Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
A Living, Intervening God Reveals Himself:
1. Science and Engineering Together Point to a Creator. 2. Fulfilled Prophecy Confirms the Bible.
3. Jesus Offers Us a Living Relationship with God.
Worship God and Give Him Thanks!
Dinosaur soft tissue - what does it prove? article by Tim Stout
1. Science and Engineering Together Point to a Creator:
Science shows us three major characteristics of living cells that are both in theory and in observation outside the capabilities of unguided natural processes to provide:
A) Emergent Systems.
B) Genetic Information Systems. C) Feedback Control Systems.
Every one of these characteristics must make a first appearance already in fully developed form, as we shall examine. Furthermore, because of necessary, extensive interactions of cellular components with each other, the initial appearance of a complete living cell must take place instantly and in a single step (emergence). By definition, this is the exact opposite of evolutionary processes. These features and systems are so complex and intricate that scientists not only cannot explain their appearance, they cannot even postulate reasonable, testable theories about how they could have appeared.
By contrast, engineers regularly design and fabricate products that implement all three of these systems. This is what they do. Therefore, unbiased analysis leads to a significant conclusion: living cells appear to have been designed using engineering methodology. However, the level of complexity in a living cell is far, far beyond what man has made in his largest, most complex projects. The implication is that the engineering underlying the initial living cells requires an intelligence and fabrication power far greater than that of man. In fact, it so great that it is most rational to assume that a Creator God, acting as a Divine Engineer, did it. This logic is clear. There are no equivalent alternatives.
Interestingly, the opening chapter of the Bible presents God as using engineering methodology in the creation of the heavens and the earth. This will be analyzed in depth.
2. Which God? God uses fulfilled prophecy to demonstrate that He, the God of the Bible, is alone the true God. He first determines what He will do in His power as the God who intervenes at will. He then tells us what He is going to do. He then does it. The evidence for this is extensive. The Bible is a big book. Yet, over one-fourth of it was prophetic when written. As the sovereign God, nothing can thwart His will. Unlike astrologers and fortune tellers who are frequently wrong, He doesn’t merely foretell the future—He determines it. As its Creator, He has the power to do whatever He wants. He alone has the power to set 100 percent accuracy for His standard of prophetic accuracy. God gave us a way to test whether or not a prophet was sent by Him: If a prophet delivers a message which does
not come to pass, that person is a false prophet and does not represent Him.
(Deuteronomy 18:22).
3. Jesus Christ offers us an intimate relationship with the eternal God. Man was created for this relationship and yearns for it. However, the temptations of sin overpower this yearning. Forget philosophy. Every man knows what sin is. Why? He condemns the same behavior in other people that he loves and practices for himself. His own words will condemn him in a coming Day of Judgment. This behavior is characteristic of all men. God uses our consciences to show us our sins.
People attempt to cover their consciences by religious rituals and good works. To do this, they turn to idolatry and worship the things God made instead of directly worshiping God Himself. Even atheistic scientists are idolators. They worship physical processes as their creator instead of physical objects (idols). Nonetheless, they still worship the creation instead of the Creator.
Robbing a bank only one time makes a person a bank robber forever. Since a man’s own words condemn the kinds of things he himself does, his own past sins have already established him as a sinner. He cannot undo the past. God remembers them. Jesus Christ offers a person cleansing from sin and reconciliation with God the Father. God has decreed that a person can receive eternal life and dwell in His presence through Jesus Christ but only through Him.
Jesus has eternally existed with God the Father as God the Son. God reveals that together they still comprise only one God. This is beyond our ability to comprehend. The Bible reveals it and God expects us to accept this on the basis of His Word. The Son was made flesh in order to identify with man, being tempted as a man but without ever sinning. Being sinless, when He died on the cross, in God’s eyes He paid for all of the sins for all men who have ever lived. This is the only means God has provided for cleansing. Nothing else truly cleanses a person’s conscience before God. Furthermore, when someone trusts Christ as Savior, not only are his sins forgiven, but God adopts him as a child within His family. This child now has a living relationship with the living God.
The living relationship between a true Christian and God gives him an internal confirmation of God that far exceeds the external intellectual testimony of the first two items discussed above. Furthermore, God promises that anyone who seeks Him will find Him. Will you come to Him, now?
Table of Contents:
A. Emergence
B. Cellular Information System
C. Feedback Control Systems
D. Engineering Methodology and Genesis 1
E. Big Bang Issues
3. Fulfilled Biblical Prophecy identifies the God of the Bible as the Creator
4. God Creates Man in His Own Image.... A Christian’s Personal Relationship with God.
This article is brief for the breadth of issues presented. It provides a thorough analysis for the person who is serious about understanding who God is and what He expects from us.
We thoroughly discuss the three most important issues in a person’s life—understanding 1) the strength of the evidence for a Creator God, 2) how fulfilled prophecy identifies the God of the Bible as the Creator, and 3) how to get a close personal relationship with Him. Most people would not even know where to look to find this information or that it is even available.
By contrast, any other religion only offers an external relationship through idols and religious works, not a personal relationship. The discussion presented here shows how to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life from the eternal God. Nothing is more important in life than clearing this up.
1. History records how atheists hijacked true science.
The Bible says, “He who has an ear, let him hear” (Revelation 2:7). God says that He has provided such strong evidence showing Him as the Creator that He says there is no excuse for not understanding it (Romans 1:18-21). The material on the front cover illustrates this kind of evidence, clearly demonstrating how science and engineering working together point to a living God as the creator. There is no other rational, demonstrable alternative to the argument presented. Yet, sadly, many people will reject such evidence without even considering it. In their hearts, they want excuses to forget about God, not to confirm His authority and power. God simply says in the above verse that He reveals truth to the one who will receive it. Thus, a person decides whether to receive truth or reject it.
Henry M. Morris wrote a small book titled Men of Science | Men of God.1 It documents the influence Christians had on early western science. Over 100 men are discussed. This includes Sir Francis Bacon for the scientific method, Kepler for the laws of planetary motion, Robert Boyle for chemistry, Sir Isaac Newton for laws of motion, Faraday for relationships between electricity and magnetism, and the list goes on and on. He documents that modern science was formed mostly by men that believed that God could intervene at will into nature and that the order that we study in science today was merely God’s way of maintaining consistent behavior whenever He was not intervening. As an example, it would be very awkward to live in a world where gravity sometimes pulls down and at others it pulls sideways and with a constantly changing strength. A functioning universe requires stable laws. However, the Creator God can intervene into the affairs of His creation to any degree He desires and at any time that it suits Him. He is the sovereign ruler over the heavens and the earth. This is the Biblical perspective, which true Christians believe is still valid to this day.
Materialists highjack science.
Since the mid-1800s, modern science is no longer true science. Men such as Thomas Huxley and his friends in what they called the “ X Club” hijacked science into a weapon to promote their antigod philosophy. They were not looking for truth, only excuses to reject God. They worked behind the scenes to get their ideas accepted.2 Their attitudes have since then been gladly received by the modern scientific establishment. However, history documents how their success was primarily based on powerplays and censorship. They would deliberately not take part in an open discussion of anything contradicting their carefully crafted claims.
There always have been and still are many, many problems with their arguments. However, they deliberately avoid discussing anything that might reveal their weaknesses. These men would pretend to be neutral, being true to science alone. However, their foundational assumption was that everything could be explained by natural, materialistic processes alone. Therefore, God is redundant and not needed. With this “word game,” they disallowed discussion of any evidence supporting God as inappropriate, as fake science. Yet, if a sovereign, intervening God does exist, human word games will not make Him disappear. Furthermore, attempts to do this have consequence: they arouse His wrath.
During the 1800s, British society was becoming increasingly secular. The Bible was viewed by many intellectuals as merely the work of human editors. For example, Erasmus Darwin3, the grandfather of Charles Darwin, was a well-known evolutionist two generations ahead of Charles. Charles Lyell was a geologist who published Principles of Geology4, a three-volume set, over the period from 1830 – 1833. He postulated the theory of uniformitarianism. This proposes that geological features were the result of small changes over long periods of time, not sudden catastrophes such as the Biblical flood. Charles Darwin read Lyell’s Principles, was impressed by it, and extrapolated his approach to the origin of organic species. Evolution was proposed to take place similarly by small steps over a long time5--not entire populations of various kinds of plants and animals appearing in a day.
As mentioned earlier, shortly after Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, a man named Thomas Huxley and eight of his friends formed what they called the “X Club.” These nine people were a powerhouse in British science. For example, between 1873 and 1885 the presidency of the British Royal Society was exclusively held by X Club members. These men hijacked the word “science” to mean “the best materialistic (natural processes only) explanation available for everything from history to the behavior of natural processes.” They state that they did this specifically because they did not like being subject to moral restrictions typically associated with any kind of God. For them, materialistic science was a weapon for use in their already existing, pre-Origin of Species fights against the church and Biblical morality. They had no interest in unbiased discussion of anything that might lead to recognition of any kind of supernatural accountability for the things they did. Their goal was to rid the world of the influence of any form of religion. Their method was to scoff at, twist, and deny anything that did not fit into their agenda. Such behavior clearly represents bias, not a search for truth.
Peter Bowler wrote Evolution | The History of an Idea | Revised Edition. His book served as a standard textbook on university campuses for courses on the history of evolutionary theory for many years. This Revised Edition has a section on Thomas Huxley and the X Club.1 Some quotations:
“ Evolutionism was useful to them precisely because it demonstrated that science could now determine the truth in areas once claimed by theology.”
“...behind-the-scenes activity shaped much of late Victorian science.” “They avoided open conflict in science journals....
“The journal Nature was founded at least in part as a vehicle for promoting Darwinism.”
“Academic appointments were also manipulated to favor younger scientists with Darwinian sympathies, who would ensure that the next generation was educated to take the theory for granted.”
“It was by exploiting their position within this network that Huxley and his fellow converts ensured that Darwinism had come to stay.”
This summary clearly shows the bias and mentality of those who used power plays and behind- the-scenes manipulation, doing this to convert late 1800s science from a theistic perspective to one absolute in its focus on materialism. It is also interesting that this this truly was not the result of working through issues in open debate among scientists.
