Sunday, February 3, 2008


The Myth of "Accidental Genesis"
by Bill Dietrich

Life began by accident.


Life began by accident.

Life began by accident.

Believers in the creation of life without a supernatural Creator have to keep chanting this to themselves. Otherwise they might examine the facts and start to doubt this doctrine which has been preached to them all their lives. They heard it in their Biology classes from elementary school through college and beyond, it is repeated by their friends and co-workers and reinforced in the media.

It is assumed to be true throughout a culture that often considers believers in our Creator God to be intellectually challenged, at best. Ours has become a culture that prefers to bow at the altar of science instead of the altar of God. Fellow Christians who don’t like being marginalized often decide to keep their beliefs to themselves, rather than arguing a point they think they can’t win. The fear of embarrassment not only discourages some from speaking out, it also creates vulnerability to believing the unbelievable.

So let’s see if we’ve got this straight. The belief that the phenomenon of life occurred solely through random physical processes, without intervention by any supernatural forces, is what I call "Accidental Genesis". And here are some of the steps you would have to believe in order for this to occur:

Click here to read the full article



_______________________________________________________________________________

The Myth of “Slow Creation”
by Bill Dietrich

How many times have you heard a fellow Christian say, “I believe God created everything in six days, but they were not six LITERAL DAYS. Each DAY was probably a much longer period... maybe millions of years.”

I don’t know about you, but my reaction is twofold: First, I believe that if God is truly Omnipotent, He is certainly capable of incomprehensible supernatural acts. Just because our human minds can’t comprehend such incredible power, that does not make it impossible for Almighty God. Do we really want to believe in a God who is not powerful enough to accomplish such a mighty feat in such a short time?

Secondly, a truly scientific analysis of the facts leads me to a simple conclusion. For reasons I will discuss here, it would be impossible for creation to be spread over a series of multimillion-year steps corresponding to the six “days” of creation. The person who embraces this “slow creation” idea is attempting to accommodate and appear logical in the eyes of the secular scientific community, while maintaining a belief in a creator God.

You can’t have it both ways. Here’s why not.


Click here to read the full article


_______________________________________________________________________________

Losing the Culture War
by Bill Dietrich

I love this country. I want the best blessings God has in store for this country and all of us who call America our home. I believe in my heart all Christians feel the same way. Many of us see the way our culture is steadily becoming more Godless and profane and we are deeply concerned, bewildered, even angry at times. As a result, many have described the conflict between Christian values and those of the Popular Culture as a “Culture War”. Indeed, there is a deep rift between our respective values. Many of us have chosen to confront the major problems we see at this time, seeking to bring about change in the attitudes and lifestyles of the opposition.

We have drawn battle lines in such areas as Legalized Abortion, Homosexuality, Same-Sex “Marriage”, Evolution and Assisted Suicide to mention a few. We have fought to protect our Freedom of Religious Expression in our schools and in the workplace. These are areas in which government is actively promoting conduct which is absolutely contrary to our Biblical standards. Under the guise of “freedom of speech”, today we are told we must tolerate unprecedented filth in Movies, Rap Music, Radio and Television. Evolution is being taught in our schools as though it is an undisputed fact.

If our struggle against the moral meltdown in our values is truly a “Culture War”, are we winning or losing? I believe we are losing. But why?


Click here to read the full article


_______________________________________________________________________________


The Myth of “Evolution Science”
by Bill Dietrich

When you hear anything repeatedly, day after day, year after year, eventually you begin to accept it as truth. This is especially true when you hear it from every corner of our culture… schools, the media, movies. Even in many of our churches, due to fear of being ridiculed by the secular elites, you find a willingness to accept Darwinian evolution as fact. After all, who are we to question the science of evolution?

But the theory of Evolution is not really science. It’s not even close to being science. When it comes to oxymorons, the term “Evolution Science” tops the list. If you look at the origin of the theory, one can only wonder why any self-respecting modern day scientist would place any credence in it at all.

