Four more interesting topics.

 IN THE IMAGE OF GOD
 STARLIGHT AND THE UNIVERSE
 IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY
 CHANCE OR DESIGN
 WHY IS IT THAT......

"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 upon the earth."

In modern usage the word 'image' can mean many things. The Hebrew word tselem,  translated as 'image',  is an archaic form that means 'resemblance', not an exact representation as is one of the common usages today. So what we are told in Genesis 1:26 is that we are made to resemble God, not that we are His exact image, or duplicates of Him.

In our current state it is not possible to see God as He actually is, because although we stand in right relationship to Him and have been delivered from our former bondage to sin, we still have to contend with our weak flesh every day. If we were somehow to catch a glimpse of Him it would destroy us as it would have Isaiah ( 6:5 ) had not God had mercy on him and cleansed him for the work that he was to do. Isaiah's problem was that he knew that not only were his lips unclean, but his heart was also.
Job ( 42:6 ) and Peter ( Luke 5:8 )  similarly recognized the truth about themselves when they were confronted with the presence of the Lord. The word in Isaiah 6:5 that is translated as 'undone' literally means 'destroyed' or 'cut off'. Isaiah was shown exactly who he was in relation to the Holy God and he was convinced that he was finished.

Will we ever see God as He is? Yes we will, although "...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". At the moment it is enough for us to be like Him. Each day that a Christian lives he becomes a little more like Him. Because He has created in us new hearts that respond to Him, whereas formerly our hearts were as stone and were not capable of responding, we eagerly accept His correction and instruction because of our love for Him who first loved us and gave Himself for us ( Ephesians 5:2 ).

We are made in His image and we know for certain that our chief end is to glorify Him and enjoy Him forever. Knowing these things we recognize that all men are made in His image. Old, young, fat, thin, wise, foolish, presidents, common people, those who are born and those who are unborn ( i.e. being made in His image ), saints and sinners, we are all the work of His hands and all that we have is His.

Therefor take thought when you are feeling proud of yourself, and remember Who it is that made you "...for a little while lower than the angels". ( Hebrews 2:7)
 

                                            Behold, now is the acceptable time.
                                         Seek Him while He may still be found!

Recent discoveries at the Sandia National Laboratories. It ain't as old as it looks.

Dr. Humphreys proposes that the starting point was not a black hole, but a white hole, which is a black hole running in reverse. Relativity theory permits this, and the idea accounts for certain features of the universe that the Big Bang cannot. There is solid evidence that that earth can be very young while the universe is vastly older.

For a full explanation get yourself a copy of Starlight and Time by Dr. Russell Humphreys
ISBN:0-89051-202-7.

             A discussion of why things must be designed from the beginning to work correctly.

                If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could
                not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
                my theory would absolutely break down.
 
         Charles Darwin,  Origin of Species, 6th ed. (1988), New York University Press, p.154

Question: What type of biological system could not be formed by "numerous, successive, slight modifications"?

Answer: Any system that is irreducibly complex. An irreducibly complex system is any system which is composed of several interacting parts that all contribute to the basic function so that the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to stop working. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced by continually improving the initial function by slight, successive modifications to a precursor system because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional.

An example of an irreducibly complex system in daily life is the mousetrap. There are five parts involved: a hammer, a trigger, a latch, a spring, and a base which holds everything in its proper place. Remove any one of these parts and you don't catch mice.

OK, but what about biological systems? There are many examples in biology to choose from. Vision, blood clotting, immune response, etc., etc, etc.

Because there is so much detail involved I will not here try to explain it all, but instead refer you to Darwin's Black Box, by Michael J. Behe, Associate Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University. Obtain a copy from  Amazon.com. , it is very readable and the examples and explanations are compelling.
 

You have no doubt heard it said that the Earth and everything upon it evolved by chance. What do you suppose the chances are of that happening?