I was surprised to find Bowler so openly document how materialists effectively hijacked science. It is interesting that a few years later, he revised the book with a second revision that completely removed all of the above discussion. It appears that he might have had serious backlash at exposing weaknesses that materialists do not want exposed, even if they were true.
How about today? An extremely explicit, clear statement of deliberate bias against God in today’s established science was provided by the world-renowned geneticist Richard Lewontin, Ph.D. He was a professor at Harvard University for many years. His personal convictions are merely a continuation of what Huxley and friends started in the late 1800s. He states openly what are the current attitudes of modern secular scientists in general. What he says is shocking. In 1998, he made the following statement in New Yorker Magazine:
We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of
science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen.6
Here it is. In Dr. Lewontin’s own words, his commitment to materialism is absolute. His above opening statement is a lie, contradicting the definition of science given by its founders as discussed earlier. He does not take the side of science; he assumes the philosophy of materialism and calls it “science.” Science does not compel him to support materialism, rather his materialism compels him to force materialistic explanations for his “science” regardless of how ridiculous (patently absurd) the logic needs to be to justify his predetermined conclusions. Why? “We cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
Who is Dr. Lewontin to so challenge the living Creator God? His above openly-stated position is out and out pure pseudoscience—fake science. To a person with his mindset, open discussion on any of the issues brought to attention in this article would not merely be rejected, they would be mocked, forbidden, and condemned as invalid without examination. This has nothing to do with any potential scientific merit, but is the result of a higher priority being given to promoting a personal philosophy— materialism (which is related to naturalism and humanism) than promoting honesty in scientific evaluation and presentation. In the above citation, Lewontin represents a modern example of Thomas Huxley. Science is treated by both of them as a weapon for promoting materialism. It is not a free exchange of ideas in search of finding and understanding observed structures and processes as best as possible.
Experimental science cannot say anything one way or the other about the existence of a God who intervenes at will into His creation and thereby overrides the natural laws that He Himself created. The scientific method is based on experiments in which everything that can change the outcome of the experiment is controlled or at least is fixed and static. Otherwise, the results of an experiment are meaningless. Obviously, a scientist cannot control the manner in which an eternal, sovereign, omnipotent Creator God may or may not choose to intervene in an experiment. Likewise, we cannot measure how much God intervened in historical events. Yet, Lewontin treats what are his personal philosophical preferences though they are the limiting factors of what can be real and true in real life, including experimental science. This approach truly represents fake science. Sadly, he represents the attitudes of most scientists today.
By contrast, as mentioned earlier the Bible states and a Christian believes that study of the creation leads a person to the understanding of God as the Creator. The Bible goes on to say that the testimony of this is so powerful that there is no excuse for missing it. Why does it say this?
In Proverbs 18:17 we read, “The first one to plead his cause seems right until his neighbor comes and examines him.” This verse explains why the modern scientific establishment, starting with Huxley and the X Club, does not allow open discussion on the kinds of issues we present here. They know inwardly of the weaknesses of their position. They are trying to justify to themselves their rejection of God. They do not want their neighbor to have the opportunity to examine them and expose the weaknesses of their position.
Lewontin died about four years ago and is no longer with us. However, his baton is still being carried by most scientists today. Yet, until and unless they can show that a natural origin of life is not thwarted by the arguments to be presented here, then they are the ones fighting actual scientific observations—not the creationists. Word games do not make a living God disappear.
Since eminent scientists have openly admitted to their overriding bias against God, it is appropriate to mention just how deep and prevalent the problem has become. The big question facing the author is to determine just how technical the discussion in this article should get. As mentioned earlier, almost all fields in a modern university are looked at from a humanist perspective. Yet, many of those studying the liberal arts barely understand how to spell science, let alone feel comfortable with technical discussion. Yet, this discussion is just as important to a validity of what is taught in a political science class or an art class as it is to a biology class. An attempt will be made here to discuss foundational issues at a level that can be understood by a university student at a major university but who does not have a deep technical background. The hope is that a person with a strong technical background but is seeking truth will be able to fill in the gaps from his own knowledge. As a person reads the article, he will need to determine for himself how successful this attempt turns out to be.
The Bible teaches that God designed our minds such that study of the creation should lead us to understand that there is a Creator God and for this then to lead us to worship Him and give Him thanks (Romans 1:18-21). If this is valid, then an honest, organized, systematic study of the creation should lead us to understand that that there indeed is a Creator God. A major goal of this article is to provide evidence in support of this understanding.
Why is the modern scientific establish so strong against God? We suggest that it has nothing to do with science. The Bible offers a simple explanation: men prefer to live for their sin instead of for God. For example, we read in Romans 1:28-2:1,
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. 2-1 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.
In other words, men prefer to live for their sin over living for a holy God who hates the sin that they themselves love. Truth has nothing to do with their actions. Their goal is to justify to themselves why the things they want to do are acceptable and that there is no accountability to any kind of deity for what they do. They approve of sinful behavior in general but only so long as they are not the victims of it. When victimized, they then condemn other people for doing the very things they themselves do. Woe to the man who lies to a dictator and gets caught, even though the dictator habitually lies himself. Worse is the man who lies to God, who is absolutely pure in His own actions.
2. Science and engineering together point to a Creator
In the opening comments of the cover, we mentioned that A) emergence, B) information, and C) feedback control are by nature single-step in their first appearance. This eliminates any possibility of evolutionary processes gradually providing them. However, engineers regularly design products exhibiting these very features. This gives us a rational model, one without competition: Living cells were designed and fabricated by an engineer with understanding and power greatly exceeding that of
man. This in turn leads to the understanding that living cells were created by a Living God—one with intelligence, will, and power.
A. Emergence
Emergence is the foundational root of the arguments presented here for God. Information and feed-
back control discussed later flow from it. The philosophical concept of Emergence refers to new
characteristics that emerge as a result of two or more components interacting, such that they give no
hint of possibility without the interactions of all required components. Emergence is a phenomenon of
general scope that has been understood since the days of Aristotle. It has a broad impact, affecting
fields as diverse as sociology, art, philosophy, and the physical phenomena studied in science.7 Such a
broad, fundamental property of nature is going to be very difficult for unguided natural processes to
work around. Evolutionary processes are by definition the exact opposite of emergence.
The historical example of emergence is water. Water is made up of a combination of hydrogen
and oxygen. So is hydrogen peroxide. However, there is no basis to predict various properties of water
or hydrogen peroxide by studying behaviors of hydrogen and oxygen separately. It is only when
hydrogen and oxygen combine and interact that either water or hydrogen peroxide emerge. A possible
exception might be for an extremely intelligent chemist to predict them. However, that would only
illustrate the value of intelligence when it comes to discovering new things. It is irrelevant in an
attempt to figure out how natural processes could accidentally put together a living cell.
Engineers characteristically design emergent systems. This is their job. In order to build a complicated product, which could be anything from a table saw to an automobile to a cell phone, there will be many, many different parts which need to dovetail together satisfactorily. Any part which prevents the system from performing satisfactory for a specific function is emergent to that function.
For example, consider an automobile. There are many components such as a steering system, motor, transmission, wheels and a fuel delivery system which are required for a car to be drivable in traffic. If any required function is not available, a person cannot drive his car to work. A car capable of driving a person to work is an emergent system. Its appearance is the result of the engineering process: design then fabrication. Natural appearing energy sources such as heat, light, chemical reactions, physical collisions, sparks, etc. acting on water, fuel, and rocks do not spontaneously build cars.
Notice, it is not just that a component must meet a specified need. It must also fit so as to join properly to the other units. Then they must actually be physically joined. When a person goes to a car parts store and buys a brake pad, it must properly be fit onto the brake. This issue becomes a problem. A brake pad for a small sports car is useless for directly replacing defective brakes on a large truck.
Virchow’s aphorism: “All cells from cells.” Rudolf Virchow was a German physician/scientist who became the father of biological cellular theory in the 1850s. He is famous for the saying, “All cells from cells,” which is referred to as Virchow’s Aphorism. This says it all. It takes an already existing cell to make a new one. Emergence explains why the aphorism is valid. Until a fully-formed, functioning minimal cell appears, there is nothing available in nature to make it appear. Furthermore, it is too complex to make a natural single-step first appearance. This is something even atheistic scientists acknowledge. Virchow’s observation was foundational to formation of cellular biology as a viable field of study. The aphorism has been understood for over 170 years. The past 70+ years have seen billions of dollars spent on thousands of experiments in abiogenesis. Yet, scientists have yet to explain how the first cells appeared.8 If anything, we now better understand the reasons it is true. Hence, it has become even better established today than it was in the 1850s. Materialistic biologists are still completely baffled about how to work around the aphorism. Emergence, information, and feedback control still present severe barriers for natural processes to overcome in kickstarting cellular life.
Penzlin introduces emergence in living cells. The basic features of emergence in living cells were discussed by the German scientist Heinz Penzlin in 20099, although he did not understand the implication that single-step characteristic of emergence potentially thwarts abiogenesis. He postulated that there was some unknown biological quality of life that causes organic chemical reactions to favor life. Broad experimental results in abiogenesis fail to give any hint of such a quality. 10
Network Emergence. A basic issue facing abiogenesis is that a living cell is a giant network of
emergent components. The basic functioning structure of the entire cell is a giant, intertwined
emergent structure, such that missing any single essential network strand prevents cellular life. From this perspective, observed science teaches that a living cell must make a single-step first appearance.
Network emergence is readily observable in living cells. It just forbidden to discuss it within the context
of the origin of life because it falsifies the field of abiogenesis as an objective study and this in turn
challenges materialism.
Network emergence is the simultaneous appearance of both horizontal and vertical emergence.
Horizontal Emergence is where separate components or systems interact with others in an emergent
manner. For instance, a living cell features four separate major systems: 1) the information system
which defines all of the components used to make a cell and how they are used. 2) The metabolic
system, which uses an energy source to make all of the internal components needed for cellular
activity. This includes the specific energy packets used to drive internal cellular operations. 3) The
cellular membrane system, which holds everything close enough together for different cellular
processing stations to interact with each other while selectively allowing nutrients to enter and waste
products to be removed. 4) The replication system which provides the mechanism for a living cell to
divide into two identical cells. A living cell is dependent on all four of these systems interacting with
each other successfully. Thus, the entire living cell is an emergent system. Missing or malfunction of
only one critical part is fatal to the entire cell.
