The Fighting Fundamental Forums - Liberty University

The Fighting Fundamental Forums - Liberty University http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ en Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:12:32 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.fundamentalforums.com/images/styles/Skylight/misc/rss.png The Fighting Fundamental Forums - Liberty University http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ Anti-Evolutionary Secrets Of The Bonobo Genome http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113522-anti-evolutionary-secrets-bonobo-genome.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:05:54 GMT . Image: http://static-www.icr.org/i/wide/bonobo_genome_wide.jpg *_Anti-Evolutionary Secrets Of The Bonobo Genome_* By: Jeffrey Tomkins,... .

Anti-Evolutionary Secrets Of The Bonobo Genome

By: Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D.

The popular press recently announced the completed bonobo genome sequence. Bonobos are close relatives to chimpanzees. Unfortunately, much of the popular reporting misrepresented the data in the original Nature journal paper.[1]

The bonobo genome was immediately touted to be nearly identical to human in a number of popular articles attempting to describe the research. However, these reports failed to indicate that the high DNA sequence similarity was only observed in selected segments of the genome known to already be highly similar among humans and apes.

Geneticists rejected large portions of the genome to report high levels of DNA similarity. The selected areas of DNA that were compared are called "single copy," meaning they contain higher levels of genes. Only the single copy areas which are similar between chimp, bonobo, and humans are compared—everything else was omitted. How can they honestly say that bonobo and human genomes are so similar, when only the similar portions of those genomes were compared, and the dissimilar portions were ignored?

Unfortunately, the popular press did not highlight the most significant results of the bonobo genome research. The gene sequences that were similar between humans and apes showed significant levels of a phenomenon called incomplete lineage sorting (ILS). This means that the gene sequences did not consistently match up with the predicted evolutionary tree.

In evolutionary dogma, bonobo is thought to be a more distant ancestor from humans than chimps. But of the bonobo genes that were found to be similar to human and chimp, 25 percent produced discordant evolutionary trees. Significant numbers of bonobo genes were more similar to human than chimp and vice versa.

The same evolution-negating anomaly of ILS characterized the recent gorilla genome sequence. ICR news reported that the gorilla genome provides "no clear path of common ancestry between humans and various primates."[2] In other words, neither the gorilla nor bonobo genome sequences show evolutionary relationships. Instead, they each appear to have been uniquely created.

Human and ape genomes are not nearly as identical as commonly reported. A recent genome-wide DNA comparison showed that the human and chimpanzee genomes are considerably less identical than commonly claimed.[3]

Another recent research report evaluated most of the key human-chimp DNA comparison studies of the past decade. This study showed that evolution favorable levels of high DNA sequence similarity are achieved by omitting large amounts of non-similar data.[4]

The evolutionary paradigm of common descent between humans and apes continues to be invalidated with each new release of an ape genome sequence, despite the claims of the popular media. The present culture could surely benefit from considering the well-supported contention that humans and ape kinds were uniquely created.

References

1. Prüfer, K. The bonobo genome compared with the chimpanzee and human genomes. Nature. Posted on nature.com June 13, 2012.

2. Tomkins, J. 2012. Gorilla Genome Is Bad News for Evolution. ICR News. Posted on icr.org March 9.

3. Tomkins, J. 2011. Genome-Wide DNA Alignment Similarity (Identity) for 40,000 Chimpanzee DNA Sequences Queried against the Human Genome is 86-89%. Answers Research Journal. 4:233-241.

4. Tomkins, J. and J. Bergman. 2012. Genomic monkey business—estimates of nearly identical human-chimp DNA similarity re-evaluated using omitted data. Journal of Creation. 26:94-100.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113522-anti-evolutionary-secrets-bonobo-genome.html In The Way http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113521-way.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:04:44 GMT . *_In The Way_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of my master Abraham, who hath not left destitute my master... .

In The Way

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of my master Abraham, who hath not left destitute my master of His mercy and His truth: I being in the way, the LORD led me to the house of my master’s brethren” (Genesis 24:27).

