Observations on life; particularly spiritual


Complex creation

William Shakespeare is the best-selling fiction author of all time. But his plays and poetry were written over 400 years ago. The Oregon Shakespeare Festival has decided that Shakespeare’s language is too difficult for today’s audiences to understand. So it has commissioned 36 playwrights in a 3-year project to translate all of Shakespeare’s plays into modern English.

CERN 1 400pxIs the universe more complex than we realize? Many people think that scientists understand how it was formed and how it works. But even the most brilliant scholars don’t understand this. For example, here’s summary of what they know (and don’t know) about the forces and particles that make up the universe. This shows that the intelligence behind the universe is greater than the intelligence of the human mind.

Fundamental forces

The four fundamental forces of nature are gravity (which holds planets, stars and galaxies together), electromagnetism (which holds atoms together so that electrons are attracted to the nucleus), the strong nuclear force (which holds the atomic nucleus together) and the weak nuclear force (which is involved in radioactive decay). These forces hold together atoms, molecules, planets and galaxies. Gravity is described by Einstein’s general theory of relativity, while the other three forces are part of the Standard Model of particle physics.

How well do we understand these forces? Let’s look at the force of gravity.


In the late 16th century Isaac Newton developed three laws of motion, which included a description of gravity. Newton’s laws of motion described the movement of objects. In 1915 Einstein’s theory of general relativity replaced Newtonian mechanics. This theory describes the force of gravity and describes the motions of bodies in our solar system. The general theory of relativity describes an expanding universe, which has been detected by scientists (although some dispute whether the universe is expanding). But observations of distant spiral galaxies defy the predictions of general relativity. To explain this behavior, scientists postulate the existence of dark matter and dark energy. They are named “dark” because they can’t be detected. So they are “fudge factors” to make the mathematical model work. Dark matter and dark energy are theoretical inventions that explain observations we cannot otherwise understand.

On the scale of galaxies, gravity appears to be stronger than can be accounted for using only particles that are able to emit light. So scientists added dark matter as 27% of the mass-energy of the universe. But these particles have never been directly detected! The Hubble Space Telescope found that the expansion of the universe is increasing with time, instead of decreasing as was expected from the force of gravity due to the matter in the universe (whether ordinary or dark matter). So scientists added “dark energy” (a weak anti-gravity force that acts independently of matter) as 68% of the mass-energy of the Universe. Dark matter is an invisible substance that can only be seen through the effects of its gravity, while dark energy is pushing our universe apart. The nature of both remains mysterious.

However, the amount of dark matter and dark energy postulated in the universe is huge. The mass-energy of the universe is assumed to be 68% dark energy, 27% dark matter and 5% observable matter! This means that without the fudge factor, the general theory of relativity only explains 5% of what is observed to exist! So, the universe is so complex that the best mathematical description of gravity needs to be adjusted by a factor of 95%! General relativity is also part of the framework of the standard Big Bang model of cosmology.

So the universe is too complicated for our most brilliant scholars to understand all aspects of the forces that control it. For example, we don’t really know:
– if dark matter exists
– if dark energy exists
– if the universe is really expanding (because it can’t be explained by general relativity without using these fudge factors)
–  if Einstein’s theory of gravity is correct (because it can’t explain the universe without using these fudge factors).

This situation is influenced by the fact that astronomy uses remote sensing (measurements made from a distance) to gather its data. Many assumptions are made when interpreting these data and the assumptions have a large influence on the findings. If any of the assumptions are wrong, then the findings are probably also wrong.

These fundamental forces act on atoms, molecules, planets and galaxies. How well do we understand the matter that makes up atoms, molecules, planets and galaxies? Let’s look at the particles that combine to form atoms.

Fundamental particles

CERN 5 400pxIn late 1800s scientists thought that the atom was the smallest building block of nature. But then the electron was discovered in 1897, the proton in 1919 and the neutron in 1932. By the mid-1960’s, it was realized that the understanding that atoms were composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons, was insufficient to explain the many subatomic particles being discovered. Via quantum theory, protons and neutrons were found to contain quarks—now considered elementary particles. Then the Standard Model of particle physics (of fundamental particles and their interactions) was developed to explain the behavior of these subatomic particles. The Standard Model is a mathematical equation that describes the particles and forces that govern quantum physics.

In the Standard Model there are 61 elementary particles (18 quarks, 18 antiquarks, 6 leptons, 6 antileptons, 8 gluons, 4 electroweak bosons, and one higgs boson). This number varies according to what is assumed to be an elementary particle. So in a century the number of fundamental particles has risen from one to 61! That’s a huge increase! The particulate structure of creation was more complex that was imagined. I wonder how many more fundamental particles will be discovered in the next 100 years?

But the Standard Model that describes these particles can’t explain gravity, dark matter or dark energy! The quantum theory used to describe the micro world, and the general theory of relativity used to describe the macro world, are difficult to fit into a single framework. No one has managed to make the two mathematically compatible in the context of the Standard Model.

So the universe is too complicated for our most brilliant scholars to understand all aspects of the fundamental particles that are the building-blocks of the atoms and molecules of matter.

The implications of this complexity

Clearly the forces and particles of the universe are complex. The pattern (design) of the universe is too complex for the human mind to understand. This shows that the intelligence behind the universe is greater than the intelligence of the human mind. Is this evidence of design by a being that is more intelligent than humanity? This is consistent with what the Bible says.

What the Bible says

According to the Bible, Jesus Christ created and sustains the universe.

“Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation, for through Him God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can’t see—such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through Him and for Him. He existed before anything else, and He holds all creation together” (Col. 1:15-17NLT).

Jesus “existed before anything was created”, including time. As He existed before time was created, Jesus is eternal. In this way, He is different to His creation (the universe). He is “supreme over all creation” because He “created everything”. He created the stars and galaxies (“the heavenly realms”). He not only made the “things we can see” (the visible universe), but He also made “the things we can’t see” (so there is a spiritual unseen dimension to God’s creation which is inhabited by angels). And Jesus “holds all creation together”. This means He controls all the forces of nature including gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force. Hebrews also says that Jesus “sustains everything by the mighty power of His command” (Heb. 1:3).

Solomon said, “people cannot see the whole scope of God’s work from beginning to end” (Eccl. 3:11). God works in nature, in the spiritual world, in society and in our own lives. This means that no-one can discover the full extent of what God does. Our understanding is limited. Our knowledge is finite, and thus infinitely less than God’s. Some of the wisdom, power, and goodness of God is evident in His creation. But it is so vast and our capacity is so limited and our life is so short that we only understand a miniscule part of what God does. Consequently, there are many mysteries that we don’t understand. For example, when science answers one question usually several replace it. There’s always more to discover.

If complexity requires a creator, who created God?

A common objection to the idea of an intelligent creator is “if all complex things require an intelligent creator, then why is that creator himself not bound to the same rule? Would that complex deity not require an even more complex creator, and so on, for infinity?”.

What this fails to acknowledge is that there are two categories of complex things – those that have a beginning (and so were created) and those that don’t have a beginning (and so were not created). Those that have a beginning (such as the universe and people) do require an even more complex creator. The reason for this is that everything which has a beginning has a cause. This is the law of cause and effect. But as mentioned above God is in a different category. He has no beginning; He is eternal. God, as creator of time, is outside of time. This means He has no beginning in time. As He has always existed, He doesn’t need a cause. So the seemingly endless sequence proposed by the questioner stops at God – He doesn’t have a more complex creator.


We have seen that the universe is too complicated for our most brilliant scientists to understand all aspects of the forces that control it and all aspects of the fundamental particles that are the building-blocks of the atoms and molecules of matter. This complexity should cause us to be humble before our God who created and sustains the universe. And to praise Him as Paul did when he wrote:
“Oh, how great are God’s riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand His decisions and His ways! For who can know the Lord’s thoughts? Who knows enough to give Him advice? And who has given Him so much that He needs to pay it back? For everything comes from Him and exists by His power and is intended for His glory. All glory to Him forever! Amen” (Rom. 11:33-36).