Look at a few historical facts. Charles Darwin is generally credited as the father of the theory of evolution. He first postulated his theory in 1859, with his book The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. Without any knowledge of genetics, DNA, or cell biology, he attempted to explain how inherited traits are passed from generation to generation. He speculated that traits which tend to make an individual better suited to survive in his environment would be more likely to be expressed in future generations. In other words, an organism more “fit” than individuals lacking these traits will survive to reproduce more abundantly. Eventually, these traits would then become predominant in the population. His ideas were based strictly on empirical observations and lacked any evidence of how such mechanisms work at the level of genetics.

While it may be difficult to argue against Natural Selection as it relates to variations within a species, the extension of this process to allow the creation of a new and different species cannot happen, and does not happen. There is also no evidence in the fossil record that it has ever happened.


Click here to read the full article


********************************************************************************

"Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools...."

Romans 1:22

Monday, January 21, 2008

The Myth of "Accidental Genesis"
by Bill Dietrich

Life began by accident.


Life began by accident.

Life began by accident.

Believers in the creation of life without a supernatural Creator have to keep chanting this to themselves. Otherwise they might examine the facts and start to doubt this doctrine which has been preached to them all their lives. They heard it in their Biology classes from elementary school through college and beyond, it is repeated by their friends and co-workers and reinforced in the media.

It is assumed to be true throughout a culture that often considers believers in our Creator God to be intellectually challenged, at best. Ours has become a culture that prefers to bow at the altar of science instead of the altar of God. Fellow Christians who don’t like being marginalized often decide to keep their beliefs to themselves, rather than arguing a point they think they can’t win. The fear of embarrassment not only discourages some from speaking out, it also creates vulnerability to believing the unbelievable.

So let’s see if we’ve got this straight. The belief that the phenomenon of life occurred solely through random physical processes, without intervention by any supernatural forces, is what I call "Accidental Genesis". And here are some of the steps you would have to believe in order for this to occur:

- Matter and energy in the universe either always existed or spontaneously came into being out of nothingness. Either way, it came about accidentally. No intelligent force caused it to happen;

- Massive chunks of matter became organized into complex solar systems with planets orbiting around flaming suns and moons orbiting around planets. The millions of solar systems arranged themselves into galaxies, all in perfect balance;

- The planet we call "Earth" accidentally developed all the right conditions for life to occur and sustain itself. It had oceans, land masses, lakes and rivers. It was spinning at a constant speed on an axis perfectly tilted to produce four seasons each annual orbit around the sun;

- It had a perfect mixture of gases hovering over its surface. Its position relative to the sun resulted in a mean temperature range which allowed surface water to cyclically evaporate into the atmosphere, then return to the surface as rain or frozen precipitation;

- Interactions between electrically charged particles in the atmosphere resulted in the phenomenon of lightning. The lightning discharges caused different elements to link together into new molecules. More lightning caused more molecules to link together into more and more complex molecules;


Accidentally, some of the complex molecules being formed were organic bases, which in turn accidentally linked up to form nucleic acids, namely RNA and DNA. The accidental arrangements of the components of these extremely complex DNA molecules formed an incredibly intricate code we now describe as "genes";

(We’re getting close to making that incredible leap of faith: Non-living chemicals miraculously become ALIVE!)

OK, we’re accidentally at the level of DNA, but is that LIFE? Not yet. We’ve got a long way to go. We have to get a basic cell, which has to be able to carry out all necessary biologic functions. Now we’re beyond the level of single, sequential accidents. Now we require a simultaneous combination of very specific and essential accidents in order to produce the first living cell.


Our accidental DNA has to be able to make itself a cell wall or membrane to contain all the complicated "stuff" inside a living cell. It also has to be able to manufacture all that "stuff". Then the cell needs to possess the following capabilities:

1. Replication. It has to be able to reproduce exact copies of itself. Those copies must also be able to replicate themselves, generation after generation;

2. Metabolism. It has to be able to take in nutrients or assemble its own, as in photosynthesis, then extract and store the energy from those nutrients in a way that can be used to power the ongoing life processes. Any student of Biochemistry will have to admit that even the basics of cell metabolism are extremely complex and sophisticated;

3. Respiration. A plant cell needs to take in CO2 and dispose of the O2 waste which is produced by its metabolic processes. An animal cell does the exact opposite. (By the way, there’s another fortunate accident. For life on earth to continue, some cells had to accidentally be animal cells, others had to be plant cells);

Is it just me, or does this all seem like total lunacy? I can’t even get to a plausible explanation of the origin of a single-celled organism. How on earth can we go from there to a multicellular level, complete with brain and nervous system, heart and circulatory system, digestive system, skeletal system, sexual differentiation and reproductive system, and on and on?