Vertical Emergence. Vertical Emergence is where a particular component is itself the emergent product
of lower-level interacting components within the system. For instance, the information system consists
of a number of components such as DNA, messenger RNA, spliceosomes, and ribosomes among
others. All are needed to make the genetic information system function properly. These components
plus the information contained in the DNA constitute an emergent subsystem. They cannot contribute
to cellular life until all are in place and properly functioning. The above components are themselves
composed of yet another layer of number of specific components properly combined with each other,
which is a yet lower lever of vertical emergence. For instance, a protein must be made from a specific
amino acid sequence to function properly.
The metabolic system and the cellular membrane system itself are also vertically emergent.
As mentioned earlier, emergence is a general principle of nature that crosses over many fields
and has been known since the days of Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) A living cell appears to be an extremely
complex emergent network, with many, many emergent interactions. By definition, this requires a
living cell to make a complete, single-step first appearance. Emergence is such a basic principle of
nature, that for a materialist to have any credibility, he must clearly give objective experimental
evidence that emergence does not apply to cells. He certainly is unlikely to invalidate the principle
itself. This will be difficult to do when 70+ years of experiments have failed to produce a single example
where the principle of emergence has not proven fatal to abiogenesis, but many where it has.
A materialist may claim that a person can believe in science or an intervening God, but cannot
rationally do both. This is backwards. When a person looks openly at the strength of evidence provided
by emergence alone, it appears that the materialist is the one who is irrational. Furthermore, the
principle demonstrating this is not hidden. It has been known for well over 2,000 years. The current
analysis leads us to understand that science and engineering point to a living God, not to reject Him.
Cellular information system. A computer and a living cell are very similar to each other. Both
have hardware which is controlled by a set of commands in the form of information.
In a computer, the information exists in the form of software. Operation of the hardware is
completely dependent on the software. In one sense, it is a slave ready to do its master’s bidding and
sits idle until it is given an instruction. Software provides the operating instructions. Microsoft
Corporation employees thousands of engineers and has done so for many decades. They are one of the
largest corporations in the world and their primary product is computer software. Microsoft does not disclose its number of engineers, but has been estimated to be between 60,000 to 90,000. This is out
of 220,000 total employees in 2023.11 Even with this huge number of engineers, their total work
output does not approach the complexity of a cell’s genome. Natural processes cannot be
demonstrated to generate any information starting from scratch. Rationally, they cannot generate even
a minimal living cell’s genome.
The final product produced by software engineers is a string of numbers organized as bytes. A
person could string together a number of randomly selected bytes and call it a program. It would
certainly be cheap to do. However, this program would be useless and not able to operate a computer
satisfactorily. As a professional engineer with two decades of experience in computer design, I can only
say that there is no rational possibility of randomly generated numbers with randomly connected
hardware components ever accidentally creating a functioning computer. Cells are even more complex.
Then there is the problem of replication. Before a cell can replicate, its normal systems of
information, metabolism, and containment must all be working satisfactorily. There is no mechanism
for evolutionary steps to provide this before replication. Yet, replication requires still additional cellular
hardware and genetic information for control. Everything must appear fully functional in a single step.
When one looks at all of the emergent interactions present in a living cell, there is simply no rational
basis to expect natural processes to provide cells from scratch. This is exactly what Virchow’s aphorism
stated almost 200 years ago.
There is another perspective on problems facing a natural origin. Suppose an incipient
replication system has only five unrelated defects in its genome that prevent replication. How can
these five problems be fixed without any way to isolate them and change them before everything the
rest of the cell degrades and decomposes? Abiogenesis depends on replication processes being
available at the beginning. Observation shows that it does not appear until everything else is already in
place. This is fatal to abiogenesis.
A fundamental problem facing a natural origin of life is that living cells are built around carbon
atoms. A carbon atom has a unique structure which allows it to join with up to four other molecules.
This allows it to form carbon to carbon bonds in a string while each carbon molecule still joins to other
molecules. Over six million different kinds of carbon-based molecules have been made, their chemical
traits analyzed, and the results officially published in a formal science catalogue.12
Abiogenists have two problems. First, in a natural setting there is nothing to control the local
chemical reactions possible for any particular carbon atom. The result is that although energy sources
such as ultra-violet light, heat, and sparks can cause carbon molecules to reorganize into new ones, in a
non-life setting these reactions are unguided. There is nothing to direct them to form the specific
molecules needed for life out of the millions possible. As a result, most of those formed are not
suitable for life and end up as contaminants prohibiting progress. A few of them might be temporarily
suitable, but even these are only temporary before they get made into yet another new chemical.
B.
www.trbap.org/lirgh page 9 August 27, 2025
2) Worse, they invariably turn into tar long before any proteins or nucleic acids can form. The actual
arrangements of chemicals needed to make a living cell is not even hinted at before tar stops any
possibility of further progress. The tar problem will be discussed later.
The above situation fits both theory and experimental observation. Normally, when theory and
experiment agree, a theory is considered established. However, to a materialist the observed results of
origin-of-life experiments are not acceptable, even though chemical theory leads us to expect the
problems that are then actually observed to take place. Why? Even as Lewontin discussed earlier, “We
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” It is forbidden for a materialist to acknowledge that both
theory and observed results agree that natural processes are not capable of forming living cells. This
conclusion is forbidden regardless of the strength of the evidence. Why? If natural processes cannot
create the initial cells, then their appearance had to be from outside natural processes. The scope of
the problem is so great that acknowledging this directly leads to the understanding that that they must
have had supernatural origin. This would falsify materialism and lead directly to understanding the
reality of an intervening Creator God. A materialist will not face this evidence regardless of its strength.
Abiogenesis has been an active field of scientific research since the Miller-Urey Experiment first
performed in 1952.13 Amino acids appeared when methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water were
zapped in a spark chamber for a brief period of time. Sadly, though, these amino acids were absolutely
useless as feedstock for any further advance towards life. They were in relative ratios which made
them completely unusable. There were already four times as many contaminants as amino acids with
the contamination problem expected to grow. Worse yet, except for samples that were removed from
the experiment at an early stage, even here in the first experiment the product quickly turned into tar.
Whereas as naturally occurring random processes cannot account for the information found in
a living cell as well as its associated hardware, engineers design computers, which also feature a
complicated interaction between information and hardware. However, in a cell the interactions are far,
far more complicated. Moreover, since a living cell comes only from replication of an already living cell
and the reasons for this are very well understood as discussed above, then all of a minimal cell’s
original complexity must appear at it its very first step. This can be done through an engineering
process of design then fabrication followed by testing and then problem fixing. There is no hint of any
rational alternative. When worked through, this logically leads to the understanding that a living God
acting as an engineer first designed the initially appearing cells using His divine wisdom and then
fabricated the design using His power to intervene in nature as God. This is a rational explanation
resulting from observed science and standard engineering practice working together. As offensive as
this might be to a materialist, this is the simplest and most logical conclusion.
C. Feedback control systems
Almost every internal process taking place in a living cell is regulated by what is called a “feedback control loop.” An example of feedback control would be steering a car while it goes down a highway. In order to drive a car from California to New York, we must be able to steer the car properly. We need to keep it in a specific lane most of the time and the lane itself will typically have curves. We need to change lanes for various reasons. We need to follow a course that allows us to reach our destination. There are a number of steps required to do this. First is to sense where the car is at and in which direction it is heading, then to compare this with a standard of where it should be, then to determine what if any corrections need to be made, and then to implement the corrections by turning the steering wheel. This needs to be repeated continually as the car travels. A continuous loop of observation, analysis, and correction is needed. This is a complicated process. We now have exotic computers and supporting sensors which can drive a car and steer it in traffic, but it still has problems to be overcome before it is commonly used.
The problem with feedback control is that once wheels can be steered, without proper control this causes accidents. The entire system must work reliably from the beginning in a single step.
Many cellular components are made when needed and disassembled when no longer needed. Nutrients are converted into the various required chemicals when needed. This includes the building block chemicals of amino acids, nucleic acids, and fatty acids. Each conversion requires a feedback control loop that is fully functional from its first appearance. Therefore, they represent an emergent feature. A major problem facing the initial appearance of a living cell is that each feedback control loop required in a minimal cell must appear fully formed at the same time as all of the others. This becomes so complex an operation and so intertwined with so many components that it is absurd to assert that natural processes did everything needed in a single step. Hana El-Samad says in the journal Cell Systems, “Even the simplest of cells seems to have hundreds of feedback loops14.”
However, the design and implementation of feedback control loops are part of the standard toolkit of a trained design engineer. Therefore, there is a simple means to account for the feedback control systems in a living cell: it was designed by an engineer. No other means are known.
The complexity needed to control required feedback in a living cell dwarfs what a car needs. Genetic information must prescribe how to sense what is needed and then direct the cell to respond properly. An unbiased person will readily recognize that initial appearance of proper feedback control for all of a cell’s activity is impossible to do in a single, unguided step using only uncontrolled, natural energy sources.
Tar—the eventual product of organic chemical bonds connected randomly instead of under feedback control.
As if the above problems facing a natural origin of life are not severe enough, there is yet another fatal problem facing a natural origin of life: tar production. As natural energy sources join organic molecules together, they eventually grow into tar. Tar is a merely a large mass of randomly joined organic molecules. Importantly, there is no chemical formula for tar. It is just a mixture of many randomly joined organic molecules. If the process continues, the tar eventually grows into asphalt and finally into what is called kerogen. These are all fundamentally the same, with the difference between them chiefly being in molecular size and melting point.
Tar production is the standard product eventually appearing whenever organic molecules get randomly joined. The extreme organization characteristic of a living cell and the extreme disorganization characteristic of tar are complete opposites of each other. There is no known scientific basis for natural processes to produce the chemicals of life in pure, usable quantities and ratios with each other. Both theory and experience indicate that natural processes produce tar—not the chemicals of life in usable ratios. Scientists studying the origin of life are very much aware of this discrepancy. They simply just choose to ignore its implications, because acknowledging them would require them to acknowledge that both theory and observation ultimately lead to the understanding of a Creator God.