Written, August 2017

Also see: How the universe is held together


Evidence of Noah’s flood

Flooded river - Jun 2016 400pxAfter some Australian motorists drowned when their cars were swept away by floodwaters in June 2016, university researchers investigated how much force it takes to wash cars away from the road. A 1 tonne vehicle was moved by water 15 centimeters deep flowing at 3.6 km/hr. It was carried away in 60 centimeters of water. A 2.5 tonne vehicle was moved by 45 centimeters of water and began floating in 95 centimeters of water. The cars were moved so easily partly because even shallow water can be deceptively strong, and partly because modern cars are so air-tight that instead of taking on water they get pushed along by it. Even slow-moving water is powerful because water is heavy: each cubic metre weighs 1 tonne. They concluded that vehicles became vulnerable to moving floodwaters once the depth reached the floor of the vehicle. This is consistent with Queensland advice that “Water deeper than the bottom of your car door is enough to float your vehicle away, or splash the engine and cause it to stall”.

If a shallow river can be so powerful, a global flood would be an enormous catastrophic disaster. If this happened about 4,350 years ago, surely there would be some evidence of it still visible today. This blogpost is a summary of eight main points that were made by Dr Tasman Walker in a presentation on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.

What would we expect to find on earth if there was a global flood as described in Genesis chapters 6-8 in the Bible?

Fractures in the earth’s crust

The two main sources of the water for the flood are described as “all the underground waters erupted from the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (Gen. 7:11-12NLT). Subterranean water burst from beneath the earth and there was torrential rain for 40 days. The flood waters rose to cover the highest mountains of the pre-flood world by 8 meters (Gen. 7:17-20). By the way, Mt Everest didn’t exist before the flood because there are sedimentary rocks with marine fossils on its summit.

If underground water was erupting from the earth on a global scale you would expect that the earth’s crust would be fractured. Today major fractures are seen in the earth’s crust around the edges of the continental plates. When these continental tectonic plates move against each other there are earthquakes and volcanic activity. Such geological activity around the Pacific Ocean is called the “ring of fire”.

So we would expect to find fractures in the earth’s crust and we do. These fractures are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Billions of dead things

If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find billions of dead things all over the earth. “Everything (except those on the ark) that breathed and lived on dry land died” (Gen. 7:22NLT). Because such a flood would transport huge amounts of sediment across the earth, most of the creatures that drowned would be buried in the sediments. Because such a flood would also transport huge amounts of sediment into the ocean and cause a depletion in oxygen levels, many marine creatures would die and be buried as well.

Queensland dinosaurs 400pxAt Winton in Queensland, there are many well-preserved fossils of dinosaurs and marine creatures. Dinosaur fossils have also been found at Muttaburra (Queensland). These fossil-bearing sediments extend across the Great Artesian Basin into New South Wales, South Australia, and the Northern Territory, while marine fossils are found in other parts of Central Australia.

So we would expect to find billions of dead things (fossils) in sedimentary rocks and we do. These fossils are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Evidence of rapid burial

If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of rapid burial.

At Richmond in Queensland an exceptionally well-preserved marine reptile fossil was discovered in 1990. It’s a plesiosaur that’s over 4 meters long. In order to be preserved so well it must have been buried rapidly. Fossils of land animals are also found in this region, such as the ankylosaur (an armored dinosaur).

So we would expect to find evidence of rapid burial and we do. These fossils of creatures that were buried rapidly are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Sediment covering huge areas

Great artesian basin 400pxIf a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas.

Geologists find that layers of sedimentary rocks extend across large areas called sedimentary basins. They can contain coal, oil and gas that’s used as fossil fuels. For example, the Great Artesian Basin and the Sydney Basin. There are also examples in other continents. And there are also offshore sedimentary basins on the continental shelf of countries around the world.

So we would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas and we do. These layers of sedimentary rock across huge areas are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Evidence of raging waters

If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of raging waters. As these flood waters would have been highly energetic, they would have transported material along with the flow.

3 sisters 400pxThe Three Sisters rock formation at Katoomba is composed of sandstone, which was laid down by water. This layer extends across the Sydney sedimentary basin. An examination of the sedimentary layers evident in road cuttings shows layers 1-2 meters thick, which indicates that a lot a water was involved in transporting and depositing this sediment. This water must have been continually rising (to enable continual deposition). There are many cross-beds that go at an angle across the strata. They are formed when the sediment layer builds sideways.

Uluru 400pxUluru (Ayers Rock) in the Northern Territory is made of sandstone and the layers have been tipped up so they are almost vertical. These strata are visible as parallel lines on Uluru. This shows that there hasn’t been any significant erosion between the deposition of the strata. So there was rapid deposition – one layer was laid upon the other quite quickly. When we look at a geological cross-section through Uluru it is evident that a lot of sandstone has been eroded from above Uluru. The grains that comprise Uluru are angular, poorly sorted (a large range of particle sizes) and well-preserved (not weathered) which is consistent with rapid deposition.

Olgas 400pxKata Tjuta (the Olgas) is a group of large, domed rock formations 25km west of Uluru. They are comprised of large boulders (30-50cm in size). These all face in a similar direction, which is the direction of the water flow that transported them to this site. They indicate highly energetic flood waters.

So we would expect to find evidence of raging waters (which transport and deposit lots of sediment) and we do. These cross-beds, parallel sedimentary strata and boulders are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Evidence of massive erosion

If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of massive erosion. After the flood waters peaked and subsided, they would have flowed off the continents and eroded material away as they flowed back into the ocean.

When you stand at Echo Point overlooking the Three Sisters, you see that Jamison valley is cut into a flat plateau. How did it get so flat? As the floodwaters moved across the continent, they eroded the surface flat. That’s how plateaus formed all around Australia and around the world. Jamison valley is much larger than any valley caused by Kedumba River that flows through it (the same is true for the Grand Canyon in USA). Geomorphologists call these overfit valleys – the valley is too big for the river. How did it get to be such a large valley? The valley was carved by a lot of water and not by the current river. As the floodwaters subsided, when hills became exposed, the water carved out large valleys transporting the sediment out of the area.

This is also evident at Carnarvon Gorge in Queensland at the intersection of the Great Artesian Basin and the Bowen Basin. A large valley has been cut into a sandstone plateau that’s capped by basalt. As material has been eroded away, these sedimentary layers originally covered a much larger area.

As a result of such erosion, rivers can flow through mountain ranges rather than around them. For example, the Heavitree Gap in the MacDonnell Ranges near Alice Springs. How did that happen? Many explanations have been proposed, but none of them work. As the floodwaters subsided, the higher parts of the ridge become exposed and the water flows between the gap between them. As the waters continue to drop, they continue to erode through this gap until when the water has all subsided the gap remains and a river flows through this gap today. It’s called an air gap if it doesn’t go down to the level of the adjacent surface.

So we would expect to find evidence of massive erosion and we do. These large overfit valleys are evidence of Noah’s flood.

Evidence of youthfulness

If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find evidence of youthfulness.

At Kata Tjuta there are a few boulders lying around, but not many. And there is a small apron around it, but not a large one as if it had been eroding for millions of years. And there’s very little debris around the base of Uluru or Kata Tjuta. This indicates that it was eroded recently.

So we would expect to find evidence of youthfulness and we do. The lack of erosional debris is evidence of Noah’s flood.

Worldwide memories of the flood

All of the people of the earth are descendants of the eight people on Noah’s ark. As the global flood occurred about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find memories of Noah’s flood in the different people groups around the world.

Cultures around the world have flood legends (or stories). For example, the Bundaba Flood Story of the Aboriginals at Broome is given in the appendix. Common features in the stories are that there was a moral cause, people were drowned, there were people saved in a boat, and there was a bird.