The remarkable, providential leading of Abraham’s servant to the maiden who was to be the bride of Isaac has been a source of inspiration to every generation of believers.

One very important principle can be gleaned from this wonderful journey: Before the Lord could lead the servant to the object of his quest, he had to start out on his way. “Being in the way, the LORD led me,” he testified.

Abraham himself knew this by experience: “By faith Abraham, when he was called . . . obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went” (Hebrews 11:8). God first led him from Ur to Haran, thence to Bethel in the land of Canaan, on to Mamre, and finally, to Beersheba. He had no certain home, but because he was “in the way,” the Lord assured him that “in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 22:18).

Hebrews 11:8 - By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

Genesis 22:18 - And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Consider also the Apostle Paul, who carried the saving gospel of Christ to the Gentiles. He did not, however, dawdle around waiting for this call. “After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not. . . . And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us” (Acts 16:7,9).

Acts 16:7, 9 - After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not. 9. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.

The principle is this: Those who truly desire to be called to some special field of service should first be doing what they can where they are. Then the Lord will re-direct them, if it is His will. “Thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left” (Isaiah 30:21). When we are actively “in the way,” then the Lord can lead us.

Isaiah 30:21 - And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113521-way.html <![CDATA[Have Scientists Found The 'God' Particle?]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113520-have-scientists-found-god-particle.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:03:42 GMT .

Have Scientists Found The 'God' Particle?

By: Jake Hebert, Ph.D., & Jason Lisle, Ph.D.

Scientists from Europe's CERN research center presented evidence on Wednesday, July 4, 2012, for a particle that is likely the Higgs boson, the last remaining elementary particle predicted by the "Standard Model" of particle physics.[1]

Particles are thought to have mass due to their interaction with a quantity called the "Higgs field." The Higgs boson can be thought of as a "ripple" in this field.[2]

Although it has been nicknamed the "God particle," it is widely agreed that the name is more for publicity than accuracy, and many physicists do not like it.[3] The Higgs mechanism does not miraculously create mass out of "nothing." Rather, the mass is transferred to the particle from the Higgs field, which contained this mass in the form of energy.[4, 5] Thus, the Higgs mechanism does not account for the origin of mass in the ultimate sense.

If God chooses to use a Higgs field to set the masses of all particles, He can certainly do so. The fact that such physics is possible or even meaningful would only make sense in a created universe that is controlled by the mind of God anyway. The study of how God upholds the universe today is the very essence of science. So the possible discovery of the Higgs boson falls under operational science, not origins science.

We know readers are curious about this development. Stay tuned for more information!

References

1. Wickham, C. and R. Evans. "It's a boson:" Higgs quest bears new particle. Reuters, July 4, 2012.

2. Strassler, M. The Higgs FAQ 1.0. Of Particular Significance Blog. Posted on profmattstrassler.com, accessed July 5, 2012.

3. Moskowitz, C. What Should 'God Particle' Be Renamed? Physicists Weigh In. LiveScience. Posted on livescience.com December 14, 2011, accessed July 5, 2012.

4. Jammer, M. 2000. Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics and Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 163.

5. Because of Einstein's famous equation E = mc2, energy has mass.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113520-have-scientists-found-god-particle.html Inheriting The Earth http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113471-inheriting-earth.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:37:22 GMT . *_Inheriting The Earth_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (*Matthew 5:5*). This third... .

Inheriting The Earth

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5).

This third of Christ’s beatitudes has always seemed paradoxical because those who now rule the earth seem anything but meek. It has always been the strong and aggressive who control the world, not the meek of the world.

Christ, however, was confirming an ancient promise given through David: “But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace” (Psalm 37:11). Surprisingly, there are also four other promises in this psalm describing those who are to inherit the earth:

Psalm 37:11 - But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.

“Those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth” (v.9). “For such as be blessed of Him shall inherit the earth” (v.22). “The righteous shall inherit the land (same word as ‘earth’)” (v.29). “Wait on the LORD, and keep His way, and He shall exalt thee to inherit the land (i.e. ‘earth’)” (v.34).

