist David Barton.

Hagee was asked why this wasn’t astrology. He said that astrology is a false science, not at all like what he does. The movie had tried to ground the idea of getting wisdom from the sky with the Star of Bethlehem, but what came to mind for me instead was seeing portents in comets, like Halley’s comet as an omen to the Battle of Hastings.

The biggest surprise in the movie was Hugh Ross saying that this was all just a coincidence (prediction after the fact) and that the number of eclipses was arbitrarily chosen—why four? He also noted that the eclipses couldn’t be seen in Israel—wouldn’t that be important if Israel is the focus? So, yeah—it’s astrology...

You may also click the following link for more. ( this following blogger Bob S. is an atheist and he is definitely anti-Christianity, yet his many analyses could be very valid cross examinations for Christians to check into. I am pretty open minded, am I not?)

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/12/the-world-will-end-soon-again-2-of-2/

..And the first instance of four blood moons is …

We start in Spain in 1492. For this date, Christian history typically points to the end of the eight-century-long expulsion of the Muslims from Christian Spain. This “Reconquista” ended with the fall of Granada on January 2, 1492.

But no, Hagee says that God was focusing on the expulsion of Jews from Spain. The Edict of Expulsion was issued on March 31, 1492, and it gave Jews four months to leave. An estimated 100,000 Jews or more were forced to leave.

One small problem is that Hagee’s first blood moon didn’t happen until almost a year later (Passover, on April 2, 1493).

Remember that the “four blood moons” take about 18 months to play out (starting with a Passover and ending two Sukkots later). So God’s celestial show took place in slow motion after the problem had already come and gone.

Example two

Next up is the establishment of Israel on May 14, 1948. Okay, that sounds like a big development.

One small problem is that, once again, Hagee’s first blood moon didn’t happen until almost a year later (Passover, on April 14, 1949).

Example three

The last one was the Six-Day War, June 5–10, 1967. God must’ve been paying attention this time, because the first blood moon had already happened (on Passover, April 25, 1967).

But why this war? 
Since independence, Israel has had lots of conflicts. In particular, why not the Yom Kippur War in 1973? That war was a surprise, and there were more Israeli casualties.

And what about the Holocaust?! How does this not make the list? Israel lost less than 1000 dead and 4500 wounded during the Six-Day War. In the Holocaust, six million Jews were killed.

And God was apparently unmoved by any of the anti-Jewish pogroms. In Ukraine, for example, as many as a quarter million Jews were killed after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Let’s be clear, too, that the idea of “blood moon” = eclipse is Hagee’s invention. More importantly, the idea that eclipses occurring on Jewish holy days is meaningful in a cosmic sense is an invention. As is the idea of four in a row (instead of two or seven, say). “Four blood moons” is a marketing concept, not a biblical concept.

The world will end!

In Hagee’s brief video introduction, he has yet more nutty stuff to say. He quotes Mark 13:24–6 as somehow relevant to what we’re going to see during the upcoming four blood moons phase:

But in those days, “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light.” At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.

He wants to say that the world will end and Jesus will return, but not in any measurable way—y’know, just in case. He tap dances away from any accountability by omitting an important part. Actually, the quoted bit in Mark goes like this:

“the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.“

Stars falling from the sky? That’s something you wouldn’t miss. I can see why Hagee would delete mention of anything specific that will hang around to embarrass him in 2015.

(* for your references:

The original quote from Joel 2:31 "I will display wonders in the sky and on the earth, Blood, fire and columns of smoke. 31"The sun will be turned into darkness And the moon into blood Before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes.32"And it will come about that whoever calls on the name of the LORD Will be delivered;...)

...Hagee also says, “the Sun and the Moon will eclipse at the same time.” This isn’t possible in our reality, and Hagee doesn’t say how this is supposed to happen.

( * Here I think Hagee's  speculation certainly is too far fetched!!-BH- )

   .

Mosaic Authorship Tried and True

Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch--Tried and True

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min. A.P. Staff

http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=36

Dear friends:
Please click the above link for all the issues related to Moses' authorship and its rebuttals. You may think it is okay if Moses isn't the author, but think again?! It is a serious issue.

"Prove that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch and you prove that Jesus was totally mistaken and not the infallible Son of God he claimed to be. Upon your faith in Moses as the writer of the five books attributed to him rests also your faith in Jesus as the Son of God. You cannot believe in Jesus Christ without believing what Moses wrote. You see, there is much more involved in denying the books of Moses than most people suppose."--M.R. DeHaan M.D.