So we would expect to find worldwide memories of the flood and we do. These flood stories are evidence of Noah’s flood.


There’s plenty of evidence in Australia of Noah’s flood. Evidence of eight aspects of Noah’s flood show that what we observe is consistent with what the Bible says. This flood is a key to connecting the Bible to the world around us. It explains the sedimentary rocks and the fossils. And it washes away the millions of years that are assumed by evolutionists.

It also helps us understand the world. It makes sense of biblical creation. Death and suffering came after Adam and Eve and not before them because they were a consequence of sin. Whereas according to the idea of evolution, death and suffering over millions of years brought about our existence.

Questions and answers

What is rapid burial?
When animals and fish die today they disintegrate and are recycled. They aren’t fossilized. So, how were the fossils preserved? If they are buried quickly it stops them being scavenged and it affects how bacteria destroys animal’s bodies. So rapid burial is necessary to produce fossils.

What about continental drift?
Like evolutionists, creationists fit the evidence into their world view. There is a creationist model of how the continents were all together before the flood and they broke apart during the flood (catastrophic plate tectonics). The earth’s mantle (beneath the earth’s crust) can suddenly lose its strength under high temperature and high pressure. So the continental movement could have happened very quickly (continental sprint) during Noah’s flood. In the second half of the flood the ocean basins sank and the continents rose: “Mountains rose and valleys sank to the levels you decreed” (Ps. 104:8NLT).

What does “the earth was divided” in the time of Peleg mean (Gen. 10:25)?
This is just before the tower of Babel when God divided the people into different language groups and they dispersed across the earth (Gen. 11:1-9). This is what we believe it means. It couldn’t be the separation of the continents because if it happened a few hundred years after the flood that would be a huge catastrophe and many people would perish and there is no evidence of this in Scripture.

When was Mt Everest formed?
The earth’s crust moved during the flood. The mountain ranges like Mt Everest were elevated towards the end of the flood. The mountians we see today rose up at this time. The shapes of the mountains were carved by the waters of the flood (and any post-flood ice).

Do we know how high the mountains were before the flood?
No. We know there were mountains before the Flood because the Bible speaks of them (Gen. 7:19-20). But we don’t know how high they were. Some creation geologists speculate that they weren’t as high as those today.

What about the ice age?
It happened after the flood. The flood is the only thing that explains the ice age. It was due to warm waters after the flood caused by the addition of hot subterranean water and by heat from volcanic activity. And large amounts of volcanic dust and aerosols in the atmosphere would have reflected solar radiation back into space causing low atmospheric temperatures. Warm oceans evaporate water, which then moves over the land. Cold air over the continents results in this water precipitating as snow. And the snow accumulates forming ice. Because the ice was not fully melted the following summer, the ice built up from year to year. It has been estimated that the ice accumulated for 500 years after the flood and then retreated to where it is today over another 200 years. But evolutionists don’t have an adequate explanation for the ice age.

What about global warming?
Climatic modelers try to include the ice age, but they don’t include Noah’s flood. They think that the earth’s atmosphere is unstable and a little change will tip it over the edge. Whereas the earth’s climate is very stable – after the huge climatic disturbance of the global flood, it took about 700 years to come back to equilibrium.

What about the decrease in longevity?
Before the flood people typically lived over 900 years. After the flood this decreased exponentially towards 100 years (David) and then 70 years. It was probably a genetic change and not an environmental one because after the flood Noah lived 350 years (Gen. 9:28) and Shem lived 500 years.

What about the Behemoth described in Job 40?
We believe it was a brachiosaur (sauropod) dinosaur. The size of its tail is one of the reasons. We believe that dinosaurs and people lived together. They were called dragons and other names because “dinosaur” is a modern name.

Appendix: The Bundaba Flood Story

Long, long ago there was a great flood. It happened because some children found the “winking” owl and plucked out all its feathers. The bird flew without wings, into the heavens and showed himself to Ngowungu, the Great Father. Ngowungu became very angry and decided to drown the people.

Later the people saw a small cloud rising which grew bigger and bigger till it spread all over the sky. The thunder began to roll and crash and the people were greatly afraid. With the rain and thunder was a terrible wind which broke great limbs off trees and rooted up others. During this terrible storm there was a noise above the awful crashes of thunder. This noise was coming from the north. The salt water, the sea, came pouring over the ranges from the north. The flood rose higher and higher till all the land was covered except the tops of two or three mountains.

A bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. From further west a man and his wives with a dog were battling their way in a canoe when a bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. They eventually reached Mt. Broome and landed there where some other survivors were.

Then Djabalgari, the great left-handed man incised his little finger and let the blood trickle down into the flood waters. The waters began to go down and eventually disappeared off the country. All other people were drowned.

Acknowledgement: This blogpost was sourced from a presentation by Dr Tas Walker (a geologist with Creation Ministries International) on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.

Written, July 2016

In six days

environ auditor 2In March 2016 the NSW Environment Protection Authority served notice requiring a company to conduct a mandatory environmental audit of its waste oil processing facility near Maitland. This followed a pattern of environmental non-compliance at the facility, including serious breaches involving air emissions and water discharges. The audit of site practices and procedures includes assessment of testing waste products, operation and maintenance of pollution control equipment, bunding and spill management, and potential impacts on groundwater. In this post we carry out an audit of the naturalistic explanation of the origin of life.

In 1999 New Holland published a book, ‘In six days: why 50 scientists choose to believe in creation’. The editor, Dr John Aston, noted in the preface that:

‘Why would educated scientists still believe in creation? Why wouldn’t they prefer to believe in Darwinian evolution or even theistic evolution, where an all-powerful intelligence is seen as directing the evolutionary processes? Could scientists believe that life on earth is probably less than 10,000 years old? How would they deal with the evidence from the fossil record and the ages suggested by the radioactive dating of rocks as millions and billions of years old?’

‘During the past century, the biblical story of Genesis was relegated to the status of a religious myth and it was widely held that only those uneducated in science or scientific methods would seriously believe such a myth. However, my experience in organizing this book, is that there is a growing number of highly educated critically thinking scientists who have serious doubts about evidence for Darwinian evolution and who have chosen to believe in the biblical version of Creation.’

The scientists gave their personal response to the question: ‘Why do you believe in a literal six-day biblical Creation as the origin of life on earth?’ The responses were divided into two categories ‘Science and Origins’ (dealing with the scientific critique of evolution as well as the scientific basis for creation) and ‘Religion and Origins’ (dealing with a more philosophical approach to the question of evolution and creation). My contribution was in the latter section (p.322-327).


There are two main views about the origin of the universe and the origin of life: those based on naturalism and those based on an intelligent Creator. As these events occurred long ago and are not subject to direct observation or experimental tests, both of these perspectives are mainly philosophical beliefs based on certain assumptions about the physical world.

This fact is ignored or distorted in most modern treatments of the topic of origins. For example, the March 1998 issue of National Geographic included an article titled, ‘The rise of life on earth’. The editor of the magazine wrote concerning this article on the origin of life: ‘Science is the study of testable, observable phenomena’, and religious faith is ‘an unshakeable belief in the unseen’. This ‘straw man argument’ diverts the discussion away from the issues of science and logic to the separate topic of science versus religious faith. It also ignores the fact that there are no obvious ‘testable, observable phenomena’ on the origin of life. Furthermore, the language used in the article demonstrates that naturalism also relies on faith in the unseen.

The naturalistic view of origins is that everything that exists can be explained by physical and chemical processes alone. This differs from the view that matter, energy, physical and chemical processes and life were established by a Creator as revealed in the Holy Bible.