Psalm 37:9, 22, 29, 34 - For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth. 22. For such as be blessed of him shall inherit the earth; and they that be cursed of him shall be cut off. 29. The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever. 34. Wait on the Lord, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.

It is Jesus Christ, of course, who ultimately will receive “the uttermost parts of the earth for (His) possession” (Psalm 2:8). However, we also (if we are among the “meek”) are “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ” (Romans 8:17), and thus we also shall inherit the earth with Him.

Psalm 2:8 - Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

Romans 8:17 - And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

But how does this quality of meekness equip believers for such an exalted future? In the Bible, meekness does not mean “weakness,” of course, nor is it even an innate mildness that may characterize some unsaved people. “The fruit of the Spirit is . . . meekness” (Galatians 5:22-23), which means that meekness is not a natural human trait at all. It is best defined as the character of Christ, Himself, for He said: “I am meek and lowly in heart” (Matthew 11:29), and Paul measured his own actions “by the meekness and gentleness of Christ” (II Corinthians 10:1). In Psalm 37, it was seen that “the meek” (v.37) are synonymous with those who “wait on the LORD, and keep His way” (v.34).

Galatians 5:22-23 - But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23. Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Matthew 11:29 - Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

II Corinthians 10:1 - Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence am base among you, but being absent am bold toward you:

Psalm 37:37 - Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of that man is peace.

Psalm 37:34 - Wait on the Lord, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113471-inheriting-earth.html <![CDATA[Do People Have 'Gill Slits' in the Womb?]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113470-do-people-have-gill-slits-womb.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:36:07 GMT .

Do People Have 'Gill Slits' in the Womb?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

German zoologist Ernst Haeckel is perhaps most famous for defending evolution with the argument that creatures replay their evolutionary past when developing in the womb. Since Darwin's time, textbooks have reiterated that early embryos of many vertebrates, including humans, have tiny pouches that reflect an evolutionary fish stage. More recently, embryologists thoroughly refuted that concept, and others have shown that Haeckel's drawings were partially faked. And a new online video taken from 3-D scans of a developing baby's face should bury Haeckel's old and uninformed argument.

Embryologist and evolutionist Michael Richardson and colleagues dropped a bomb on Haeckel's long-held concept known as "embryonic recapitulation." He compared Haeckel's old drawings with actual photographs of the same embryos in a 1997 technical paper.[1] The comparison showed that Haeckel's drawings were frauds.

Richardson's report revealed that in order to make animal embryos look more similar at a certain early stage of development, Haeckel had omitted limb buds and heart bulges and resized and selected certain creature's embryos.[2] Since Haeckel had to manipulate data to conform it to his evolutionary notions, then perhaps embryos—including human—do not rehearse their "evolutionary past" after all.

However, textbooks have not yet reflected these findings. For example, the 2007 edition of a popular college biology textbook by Sylvia Mader features a Haeckel-like illustration and an explanation about embryo pouches—sometimes called "gill slits" by evolutionists—and how their presence supposedly supports evolution. Mader wrote:

At some time during development all vertebrates have a postanal tail [spinal cord-like scaffold] and exhibit paired pharyngeal pouches... In humans, the first pair of pouches becomes the tonsils, while the third and fourth pairs become the thymus and parathyroid glands. Why should terrestrial vertebrates develop and then modify such structures like pharyngeal pouches that have lost their original function? The most likely explanation is that fishes are ancestral to other vertebrate groups.[3]

But how does Mader know that the pouches "lost original function?" She doesn't—she makes the statement on the basis of evolutionary belief, not on scientific observation. She even lists the pouches' critical functions for human development. Since the pouches are tissues organized into folds and have known functions, then there is no scientific reason to even suspect that they reflect any evolutionary past.[3]

A new online video by New Scientist TV, captured by digitally splicing together scans taken during the first trimester of pregnancy, shows the remarkable transformation of these pouches into a human face and head. The pouches show no hint of any loss of function, past or present.