...

DOES IT REALLY MATTER
WHO WROTE THE PENTATEUCH( the first 5 books of OT Bible?)

To some, the question of whether or not Moses wrote the Pentateuch is a trivial matter—one of secondary importance. After all, we do not consider it an absolute necessity to know whom God inspired to write the book of Job or the epistle of Hebrews. We do not draw lines of fellowship over who wrote 1 and 2 Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles. Why, then, should the discussion of who penned the first five books of the Bible be any different? The difference is that the Bible is filled with references attributing these books to Moses! Within the Pentateuch itself, one can read numerous times how Moses wrote the law of God.

“Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah” (Exodus 24:4).
“Jehovah said unto Moses, ‘Write thou these words...’ ” (Exodus 34:27).
“Moses wrote their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of Jehovah” (Numbers 33:2).
“Moses wrote this law and delivered it unto the priests...” (Deuteronomy 31:9).

Bible writers throughout the Old Testament credited Moses with writing the Pentateuch (also known as the Torah or “the Law”). A plain statement of this commonly held conviction is expressed in Joshua 8:32: “There, in the presence of the Israelites, Joshua copied on stones the law of Moses, which he [Moses—EL] had written” (NIV, emp. added). Notice also that 2 Chronicles 34:14 states: “Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the law of Jehovah given by Moses” (emp. added; cf. Ezra 3:2; 6:18, Nehemiah 13:1, and Malachi 4:4). As Josh McDowell noted in his book, More Evidence that Demands a Verdict, these verses “refer to an actual written ‘law of Moses,’ not simply an oral tradition” (1975, pp. 93-94). [NOTE: The Hebrew Bible was not divided like our modern English Old Testament. It consisted of three divisions: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings (cf. Luke 24:44). It contained the same “books” we have today; it was just divided differently. Genesis through Deuteronomy was considered one unit, and thus frequently was called “the Law” or “the Book” (2 Chronicles 25:4; cf. Mark 12:26). Even a casual perusal of its individual components will confirm that each book presupposes the one that precedes it. Without Genesis, Exodus reads like a book begun midway; without Exodus, Leviticus is a mystery; and so on. They were not intended to be five separate volumes in a common category, but rather, are five divisions of the same book. Hence, the singular references: “the Law” or “the Book.”]

The New Testament writers also showed no hesitation in affirming that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. John wrote: “The law was given through Moses” (John 1:17). Luke recorded of the resurrected Jesus: “And beginning from Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them [His disciples—EL] in all the scriptures the things concerning himself ‘ (Luke 24:27). Referring to the Jewish practice of publicly reading the Law, James affirmed Mosaic authorship: “For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath” (Acts 15:21). With this Paul concurred, saying, “For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, ‘The man who does those things shall live by them’ ” (Romans 10:5, NKJV, emp. added; cf. Leviticus 18:5). In 2 Corinthians 3:15, Paul also wrote: “Moses is read.” The phrase “Moses is read” is a clear example of the figure of speech known as metonymy (where one thing is put for another) [see Dungan, 1888, pp. 273-275]. Today, we may ask if someone has read Shakespeare, Homer, or Virgil, by which we mean to ask if he or she has read the writings of these men. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus, one reads where Abraham spoke to the rich man concerning his five brothers saying, “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them” (Luke 16:29). Were Moses and the Old Testament prophets still on Earth in the first century? No. The meaning is that the rich man’s brothers had the writings of Moses and the prophets.

Furthermore, both Jesus’ disciples and His enemies recognized and accepted the books of Moses. After Philip was called to follow Jesus, he found his brother Nathanael and said: “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (John 1:45, NKJV, emp. added). Notice also that New Testament Sadducees considered Moses as the author, saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote unto us, if a man’s brother die, and leave a wife behind him, and leave no child, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother” (Mark 12:19, emp. added; cf. Deuteronomy 25:5).