Searching for truth

An environmental auditor relies on two main factors: objective evidence and agreed standards. The outcome of each part of an audit depends on comparing the observable evidence against the relevant standard. Of course, environmental standards change in time and space across the world. Similarly, any explanation of origins should be consistent with the body of ‘observable evidence’ and any relevant ‘standards’. This is complicated by the fact that the evidence is viewed today, a long time after the beginning of the universe and life. Also, in a changing world, it is not immediately obvious which standards are relevant. The Bible is the only reliable and consistent source of truth; it is like a fixed frame of reference. Other authorities, such as science and logic, are not sufficient, as they may change in time and space; they are like a changing frame of reference.

The laws of physics and chemistry are examples of the relative standards of science, which change with time as knowledge develops. They were developed under present conditions and assume that the universe already exists. Two of these fundamental laws are that life always comes from earlier life and that mass/energy is conserved. Applying them to the origin of life assumes that all these conditions were true at that time. To say; then, that naturalism explains the origin of life is ‘circular reasoning’, as the outcome is largely determined by the assumptions made. Although these laws may describe the present world, it would be a gross assumption to extrapolate them back to the unobserved initial conditions. Yet this is done frequently by those with a naturalistic viewpoint, without acknowledgement of the uncertainties involved and the limitations of the scientific method.

The assumptions of both naturalism and biblical creation and the principles of the scientific method are stated clearly in W Gitt’s ‘Did God Use Evolution?’ 1993, CLV Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung e. V.

The Bible is a source of ‘absolute’ truth that has stood the test of time much longer than any other document or philosophy. Of course, as in the case of any literature, it requires interpretation as to what is historical and what is metaphorical or symbolic. Besides obvious literary techniques, the most reliable method is to use the whole message of the Bible to interpret any particular passage. Otherwise, an interpretation may not be consistent with the rest of the Bible.

The Bible contains three clear tests for determining whether a belief, teaching or philosophy is true or false. To be true it must pass each of the three tests:

The Jesus test: This test states that, ‘Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist … This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood’ (1 Jn. 4:2-6NIV). The question to be answered in this test is: What does it say about Jesus Christ? The Bible teaches that Christ was unique: divine and human, sinless, eternal and the Creator. It is false to deny that Christ was the divine Son of God. Beliefs that fail this test usually claim that Christ was, at best, a great teacher or a prophet. They may even encourage the view that Christ and other events in the Bible are mythical.

The gospel test: The Bible warns about those promoting a different gospel, ‘If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!’ (Gal.1:9). The question to be answered in this test is: What is its gospel? In other words: what is the core belief or hope? The Bible says that the root cause of all our problems is that everyone has sinned and fallen short of God’s requirements—resulting in death. The only means of rescue is salvation by faith in Christ. ‘Different gospels’ are those that differ from this. They either add to it or take away from it. There is a warning against adding to or taking away from the words of the Bible (Rev. 22:18-19). Broader aspects of the gospel include the original creation and the ultimate restoration of all things (Rev. 4:11; 21:1-22:6). We need to be careful when applying this test because a ‘different gospel’ may deceive by using words similar to the true gospel but give them different meanings.

The fruit test: Jesus Christ warned, ‘Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them’ (Mt. 7:15-20). The question to be answered in this test is: What kind of fruit is evident? In other words, what type of attitudes and behavior does it encourage? Is the divine nature or the sinful nature most evident? The former is characterised by the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The sinful nature may involve: idolatry, sexual immorality, selfish ambition, pride, hostility, quarrelling and outbursts of anger (Gal. 5:19-23).

These tests will now be used to assess the naturalistic view of origins.

Testing naturalism

The Jesus test: As naturalism means that nature is all there is, it is associated with atheism. For example, the American Association of Biology Teachers states, that; ‘The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.’
This view of origins has no need for a Creator or the divine, and so is consistent with a belief that Jesus Christ was only a human being and not divine. Naturalism clearly fails the Jesus test.

The gospel test: As naturalism assumes there is no God, it accepts no absolute standards of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and rejects the existence of ‘sin’ in the sense of falling short of God’s standard. Therefore, it teaches that there is no need of a savior. Its gospel is that nature has made itself and the Genesis account of origins is not true. A biblical consequence of this is that if there was no paradise at the beginning as described in Genesis, then there can be no hope for a future paradise (Acts 3:21). In fact, naturalism rejects all the basic biblical truths, such as: creation, the beginning of evil, the need for salvation and the ultimate destiny of human beings. So, naturalism fails the gospel test.

The fruit test: Naturalism supports and is associated with: materialism, humanism (humanity is self-sufficient, capable of solving all their difficulties) and pantheism (‘nature’ replaces God). Its acceptance leads to: less value on human life (practices such as abortion and euthanasia are more acceptable). Another example from the past is racism; less value on family life (biblical marriage is less important; divorce is more acceptable); less value on morals (truth is now relative, not absolute); a ‘might is right’ attitude that supports the strong, but not the weak (survival of the fittest; a competitive world; compassion involves saving ‘weak genes’). As these are opposite to the values of the Bible, naturalism fails the fruit test.

It is clear from this that the viewpoint of naturalism fails all the three biblical tests for determining what is true. Therefore, it is false and is not consistent with the overall message of the Bible.


Due to the influence of the above philosophies, claims are often made in the name of ‘science’ that go far beyond the available evidence, and some aspects of modern science have become increasingly tenuous and speculative. In fact, the everyday use of the word ‘science’ has changed from dealing with things that are observable and testable to meaning ‘naturalism’ and so includes conjecture and dubious hypotheses.

Although we live in a ‘cause-and-effect’ universe, ultimate causes, such as origins, are outside the realm of reliable science. Science can only reliably deal with the present world; it cannot reliably deal with the past (such as origins) or the future (such as ultimate destinies), as it cannot directly observe these. I believe all scientists should be wary of their assumptions, as these can largely determine their findings. They should also be wary of extrapolations outside the range of observation. The further the extrapolation, the less reliable the prediction. Changes in the assumptions will change the prediction. This applies in particular to boundary conditions, such as those involving initial conditions (or origins). Therefore, scientists can only speculate, imagine and guess about the origin of life.

The author

Dr Hawke is a Senior Environmental Consultant with an electricity supply company in Sydney, Australia. He holds a BSc with first class honors in Physics from the University of Sydney, and PhD in Air Pollution Meteorology from Macquarie University. Over the past 22 years, Dr Hawke has worked as an environmental scientist and environmental consultant for a state government regulatory authority and the electrical power industry. He is also a Certified Environmental Auditor with the Quality Society of Australasia.

Published in 1999

Also see: Recognizing false teachers
The idol of evolution: Part 1

Environmentalism: Idolatry or Stewardship?

Greens electionToday there is a national election in Australia. Key election issues include: the economy, jobs, health, education and the environment. The political parties seeking election included the Greens, the Renewable Energy Party, the Animal Justice Party, and the Sustainable Australia Party. This post looks at the foundation of the ethics and morals of the environmental movement.

I gave this message at a conference in 1998. It’s based on the situation over 18 years ago. Although the examples are now historical, most modern examples would be similar in many ways. Many people are still concerned about the natural environment.

Concern for the environment and pollution affects us all: we see and hear about it in the daily news media, it’s taught at all levels of education, it affects all businesses in some way, governments pass more and more laws about it, and in 1996, the first national “State of the Environment” report said that, “Australians are among the most environmentally aware people in the world”.

My background is in science (physics and mathematics) and environmental science. I am a certified environmental auditor, who audits environmental management systems for industry and businesses. In this message I will present the results of an audit of the foundations the environmental movement and of modern science. So we are looking at basic beliefs, values, viewpoints and assumptions.  The findings will be compared to the Bible, which I believe is God’s guidebook for humanity.

Environmentalism involves concern for the physical world, such as advocating protection and conservation of the natural environment. It’s a complex and recent subject that has developed over the past 30 years.

Model of aspects of environmentalism

A schematic diagram of aspects of environmentalism provides a framework for this message. The two main aspects of environmentalism are the principles, which are what we believe, and the practices, which are what we do. Our principles (assumptions and values) have a strong influence on our behavior. That’s why they are sometimes called “guiding principles”. This message is focused on the principles that can drive environmentalism.