Would you like to observe actual tar formation on the interior surface of a glass chamber as a scientist tries to mimic origin-of-life processes in the lab? I have put together a YouTube video showing this.15 Carl Sagan was a prominent scientist of an earlier generation. He spent ten years of his life trying to improve on the initial experiment performed by Stanley Miller discussed above. As both of them ran their experiments, everything made was either deposited on the surface of the test apparatus as tar or it was in a solution on its way to being deposited there. The exception was when portions were physically removed from the apparatus before they were deposited. Sagan eventually gave up his effort.
The Sagan video shows how this experiment demonstrates both of the above problems discussed. Chemicals of suitable species and ratios to promote life did not appear. Tar was the ultimate
product of the experiment. Nonetheless, you can observe Sagan completely misrepresent his results in his concluding statements, saying that “in this chamber are the chemicals of life.”
Sagan refused to acknowledge the two most significant results of his experiment. First, the experiment readily demonstrated that natural processes make random products, not specific ones with the species and ratios required to produce life’s building blocks. Second, whenever a chemical that might accidentally be useful towards life does get formed, it quickly joins the tar goo and then, once there, it becomes inert and removed from any future interactions towards life. A spectral analysis of his goo may still show a useful amino acid here or there, but it is bound up in the tar and is inert, not able to interact chemically with its environment. Sagan’s concluding statements are craftily worded to give an impression that is the exact opposite of what he actually observed. He claimed to have demonstrated progress. He actually confirmed Miller’s failure. Unusable products and tar are failure.
Earlier, we quoted Lewontin about how materialists are compelled to use arguments that are absurd in their effort to promote materialism. Sagan’s experiment and his analysis of it provides a perfect example of what Lewontin was talking about. His conclusions are based on what is necessary to support materialism, not where an honest evaluation of the evidence should lead him. You can see this for yourself if you pay attention to it while viewing the clip. Yet, he sounds so sincere!!! Is it any wonder that God says there is no excuse for not seeing how His creation rightfully leads us to Him?
When a person drives his car down an asphalt road, he is driving on the natural results of energy which had been applied to organic materials. Tar and asphalt result, not the chemicals of life. No matter how much ultra-violet light from the sun shines on the asphalt, the light will never convert the asphalt into a living cell. Asphalt and living cells are at the extreme opposite ends of organization. Processes which naturally produce inert tar and asphalt do not organize chemicals into the information systems, metabolic systems, containment mechanisms and reproduction systems characteristic of life. God counts a person to be without excuse who refuses to understand this. Sagan actually showed how tar and asphalt are made, which are the exact opposite of the organization of the chemicals of life.
D) Engineering Methodology and Genesis 1
In the above material, we have clearly seen that unguided natural processes are unable to provide emergent systems, information systems, and feedback control systems. Yet, as a normal design responsibility engineers provide products with emergence, information, and feedback control. One day while reading Genesis 1, it struck me that this, the opening chapter of the Bible, does not merely present God as the Creator. It also illustrates Him using engineering methodology as He works through the events recorded.
This is particularly interesting for me. I have four decades of experience as an industrial design engineer. I have received four US Patents on some of my later design work in desalination.16 One day when reading Genesis 1, I suddenly realized that this chapter illustrates God as having used the same methodology in creation of the heavens and the earth that I and other engineers regularly use in our own design work. Genesis 1 is not a scientific treatise. It is an illustration of engineering methodology as it describes the steps God went through in creating the heavens and the earth. In other words, all of the above references to engineers solving the kinds of problems related to the origin of life are relevant.
The following summarizes Genesis 1 as an engineering project:
1. Specification of what to make. The first step in designing something is to define the product that needs to be designed. An engineer doesn’t get paid to make a jet engine and then turn in a design for a hospital x-ray machine. In the Bible, the specification for the product to be
www.trbap.org/lirgh page 12 August 27, 2025
designed is found in the opening sentence: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” The heavens and the earth are the target specification. Grammatically, these words have a unique verb tense from the following material, setting them apart from it.
2. Breaking up a large design into subdesigns. As the original specification becomes more
and more complicated, it becomes simpler to break it into more and more subtasks. In the Bible, the subtasks are six sequential days of creation. Engineering subtasks can also be parallel. 3. The three steps of basic engineering methodology are then applied to each subtask:
A. The step of designing. This provides the details of what to make. On each day, God first declares what He wants to be made on that day. He uses words such as “Let there be ...” or an equivalent to this. The spoken announcement represents the completed design that needs to be fabricated.
B. The step of fabrication. The second step of engineering methodology is to fabricate what was designed. On each day, God makes what He had just commanded to appear. This is indicated variously by words such as “And it was so...” or “And God made ....” The word “And” clearly indicates a two-step process. First determine what to make and then to make it.
C. The step of evaluation. The third step is to evaluate what was just made. Does it have flaws? Do deficiencies show up when the product is tested that were not anticipated? Does the basic design need to be altered or were there problems in the fabrication? With man, this is the test phase. Testing reveals whether or not a design works. If problems are revealed, they need to be corrected. This may involve redefining the original specification, modifying the design, or modifying the fabrication process. We have all bought defective products that were improperly designed and never tested properly or at least the problems were not corrected if they had been discovered. Ideally, during the evaluation phase all of the problems—obvious and hidden—will be revealed and corrected. For man, this is the hardest and most timing consuming task of engineering methodology.
In God’s case, the situation is simpler. His works are without flaw on the first effort and need no redesign. At the end of each day, He will look at what He had just made and be pleased with the results. The Bible tells us at the end of each day, “And God saw that it was good.” In other words, it met His intended purposes. The evaluation phase sounds so trivial for God. He gets it right the first time. Notice, Genesis 1 not only reveals God working as an engineer, but also reveals that He is much superior to human engineers.
4. The final steps in a multitask engineering process are to assemble the separate tasks of the above step together into a completed whole and then evaluate how well they work together. In this case, God is pleased with what He accomplished. The Bible tells us, “Then God saw everything that he had made and it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).
It is amazing to me as a retired professional design engineer that in the opening chapter of the Bible, God revealed that He used the same methodology that I and every other engineer uses in his own work. I was made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27) and I copy His methodology. He, the eternal Creator God, doesn’t copy mine. Specifically, Genesis 1 describes 22 steps which provide a perfect illustration of engineering methodology in the creation of the heavens and the earth:
1 step specifying what to make.
1 step breaking the design into six separate tasks, sequential in this particular case.
18 steps total from the six subtasks using the above three basic engineering steps in each. 1 step of assembling the sequential stages into a unified whole
1 step of evaluating the completed whole. .
22 steps total—all perfectly arranged
There is absolutely nothing comparable to this in any other religious book known to man. The Bible’s opening remarks establish the God of the Bible as the Creator God and then proceeds to reveal engineering methodology as the mechanism He used in doing this.
Randy Guliuzza and Phill Gaskill analyzed 342 journal articles and 67 online reports related to biological adaptation, bioengineering, and design. They concluded that numerous biological functions are most accurately explained by engineering principles.17 This article uses scientific analysis and engineering analysis that solidifies the understanding that God acts as an engineer in creating life.
No Mistakes Allowed. As an experienced design engineer, I am very much aware of a basic engineering
principle: In an engineering design, the issue is not how much works but what doesn’t work. A single
miscalculation can be fatal to a gigantic, extremely complex system. Abiogenists don’t understand this.
Rationally, the standard of no mistakes in a one-step appearance of a complete living cell presents too great an obstacle for natural processes to overcome. Therefore, this single practical observation destroys the entire field of abiogenesis. The task facing a naysayer is to explain the steps which could actually falsify it, not just mock it then ignore it. The basic goal in abiogenesis is to show how the initial living cells appeared as a succession of small steps that were easy to perform. It is essentially applying the evolutionary theory to the origin of life. However, true to form, when observation contradicts their philosophy, abiogenists simply ignore the evidence.
Engineering and a literal of the six days in Genesis. Engineers design literal products, not symbolic ones. I was paid good money in my career as an engineer. However, no one ever paid me to design a symbolic product. It was always something real. Furthermore, it was expected to function properly. Engineers that do not design products which work will need to change their careers. When God revealed that Genesis 1 represents engineering methodology in creating the actual things we see around us, such as trees, stars, fishes, birds, and animals, He indirectly gave yet further evidence that Genesis 1 is to be taken literally.
Evening and Morning are always used literally in the Bible. As an incidental comment, the word for “evening” is used 134 times in the original Hebrew language. It consistently refers to the transition between daytime and nighttime or events following the transition. “Evening” is never used figuratively to mark the beginning of a symbolic event. Likewise, the word “morning” is used 214 times in the original language. It consistently refers to the transition between night and daytime or events that happen after the transition. “Morning” is never used figuratively to mark the end of an event. So, Genesis 1 uses “evening” and “morning” in a sense compatible with alternating approximately 12-hour periods which together constitute a single 24-hour day. The word “day” might sometimes have the sense of a general time period. However, Genesis 1 uses numbered, sequential days which consist of one evening followed by one morning with a total of 24 hours between consecutive days. Grammar requires the six days of creation to refer to literal, 24-hour events.
E. Big Bang Issues
God Stretched Out the Heavens, Not the Big Bang. According to Big Bang theory, the universe was created 13.8 billion years ago. This conclusion is based on two scientific observations: 1) the color spectrum of distant starlight is observed to be stretched out. 2) a uniform low temperature black body radiation is observed throughout the universe. Both of these are understood by modern scientists to
No Mistakes Allowed. As an experienced design engineer, I am very much aware of a basic engineering
principle: In an engineering design, the issue is not how much works but what doesn’t work. A single
miscalculation can be fatal to a gigantic, extremely complex system. Abiogenists don’t understand this.
www.trbap.org/lirgh page 14 August 27, 2025
be the result of space being stretched. Atheistic scientists assume the stretching is purely the result of natural processes. Complex mathematical analysis of the observed data then leads to the conclusion of a Big Bang that brought the universe into existence 13.8 billion years ago.