A final reason that one must defend the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, instead of sitting by idly and claiming that “it doesn’t really matter who wrote it,” is because Jesus Himself acknowledged that “the Law” came from Moses. In Mark 7:10, Jesus quoted from both Exodus 20 and 21, attributing the words to Moses. Mark likewise recorded a conversation Jesus had with the Pharisees regarding what “Moses permitted” and “wrote” in Deuteronomy chapter 24 (Mark 10:3-5; cf. Matthew 19:8). Later, we see where Jesus asked the Sadducees, “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the place concerning the bush, how God spake unto him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?” (Mark 12:26, emp. added). But, perhaps the most convincing passage of all can be found in John 5:46-47, where Jesus stated: “For if ye believed Moses, ye would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?” (John 5:46-47, emp. added; cf. Deuteronomy 18:15-18). The truth is, by claiming that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch, one essentially is claiming that Jesus was mistaken. M.R. DeHaan expounded upon this problem in his book, Genesis and Evolution:

Prove that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch and you prove that Jesus was totally mistaken and not the infallible Son of God he claimed to be. Upon your faith in Moses as the writer of the five books attributed to him rests also your faith in Jesus as the Son of God. You cannot believe in Jesus Christ without believing what Moses wrote. You see, there is much more involved in denying the books of Moses than most people suppose (1978, p. 41).

Indeed, believing Moses wrote the Pentateuch is very important. It is not a trivial issue we should treat frivolously while suggesting that “it really doesn’t matter.” It matters because the deity of Christ and the integrity of the Bible writers are at stake!

Did Moses really write Genesis?

Did Moses really write Genesis? 

Evidence for Moses authorship of the Pentateuch

Clay tablets like this were ideal for long-term written records. Far from ‘Flintstones’ clumsiness, these could be held in one hand.
Patriarchal records may have been carried on the Ark, later used by Moses in compiling Genesis (under inspiration).

The evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, often referred to in the Bible as ‘the Law’ (Hebrewtorah), is overwhelming:

1. Contrary to the views of Wellhausen and others, archaeological research has established that writing was indeed well known in Moses’ day. The JEDP hypothesis falsely assumes that the Israelites waited until many centuries after the foundation of their nation before committing any of their history or laws to written form, even though their neighbors kept written records of their own history and religion from before the time of Moses.⁴
2. The author is obviously an eyewitness of the Exodus from Egypt, familiar with the geography,⁵flora and fauna of the region;⁶ he uses several Egyptian words,⁷ and refers to customs that go back to the second millennium BC.⁸
3. The Pentateuch claims in many places that Moses was the writer, e.g. Exodus 17:14; 24:4–7;34:27; Numbers 33:2; Deuteronomy 31:9, 22, 24.
4. Many times in the rest of the Old Testament, Moses is said to have been the writer, e.g.Joshua 1:7–8; 8:32–34; Judges 3:4; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 21:8; 2 Chronicles 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 8:1; 13:1; Daniel 9:11–13.
5. In the New Testament, Jesus frequently spoke of Moses’ writings or the Law of Moses, e.g.Matthew 8:4; 19:7–8; Mark 7:10; 12:26; Luke 24:27, 44; John 5:46–47; 7:19. Jesus said that those who ‘hear not [i.e. reject] Moses’ would not be persuaded ‘though one rose from the dead’ (Luke 16:31). Thus we see that those churches and seminaries which reject the historicity of Moses’ writings often also reject the literal bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.
6. Other New Testament speakers/writers said the same thing, e.g. John 1:17; Acts 6:14; 13:39;15:5; 1 Corinthians 9:9; 2 Corinthians 3:15; Hebrews 10:28.

Does this mean that Moses wrote Genesis without reference to any previous information? Not necessarily. Genesis comprises narratives of historical events that occurred before Moses was born. Moses may very well have had access to patriarchal records and/or reliable oral traditions of these events. In that case, such records would certainly have been preserved by being written (probably on clay tablets) and handed down from father to son via the line of
Adam-Seth-Noah-Shem-Abraham-Isaac-Jacob, etc.

There are 11 verses in Genesis which read, ‘These are (or ‘This is the book of’) the generations of …’ The Hebrew word toledoth translated ‘generations’ can also mean ‘origins’, ‘history’, or even ‘family history’, and each verse comes either before or after a description of historical events that involved the person named.⁹ The most likely explanation is that Adam, Noah, Shem, etc. each wrote an account of the events that occurred either right before or during his lifetime, and Moses, under the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit, selected, compiled, and edited these to produce Genesis in its present cohesive form.¹⁰

Genesis does not show a progress from idolatry to monotheism, as Wellhausen’s evolutionism requires. Rather, the Bible begins with an original revelation of God, which was later rejected to the point that the Hebrew nation itself descended into idolatry and so was given over to captivity by God.

What about the different words used for God?