Aspects cropped 400pxAccording to the Bruntland Report, “Our common future” (1987), “to achieve the goals of sustainable development, good environment, and decent standards of life for all involves very large changes in attitude”. Where do these attitudes come from? Our minds. If we are consistent, they are the principles that drive our practices. For example, if we believed in the golden rule (treat others as we would like them to treat us), then we would help others. Or, if we are selfish, we may ignore others or exploit them. But other things besides our principles can influence our behavior.

The schematic diagram shows how our assumptions and circumstances can also influence our behavior. For example, in the case of global warming; the principles are our worldview, values and ethics; the science is the mathematical models that predict temperatures and sea levels; the assumptions are those made in the scientific predictions; the circumstances are the technology available and the particular situation in each nation; and the practices are what each nation does in response to this issue.

In environmental auditing we begin by checking compliance with the organisation’s environmental policy because it contains their guiding principles, including philosophy, values, and ethics.

This message is focused on the principles of environmentalism and the assumptions of science. What are they? And, how do they compare with the Bible?

Principles of environmentalism

Environmentalism is based on a viewpoint that nature should be valued and protected. This is a pro-environment/conservation world view. Many world views have been explored in attempts to develop an ethical basis for environmentalism. There is range of viewpoints and philosophies within the environmental movement which overlap and can lead to conflicts. The three main categories of principles are based on the three main parts of our world. They are: human-centered, nature-centered, and God-centered.

Human-centered environmentalism

Nature is our life support system; we depend on it for survival. So people have a self-interest in the preservation of their environments. It’s important because of its impact on people. For example, ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere can increase risk of skin cancer. So we want to protect stratospheric ozone.

The two main ideas in this approach are conservation and preservation. Nature is a resource that needs to be conserved for human needs. So, Government Forestry Services manage forests to maintain productivity. Nature also needs to be protected for the enjoyment of all people. For example, zoos and nature parks.

Sometimes people can have a negative impact on the environment. For example, the exploitation of nature without consideration for sustainability.

Nature-centered environmentalism

This introduces the idea that nature has intrinsic value – it should be preserved unless it conflicts with something of greater value. In this category we will look at two approaches: species centered and ecosystem centered.

The first approach says that species have rights or intrinsic value. For example, animal rights are promoted – as they have a value of their own, we should seek to minimise our impact on animals. This can lead to treating other species as though they were human. Stephen Gould advocates applying the golden rule to nature and the environment, “Do to others as you would have them do to you” (Lk. 6:31NIV). Similar rules exist in other religions as well. This means treating nature as we would want to be treated. But try applying this to an ant! It would be difficult avoiding killing an ant as we walk around.

The second approach acts for the good of all nature, not just human interests. This is more holistic as it involves the whole ecosystem/biosphere. This can lead to reverence for nature and wilderness, such as deep ecology. Here all natural things (ecosystems, life, landscape) have an intrinsic right to exist and there is a feeling of being connected with nature. This in turn can lead to Gaia theory (which is named after the ancient Greek earth goddess), where the earth is viewed as a single organism, like a living thing. It claims that evolution is not random, but is directed by Gaia.

These modern ideas are similar to ancient ones where nature has a spirituality. Animism is the belief that all natural objects and the universe possesses a soul. And pantheism is the belief that: God is not a personality, but a force; the universe exists of itself; all natural happenings are God, and that God is everything and everything is God; and Mother Nature replaces God.

Examples of these principles of environmentalism are given in the Appendix 1.

Problems with these principles of environmentalism

Human-centered environmentalism is not sufficient, as it omits much of the ecosphere. So most environmentalists have stopped using this approach.

Nature-centered environmentalism also has limitations, particularly with regard to species rights, sanctity of life and intrinsic value. For example: How can we determine priority between species? Is there a hierarchy of rights? Catastrophes (e.g. fires, droughts, storms, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes) that kill huge numbers of organisms are a part of nature. So nature can be destructive. It does not act as a perfect God, unless you believe in a God who can be evil. As species are interdependent (can be linked by a chain of dependence), this leads to saying that “all aspects of nature have intrinsic value” – but it is impossible to preserve everything. And it doesn’t help to solve day-to-day environmental problems.

God-centered environmentalism

We now turn to the Biblical viewpoint of the physical environment (values, principles, truths). We need to realize that the Bible contains basic principles which can be applied to all areas of our life. It contains God’s plans for the natural world (its history and its destiny) and how He intends us to live in it.

We will look at three Biblical principles here: creation, the gospel, and stewardship.

Doctrine of creation

This has two parts: God as creator, and God as sustainer. First, God created everything. “God made the world and everything in it” (Acts 17:24-28). “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (Heb. 11:3).  So God is the sole source of all that exists. “Everything God created is good” (1 Tim. 4:4). Jesus is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), “He made the universe” (Heb. 1:2). “All things were created through Him and for Him” (Col. 1:16). “God saw all that He had made, and it was very good” (Gen 1:31) – Eden was paradise.

Creation is separate to the Creator. “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25).

God owns creation. “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it” (Ps. 24:1).

The awe and beauty of nature. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–His eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20).

The relationship between God, people and nature can be summarized as follows. God is infinite and personal. People are finite and personal. Animals, plants and machines are finite and impersonal. So humanity has special value, we share personality with God. We were made in God’s image, and people still have some of God’s image (Gen 9:6). Also, God came to earth as a man. So the Bible says that humans are both a part of nature (but not on the basis of biological unity), and apart from nature (like God). Nature is not our Mother, it is our brother and sister (as we are both created things).

“For this is what the LORD says– He who created the heavens, He is God; He who fashioned and made the earth, He founded it; He did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited” (Isa 45:18). So, creation has value because God made it and owns it.

Second, God sustains everything.

Jesus – “sustaining all things by His powerful word” (Heb. 1:3). “In Him all things hold together” (Col. 1:17). “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight” (Heb. 4:13). So the bible teaches that God sustains natural processes. The creation is dependent on the Creator for its continuing existence.

This includes the forces that hold things together (such as nuclear forces and gravity). Without Him all things would fly apart! God also cares for birds and vegetation. “Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?” (Mt. 6:26). “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin.” (Mt.6:28). “If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will He not much more clothe you – you of little faith?” (Mt. 6:30).

We can view God’s power and presence in nature, like electricity flows through a wire.  The wire is not the electricity, but it can be the vehicle through which the electricity flows.  God is not nature and nature is not God. To think that would be a to think like a pantheist and not a Christian. But in this sense, God is in nature.

“Your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you … Therefore, honor God with your bodies” (1 Cor. 6:19-20). Our bodies and senses should be used and appreciated for God. Similarly, all creation has been made by God and He sustains it, therefore, honor God as you interact and appreciate the physical world.

“Do not offer any part of yourself to sin, as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to Him as an instrument of righteousness” (Rom. 6:13). So the body and the physical world can be viewed as an instrument (or tool) which can be used for good or bad. We should honor God in our way of living in the material world – and work out what this means in the various areas of our life.

The gospel

The gospel is the good news, that addresses the bad news. God created a perfect universe, but because of the fall into sin when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, the universe is now flawed. To fix the situation, God sent Jesus to enable redemption and restoration. Those who accept what Jesus did are promised eternal life in the new heaven and new earth, while those who reject it face eternal punishment.

The fall into sin led to suffering, decay and death (Gen. 3; Rom. 8). Genesis 3 is one of the most important chapters in the Bible. God cursed not only people, but also nature, because of human sin. It explains the problem of evil in our world, in both humanity and in nature. It’s the ultimate cause of environmental problems. We live in a fallen world, different to the original condition of “very good”. Nature is abnormal, and it can be destructive. Environmentalist try to stop death in the environment. The fall explains death.