By contrast, the Bible tells us that God created the cosmos on a specific day (day 4 of the creation week— effectively instantly (Genesis 1:14-19))—not over billions of years ago. He states seventeen times that He subsequently stretched out the heavens, doing so according to His own will and purposes (Jeremiah 10:12, 51:15; Job 9:8, 26:7,37:18; Psalms 18:9,104:2, Isaiah 40:22, 42:5, 44:24, 45:12, 48:13, 51:13; 2 Samuel 22:10; Ezekiel 1:22; Jeremiah 10:12, Zechariah 12:1).
It is extremely rare for any issue in the Bible to get a 17-verse emphasis. Thus, it appears that God considers the understanding that He directly stretched out the heavens in accordance with His will is an extremely important issue to Him, one which He wants us to understand and believe. Understanding this gives us personal testimony of just how great His intervening power is. Instead of trying to limit His power to what makes sense to us, we should be in awe as we consider how great He reveals Himself to be. He can stretch out a three-dimensional space, doing so at different amounts in different locations and at different points in time, doing so as He pleases.
When God reveals to us that He fills all of space and time simultaneously as discussed earlier, then elapsed time means nothing to Him. As the Creator who created time, its rate of change means nothing to Him. Anything He can do over a time span He can also do instantly. Our minds are finite and cannot grasp how great His essence is. We submit to it in faith.
A good illustration of “stretching out” is found in Jeremiah 6:4 KJV, “...For the day goeth away, for the shadows of the evening are stretched out.” In other words, as the day goes away and the closer the time gets to evening, the longer shadows become. They are “stretched out.” As time progresses, stretching increases. When God stretches out the heavens, it gives a false appearance of old age from a secular perspective. However, the secular perspective is not the only possible interpretation of the observed evidence. God told us in seventeen places in the Old Testament about Him having personally stretched the heavens out, many thousands of years before scientists realized it. The above verses teach that God changes the time and rate of stretching according to His own purposes.
There is not space in this article to discuss this issue any further. However, recent YouTube clips discuss that the James Webb Space Telescope has made recent observations which have thrown cosmology into a state of chaos. Here are five interesting clips worth looking at but cannot be discussed due to lack of space18 19 20 21 22. For more current ones, a YouTube search could be made on the phrase “jwst cosmic chaos” with the filters at the right top of the return page set for the past month or past year. Keep in mind that God said He stretched the heavens out and see if this makes more sense than traditional Big Bang theory.
My preprint journal article on problems facing a natural origin of life.
In 2016, revised 2018, I wrote a potential science journal article showing how natural processes
provide the wrong kinds of products at virtually every proposed step of abiogenesis.2 It was published
in preprint only. It was submitted to two standard science journals that were specifically looking for
new perspectives on the origin of life. However, they were looking for new perspectives on how to
work around known problems, which were treated as isolated instances. They had no interest in
discussion that showed there was a set of factors common to all of the steps and which could predict
any step’s outcome as providing chemicals that would thwart any future progress towards life:
1) At every step there were many possible options of new chemicals to be produced.
2) Most of the possible options will act as contaminants.
3) There was nothing to constrain results to provide the new chemicals required for an advance
towards life instead of contaminants that would prevent life from appearing.
4) As a result, at any given step, the contaminants produced will thwart progress.
5) Observed experimental results confirm that the proposed steps of abiogenesis are nothing
more than a series of failures—each step presents its own wall impossible to get past.
In science, if a common unifying explanation is found to explain a behavior across a wide range
of actions which previously had been considered separate from each other, then the explanation is
considered a significant advance in science. However, these journals were not looking for a broad
principle which showed abiogenesis to be impossible. The target audiences of the journals were
professionals working in the field. They wanted something to remove all the problems they were
having. So, in both cases the article was rejected within 2 hours of online submission as “outside their
scope.”
The article truly was “outside their scope.” Their interest was to support materialism. It was not
to present an underlying cause common for the observed failures appearing at every proposed step of
abiogenesis. Over 3,500 people have accessed the article. My email address is on it. At this point, after
more than half a decade has elapsed, no one has ever pointed out a flaw in the five steps. Can you? If
they are true, abiogenesis is impossible.
3. Fulfilled Biblical Prophecy identifies the God of the Bible as the Creator God
Although science and engineering working together are capable of leading us to a solid understanding of the existence and intervening actions of a Creator God, they do not tell us which God is the Creator. God uses another tool for doing this: fulfilled prophecy.
We read in Isaiah 46:9-11,
9 I am God, and there is none like Me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand,
And I will do all My pleasure,'
11 ...Indeed I have spoken it;
I will also bring it to pass.
I have purposed it;
I will also do it.
In this passage, the God of the Bible asserts that He alone is God. He declares what He will do at the end, doing this even from the beginning. Furthermore, He is absolutely sovereign in His action: He does all His pleasure. There is no other person or spirit who restricts or restrains Him from doing whatever He desires. Whatever He purposes to do, He does. Furthermore, He has specifically told us what some of these events are. For Him, prophecy is not a matter of him merely foretelling something. It is a matter of Him using His sovereign power as God to bring to pass what He pleases and purposes. Only one God can have such absolute sovereignty. The God of the Bible claims this for Himself.
God’s uniqueness actually goes beyond this. He fills all of space and time. In our universe, time and space are intertwined. Those who are trained in physics understand that the theory of relativity reveals such a relationship. As Creator, God created not only the universe but also the space-time relationships that it operates under. God lies outside of both of these. He is omnipresent and eternal. He simultaneously exists everywhere in the space He created and everywhere in time, being the Creator. Indeed, Acts 15:18 (NKJV) reveals, “Known to God from eternity are all His works.”
Jesus ascribed this to Himself as well (see discussion on page 19 for John 8:56-59). He, the Creator God who intervenes at will, has known from eternity everything that He will do. He must, because He exists outside of the time and spatial constraints of our universe. Prophecy is nothing more than Him telling us some of the things that from His perspective He is performing at the same instant that He reveals them to us. Because of this, He alone is capable of 100 percent accuracy in a prophetic declaration. Such a God can certainly not be controlled by a human scientist in an experiment.
There are about 750,000 words in the Bible, the exact number varying according to the translation.23 The webpage gotquestions.org has become a well-respected place for people to find answers to various questions on the Bible. In general, I have been impressed with their work. A particular article on Biblical prophecy they post states that 27% of the Bible, just over 200,000 words, were predictive when they were written. About half of these have already been literally fulfilled. The other half are waiting to be fulfilled, with God giving a detailed description of a number of different stages yet to happen in His plan.
The article specifically states, “The amount of prophecy in the Bible is one of the things that make it unique among religious books. There is absolutely no emphasis on predictive prophecy in the Qur’an or the Hindu Vedas, for example. In contrast, the Bible repeatedly points to fulfilled prophecy as direct proof that it’s God is the Creator.”24 The God of the Bible alone dwells outside of and is independent of space and time and uses an exhaustive number of prophetic statements to confirm this. He has no competition in this area.
A significant portion of Biblical prophecy discusses the coming of a coming King, the Messiah, to the Jewish people. One list shows 113 prophetic verses in the Old Testament along with fulfilling verses in the New Testament. They provide a rather complete picture of Him and His ministry, even before He was born.25 The prophecies were all written over the period ranging from roughly 1,500 B.C. to 500 B.C. It would take a long book to discuss them. We will look at a hand full of the more important ones.
The impact of such a large number of detailed, intertwined prophecies demonstrates God’s sovereignty over time and space. Indeed, Jesus coming to earth as “God made flesh” (John 1:14) was in God’s mind from man’s beginning and is revealed in more and more detail as time goes on. These prophecies were written by many different men over a period greater than a thousand years. Before Jesus was born, it was not clear how these could mesh. With so many different authors and having been written over such a long time, they were certainly not the result of human planning. In looking back, we see that the God of the Bible is truly the God of creation and that Jesus is God made flesh, sent first to die for our sins and then be resurrected (already accomplished) and who will yet someday future come back to rule as King over the entire earth (among those prophecies which are still future.)
An interesting observation: The Bible’s opening comments are about God’s creation of the universe and of man. Next, the Bible shows how God has continuously dealt with man and intervened in his affairs at every stage throughout history. No other book from any other religion does this. Yet, if the Biblical account is true, this is exactly what would appear to be appropriate.
People in many parts of the earth today no longer have any knowledge of God. This is a case where if one goes back far enough in time, there will be ancestors who did have knowledge of Him, rebelled against Him, and deliberately wanted their children to forget about Him. This same pattern continues to this day. This pattern illustrates the serious consequences of not only rejecting God personally, but of encouraging one’s children to reject Him as well. This is all in God’s overall plan. How He deals with people who do not respond properly to the message is between them and Him.
God asserts that the testimony of Him provided by the creation establishes His identity sufficiently to make each person accountable to Him if they reject it. The deliberate bias against God shown by the modern scientific community demonstrates just how strongly people do not want God in
their lives. They can choose to oppose Him freely today or to submit their wills to Him in faith. However, their choice is not without consequences. God has already established a specific date when the current stage of offering freedom of choice will end for everyone.
A major issue is the response exhibited by those who do not know about Him but are given an opportunity to do so. For instance, there is a good possibility that multiple thousands of copies of this article will be distributed free on various university campuses in the Fall of 2025. For the people receiving an offer of one, the issue becomes how they will personally respond to this opportunity. It may be one of the most significant incidents in their lifetime. Yet, most people will not want it.
1) The initial announcement of Christ
The same day that Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit of a certain tree, God confronted both of them about what they had done. A series of judgments were announced. God also gave a cryptic prophecy to the serpent, who was controlled by Satan (John 8:44, Luke 8:26-39, Revelation 12:9), of the pending hostility between the seed of the woman and Satan, saying to Satan
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head
And you shall bruise His heel.” Genesis 3:15
Women do not have seed, men do. This is the only reference in the Bible that speaks of the seed of a woman. This strange verse was fulfilled by the coming of Jesus, who would be born of a virgin according to the next prophecy we look at. Jesus was going to deal a fatal blow to Satan when he eventually casts him into the Lake of Fire (Revelation 20:7-10), which was specifically created for his judgment (Matthew 25:41). This is represented by the seed of the woman crushing the serpent’s head, i.e., dealing it a fatal blow. Satan will bruise Jesus’s heel, which he did at the cross. However, three days later, Jesus was resurrected. In a yet future time, Jesus will permanently cast Satan into the Lake of Fire. In the Hebrew, the same word is variously translated “crush” and “bruise” in the above verse. This passage made no sense when it was given. For us, it has become a foundational part of God’s plan.