In fact, the caption accompanying the video states, "A close look at the animation reveals that a face forms from three main features that rotate into place, meeting at the philtrum, the groove above the top lip. The transformation occurs with very precise timing and delays can result in a cleft lip or palate."[4]

Very precise timing required an ingenious precision engineer.

In his zeal to promote evolution, Haeckel foisted faulty embryo sketches onto his readers, and the zeal of his followers has perpetuated those falsehoods for over a century. Now, not only is his sketch work on embryos "one of the most famous fakes in biology," but every pouch and fold of the human embryo itself is now known to be fully functional, precisely timed, and intricately arranged.[5]

The unaltered data provides accurate information—humans do not rehearse an evolutionary past during embryonic development. They do rehearse an intricate and expertly designed ballet of precise fit and timing.

References

1. Richardson, M. K. et al. 1997. There is no highly conserved embryonic stage in the vertebrates: implications for current theories of evolution and development. Anatomy and Embryology. 196 (2): 91-106.

2. van Niekerk, E. 2011. Countering Revisionism—part 1: Ernst Haeckel, fraud is proven. Journal of Creation. 25 (3): 89-95.

3. Mader, S. 2007. Biology, 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 97.

4. Ceurstemont, S. First animation reveals how a face forms in the womb. New Scientist TV. Posted on newscientist.com July 4, 2012, accessed July 11, 2012.

5. Pennisi, E. 1997. Haeckel's Embryos: Fraud Rediscovered. Science. 277 (5331): 1435. See also Jonathan, M. The Recapitulation Myth. Evolution News. Posted on evolutionnews.org June 29, 2010.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113470-do-people-have-gill-slits-womb.html In The Image Of God http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113469-image-god.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:34:58 GMT . *_In The Image Of God_* By: Paul G. Humber, M.S. “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and... .

In The Image Of God

By: Paul G. Humber, M.S.

“So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them” (Genesis 1:27).

The Lord Jesus Christ “is the image of God” (II Corinthians 4:4), “the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person” (Hebrews 1:3), “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15). Human beings were created “in” God’s image. From the beginning we were made to be like Jesus, God the Son, but we miserably failed.

II Corinthians 4:4 - In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Hebrews 1:3 - Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

Colossians 1:15 - Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

God the Father did not forsake His purposes, however. In the fullness of time He sent His Son to take on our flesh so that the believer might “be conformed to the image of His Son” (Romans 8:29), “renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created Him” (Colossians 3:10).

Romans 8:29 - For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Colossians 3:10 - And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Animals do not share this privilege. They were not made to resemble Jesus. Animals have instinct; humans, creativity—like the Creator! He reasons with His human creatures and wants us to reason back (cf. Isaiah 1:18). Like Jesus, we also have authority. He calmed the storm; we tame killer whales and whole herds of cattle. Yet, our rebellion against God shows up in many and varied abuses, but the ingredients are stamped on our beings nevertheless.

Isaiah 1:18 - Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

The fact that we can worship God and commune with Him in prayer is a tremendous truth. God is tripersonal; each Person of the Trinity communes with the Other. But God also invites us into His fellowship. Let us be what we were meant to be. Let us imitate the Lord Jesus Christ—trusting solely in the merits of His cross, commune with the Father through the Son, and experience the joy of fellowship with the Spirit for all eternity so that “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord” (II Corinthians 3:18).

II Corinthians 3:18 - But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

PGH

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113469-image-god.html Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113429-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:39:56 GMT . Image: http://www.icr.org/i/wide/one_ton_croc_wide.jpg *_Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?_* By: Brian Thomas, M.S. ... .

Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

After a three-week hunt, Philippine locals used cables to capture a huge crocodile from a remote location in the southern Agusan del Sur province.[1] Guinness World Records deemed it the largest captive croc in the world.[2] Since last September, caretakers have held the one-ton saltwater crocodile at Bunawan Eco-Park. Were giant crocodiles on board Noah's Ark?

Some question the veracity of the historical Noah's Ark on the grounds that certain dinosaurs would have been too large to enter it or even to fit on board. But dinosaurs would certainly have fit for the same reasons that crocodiles would have, leaving intact the feasibility of the Ark account.