There is a simple explanation for someone believing something as ludicrous as accidental genesis. When a person wants desperately to disbelieve God, they will keep coming up with reasons, no matter how illogical those reasons may be. Then they finally get to the point that they are totally incapable of believing the truth of God.

Albert Einstein was a brilliant scientist. In an effort to maintain credibility, it is said he finally admitted that the evidence for an intelligent creator was inescapable. Sadly though, he believed there was no way we could know our creator.

How sad, indeed. God has revealed himself to us throughout scripture. And even for those who will not accept it as the Word of God, the truth of Psalm 19:1 cries out: The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands and Psalm 14:1 …The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

Copyright 1/21/2008 William C. Dietrich




Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to digg DIGG
Add to StumbleUpon Stumbleupon
Add to Reddit Reddit
Add to Google Google
Add to Yahoo Yahoo!
Add to Netscape Netscape
Add to Ask Askjeeves
Add to BlinkList Blink List

Monday, January 14, 2008

The Myth of “Slow Creation”
by Bill Dietrich

How many times have you heard a fellow Christian say, “I believe God created everything in six days, but they were not six LITERAL DAYS. Each DAY was probably a much longer period... maybe millions of years.”

I don’t know about you, but my reaction is twofold: First, I believe that if God is truly Omnipotent, He is certainly capable of incomprehensible supernatural acts. Just because our human minds can’t comprehend such incredible power, that does not make it impossible for Almighty God. Do we really want to believe in a God who is not powerful enough to accomplish such a mighty feat in such a short time?

Secondly, a truly scientific analysis of the facts leads me to a simple conclusion. For reasons I will discuss here, it would be impossible for creation to be spread over a series of multimillion-year steps corresponding to the six “days” of creation. The person who embraces this “slow creation” idea is attempting to accommodate and appear logical in the eyes of the secular scientific community, while maintaining a belief in a creator God.

You can’t have it both ways. Here’s why not.

According to Genesis, the first living organisms God created were plants. During subsequent “days” He created the various types of animals. Any high school biology textbook will point out that plants take in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Animals are just the opposite. They breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide. In effect, plants and animals are absolutely interdependent for life itself. If there were nothing but plants on earth for millions of years, their oxygen “waste” would eventually increase to toxic levels, while the available carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would be depleted. Plant life would become extinct before animals ever appeared on the scene.

There is simply no way creation could have taken millions of years.

Evolutionists have successfully promoted the idea of a very old earth. They have built a house of cards based on the extremely flawed speculations of a nineteenth-century naturalist named Charles Darwin. His theory of the origin of species appealed to those who sought to explain the complexity of the universe without reliance on a supernatural God. But in order to make the evolution fairy tale seem plausible, they must continue to stretch the time line of the evolutionary process, thus calling for an older and older earth.

However, by insisting on a very old earth, they have created another trap for themselves.

Think for a moment. If the earth has been around for 4 billion years or more, and if life has slowly evolved over even millions of years, then the environment had to remain reasonably constant over that time span. Average temperatures on earth would have to remain within a definite range which permits life to proceed as we know it.

Therefore, the sun would also have to be billions of years old.

The sun is literally on fire. When something is burning, matter is being transformed, and energy is being released in the process. How would any intelligent person imagine that the sun could remain on fire for billions of years, or even millions of years, burn at a steady rate, and not be consumed or even diminished? And how could that happen accidentally?

At the very least, if the sun is indeed billions of years old, it would have started off much bigger and brighter and generating far more heat than now. The planet Mercury, which is the closest to the sun, would have been burned to a crisp! Our oceans would likely have been boiling and thus unable to support life.

So is it really important to challenge the notion of “slow creation”? Absolutely.