Virgin Birth of Christ
The prophet Isaiah gave a dramatic prophecy to King Ahaz, who was rebelling against God and refusing to ask for any sign that would show him God’s power. God uses this occasion to make the following announcement, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)
Mathew 1:23 specifically states that the birth of Jesus was the fulfillment of this prophecy. The name “Immanuel” translated from the Hebrew means, “God is with us.” In Isaiah 7:14 the significance of the prophecy was that a virgin birth would be the means for God to come and be with us. John 1:14 refers to this event as “God became flesh and dwelt among us.”
Born in Bethlehem but whose actions are from everlasting
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Though you are little among the thousands of Judah,
Yet out of you shall come forth to Me
The One to be Ruler in Israel,
Whose goings forth are from of old,
From everlasting.” (Micah 5:2)
This is a prophecy that the Messiah will be born in Bethlehem. The Messiah has two phases of
His time on earth. The first phase is recorded in the Gospels, the first four books in the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These primarily discuss the time from His birth on earth until His www.trbap.org/lirgh page 18 August 27, 2025
ascension into heaven after His death and resurrection. This appearance represents His coming to pay for our sins. Then, at some yet future time to us now, He will come back to rule on earth first for a thousand years, then forever in a new heavens and earth. These are discussed in Revelation. The Gospel of John presents Him as the eternal Word of God, who was with God (the Father) when God created the earth and Himself was God (John 1:1). Then John goes on to explain that the Word became flesh (John 1:14), which took place at the virgin birth of Christ. Micah states in the above passage that this ruler has existed and been active for eternity. I.e., He is God being born as flesh. Amazing!
Of lineage of David Many passages in the Old Testament teach that the Messiah, (the Christ, the coming king to rule over the world), would be a descendant of David. (2 Samuel 7:12-13, 16, 25-26; 1 Chronicles 17:11-14, 23-27; Psalm 89:3-4, 35-37; 132:11, Isaiah 9:7). David was a king of Israel who ruled around 1,000 B.C. The New Testament shows that Jesus fulfilled these prophecies (Matthew 1:6; 19:28; 21:4; 25:31; Mark 12:37; Luke 1:32; 3:31). Interestingly, the Jews kept strict records of ancestry, partially for the purpose of authenticating the birth of Christ. The Gospel of Matthew opens with the genealogy of Christ followed by His birth in Bethlehem. What reads as a horrible way to start a book has a major purpose. It establishes from the beginning that Jesus had the proper birthplace and genealogy. This is cleared up before anything else is discussed. Jesus was challenged about the legitimacy of His birth (implied in John 8:41), but never questioned about His official genealogy and place of birth.
Gentiles follow Him The kings of Judah only ruled over Judah, not the entire world, i.e., not all of the Gentiles. However, there is a particular king called the Messiah (meaning “Anointed One”) who will appear someday and rule over the entire world. At that time, Israel will have no enemies, which it characteristically has had throughout its history and still does today. However, the Bible, referring to the Messiah as the Servant of God, will minister not only to the Jews but also to the Gentiles: “Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles (Isaiah 42:1). When He brings in a kingdom of righteousness, it will include the Gentiles. The ministry of the church after the resurrected Jesus Christ was led by God to minister to the Gentiles, as we see even today. In the both the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6) and the new heavens and earth (Revelation 21-22), He will rule over the entire world.
Jesus claims not only claims to be God, but also that He as God fills all of time. The Gospel of John records the following conversation between Jesus and some Jews,
51Most assuredly, I [Jesus] say to you, if anyone keeps My word, he shall never see death.” 52Then the Jews said to Him, “...You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word, he shall never taste death.’ 53Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?” 54Jesus answered, “... 56Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
59Then they took up stones to throw at Him....(John 8:51-59)
The Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be presently active even before Abraham was born, approximately 2,000 years earlier, and that Abraham later rejoiced in what he saw. Since Jesus’s audience did not recognize His deity, to them these words were utter blasphemy. So, they challenged Jesus about this. He responded with the very clear statement, “Before Abraham was, I AM,” We discussed earlier that God fills all of space and time. Jesus claimed in this dialogue with the Jews that He was already existing before Abraham was born as well as at the present moment while He was talking. In other words, He personally is God in the flesh, filling all of time simultaneously. Earlier, we saw that this includes all of space as well. The pharisees understood that Jesus was claiming to be such
The pharisees understood that Jesus was claiming to be such
a God in this statement. In fact, they may have thought these comments to be stronger than even appropriate for God, since spiritual truth was not guiding them. So, they tried to kill Him.
The Jews thought that Jesus’s claim of an eternal present was blasphemy. Their response was to carry out the command of God in Levitus 24:16, “Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.” This is why they wanted to stone Him.
There is yet more going on here. In the Book of Exodus, written about 1,500 B.C., God wanted Moses to take a message to the Jewish people, who were at that time slaves in Egypt. Moses did not know God’s name and he felt awkward about asking people to follow a God whose name he didn’t even know. So, Moses asked God for His name. God replied, “I am who I am.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, “I AM has sent me to you.” (Exodus 3:14) I AM is the name of the God that Moses said was going to take the Jews out of Egypt and back to the promised land. Jesus was in effect claiming that He was the eternally present God. In theology, of the three members of the Godhead, the Father is the planner, the Son is the One that directs the work, and the Holy Spirit is the active agent of the work. This is too deep to go into this article. It is sufficient to say that Jesus truly was the God of ancient Israel who had become present in the flesh, being born of a virgin.
These things are beyond a human mind to understand fully. This observation should be expected of a God who invented the laws of nature and then creates a universe that operates under them except when He chooses to intervene. His nature is beyond our comprehension. We are only created in His image—we are not fully like His essence. We believe these things because we believe that the God of the Bible is the true God and that He reveals these things to us in the Bible. If a person submits His will to this God, the Holy Spirit will convince him of their truths (John 16:8-11).
Isaiah 53 This chapter is one of the most remarkable chapters in the entire Bible. When I personally witness to someone about what Christ did on the cross, I find that this book, even though it was written around 750 years before Christ came onto Earth, gives such a concise and complete account of the salvation message that I frequently use it when I explain what a person needs to believe in order to be saved. This is absolutely amazing. Here are some highlights:
5But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
On the cross, Jesus’s hands and feet were pierced. While on the cross, a soldier thrust his spear into Jesus’s stomach to ensure that He was dead. He, the One without sin, was killed on the cross to pay the judgment penalty due us for our sins.
6We all like sheep have gone astray, each one has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid upon Him the iniquity of us all.
Every person has gone astray from God’s will and turned to the passing pleasure of sin in
his life. Yet, God, in His love, His grace, and His mercy laid on Jesus the guilt we had all accumulated in our own account. May we say from the heart, “Thank You, Lord!”
10 ...and when His soul is made a guilt offering, He will see His offspring....
After His death served as a guilt offering, He will be resurrected!! He will see His offspring!! His offspring are those who are born into the family of God because of Him.
11 After the anguish of His soul, He will see the light of life and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant will justify many, and He will bear their iniquities.
After Jesus has died and been resurrected, He will then see the new, eternal life of those
who receive forgiveness of their sins because of what He did. His reaction will be to “be satisfied.” When He sees what His death and resurrection accomplished, He will conclude that it was worth the humiliation and suffering it cost Him to purchase our salvation. Knowing this should motivate us to serve Him out of love and appreciation. Woe to the man who curses Him because of hatred for God in his heart. Salvation is received by knowing Christ personally, which is the fruit of relying on Him as our personal Savior.
There are many, many more prophecies of Jesus in the Old Testament that He fulfilled during His life on earth. This is an introduction with intent to show the unique capacity of God to foretell the events of the future because He controls the future. Furthermore, He is eternally present in it, as we have discussed. This is truly a worthwhile study to be pursued by those who are interested in more.
Remaining Future Prophecies
The Bible has many yet future events laid out. The Book of Revelation is in almost its entirety still future prophecy. It gives many specific details of what is to take place on the earth after the church has finished it purpose on Earth. Although this is itself an extremely fascinating study, there is not enough space to go into it here. We will content ourselves with the understanding that the God of the Bible fills all of space and time simultaneously. He tells man what He is going to do in order to accomplish His own purposes, but is unlimited in what He is capable of doing. Praise be to His name!
4. God Creates Man in His Own Image. True Morality Flows from This. So Does a Christian’s Personal Relationship with God.
I once received a letter from a student at the University of Tennessee. He said that we had talked two years earlier when I gave him an article. It was an earlier version of this one. He said that at the time, he was an atheist. After thinking about our discussion, he gradually became convinced that there was a Creator God. However, he wasn’t sure about Christianity. He wanted to know what evidence was available to distinguish it from alternatives.
I told him that the strongest evidence is not in an external book. it is within himself. God created us for the purpose of worshiping Him and giving Him thanks. However, when we attempt to do this before we have been saved, the Holy Spirit will stir up our consciences about our sins. God is showing us that sin separates the two of us. The problem is that man wants to continue in his sin while he worships God. Yet, the two of these are not compatible. Man’s natural tendency is either to turn to idolatry and worship the things created instead of God or, as happens so frequently today, to deny God and claim natural processes as our creator. However, neither of these truly works.
By contrast, a person who trusts the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior actually gets his sins forgiven by God Himself. He gets a personal relationship with God. He has true peace and joy in God. In fact, God wants him to come to Him in prayer at any time and he can talk with God about anything that concerns Him. This is just like a small child coming to his human father. As he prays to God and sees God interacting in his life, he experiences a living relationship with God that is only available through Jesus Christ. Any other religion only offers an external relationship to God and does not truly provide an intimate living relationship with Him.
