Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Meaning’

Question 1-Puritan Catechism

January 10, 2013 2 comments

CharlesSpurgeon

Q. What is the chief end of man?

A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, (1 Corinthians 10:31) and to enjoy him for ever. (Psalm 73:25, 26)

Charles Haddon Spurgeon-A Puritan Catechism

Chapter IV : Of Creation

1. In the beginning it pleased God the Father, (a) Son, and Holy Spirit, for the manifestation of the glory of (b) his eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, to Create or make the world, and all things therein, (c) whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days, and all very good.

a  John 1.2,3. Heb. 1.2. Job 26.13

b Rom.1.20.

c Col.1.16. Gen 2.1,2.

2. After God had made all other Creatures, he Created (d) man, male and female, with (e) reasonable and immortal souls, rendring them fit unto that life to God; for which they were Created; being (f) made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holyness; having the Law of God (g) written in their hearts, and power to fulfill it; and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was (h) subject to change.

d Gen. 1.27.

e Gen. 2.7.

f Eccles. 7.29. Gen. 1.26.

g Rom.2.14,15.

h Gen. 3.6.

3. Besides the Law written in their hearts, they received (i) a command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; which whilst they kept, they were happy in their Communion with God, and had dominion (k) over the Creatures.

i Gen. 6.17. & ch. 3.8,9,10.

k Gen. 1.26,28.

 

The 1677/89 London Baptist Confession

Divine Creation is the only Reasonable View

April 12, 2012 2 comments

Is the belief in Divine Creation reasonable? The Bible and Science affirm that it is. Most think that the science of Evolution has proved otherwise. What most don’t know is that the theory of evolution is not provable by science itself.

Science is a field of study that uses methods in order to prove something through observation. Since we see nothing creating today, then science cannot be used to test how anything came into existence. Therefore the Creation theory and the Evolution theory (1) cannot be tested by science. In other words, these two theories are merely interpretations of how we believe that every thing came into existence. These two theories have to be proven by what we see in existence today.

There is one field of science that can play an important role in which view we hold. This field is called Forensic Science. Forensic Science is used in crime scene investigation. Since the murderer is only going to murder his victim once and it is not a repeatable act, then this science helps in solving the murder. In other words, this science is a science that tries to interpret what happened in the past by looking at the evidence of the present.

This being said, Is the theory of Evolution a better interpretative grid of how our universe came to be? In other words, do we see life coming from non-life today? Do we see things with design coming into existence today without a designer? Of course we don’t. We understand that things that exhibit complex design must have a complex designer. This universe and everything in it such as: the birds, fish, people, and even the DNA by which we are made exhibits complex design. Therefore things could not just have evolved in order to have what we have today.

I contend that evolution is just as much a religion as belief in a Divine Creator is. This is because there is no evidence whatsoever for evolution and in order to believe in evolution one must just believe it, on mere faith alone. This is why the Atheist is just as religious as the Creationist. It is because they believe in atheistic evolution without any evidence for this belief whatsoever.

This much said, I want to point you to an article that will give evidence that there is unique design and purpose in this life.

 

Creation: The Only Reasonable Explanation of Natural Phenomena  by W. Hewitt Tier

 W. HEWITT TIER

Mr. Tier was born in Southampton, England, in 1886 and was educated at Portsmouth and at Reading University College where he held the position of associate. He later served as an educator in science fields in schools in England and New Zealand, the latter place where he was head master.

Mr. Tier’s interest in creation and its evolutionary antithesis began at the age of 15, when the theory of evolution disturbed his belief in the truth of the Bible. Intensive and wide-ranging reading on the subject followed. This led to his deep and profound conclusion as to the majesty of creation, with its superior logic, and the falsity of the theory of evolution. His conclusions have motivated the writing of several articles and pamphlets for the Evolution Protest Movement and other publications. He has served the Evolution Protest Movement (later renamed to: Creation Science Movement, based in the U.K.) as a council member since 1956.

 

PART I – The Super-terrestrial

If the Bible is accepted to be a revelation from God about matters which concern mankind, but which do not come within the range of our finite powers of investigation and discovery: more precisely, if we believe that we are the subjects of a Supreme Being who is concerned for our present state and our eternal welfare, we shall find little difficulty in accepting the written statement by Moses, as God’s mouthpiece, that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” together with the formal record of how the flora and fauna came into existence. Those who do not accept the truth of Genesis I are reminded by the Apostle Paul that “the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead” (Romans1:20). This constitutes a challenge to human intelligence and reason which should be carefully noted, because it comes from a source which claims to transcend human reason, where this is necessary, for our fuller knowledge of God’s purposes: e.g., Why should we expect divine mercy?

It is, no less, a challenge to true science as well as to that which the Bible calls “science so-called.” The latter embraces conclusions based on incomplete or inadequate knowledge, imaginations, suppositions, and the like, which abound in the theory called Evolution. If the public were fully aware that so many of the statements by scientists are mere surmises, there might now be much to complain about. On the contrary, alas, these guesses are often presented as proven facts. We need only recall the case of the Piltdown Man, exposed within the last decade as a fraud. This is true also of the so-called Java Man, the Peking Man, and many other impositions on public credulity. These rash inventions are themselves evidence of the very shaky foundation of the theory they are seeking to uphold.

Read the rest here.

(1) I want to clarify that I only used the terms “Creation Theory” and “Evolution Theory” because this is the terminology that most people have become accustomed to using.  But to be clear on this issue, I want to say that neither creation nor evolution in its proper sense is a scientific theory or scientific hypothesis. This is because neither can be tested by the scientific method. These two terms should be viewed more as scientific models.  The “creation model” and “evolution model.” A model is simply how we interpret the evidence.

The Shrew is rebuking the Belief of the Atheist

April 10, 2012 2 comments

Here is an article that gives evidence for design in one of the tiniest mammals on earth.

Shrewbot’s Synthetic Whiskers Detect God by Kile Butt, M. A.

The Etruscan pygmy shrew is a contender for the smallest mammal in the world. But its diminutive size does not detract from its amazing design. Since this little critter is blind, it must rely on its whiskers to navigate and find food. The whiskers of this tiny shrew are highly sensitive and extremely efficient. In fact, the shrew’s whiskers work so well that researchers have been studying them in an attempt to equip robots with similar technology.

Read the rest here.

Why I am not an Atheist

Two mp3’s by Ravi Zacharias on “Why I am not an Atheist.” This is a response to Bertrand Russell’s book “Why I am not a Christian.”

 In these mp3 lectures Ravi Zacharias gives an answer on the four existential struggles of life, in which Bertrand Russell had no answer and admitted he had no answer in many of his essays.

The four points that Ravi Zacharias  drove home were:

  1. Without God there is no law
  2. Without God there is no hope
  3. Without God there is no meaning
  4. Without God there is no recovery

 

So here are the two MP3’s. I hope you enjoy.

Why I am not an Atheist Pt 1

Why I am not an Atheist Pt 2

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 800 other followers