Now looking at redemption and restoration. Christians are seen as being part of a new creation, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: the old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17). Through Jesus, people can be reconciled to God. The biblical visions of the kingdom of God are visions of people in harmony with nature. The Bible teaches that the effects of the curse on nature will end and nature will be restored to its original splendor (it will be a sinless, deathless paradise, reconciled to God). Nature will also enjoy with Christians the effects of redemption.

“I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently” (Rom. 8:18-25). So all of creation is looking for redemption by God; not by people like us.

Christians share the gospel message with many people, even though they know that probably only a few will respond. Likewise, Christians ought to be willing to care for the created world, even though they know that they can’t bring full restoration.

Our bodies and the physical world will be transformed one day (like Jesus after His resurrection). The restoration will be through Jesus; “to reconcile to Himself (God) all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven” (Col. 1:20). “Heaven must receive Him (Christ) until the time comes for God to restore everything, as He promised long ago through His holy prophets” (Acts 3:21). When God judges the ungodly, the earth will be destroyed by fire and replaced by a new heaven and a new earth (2 Pt. 3:7-13). And we “are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells”.

God will then live with mankind as in the Garden of Eden, “There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (Rev. 21:1-8).

Doctrine of Stewardship

God told Adam and Eve, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground” (Gen 1:28). “Subdue” (“kabask” in Hebrew) means to conquer. “Rule” (“radah” in Hebrew) is generally used to describe the righteous and loving rule of a good and kind king. For example, King Solomon “ruled over all the kingdoms west of the Euphrates River, from Tiphsah to Gaza, and had peace on all sides. During Solomon’s lifetime Judah and Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, lived in safety, everyone under their own vine and under their own fig tree” (1 Ki. 4:24-25).

God told Adam how this rule is to be carried out. “The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work (“abad” in Hebrew) it and take care (“shama” in Hebrew) of it” (Gen. 2:15). Elsewhere “abad” is translated to “serve” (e.g. “we will serve the Lord”, Josh. 24:15) and “sharma” is translated to “keep”, “watch” or “preserve” (e.g. “The Lord bless you and keep you”, Num. 6:24).  God keeps His people in such a way to demonstrate His great love and care. All this was given before the fall of man, so there is no suggestion of evil or exploitation of nature here. So, Adam managed the garden of Eden. Before the fall there was perfect harmony between humanity and the environment.

As God owns the world, Christians can be seen as His stewards (or managers, a delegated authority). A “steward” is a manager of a household (e.g. Lk. 16:1-9). Peter also used it as a metaphor for believers, “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms” (1 Pt. 4:10).

Stewardship means caring for creation as God would. And we are accountable to God. For example, in the Old Testament there was a Sabbath rest for animals and a Sabbath year rest for agricultural land (Ex. 20:10; 23:10-11).

The assumptions of modern science

Science provides a useful method for finding out things about the way the world works. The assumptions and boundaries of “science” largely determine the findings of science. Only theories consistent with these are acceptable to science. We will look at three major assumptions of science.

Doctrine of Naturalism

Science assumes a naturalistic world where the physical universe is all that exists. Nature is all there is. So, everything is explained in terms of mechanical processes. God only exists as an idea in the minds of religious believers. Naturalism is associated with: materialism -there is only matter (no unseen world of souls, spirits or deities) and atheism – there is no God. This limits science to naturalistic theories. As science excludes the supernatural (by definition), a model or explanation that incorporates supernatural intervention (e.g. creative intelligence), cannot be called “scientific”. Therefore, “Creation science” is impossible. As a result, science is unable to disprove the spiritual, as whatever it discovers is “natural” by definition.

Doctrine of Evolution

Science assumes an evolving world (mainly because the only alternative is an act of creation by a God). Mutation and selection are assumed to be the driving forces of evolution. As naturalism and evolution are assumptions of science, science cannot be used to prove these.

Examples of these doctrines of science are given in the Appendix 2.

Doctrine of Uniformity

Science usually assumes the present is the key to the past and the future. Sometimes there is immense extrapolation into the past (e.g. speculation on the origin of life) and into the future (e.g. speculation on global warming), without proper consideration of assumptions and uncertainty. I call this speculative science. It fails to recognize that many deep questions are unanswered and will probably never be definitively answered, given the limits of science. For example, how was the universe created?

Consequences for Christianity

Once science was based on what was able to be observed, repeated and tested. But these assumptions have been added in such a way that anything outside this scope is deemed to be unscientific and false. When applied to situations outside the scope of observational science, this approach renders all other viewpoints false. For example, it means that there is no need to prove that evolution happened. Instead they just say that it happened with no need for a rigorous proof. In this way, science has used evolution to destroy Christianity. This is explained below.

Biblical viewpoint of evolution

Putting the doctrine of evolution (one of the assumptions of modern science) to the test.  The Bible contains three clear tests for determining what is true and false:

The Jesus test: Who was Jesus Christ?
“This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God …. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood” (1 Jn. 4:2-6).

The gospel test: Is it a different gospel?
“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!” (Gal. 1:6-8).

The fruit test: What kind of fruit is evident?
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?  Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. …  Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them” (Mt. 7:15-20).

Here’s how evolution goes in these tests.

The Jesus test

According to evolution, there is no need for a Savior. Jesus was only a human being, not divine. He was not the Creator (as there is no need for one), or the “second Adam”, as there was no Adam who disobeyed God in the first place. So, it fails the Jesus test.

The gospel test

Gospel test.cropped 400pxThe gospel according to evolution is compared with the gospel according to the Bible in the schematic diagram. This shows they are totally different. And evolution undermines all aspects of the gospel – all basic Biblical truths.

Evolution provides a new creation story, “As a story of creation, the book of Genesis long ago crumbled under the weight of science, notably Darwin’s theory of natural selection (Time, 4 Nov. 1996, p80).

If evolution is true, then death and suffering is not the result of sin. “According to Genesis, nature is in essence benign … But according to Darwinism, the evil in nature lies at its very roots, instilled by its creator, natural selection” (Time, 4 Nov. 1996, p81). The biological roots of sin are attributed to impulses that arose by natural selection and that were then inherited as they enhanced the chances of survival and reproduction. This means that sin, death and suffering are an inherent part of nature from the beginning of time.

So there is no need for a Savior and heaven and hell don’t exist. Its message is that “salvation comes through science”.

The fruit test – the fruits of evolution

The idea of evolution supports and is associated with: naturalism, materialism, atheism, humanism (humanity is self-sufficient; capable of solving all his difficulties), and pantheism.

Acceptance of the idea of evolution leads to the following:
Less value on human life (practices such as abortion and euthanasia are more acceptable).  Another example from the past is racism (e.g. Australian Aboriginals were considered to be biologically inferior to Europeans. This was justified by biological determinism promoted by evolutionary anthropology).
Less value on family life (marriage less important, divorce is more acceptable)
Less value on morals (truth is now relative, not absolute).
A “might is right” attitude, which supports the strong, but not the weak (survival of the fittest, a competitive world, compassion involves saving “weak genes”).

These are fruits of the sinful nature, not the divine nature. So the doctrine of evolution is a major cause behind many of the problems in our society.

Results of the tests

So the “doctrine of evolution” fails all three Biblical tests. This means it’s a false doctrine, an idol, the creation story and religion of modern science.


Modern environ cropped 400pxSecular environmentalism represents a new religion (see schematic diagram). By trying to introduce ethics and morals into a world that has discarded the Bible, most environmentalists adopt ethics which are centered on humanity or nature and they follow the idols of: humanism, atheism or pantheism. These are all justified by belief in evolution (which is also an idol). Idolatry is following ideas that replace the Creator God. Although they claim to be wise, such environmentalists are foolish because their actions are based on a lie (a false idea) (Rom. 1:22, 25). Due to the influence of these philosophies, claims are often made in the name of science that go far beyond the available evidence.