The most straightforward solution assumes that the Lord brought juvenile animals to Noah.[3] Like dinosaurs, crocodiles all begin small. At about four inches long, crocodile eggs fit in the palm of an adult's hand, and even the largest dinosaur hatched from an egg not much larger than a football.

Certain animals continue to grow their whole lives, crocodiles included. Would Noah have bothered taking old, giant representatives of each large-growing kind, rather than youthful ones?

Many Bible defenders assert that reptiles continue to grow, unlike mammals, but this is not accurate. Some reptiles are "indeterminate growers," but others, such as skinks, are not. Some mammals, the kangaroo for example, are indeterminate growers, but most are not.

Both growth modes also appear to have been true with dinosaur reptiles. Many stopped growing after they reached a maximum size, but some of the largest were probably indeterminate growers. No matter how fast or slow they grew, Noah and his family would certainly have husbanded young, large-growing dinosaurs and young, large-growing crocodiles on the Ark.[4]

References

1. Guinness: Philippine croc is largest in captivity. Associated Press, July 1, 2012.

2. Largest Crocodile in Captivity. Guinness World Records. Posted on guinessworldrecords.com July 1, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.

3. Genesis 6:20 says that the Lord brought animals to Noah, Genesis 7:2 says that the Lord told Noah to take them on board, and Genesis 7:9 says that they went on board. Apparently, all three occurred. The animals "went" on board, stewarded by Noah and company, who took them after the Lord brought them close.

4. Sarfati, J. 2005. How did dinosaurs grow so big? Creation. 28(1): 44-47.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113429-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html The Sinning Brother http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113428-sinning-brother.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:38:52 GMT . *_The Sinning Brother_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother... .

The Sinning Brother

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat” (I Corinthians 5:11).

Here is a sober reminder that a Christian brother—one who has accepted Christ as Savior and repented of his sins can again fall into gross sin. This seems so anomalous that we might question whether such a one was ever saved in the first place. Some modern translations even let this question distort the real thrust of the verse. The NASV, for example, calls such a person a “so-called brother,” and the NIV translates the phrase as “anyone who calls himself a brother,” both thus implying that he was not really a brother in Christ.

The Greek word, however, is onomazo which means, simply, “named” or “called,” as the King James version correctly renders it. The thrust of the whole phrase is, “any man who bears the name of brother.” Paul is stressing the anomaly itself. Any brother in the Lord should live in a manner befitting this high calling.

If he does not, however, and if he is not responsive to the pleadings of his brethren who seek to restore him, in the manner of Galatians 6:1 (“ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness”), then he should be subject to church discipline, and be removed from the fellowship of the church. “If he neglect to hear the church,” said Jesus, “let him be unto thee as an heathen man” (Matthew 18:17). If such a person later repents, of course, Paul says we “ought rather to forgive him, and . . . confirm your love toward him” (II Corinthians 2:7-8).

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 18:17 - And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

II Corinthians 2:7-8 - So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

In the meantime, knowing that it is possible for a true believer to fall into gross sin, through carelessness, or doubt, or whatever, “let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (I Corinthians 10:12).

I Corinthians 10:12 - Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113428-sinning-brother.html <![CDATA['James...Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113427-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:34:21 GMT .

'James…Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

In 2002, the Biblical Archaeological Society and the Discovery Channel announced in Washington, D.C. that an ancient inscription on a 2,000-year-old ossuary with the inscribed Aramaic words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" was genuine. However, controversy and a lawsuit over the veracity of the inscription followed. That's all over now, and the verdicts are in.

The November/December 2002 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review magazine published the translation, dated at between 6 and 70 A.D. according to paleographer Andre Lemaire.[1] A paleographer is an expert in ancient inscriptions.

The ossuary was designed to hold previously-entombed human bones that were later interred. When it was discovered, the ossuary served as a lowly planter box.