Let us consider this in Genesis chapters 1 and 2. The word ’Elohim is used for God 25 times in Genesis 1:1–2:4a.¹¹ It has the idea of an awesome and faithful Being, having creative and governing power, majesty and omnipotence, who is above the material world He created. It is a lofty title (= ‘God’) and is the appropriate word for Moses to have used for the first factual report of God’s creative activities.¹²

In Genesis chapter 2 from verse 4, the Hebrew uses the letters YHWH to refer to God. Sometimes translated ‘Jehovah’, it is more often translated ‘LORD’ (in small capitals), and is the most commonly used term for God in the Old Testament (6,823 times). It means ‘the One who always was, now is, and ever shall be’ and is the deeply personal name of God. It is therefore used in His personal and covenant relationships with people. Genesis 2:4b ff is the detailed account of how God made Adam and Eve, and of the setting He prepared for them.¹³ Here they were meant to live and work in loving covenantal fellowship with Him¹⁴ and with each other. It was entirely appropriate therefore that Moses should have used YHWH in writing this section of Genesis. In Genesis 2, YHWH is joined to‘Elohim to form the compound name YHWH-’Elohim (= the Lord God). This identifies the covenant God YHWH as being one and the same as ’Elohim, the almighty creator. There is no logical reason (particularly any based on the term used for God) to ascribe this account to any other author(s).

Computer agrees: Genesis had only one author The following quote comes from Omni magazine of August 1982: ‘After feeding the 20,000 Hebrew words of Genesis into a computer at Technion University in Israel, researchers found many sentences that ended in verbs and numerous words of six characters or more. Because these idiosyncratic patterns appear again and again, says project director Yehuda Radday, it seems likely that a sole author was responsible. Their exhaustive computer analysis conducted in Israel suggested an 82 percent probability that the book has just one author.’

The same principles apply in the rest of Genesis and throughout the Old Testament.

The JEDP system is self-contradictory, as its proponents need to break verses into sections and even credit parts of sentences (that use more than one term for God) to different writers. Such a hotchpotch would be unique in ancient Middle Eastern literature.

The ‘scholarship’ used to promote the documentary hypothesis would be laughed out of court if applied to any other ancient book!

Conclusion

Ultimately, the author of Genesis was God, working through Moses. This does not mean that God used Moses as a ‘typewriter’. Rather, God prepared Moses for his task from the day he was born. When the time came, Moses had all the necessary data, and was infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit as to what he included and what he left out. This is consistent with known history, and with the claims and principles of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:15–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21).

On the other hand there is no historical evidence, and no spiritual or theological basis whatsoever for the deceptive JEDP hypothesis. Its teaching is completely false; the ‘scholarship’ that promotes it is totally spurious. Propped up by the theory of evolution, it exists solely to undermine the authority of the Word of God.

Is Paul a Hijacker of Early Christianity ?

Dear friends:
I highly recommend you to read the above book" Seeking Allah , Finding Jesus", just a few paragraphs from that book for you to sample.

Click the link below for more details:

Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus: A Devout Muslim Encounters Christianity

Feb 11, 2014

by Nabeel Qureshi and Lee Strobel

... Nabeel Qureshi had been taught to despise Paul as a hijacker of early Christianity (181), but now he started to ask himself why a devout Jew would turn Jesus into God. The core doctrine of Islam was the “oneness” of God. To call Jesus God was an unforgivable sin that led to hell. So this was a major issue.

Interestingly, it was his study of science at Old Dominion that made him realize that a Triune God was not out of the question. As he explains it, “One molecule of nitrate is three resonance structures all at the same time and never just one of them. They are three in one” (191). So why couldn’t one God be three persons at the same time?

He was further shaken by his study of the life of Muhammad. Allegiance to the prophet is allegiance to Islam and vice versa (203). Taught that Muhammad was a flawless man who all Muslims were to emulate, Nabeel discovered that, among other nasty things, Muhammad was a violent, petty leader who murdered without provocation, ordered his soldiers to rape the women they took captive in battle, and consummated marriage with a girl of only nine. What shocked him further was the fact that he got this negative information from Muslim sources, not Christian ones.

Qureshi writes:

It was then that I realized the value of apologetics and what arguments had done for me. All my life, barriers had been erected that kept me from humbly approaching God and asking Him to reveal Himself to me. The arguments and apologetics tore down those barriers, positioning me to make a decision to pursue God or not (241)

Did Something Come From Nothing?

http://www.christianpost.com/news/atheists-did-something-come-from-nothing-145015/

Atheists: Did Something Come From Nothing?