First, let's look at what chance is. Within the realm of mathematics 'chance' is a perfectly good term when used to describe probabilities. Take a coin in your hand. What are the chances that the coin will come up heads when you flip it? 1 in 2, right? Now, what effect did 'chance' have on the coin?  Many factors operate on the coin when it is flipped: how high it was flipped, how fast it was spinning, the density of the air at the various altitudes the coin passed through, whether or not the coins' dynamic balance was perfect, The geometry of your hand when you caught it, whether or not you turned your hand over, and so forth. These are all actual physical effects. The idea of 'chance' playing any part at all is nonsensical. The odds are still 1 in 2 of the coin coming up heads, but not by the operation of anything called 'chance'.

Chance can not do anything because chance is not anything. In order for something to act it must first be. Chance is not a thing: it is nothing. It has no existence. So if you claim that the universe was created by chance it is the same thing as saying that the universe was created by nothing. If you invest chance with ontological status you have given it magical power. You have given it the power to do something when it is not anything. But consider the axiom: EX NIHILO NIHIL FIT, Out of nothing, nothing comes. If there ever was a time when there was nothing what could there be now? NOTHING!

A man named Pierre Gelbet said, in 1913, "Chance appears today as a law. The most general of all laws. It has become for me a soft pillow like the one, in Montaigne's words, 'only ignorance and disinterest can provide' ". Scientists who are of otherwise sound mind calmly make the assertion that out of nothing everything came. This is their alternative to the notion of an Eternal self existent Creator. This is their "soft pillow", the myth of magical creation of everything out of nothing. They should know better. The first fundamental law of science is the Law of Non Contradiction which states that a thing cannot both be and not be at the same time and in the same relationship. So just how is it that the universe could exist before it existed? That is both a rational and logical impossibility. Even so, the great professors continue to insist that that is how it is with the universe: It created itself, by chance, out of nothing.

READ FOR YOURSELF

Genesis Ch. 1    Psalm 33

Why is it that the oceans have not filled up with sediment?

Science tells us that the crust of the earth is being constantly recycled through tectonic action. This can be observed to happen in various subduction zones at the edges of continental plates. This theory says that, over time, all the sea floors will be recycled at about the same rate that they are observed to be spreading along the mid ocean ridges. Here is the problem: the subduction and spreading do not occur at a fast enough rate to prevent the oceans from filling up with sediment from continental erosion. At the present observed rate of erosion only about 200,000 to 300,000 years would be required to fill the oceans with mud. Why hasn't this happened? Because of insufficient time. Simple calculations show that the Mississippi delta has formed within the past 4 or 5 thousand years. These calculations take into account the constant erosion of the delta by the sea. The sediment carried away by erosion would have to be somewhere close by. It isn't. Conclusion: The Mississippi river and it's delta are of recent origin, as are the oceans themselves.

Why is it that fossil trees are seen to penetrate layers that are supposedly millions of years apart in age?

Everyone has seen the pictures. Trees standing upright through as many as 40 feet of layered formations. Park rangers point out how the rock at the bottom is millions of years older than the rock at the top. Huh? Those trees just stood there for million of years and waited to be covered?
Are we that gullible? Besides which, what happened to the roots and branches? If a standing tree were covered and fossilized you would expect it's roots, at least, to be with it. In the famous petrified forests the trees don't have more than a few root stumps and no branches. Some trees appear in the rocks upside down. How can this be? Go back to Mt. St. Helens and observe what happened there. In a few moments of time entire forests were torn out by the roots and hurled into lakes some distance away. These trees were shorn of their roots and branches. They were observed to float for some time before being waterlogged and sinking to the bottom. Since the bottom end of the trees is generally thicker and heavier, the trees tended to sink in an upright position. Upon reaching the bottom they sank into the mud for some distance. Continued erosion of the fresh sediments from the eruption washed into the lakes and rapidly covered the trees for 10, 20, even 30 feet. Core sample of the lake bottoms show layering just like the petrified forests. Are millions of years required to create this kind of phenomenon? No. Only the right conditions.