Anytime we choose to interpret the Word of God to make it conform to the theories of secular scientists, we diminish our respect for the power and majesty of our Creator... who surpasses all human understanding. I believe we need to confront the myths that we have been led to accept without questioning. From kindergarten on, we and our children have been given so-called “scientific” theories and explanations that defy logic. The time is long overdue for Christians to logically and thoughtfully replace the myths of the secularists with sound understanding of the reality of our Creator, the one and only God, and His marvelous creation.

Copyright 1/2/2008 William C. Dietrich






Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to digg DIGG
Add to StumbleUpon Stumbleupon
Add to Reddit Reddit
Add to Google Google
Add to Yahoo Yahoo!
Add to Netscape Netscape
Add to Ask Askjeeves
Add to BlinkList Blink List
Losing the Culture War
by Bill Dietrich

I love this country. I want the best blessings God has in store for this country and all of us who call America our home. I believe in my heart all Christians feel the same way. Many of us see the way our culture is steadily becoming more Godless and profane and we are deeply concerned, bewildered, even angry at times.

As a result, many have described the conflict between Christian values and those of the Popular Culture as a “Culture War”. Indeed, there is a deep rift between our respective values. Many of us have chosen to confront the major problems we see at this time, seeking to bring about change in the attitudes and lifestyles of the opposition.

We have drawn battle lines in such areas as Legalized Abortion, Homosexuality, Same-Sex “Marriage”, Evolution and Assisted Suicide to mention a few. We have fought to protect our Freedom of Religious Expression in our schools and in the workplace. These are areas in which government is actively promoting conduct which is absolutely contrary to our Biblical standards. Under the guise of “freedom of speech”, today we are told we must tolerate unprecedented filth in Movies, Rap Music, Radio and Television. Evolution is being taught in our schools as though it is an undisputed fact.

If our struggle against the moral meltdown in our values is truly a “Culture War”, are we winning or losing? I believe we are losing. But why?

Do we not have enough troops on the ground? Are we outnumbered by the enemy? Are we using the wrong strategies? Do we as Christians agree on our objectives?

If the polls are true, the vast majority of Americans profess belief in God. Most claim to be Christians, so we’re not really outnumbered. It is obvious, however, that our “silent majority” appears content to remain silent for a variety of reasons. Some are too busy with their personal and professional pursuits and some see no harm in going along with whatever is fashionable in the popular culture. In far too many cases, faith has a low priority and is felt to be a personal and private part of one’s life.

Others have a sense of inevitability about cultural change and have essentially given up on trying to influence the culture. Still others lack the discernment to realize the problem exists at all.

Yet most Americans say they want the best for this country. So if we could just mobilize our troops, train ourselves effectively and inspire each other to go out and carry the fight to the enemy, we should win, right?

Wrong.

Let’s define “winning” first. If we get everyone to give up the hedonistic lifestyle and start living in accord with Christian values, can we declare victory? Or what if we could at least get them to stop polluting the airwaves and entertainment outlets with graphic immorality? Maybe we could persuade schools to stop teaching evolution and “tolerance” for every sort of immorality. And maybe kids could speak the name of Jesus in school without being reprimanded and silenced.

I won’t hold my breath for that to happen.

Even if it were possible, would our culture be any better off? Do we really want unbelievers mimicking the behavior of believers without coming to faith in Christ? And if they did, how long do we think that would last?

Don’t get me wrong. I would be elated if we lived in an environment less hostile toward Biblical Truth. I believe we should continue to fight to protect our First Amendment rights and exercise those rights in the way Christ commanded us. His commission however, directed us to make disciples, not simply to influence people to live according to Godly principles and live their lives without accepting Christ as their savior.

The only way lasting change in our culture will occur is through the power of the Holy Spirit living in the overwhelming majority of our population. When more and more people truly surrender to Christ, then and only then will we see a change of heart and a corresponding change in our culture. If we are successful in getting people to change their behavior without surrendering to Christ, we have done them a great disservice. In effect, we are promoting the notion that you can achieve a righteous society without Christ at its center. We would be supporting the very lie that many people now live by.


The final point is this: Should we achieve a level of success in the transformation of our culture, it will not be a permanent victory. As we have seen throughout Christian history, a culture that fails to perpetuate its faith through teaching its children about Christ will ultimately find itself in the situation America is facing today. When The Enemy is unchallenged, he will regain his lost territory. He does not rest in his battle against Christ and His children. As parents and grandparents, we must dedicate ourselves to teach our children the Truth of Christ and equip them to live in a culture that will try to defeat them.