The sin in our lives stirs up our conscience such that we cannot freely come to God. I never heard back from this student. However, although that was a number of years ago, it is the same answer I offer even now. The strongest evidence for God is the living relationship He offers to those who are reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ. However, this does require someone first to acknowledge the sin in his life and a desire to turn from serving it to serving a living, holy God and then rely on Jesus, God’s provision for sin, to cleanse him. After the cleansing Jesus offers, he is free to come directly to
God with his concerns and worship. Apart from this cleansing, his sins keep Him separated from God. This is how God chooses to work. Any other religion only offers a promise of future cleansing, not immediate and actual.
I once talked to a student at the University of Houston that read a handout similar to this, who said that he agreed that there was a Creator God. However, he went on to say that he was a Hindu, had many idols in his room that he worshiped regularly, and had lots of ways to cleanse his sins. However, in talking, these ways were only supposedly potential ways. None of them were truly effective, which is why he kept searching. He left for class before we could talk further. My heart’s desire would be that he would stop chasing after things that don’t truly satisfy and receive the only solution that is truly effective—Jesus Christ as Savior.
Created in God’s Image
When God talks about the creation of man in the opening chapter of the Bible, He states that He created man in His own image. The passage specifically indicates that woman is included with man in this context. The next chapter will expand on this. Any religion or philosophy which does not recognize that God created man in His own image will not be compatible with Biblical theology. This makes worship of the God of the Bible exclusive. A person cannot serve the God of the Bible and any other god and vice versa. The passage revealing this relationship is found in Genesis 1:26-28,
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
There are many implications of this passage:
1. God views how a person treats other people, including enemies, as what the person actually feels about Him. For comparison, a flag symbolically represents the country for which it stands. Disfiguring a flag is considered a way to demonstrate disrespect for the country it represents. Likewise, if someone degrades another person for personal reasons, then God takes it personally. The degraded person was created in God’s image and bears that image within his being. God views degrading His representation the same as degrading Him. The implications of this are powerful; they provide the foundation for Biblical morality.
For instance, if a man wantonly kills someone as an expression of evil desire, God decrees that that person shall be killed by man for not respecting the image of God inherent in the now dead man. Issues such as self-defense, war, and execution of judgment by society can override the general situation as appropriate but these are outside the scope of this discussion to work through. The important thing is to recognize that God takes offense to wanton murder because the person murdered was expressing the image of God by virtue of his creation. Thus, we read in Genesis 9:6,
"Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God
He made man.
The same thing applies to cursing other men out of contempt for them. For instance, we read in James 3:8-12,
8 But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so. 11 Does a spring send forth fresh water and bitter from the same opening? 12 Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Thus, no spring yields both salt water and fresh. NKJV
An application of this principle is found in a commandment given to the Jewish people by Moses around 1500 B.C.,
4 If you meet your enemy’s ox or donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, and you want to refrain from helping it, you shall surely help him with it.” (Exodus 23:4-5)
Jesus Christ demonstrated how to apply these verses: In the Sermon on the Mount, one of His most famous messages, He commands, “Love your enemies!”(Matthew 5:43-48) Why? If they are enemies, shouldn’t we hate them? This is certainly the prevailing attitude of most religions and societies. We may indeed properly hate what someone does and promotes. Sin is real and offends God greatly. However, even the sinner was created in and still bears God’s image within himself. God reveals that He expects us to respect even the sinner in honor of the image of God that he bears.
This principle of loving one’s enemies is foreign to our natural way of thinking. This demonstrates the inability of man to understand God’s standards based on his own wisdom or that of some other religion or philosophy. They all fall short. We are dependent on God Himself to tell us what He wants. Furthermore, the Christian recognizes that God’s standard is absolute holiness. No man lives up to this standard. Every man needs salvation through Christ, who alone offers it.
2. True worship of God is only found in the Bible. No religion or philosophy which denies the foundational relationship between God and man is going to offer an effective substitute for God’s standards or to add to them. Any different system will only serve to degrade what God wants.
3. No man can live up to the standards of God’s perfection. Adam’s image of God became tainted when he disobeyed God and ate the forbidden fruit as discussed Genesis 2 - 3. He immediately died spiritually at this time, even as God had warned him would happen.
When God appeared to Adam shortly afterwards, Adam could no longer face Him because of his newly acquired guilt status. His conscience overwhelmed him. Both he and his wife ran and hid from God. The natural man today is still running and trying to hide from the absolutely pure God. No man can reconcile himself to God by doing any amount of good works, because he inherited spiritual death from Adam and a dead man is not capable of doing the works needed to give himself life.
God makes salvation freely available through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Bible reveals that God, as God, in His love for us despite our sins, offers us grace. Grace is the foundational relationship between man and God, because no dead person can give himself life. Grace is undeserved favor or blessing. It is in His grace that God offers us salvation through the work of His Son, Jesus Christ. In other words, none of us deserve salvation, can do anything to deserve it and are totally dependent on His undeserved favor toward us—grace—to allow us to come to Him.
God has created a class of beings called angels. These have greater intelligence and power than man. They are without sexual differences and once created, continue forever. Satan was at one time the most powerful, most intelligent, and most beautiful of the angels (Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:11-19). The Bible teaches that Satan began to desire to be worshiped for his greatness just as God was for His. Ultimately, he convinced about 1/3 of the angels to worship him instead of God (Revelation 12:4).
The Bible refers to the fallen angels as “demons.” Demons are real and have much power from a human perspective. However, compared to the Creator God, their power is infinitesimal. To God they are merely beings He created and are limited to whatever He chooses to allow them to do at any given moment. Satan and the demons work among men in an effort to receive worship from them and also to motivate men to rebel against God, even as they do. They also work to get men to live for the sake of indulging in the momentary, passing pleasures of sin, even as they eagerly do.
Although Satan and the demons strive to convince men that they are better off enjoying the passing pleasures of sin than in submitting to God, this is a lie. Eternal blessing or eternal judgment is at stake. Jesus declared that Satan was a liar and a murderer from the beginning. The pharisees hated Jesus and wanted to murder him. Jesus told them that they were of their father, the devil, who was a liar and a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). The implication is that anyone whose life is focused on lying and murdering is spiritually energized by Satan and not God.
So, the problem of sin extends into the angelic realm, not just with man alone. God has already created The Lake of Fire (Hell) for a coming judgment of Satan and His angels (Matthew 25:41). Therefore, Hell was not created for the punishment of man, but for Satan and the demons. However, men who follow after Satan and die without first getting saved by Jesus will follow Satan into Hell.
At our current time, God is still allowing Satan to demonstrate that Hell truly is the proper place of his ultimate punishment. Hell is absolutely terrifying in the scope of punishment it is capable of delivering. Satan’s punishment will be severe enough to provide appropriate punishment for all of the misery he has brought about to billions of people over the multiple thousands of years since he rebelled. We are currently still in the stage where God is allowing Satan to continue in rebellion against God and His authority. During this phase of time, Satan is demonstrating that as extreme and severe as Hell is, that it is nonetheless going to be appropriate for all of the misery he has caused. Satan’s time for open rebellion will soon end, although the exact timing has not been given to men to know.
When I see such rebellion against God, I am reminded that I, too, am also a sinner by nature and by practice. It is only by God’s grace that he has allowed me to come to Him. I have true compassion on the person who is rejecting God, because I was once also such a rejector and yet God changed my heart. There is still a distinct possibility that this man’s heart might also be changed. Yet, if it doesn’t, the time will come all too suddenly when there is no more opportunity for repentance. His eternal destiny then becomes fixed. In the meantime, my heart’s desire truly is that he might turn to Jesus for the forgiveness of his sins while this is still possible. This desire provides the motivation for me to write and to actively distribute articles such as this.
God cannot endure sin in His presence. The Father ordained that God the Son would take on the form of a man in the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus was born as a human baby through a virgin birth (Matthew 1-2, Luke 1-2). He lived a normal human life and was tempted by every form of sin as He lived through His years. Yet, not only did He never sin, He was actually killed by man because of hatred for His purity and His lack of compromise concerning truth. He exposed the sin of those surrounding Him including the leaders. His exposure was not violent, but one done in love as He ministered to the needs of people and spoke the truth. The problem was that people in general do not want to hear the truth about their sins. This was particularly the case of the leaders, who were more concerned about protecting their public image than in getting reconciled with God. These things are illustrated in the first four books of the New Testament in the Bible: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
When Jesus died, He—the God-man Himself—bore the penalty of all of the accumulated sins of mankind—past, current, and future. He could do this because the aspect of God dwelling within Him exists outside of space and time. He is omnipresent and eternal, as discussed earlier.
Since a dead man cannot save himself and since we are all born spiritually dead because of Adam’s sin, there is nothing we can do to save ourselves. Our only hope for the cleansing of our sins is the payment for them that Jesus made when He died on the cross. Then, three days later He was raised from the dead. Now, the resurrected Christ can give us new life, too. This new life in Christ is variously referred to as salvation, as reconciliation with God, as new life in Christ, as being born again, etc.
Receiving Christ as Savior is not automatic. Even if I buy a gift for someone, there is no guarantee that they will receive it. Buying an engagement ring does not mean that a woman will accept a proposal of marriage. Salvation is an offer from God available to anyone who willingly chooses Christ as Savior once he understands the message and is willing to respond to it properly. The alternative is to bear the full penalty of the sin we have earned. If a person rejects salvation in Christ, he will find that Christ Himself will be the Judge who holds him accountable for all of the sins he had committed. When the Judge is the very One who suffered for your sake and you chose to continue in sin instead of seeking him, you will find yourself speechless. This takes place at an event called “The Great White Throne Judgment.” A record of every sin a person has committed will be presented. Christ will then determine the appropriate level of punishment for a person to receive. He will next order angels to cast the person into the Lake of Fire (Hell). (Revelation 20:11-15)
The problem facing unsaved man is that the sin he loves in his life here is a permanent part of his nature. If God were to allow him into the new heavens and earth, he would immediately introduce sin into it at his first opportunity, even as Satan did at the end of the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4- 10). Yet, God has specifically promised that in the new heavens and earth there will be no more sin (Revelation 21:1-4). This precludes any possibility of an unsaved man escaping an eternal Hell. He gives eternal testimony to people in the new heavens and earth the results of sin (Isaiah 66:22-24). Getting this issue properly resolved is more important than anything else for every person who ever lives.