Immediately after the Washington announcement, the bone box achieved worldwide attention. Some called it the most important New Testament archaeological discovery, since it verifies exact biblical relationships between Jesus, his brother James, and their earthly father Joseph.[2] How amazing to think that this ossuary once contained the bones of Jesus' brother![3]

However, the Israel Antiquities Authority, which was not aware of the ossuary's discovery prior to the Washington press release, accused the owner of forging the inscription. Years later, "experts" still said that the inscription was a modern-day forgery.[4] The five-year trial ended in March 2012, when Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash acquitted the accused of all forgery charges, ruling that the prosecution could not show beyond reasonable doubt that the inscription was forged.[5]

Now, according to a triumphantly titled article in the July/August 2012 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, "There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the inscription on the James Ossuary."[1]

That article also summarized the results of a detailed statistical analysis of the likelihood that the James ossuary refers to Jesus of Nazareth. Considering the possible numbers of those who were named Jesus, Joseph, and James at that time, and then adding other statistical estimates such as the total adult male population, "the number of individuals in that population who bear the three names with this relation is 1.71[one or two]."[1]

Of course, the Bible is clear that there certainly was one named James whose father was named Joseph, and whose brother Jesus was worthy of the honor shown by inscribing His name on an ossuary. With as much surety as modern analysis can muster, this artifact and its inscription are genuine. And like so much of archaeology, it verifies exact details in the Bible, which is altogether trustworthy.[6]

References

1. Shanks, H. "Brother of Jesus" Inscription Is Authentic! Biblical Archaeology Review. Posted on bib-arch.org July/August, 2012.

2. Rose, M. 2003. Ossuary Tales. Archaeology. 56 (1).

3. More accurately, James was Jesus' step-brother.

4. Kalman, M. The Burial Box of Jesus' Brother: Fraud? Time. Posted online September 5, 2009, accessed June 25, 2012.

5. Breaking News: Golan and Deutsch Acquitted of All Forgery Charges. Bible History Daily. Posted on biblicalarchaeology.org March 14, 2012, accessed June 25, 2012.

6. For example, the account written in the earliest Flood tablet 13539, written in cuneiform about 150 years after the Flood occurred and found in the ancient ruined Babylonian city of Nippur during the 19th century, does not differ in a single detail from the Flood narrative recorded in Genesis. See: Cooper, B. 2011. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Portsmouth, UK: Creation Science Movement.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113427-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Much More http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113395-much-more.html Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:42:26 GMT . *_Much More_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” ... .

Much More

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” (Romans 5:9).

The fifth chapter of Romans is sometimes called the “much more” chapter, because of five wonderful “much more” verses. The first is our text for the day, consisting itself of a commentary on the tremendous truth in the preceding verse. That is, because of the tremendous love expressed by God “in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (v.8), we shall also be delivered completely from the just wrath of a holy God.

Romans 5:8 - But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Then, there is the truth of verse 10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Formerly His adversaries, we are not only delivered from God’s wrath on sin, but also delivered from sin’s power, because Christ’s life becomes our life, once we are restored to complete fellowship with Him.

Romans 5:10 - For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Thirdly, we have more abundant grace. “But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many” (v.15). His grace is far greater than all our sin.

Romans 5:15 - But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Next, there is verse 17. “For if by one man’s offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.” Note the progression in these “much mores”: saved from wrath; saved unto righteousness; a life abounding in grace; and, now, a life of victory.

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Finally, and in summary: “Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord” (vs.20-21).

Romans 5:20-21 - Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113395-much-more.html Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113394-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:41:08 GMT . Image: http://static-www.icr.org/i/wide/physics_explains_universe_wide.jpg *_Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?_* By: Brian... .

Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

"With the laws of physics, you can get universes," said Alex Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley, during a panel discussion at the June 23 SETICon 2 science and science fiction conference in Santa Clara, California.[1] He argued that the universe could have begun as a result of a random "quantum mechanical fluctuation."[1]

Filippenko implies that we should not trust in God. "Instead, scientists say, we should trust the laws of physics."[1] But many scientists suggest that the laws of physics lead to trust in God, not from it. Which is right?