BY DAN DELZELL , SPECIAL TO CP

It seems atheists would much rather believe that something came from nothing, than to believe that Someone has always existed. Of course both beliefs are a matter of faith.

So did the universe come from nothing, or from God? Is there a rational mind behind the mathematical precision of the universe, as well as human DNA, or did it all just happen by chance?

In his book, "The Grand Design," Professor Stephen Hawking writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

But Hawking's premise is illogical. Without the cosmos, there would be no law of gravity. And if the law of gravity truly helped create the universe as Hawking suggests, then the universe was not created from nothing, but from something. In that case, how did the law of gravity originate, and how could it have been in existence prior to the creation of the universe? Impossible and irrational.

You mean to tell me that the man who is perhaps the world's most famous living scientist actually believes the mystical doctrine that something came from nothing? Yes indeed. Hawking's confession of faith is unequivocal. And a multitude of others in our world today have also chosen to place their faith in such imaginative science fiction. True science, on the other hand, recognizes that something cannot be created from nothing.

By the way, Hawking recently revealed his latest theory. He now believes that passing through a "black hole" could lead you to another universe. And his latest theory comes less than two years since Hawking made headlines with this bold statement: "There are no black holes."

But the man who believes the law of gravity helped create the universe has been digging a little deeper on the question of black holes. And he wants you to be prepared in case you ever find yourself inside one. Seriously.

Hawking now says that "if you feel you are in a black hole, don't give up. There's a way out." A way out? And Hawking knows this for a fact? Actually, it's just more science fiction from an intelligent physicist with a creative imagination.

Obviously, man is susceptible to embracing the myth that nothing created something. The Christian mind, on the other hand, has been delivered from such irrationality. Christians believe in a personal God who loved us enough to send His only Son to save us from our sin. Christians have been given "the mind of Christ." (1 Cor. 2:16) That is, we now see a number of things the way Christ sees them.

But how can that be?

Well, wisdom from God gets poured into a believer when he meets Christ through faith. Without this wisdom, how in the world could we possibly believe in a personal God? After all, we are not born into this world possessing "the mind of Christ." We only possess human reason. And those who reject God admittedly don't know where human reason originated.

Karl Popper delivered the first Darwin Lecture at Darwin College, in Cambridge, on Nov. 8, 1977. It was entitled, "Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind." Popper stated, "I conjecture that life, and later also mind, have evolved or emerged in a universe that was, up to a certain time, lifeless and mindless. Life, or living matter, somehow emerged from nonliving matter; and it does not seem completely impossible that we shall one day know how this happened. Things look far more difficult with the emergence of mind. While we think we know some of the preconditions of life, and some of the substructures of primitive organisms, we do not have the slightest idea on which evolutionary level mind emerges."

That's simple. The rational mind of man was created by an intelligent and rational Creator. He is all-powerful and all-knowing, and so it was easy for God to create both the body as well as the mind of man.

Consider for a moment the mathematical precision of human DNA. Francis Collins is the director of the Human Genome Project. Collins stated, "I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan."

Perry Marshall noted, "Dr. Jean-Claude Perez started counting letters in DNA. He discovered that these ratios are highly mathematical and based on 'Phi,' the Golden Ratio 1.618. This is a very special number, sort of like Pi." Perez' discovery was published in the scientific journal Interdisciplinary Sciences / Computational Life Sciences in September 2010.

Since God's mind is obviously a million (million million...infinite times * emphasized by this blogger) times more advanced than the human mind, it was a piece of cake for the Creator to place this mathematical perfection into the DNA of Adam and Eve. "Wait a minute! Who believes in that Adam and Eve stuff?" Well, Jesus for one. Christ said, "Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female.'" (Matthew 19:4)

And we have all descended from that first man and woman. It requires faith to believe that God is an eternal Being who created man at a special time and place. On the other end of the spectrum, it requires far greater faith (and a blind faith at that) to believe that something came from nothing.

Scriptures reveals the origin of the cosmos: "By Christ all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." (Colossians 1:15-17) God is not a thing, but a Person. Actually, three Persons in One God. And when you meet Christ through faith, you enter an eternal relationship with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Francis Collins said, "I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that 'I know there is no God' emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, 'Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative.'"

So did the universe create itself out of nothing? And did the human mind come into existence without the work of a rational designer? Or has God always existed? You make the call.

But just remember. The Lord is going to reign in heaven forever, whether you want to be part of that eternal celebration or not.