I pray we can all get ourselves on the battlefield, and strive to be victorious through sharing the gospel with as many people as possible. Righteous behavior is a result of a person surrendering to Christ. When a person tries to be a “good person” outside a relationship with Jesus, they are deceiving themselves and will remain lost until they come to accept His gift of grace.


Copyright 1/7/2008 William C. Dietrich






Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to digg DIGG
Add to StumbleUpon Stumbleupon
Add to Reddit Reddit
Add to Google Google
Add to Yahoo Yahoo!
Add to Netscape Netscape
Add to Ask Askjeeves
Add to BlinkList Blink List

Monday, January 7, 2008


The Myth of “Evolution Science”
by Bill Dietrich

When you hear anything repeatedly, day after day, year after year, eventually you begin to accept it as truth. This is especially true when you hear it from every corner of our culture… schools, the media, movies. Even in many of our churches, due to fear of being ridiculed by the secular elites, you find a willingness to accept Darwinian evolution as fact. After all, who are we to question the science of evolution?

But the theory of Evolution is not really science. It’s not even close to being science. When it comes to oxymorons, the term “Evolution Science” tops the list. If you look at the origin of the theory, one can only wonder why any self-respecting modern day scientist would place any credence in it at all.

Look at a few historical facts. Charles Darwin is generally credited as the father of the theory of evolution. He first postulated his theory in 1859, with his book The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. Without any knowledge of genetics, DNA, or cell biology, he attempted to explain how inherited traits are passed from generation to generation. He speculated that traits which tend to make an individual better suited to survive in his environment would be more likely to be expressed in future generations. In other words, an organism more “fit” than individuals lacking these traits will survive to reproduce more abundantly. Eventually, these traits would then become predominant in the population. His ideas were based strictly on empirical observations and lacked any evidence of how such mechanisms work at the level of genetics.

While it may be difficult to argue against Natural Selection as it relates to variations within a species, the extension of this process to allow the creation of a new and different species cannot happen, and does not happen. There is also no evidence in the fossil record that it has ever happened.

The discipline of science was still in its infancy in the
19th Century. The prevailing explanation for the transfer of traits from generation to generation was Lamarckism. This is also called the “Use and Disuse Theory”. People believed that if a man became a blacksmith, for example, and developed large muscles, then his sons would have large muscles, also. Lamarck postulated that the reason giraffes have long necks arises from their striving to reach higher and higher to eat leaves off trees. Their offspring, therefore, would be born with longer necks. The action of genes and the enormous complexity of even the simplest single-cell organism were not even contemplated. Even though Cell Theory was beginning to emerge, Darwin could not have made the connection between the nucleus of cells and heredity, so he simply made up his own explanation of why different varieties of animals and plants existed. Darwin’s explanation was different from Lamarck’s in that it relied on accidental changes, or mutations, which favored a given trait rather than intentional or “use and disuse”. However, both theories were totally unscientific by today’s standards.

At first, the scientific community of the day rejected Darwin's theory because scientists were predominantly Christians seeking to understand the complexity of God’s creation. They were not attempting to disprove His existence nor His role in creation. However, in time the Humanist movement began to embrace the notion of evolution and sought to use it as a means to undermine belief in God as the Creator of the universe. If the mechanisms of evolution proceeded on their own, there was no need for God, and therefore, no absolute basis for moral absolutes.

To better appreciate what the Darwinian phenomenon was all about, read his brief biography . The author of this biography is clearly a believer in evolution. It demonstrates the point that those who fervently believe this theory are either ignorant of biological processes or choose not to accept any evidence that defeats this antiquated pseudo-science.

As Christians we have truth on our side. We should not be timid about defending the truth of our Creator God and His explanation of the origin of species. It’s the only one which makes any sense and agrees with the facts.

Copyright 1/7/2008 William C. Dietrich



Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to digg DIGG
Add to StumbleUpon Stumbleupon
Add to Reddit Reddit
Add to Google Google
Add to Yahoo Yahoo!
Add to Netscape Netscape
Add to Ask Askjeeves
Add to BlinkList Blink List