Biblical environ cropped 400pxBut the Bible gives us a God-centered view of the world, it reveals the Creator, and gives us responsibility to care for the creation as God’s stewards. Biblical environmentalism (see schematic diagram) can be based on Biblical principles and assumptions. The principles include: creation, sustenance, the fall (these three show that in some respects, the past is the key to the present), redemption, restoration and stewardship. Besides the natural world, this assumes the supernatural (there is more than the physical world), special creation (which can’t be explained by current laws), and possible catastrophes (so we need to be careful when extrapolating). Let’s care for creation as God’s stewards (or managers).

Appendix 1
Examples of principles of environmentalism

The Rio declaration on Environment and development (1992) has 27 principles, including:
Principle 1 “Human beings are at the center of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature” – Human centered
Principle 3 “The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet development and environmental needs of present and future generations” – Human centered
Principle 7 “States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the earth’s ecosystem” – Ecosystem centered

Agenda 21 is the program to implement the Rio declaration. It proposes a program for action for sustainable development. Its Preamble says:
“Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future” – Human centered

The National “State of the Environment” report says, “Preserving Australia’s biodiversity is important for four reasons”. One of these is Ethics which means that “no species and no generation has the right to remove earth’s resources solely for its own benefit” – Nature centered

The objectives of the NSW EPA include:
“reduce the risks to human health and prevent the degradation of the environment” – Human centered, and “achieve Ecologically Sustainable Development by implementing: the precautionary principle (being cautious), intergenerational equity (protect the environment for future generations)” – Human centered, “conservation of biological diversity & ecological integrity” – Species & ecosystem centered and “improved valuation & pricing of environmental resources” (using economics).

Greenpeace’s philosophy is:
“Ecology teaches us that humankind is not the center of life on the planet. Ecology has taught us that the whole earth is part of our body, and that we must learn to respect it as we respect ourselves. As we feel for ourselves, we must feel for all forms of life – the whales, the seals, the forests, the seas. The tremendous beauty of ecological thought is that it shows us a pathway back to an understanding and an appreciation of life itself – and understanding and appreciation that is imperative to that very way of life” – Ecosystem centered, leading to pantheism.

The Australian Conservation Foundation Mission is loaded with evolutionary assumptions:
“The conservation ethic reveres the enormous sweep and splendor of life, through three million millennia of geological time and its spread into many millions of diverse species and habitats. It is conscious that Homo sapiens is but a relative newcomer. From this perspective, it seeks to approach other species and their environments with humility and without arrogance” – Nature centered, reveres evolution
“It seeks to sustain diverse and active living communities in which non-human life can resume, in comparative tranquillity, the ponderous process of evolution which has been so disrupted and confused by the interruption of man” – Nature centered
“Intrinsic to the ethic is the recognition that human life is an integral part of this slow, inexorable and continuing evolutionary process; that our own adaption results from it and our destiny is tied to its continuance; our genes carry chemical messages shared with many other species now living and with many progenitors extending back to the beginning of life. Consequently, conformity with the conservation ethic confers benefits on humanity in terms of greater efficiency and satisfaction in meeting basic human needs and producing more resilient, supportive and fulfilling communities” – link to Human centered via evolution
Against these threats, conservation seeks to hold the earth in trust for future generations, both human and non-human” – Ecosystem centered,

The UN Environment Program: “Caring for natural resources and promoting their sustainable use is an essential response of the world community to ensure its own survival and well-being” – Human centered

The Director General of UNESCO: “Unlike modern industrial society, many traditional cultures promote not only the need but the sacred duty for people to live in symbiosis with their natural environment … Our greatest need at the present time is perhaps for a global ethic – transcending all other systems of allegiance and belief – rooted in the consciousness of the interrelatedness and sanctify of all life. Such an ethic would tamper humanities acquired knowledge and power with wisdom of the kind found at the heart of the most ancient human traditions and cultures – in Taoism and Zen (Buddhist), in the understandings of the Hopi and the Maya Indians, in the Vedas (Hindu scripture) and the Psalms, in the very origins of human culture itself” – Ecosystem centered, leading to pantheism & other religions

“The theme of Theodore Roszak’s book The Voice of the Earth is our relationship to the natural world  … He proposes a new relationship to nature, one based on modern science which regards the world as a living organism, a dynamic system with the capacity to self-regulate  … possible solutions which Roszak envisions in an ecologically-grounded form of animism  …  The motivation for change on a planetary level must rise from deep within. This is where we must hear the voice of the earth, as she expresses herself through us as a genuine person need for a new quality of life. Her voice can bring us in contact with the ecological unconscious, the parts of the soul that we have lost touch with. What are needed are ‘ecological goals that can heal the psyche, psychological values that can heal the planet’” (Habitat May 94, p53) – Pantheism

Appendix 2
Examples the doctrines of science (
in the field of ecology)

Nature in its infinite wisdom gave our animals soft feet so they would be gentle on Australia’s fragile soils” (Habitat, Dec 96, p5).

“Throughout evolution, only two kinds of eyes have ever been invented. One is the vertebrate eye, which works like a single-lens camera; the other is the compound eye of insects and crustaceans” (NA, Winter 97, p34).

“Some animals have evolved to look like other animals or even plants, thereby reducing predator pressure” (NA, Autumn 96, p8).

“We’re the dominant species on the planet; at the top of the food chain; at the top of the evolutionary tree. The way we got there is by being incredibly ruthless and self-centered” (NA, Autumn 96, p47).

“Frogs worldwide have evolved almost 30 different ways of reproducing” (NA, Summer 94-95, p64).

“As a group, spiders have developed an astounding array of techniques to capture and immobilize their prey” (NA, Spring 94, p17).

“The ‘apeman’ – australopithecines – did not die out. We are those apemen, just as living apes are members of the group from which they descended. In the same way, dinosaurs didn’t die out – they are still alive and kicking as birds. All that’s happened is an evolutionary change through time in the shape of the creatures in these long-lasting lineages” (NA, Winter  94, p68).

An academic – Judith Kinnear (Sydney University Gazette, Apr 96, p25)
“The Darwinian model of evolution by natural selection enriches many of my everyday experiences: my walks in the Australian bush make me ponder a unique flora that evolved after the break-up of the Gondwana super-continent; my visits to the zoo reveal the living products of divergent evolution that fall into an orderly pattern; my viewing of a TV program on the appearance of antibiotic resistance in harmless bacteria transforming them into untreatable killers reminds me of the ongoing impact of evolutionary forces”. This shows that the doctrine of evolution is now embedded in our society. Everyone is indoctrinated in it so that it’s a worldview or paradigm and like a religion.

Written, January 1998; Posted, July 2016

Also see: Recognizing false teachers

Clever Nature!

Elastin sheets for tissue repair - Mar 2016 400pxDuring a person’s life, the elastin in a blood vessel will go through an estimated two billion cycles of pulsation. Elastin’s flexibility allows skin to stretch and twist, blood vessels to expand and relax with every heartbeat, and lungs to swell and contract with each breath.

An international team of researchers has discovered the molecular motions of elastin, one of the proteins that gives blood vessels and skin their strength and flexibility. They found a hierarchical structure of scissor-shaped molecules that gives elastin its remarkable properties. Elastin tissues are made up of molecules of a protein called tropoelastin, which are strung together in a chain-like structure. First they discovered the shape and structure of the tropoelastin molecules. Then they studied the dynamics of the material as it forms large structures that can stretch and rebound. The dynamics turned out to be complex and surprising,. “It’s almost like a dance the molecule does, with a scissors twist – like a ballerina doing a dance”. Then, the scissors-like appendages of one molecule naturally lock onto the narrow end of another molecule, like one ballerina riding piggyback on top of the next. This process continues, building up long, chain-like structures. These long chains weave together to produce the flexible tissues that our lives depend on – including skin, lungs, and blood vessels. These structures assemble very rapidly. A key part of the puzzle was the movements of the molecule itself, which the team found were controlled by the structure of key local regions and the overall shape of the protein.