Physicist Jake Hebert recently showed fatal flaws in this increasingly common "universe from nothing" argument, as described by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss in his 2012 book, A Universe from Nothing. In Hebert's Acts & Facts article, he first explained that the "argument hinges on the claim that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero," an extraordinarily unlikely sum.[2] And since nobody but God knows the exact energy content of the entire universe, the claim is entirely unscientific.

Second, and more critically, quantum fluctuations are only known to occur within space that already exists. How would the first universe-generating fluctuation occur without space, and how could that space be there without a universe already in place? It appears that in order to make a universe this way, another universe must already exist. In that case, how did the first universe begin—or the one before that?

Hebert also noted logical problems. For example, the assertion that the universe came from nothing assumes pre-existence of the very laws of physics that can supposedly generate universes. Filippenko began to address this by saying, "The question, then, is, 'Why are there laws of physics?' And you could say, 'Well, that required a divine creator, who created these laws of physics and the spark that led from the laws of physics to these universes, maybe more than one.'"[1]

But instead of accepting his own argument for a "divine creator," Filippenko objected that one would still need to explain where that creator came from, and where the creator of that creator came from, and so on. This is a thin smokescreen, since the ultimate Creator of the laws of physics and/or the finite universe would of necessity not be finite. Only finite entities like universes or people require causes, because only they have beginnings. A "beginningless" or infinite Creator did not come from anything else since He always was and is.[3]

Filippenko and like-minded scientists ignore the necessity of pre-existing space for quantum fluctuations to occur, ignore logical problems in obtaining laws of physics from nothing, and ignore the nature of God, all in the name of justifying their faith that the universe could come from nothing. In reality, without an infinite Creator, not only would there be no laws of physics that point sinful people to his existence, but there would be no universe at all.[4]

References

1. Wall, M. The Big Bang Didn't Need God to Start Universe, Researchers Say. Space.com. Posted June 24, 2012, accessed June 29, 2012.

2. Hebert, J. 2012. A Universe from Nothing? Acts & Facts. 41 (7): 11-13.

3. Such a Creator would be identified as Jesus in Colossians 1; see esp. verses 15-17.

4. Thomas, B. New Book Says Universe Came from Nothing. ICR News. Posted on icr.org January 20, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113394-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html The Blood Of Consecration http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113393-blood-consecration.html Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:39:04 GMT . *_The Blood Of Consecration_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put it upon the tip of... .

The Blood Of Consecration

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put it upon the tip of Aaron’s right ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot” (Leviticus 8:23).

This unique ceremony, conducted when Aaron was being consecrated as Israel’s high priest, is rich in symbolism. The blood was taken from the “ram of consecration” (Leviticus 8:22), which had been slain by Moses, its death signifying the death to self which priests should experience in order to be fully dedicated to the will and service of God. Then the blood was applied to the head, hands, and feet of the priest, thus, in effect, to his whole body, symbolizing cleansing and forgiveness of personal sins, in order that he might be an acceptable intermediary between God and the people. Further, it of course signified that the priest must have ears willing to hear God’s Word, hands willing to do God’s work and feet willing to carry God’s message wherever He led.

Leviticus 8:22 - And he brought the other ram, the ram of consecration: and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram.

In fulfillment, the high priest is Christ, the sacrificial offering is Christ, and the consecrating blood is His own blood, shed at Calvary (Hebrews 9:11–14). As the perfect high priest, His ear was perfectly attuned to God’s Word, His hands worked the perfect work of God, and His feet walked all the way from Bethlehem to Calvary, to accomplish the saving will of God.

Hebrews 9:11-14 - But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

But then each believer must remember that he, also, is a member of “an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices” (I Peter 2:5). As believer-priests, we must hear God’s Word, for “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17). Our hands and feet must also be ready to do the work of God and walk in His ways, if we would be faithful to our high calling. This is our “reasonable service” as “living sacrifice(s)” presented unto Him (Romans 12:1).

I Peter 2:5 - Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Romans 10:17 - So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Romans 12:1 - I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113393-blood-consecration.html <![CDATA[Young-Looking Methane Lakes On Saturn's Moon]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113371-young-looking-methane-lakes-saturns-moon.html Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:54:02 GMT .