Despite God’s unfathomable power and wisdom, He reveals that the man He created was given varying degrees of free will. As the omnipotent, sovereign, eternal God, He has the power to give free will as He chooses, but this is too deep a topic to go into depth here. I will simply summarize my current understanding as follows: Having created man in His own image, God gives man a limited ability to make actual decisions. This ability is not fixed. For instance, the Bible teaches that the prayers of a godly man can accomplish much (James 5:16b-18). God does hear and act on prayers, intervening in the normal order to do this. This is the basis on which He commands us to pray.
Sometimes, we will have much latitude of choice in what we choose to do because all of our reasonable options fall within His general plan. God gives us the freedom to make various choices. The choices we actually make at this time reveal where our heart is at and hence eternal consequences. Other times, we have essentially no choice because His plan requires us to make a specific decision at that moment. In such a case, His will overrides our wills.
Rather than arguing about things a man cannot fully understand, I just look with awe at God’s greatness and leave the technical details to Him. No matter how many dog biscuits I give my dog, it will never understand algebra or quantum physics. Likewise, no matter how many brownies and how much ice cream I eat, I will never fully understand the depth of God’s power and wisdom. The Bible is very clear. though, when it states that He does expect me to believe what He reveals about Himself.
God observes how I respond to Bible verses that teach about difficult things that are only hinted at and difficult to understand. How do I respond to them? Do I diligently try to understand them to the degree he has revealed them in the Bible? Or, do I use this as the opportunity to decide how I want things to be and then choose to limit what He is like and limit what He can do to what makes the most sense to me? If I do attempt to limit the infinite God to what makes sense to me, I make myself
the judge of God—a task I am woefully unqualified to do and guaranteed to fail at. Sadly, this is what most people do to their eternal detriment. Although God has made us rational beings, that rationality is only an image of His nature and does not compare to His actual fulness.
For instance, my will intervenes in nature to a small degree every time I move. However, I cannot compare my power to intervene with God’s when He created the universe. Likewise, my wisdom is greater than that of the animals, but in no way does it compare to God’s. God is not restricted in His plan of the ages to what will make sense to us. Yet, this is the attitude of many people. This is nothing more than trying to live out Satan’s promise to Eve, that she could be like God, knowing good and evil. I.e., that her own wisdom would allow her to define what is right and wrong (Genesis 3:5-6). Her belief of this false Satanic promise led to all of the misery we see around us today.
Whether we choose to receive and submit to God’s words or whether we reject Him and them does not change reality. However, it does determine our eternal destiny—whether we are to be forgiven our sins and adopted into His family as a beloved child—or to be judged as a rebel who leaves behind a trail of destruction and misery as he walks through life. A person’s own words will condemn him because he condemns in others the same things that he willfully does himself (Romans 2:1-3, 3:16).
The greatest evidence God gives of the truth of salvation is the living personal relationship that the child of God has with God. The Holy Spirit, the final member of the triune God revealed in the Bible, comes to dwell within the believer and gives him new life. Experiencing this is the natural product of true salvation. As stated earlier, salvation itself comes from believing (relying on) the death of Jesus Christ to pay for the penalty we have earned for ourselves by our sins and on the resurrection of Jesus Christ to give us new, eternal life. This personal relationship with God is only available to the child of God, adopted into God’s family by his faith in God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Moreover, it is given to all who are truly saved.
If you want to trust Jesus Christ as your Savior, the following represents a suggested confession of faith. This is not a formula of exact words to recite. It intended to represent a decision of your heart to entrust your eternal destiny into Christ’s death and resurrection to cleanse you from sin and give you eternal life, doing this as you turn from living a life of sin to a life yielded to God as your Lord.
“Father in heaven, I believe that you are the eternal God, who is the Creator of the heavens and the earth. You are worthy of worship, of receiving thanks, and obedience. I have failed You in this. I have served sin instead of you and deserve punishment. I now recognize Jesus as Your Son made flesh. However, I believe He physically died on a cross. He paid the penalty for my sins when He did this. I believe He was raised from the dead three days later and now offers me eternal life. I am utterly helpless to save myself. I am relying on Christ’s death and resurrection to reconcile me with You, making me a child of yours as a result. I now look to you to guide me in a life of worshiping You and serving You. In Jesus’s name, Amen.”
After a person has been saved, God expects him to be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (the one God in three persons) (Matthew 28:18-20). He should also seek to find other believers for fellowship, teaching, encouragement, and ministry. He should find a church which is faithful to the things spoken of in this article and submit to the authority God has given it. These are all religious works that God desires from the one who has truly been saved.
Refusal to follow God’s stated desires can indicate that a person’s profession of faith was empty, that he was not truly coming to God to serve Him, but merely trying to appease his conscience while still leading a life of sin. God expects to be believed and obeyed. God designed us to worship Him and serve Him. While we were unsaved, we could not legitimately do either of these. Our sin separated us from God.
A primary motivation for us to take Christ as our Savior is to be made clean so that we can freely come to God and interact with Him on a personal level. This interaction requires submission and obedience on our parts. It is what the Bibe calls repentance.
Repentance means “a change of mind.” We no longer want to serve sin as the master of our lives, but as a faithful bondslave submits his will to pleasing his master, we submit our wills to pleasing God as our Lord and Master.
Some people make false professions of faith. Typically, such a person has come under conviction for his sin and he wants to clean his conscience—but while he still continues in the sin that grips him. He only wants to make enough commitment to avoid judgment while he still lives for the world and satisfying his flesh. He never takes the step of repudiating his old way of life while yielding himself to God for God to use him as He pleases. He can be outwardly very religious. However, he has never known Christ as Savior and vice-versa (See Matthew 7:21-27).
A true Christian will want to have a pure walk in this life in order to be close to God. This is a growth process. As we grow in obedience and understanding over the years, we become more aware of the sin in our lives as we become purer. Yet, we still stumble in many ways (James 3:2). Also,
Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. And everyone who this hope in Him purifies Himself, just as He is pure (1 John 3:2-3).
God has ordained that while we are still living on this earth in the bodies we were born with, we will struggle with sin. God wants us to continually remember that we were only saved by grace and not lose compassion on those who are enslaved by their sins.
How does a Christian respond to sins committed in his current life? The Bible answers with the words, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9) In the original Greek text, the word confess means “to say the same as.” God wants us to say the same thing about our sins that he does: 1. We did it. 2. God is not pleased with it. 3. In the big picture, it was not profitable for us to have done it (this can be a struggle with our flesh and we may need God’s help in facing this). 4. We need to turn from it and resolve not to repeat it. 5. We want the Holy Spirit to strengthen us in our spirit in order to become faithful in overcoming deep-seated sins.
Typically, some sins are easy to repudiate and turn from. Others are harder to clean up. It is important never to accept sin in our life but instead to keep short accounts with God. We need to agree with God about our sin immediately when we stumble and seeks God’s strength in overcoming it, never viewing it as a right or something we can ignore without consequence. Stumbling as we grow in purity serves to remind us that we, too, are only sinners saved by God’s grace. This should give us compassion as we deal with people strongly enslaved to their sins. Instead of becoming proud and lifted up at the change Christ has made in us, God graciously reminds us that we by our nature are no better than them. This should all be done in the perspective of our gratefulness to God for the grace He has given us in saving us and giving us the goal of pleasing Him. We should never view any sin as unimportant to God, one that we are entitled to do. Praise be to God for His grace, love, and mercy.
References
1 Morris, M. 1992, Men of Science | Men of God. Master Books, A division of Creation Life Publishers, In. El Cajon, CA ISBN 0-89051-080-6
2 Bowler, Peter. 1989. Evolution. The History of an Idea. Revised Edition. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-06386-4 p. 196
3 Darwin, C. 1900. The Origin of Species, 6th ed. London. p. XXn
4 Lyell, C. 1837. Principles of Geology. London John Murray. https://archive.org/details/Lyell1837jf09J-c 5 Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. Bantam Books, June, 1999 . ISBN 0-553-21463-2. 229--254. 6 Lewontin, Richard C. 1997. Billions and Billions of Demons. New York Review.
https://www.nybooks.com/article/1997/01/09/billions-and-billions-of-demons.
7 Wikipedia contributors. (2024, July 27). Emergence. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 00:43, August 3, 2024,
from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emergence&oldid=1236887381
8 Schwille, P. 2015. Jump starting life? Fundamental aspects of synthetic biology. J Cell Biol. Aug 2015, 210(5 )
687- 690. www.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201506125
9 Penzlin, Heinz. 2009. The Riddle of Life. Naturewissenschaflen 96:1-23 www.doi.org/10.1007/s00114-008-0422-8
18 https://youtu.be/wXllWWUl8Dk Dr. Jason Lisle is a creationist astrophysicist. He talks about JWST predictions.
Website Recommendations for Further study:
https://www.youtube.com/@DrJamesTour James Tour, Ph.D., is one of the most honored research scientists/ biochemists in the world. He is a strong Christian and has many YouTube clips discussing why a natural origin of life is impossible.
www.creation.com Creation Ministries, International is the largest creation science organization, with more Ph.D. scientists on its staff than any other apologetics ministry. The home page on its web site has a nice box where you can ask any creation science related question and it will jump to articles discussing it. www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis is another large creation science ministry. Its internet home page also features a box where you can ask a question and it takes you to articles about it.
www.icr.org The Institute for Creation research has many articles of interest for a person interested in learning more about this subject.
X
www.isgenesishistory.com An excellent website with many videos discussing the creation and flood passages. www.creationresearch.org A creation research society with a button on its webpage for searching topics.
www.creationtruthoutreach.org This is an old website of the author, Tim Stout. It is no longer maintained, but has some potentially interesting clips in it.
.
This article: Copyright 2025 by Timothy R. Stout. Published under a Creative Commons (0) License. It
may be freely copied and distributed without further permission provided credit is attributed to the author. Email: timothystout@yahoo.com
www.trbap.org/lirgh page 28 August 27, 2025