A researcher said, “Studying how these materials fail under extreme conditions yields important insights for the design of new materials that replace those in our body, or for materials that we can use in engineering applications in which durable materials are critical. Designing materials that last for many decades without breaking down is a major engineering challenge that nature has beautifully accomplished, and on which we hope to build”.

So the amazing features of elastin are attributed to nature. Isn’t nature clever! Apparently its designed and constructed complex materials that last for many decades without breaking down. If it’s more clever than us, then I think it deserves a capital “N” – Nature.

Maybe they should also research what the Bible says, “Through Him (God the Son, Jesus Christ) all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made” (Jn. 1:3NIV).

Written, March 2016

Also see: Evolution is theomorphic

Gargoyles and dragons

gargoyle 400pxMany gargoyles peer down from medieval churches, cathedrals, houses and town halls in Western Europe. They are usually animals, or people, or hybrid animals/people carved in stone. The animals may be real animals or fantastic beasts. Dogs and lions were the most frequent animals used, while dragons were the most frequent fantasy creatures depicted. The dragons usually had a pair of membranous wings, some legs, a long reptilian tail, a long snout with visible teeth, and a fierce expression.

IMG_4326 resizedBefore the use of downpipes, waterspouts (which projected out from an upper part of a building or a roof gutter) preserved stonework by diverting the flow of rainwater away from buildings. They prevented rainwater from running down the walls and affecting the foundations. Gargoyles are decorative waterspouts, being carved stone figures with water spouts through their mouths. The figure was often an elongated animal because the length of the gargoyle determines how far water is thrown from the wall. They were usually carved in the form of a grotesque face, figure or frightening creature with wide-opened mouths to enable the water flow.

By the way, the word “gargoyle” shares a common root with the word “gargle”; which comes from “gargouille”, a French word for “throat”.

History of gargoyles

Gargoyles can be traced back thousands of years in Egypt, Italy and Greece. Lion-shaped gargoyles were used by the ancient Egyptians and on Greek temples. During the Roman Empire, lead pipes were added to gargoyles to channel water without eroding the stone. And gargoyle water spouts were found at the ruins of Pompeii.

gargoyle 3 Notre DameThere are gargoyles on medieval (Middle aged) church buildings in Western Europe like the Gothic Notre Dame cathedral in Paris. Most were carved out of limestone or marble between the 10th and 15th centuries during the Romanesque and Gothic styles of architecture and decorative arts. Although once lead drainpipes were introduced in the 16th century there was no longer any practical need for gargoyles, they continued to be used for decorative purposes.

A dragon legend

There is a French legend about St. Romanus delivering the village of Rouen from a monster called Gargouille in about 600 AD. The fierce dragon which had a long, reptilian neck, a slender snout, batlike wings and the ability to breathe fire from its mouth, lived in a cave near the river Seine. The dragon caused much fear and destruction with its fiery breath, spouting water and the devouring of ships and men.

There are multiple versions of the story, but when la Gargouille was burned, its head and neck were so well tempered by the heat of its fiery breath that they would not burn. These were then mounted on the walls of the church (or city wall) to scare off evil spirits and used for protection.

Although this legend may be embellished and have changed over time, it’s interesting that dragon stories occur in many cultures, particularly the Chinese and Japanese.

gargoyle 2 400pxIs there a link between dragon gargoyles and dinosaurs?

Dragons and dinosaurs

The word “dragon” was used 23 times in the King James Bible (KJB), which was published in 1611, about 400 years ago. It seems as though the original translators of the KJB understood that a “dragon” was a real creature, not one that was legendary or mythical. It appears the “dragons” that were understood to be real animals were probably types of dinosaur which are now extinct. The translators of the KJB didn’t know about dinosaurs as this word was coined 230 years later in 1841. So the word “dragon” is probably an old word for a type of dinosaur.

dragon gargoyle 400pxCould some of the gargoyle dragons have been carved from the dragons that were known in the 1600s?

Ancient images and dinosaurs

There is also a theory that gargoyles were inspired by early findings of dinosaur fossils such as proceratops. Adrienne Mayor (“The First Fossil Hunters: Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times”) saw a similarity between some Greek and Roman images and dinosaurs. To explain this she hypothesised that these were based on fossil bones discovered in these times.

She said that, “The earliest depictions of griffins looked really gnarly and brutish. It looked as if the artist were trying to portray something real rather than mythological. And then … I realized that they looked like modern reconstructions of dinosaurs in a museum”.

However, as she believed that all the dinosaurs died out millions of years ago, she failed to consider the possibility that the griffins could be based on seeing the actual creatures, not just the bones. After all, it takes modern scientists considerable research to reconstruct the appearance of an unknown animal from its bones.

Dragon Babylon 400pxLooking back

As the story of the gargoyles relates to ancient times, some of it has probably been lost from our history. But they remind us of a time when buildings were more decorative and ornate. Some speculate about the symbolism of gargoyles, but I think they show the skill and creativity of the medieval stone masons.


It is interesting to note the image of a dragon on the Ishtar gate in Babylon which was constructed about 575 BC.

Written, February 2015

Andy arrives!

IMG_0965 400pxAndy, our new grandson, arrived recently. Here are a few things that I am reminded of at a time like this.

Just like you and I, Andy is unique. There is no one else on earth (past, present and future) who is exactly like him. He has a unique genome, which is comprised of about 3 billion DNA base pairs in each cell of his body. He grew from a single cell itself.

God designed and created our world so that, over a period of nine months, the genetic information in a single cell can develop into a child that is ready to be born. It takes a lot of design to build a genome; it’s amazingly complex.
The Bible says that the development of a baby in the womb is an example of God’s power (omnipotence) and skill. King David wrote, “You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother’s womb. Thank you for making me so wonderfully complex! Your workmanship is marvelous—how well I know it. You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion, as I was woven together in the dark of the womb. You saw me before I was born” (Ps. 139:13-16NLT). And another psalm says of God the Creator, “You made me; you created me” (Ps. 119:73). Of course God knows all about a baby as it’s growing in the womb (Jer. 1:5; Gal. 1:15).

I think another example of God’s power and skill is life itself. Can anyone explain the origin of life, without referring to God? We see that life always comes from life. Andy’s family tree goes back to Adam and Eve. How did Adam and Eve become alive? The Bible says their life came from God (Gen. 2:7, 22). Only God can create life; scientists can’t manufacture it, they just use it.

Is Andy perfect?

Although Andy is perfect in the eyes of his parents, in two ways he isn’t perfect.

Firstly, just like you and I, Andy’s genome contains mutations inherited from his parents. When parents reproduce, they make a copy of their genome and pass this to their child. From time to time, mistakes occur (called “mutations”), and the next generation does not have a perfect copy of the original genome. Each new generation carries all the mutations of previous generations plus their own. So the mutations accumulate from generation to generation. This means that the human genome is degenerating genetically with time due to the accumulation of mutations. In order to minimize the risk of deformed offspring that can result from shared mutations between genetically close parents, marriage is usually prohibited between close relatives. In fact, such limitations needed to be imposed after about 26 copies of the human genome, which was in the times of Moses’ children  (Lev. 18:6-16; 20:11, 17, Dt. 27:22).

Secondly, just like you and I, Andy has a sinful nature. This means that he will have a natural tendency to misbehave. The Bible says that we are all sinners by nature (Rom. 3:23; Eph. 2:1-3). Even when Andy tries to do the right thing, it will be elusive (Rom. 7:14-20). This attitude affects our mind, will and emotions in particular (Jer. 17:9). But according to Andy’s “Beginner’s Bible”, “Jesus knew that he had to die for the sins of all people. It was part of God’s plan. When it was time, Jesus died on the cross for our sins.”

Now we can look forward to seeing Andy grow and develop from a baby to a child, to an adolescent, and then to a man, the way God has planned.

Written, February 2015