Young-Looking Methane Lakes On Saturn's Moon

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

The Cassini spacecraft detected what appear to be lakes and ponds near Titan's equator. If so, one lake is almost forty miles long, 25 miles wide, and at least three feet deep. Natural processes on the moon's surface rain down methane mixed with hydrocarbons, but only near the poles. Near the moon's equator, natural processes evaporate the methane. So, after many millennia, any ancient equatorial methane lakes on Titan should have completely dried. The methane lakes' continued presence baffles astronomers, leaving them to face the difficult task of explaining it.

Caitlin Griffith, planetary scientist at the University of Arizona in Tucson, is lead author of the study results published in Nature.[1] She told Nature News, "Lakes at the poles are easy to explain, but lakes in the tropics are not."[2]

These observations are easy to explain if evaporation has only been occurring for thousands, not billions of years. How could methane lakes still exist on Titan's equator after billions of years of evaporation?

"Because tropical lakes on Titan should evaporate over a period of just a few thousand years, the researchers argue that these ponds and lakes are being replenished by subsurface oases of liquid methane," according to Nature News.[2] That kind of argument is very familiar.

For example, in 2008 Cassini discovered frozen carbon dioxide on Iapetus, another of Saturn's moons, even though sixty-trillion tons of the carbon dioxide are lost to space during each orbit. To explain this, researchers proposed that it is replenished from below the surface or from impacts, but neither explanation has supporting evidence.[3]

Another case in point involves comets. Researchers continue to imagine an invisible cloud or belt of comet sources lying near the solar system to explain how comets with short life spans still swing through the Solar System, even though they are supposed to be billions of years old.[4]

Likewise, to explain the moon recession problem—it would have been touching the earth and making life impossible at only a fraction of the earth's supposed billions of years—many suggest with no evidence to back the claim that the moon's current drift rate away from earth is abnormally fast these days.

Rescuing devices are a central feature of long-age astronomy. Thus, it is no surprise to read of another one. The claim that an unseen subsurface methane reservoir is an attempt to rescue Titan's supposed old age from scientific evidence of its youth.

References

1. Griffith, C. A. et al. 2012. Possible tropical lakes on Titan from observations of dark terrain. Nature. 486 (7402): 237-239.

2. McKee, M. Tropical lakes on Saturn moon could expand options for life. Nature News. Posted on nature.com June 13, 2012, accessed June 18, 2012.

3. Coppedge, D. 2008. Iapetus: Youth in Black and White. Acts & Facts. 37 (6): 15.

4. Humphreys, D. R. 2006. Evidence for a Young World. Acts & Facts. 34 (6).

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113371-young-looking-methane-lakes-saturns-moon.html Labor And Profit http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113370-labor-profit.html Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:52:14 GMT .

Labor And Profit

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

"Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labor that I had labored to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 2:11).

One of the inequities of human life seems to be that there is no dependable relationship between the diligence with which one labors and the reward he receives for that labor. Some men may work hard all their lives, yet live in poverty; the “idle rich,” on the other hand, may inherit their wealth.

The trouble is that perfect equity can never be achieved in such matters while man’s entire dominion is in bondage to sin and death, under God’s curse (Genesis 3:17–20). As long as one’s goals and motives in working are only “under the sun,” there is bound to be “vanity and vexation of spirit,” no matter what his current economic and social status may be. The accounts are not to be settled in the fallible ledgers kept here on earth, but in God’s books.

Genesis 3:17-20 - And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. 20. And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

“Labor not for the meat which perisheth,” said the Lord, “but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life” (John 6:27). To bondslaves, Paul said, “Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Colossians 3:23-24).

John 6:27 - Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

Colossians 3:23-24 - And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; 24. Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

It is important to remember that, when all accounts are settled at His judgment seat, the “profit” we receive is not based on quantity, but quality, of services rendered. “Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it . . . and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is” (I Corinthians 3:13).

I Corinthians 3:13 - Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Not “how much,” but “what sort!” There is little profit under the sun, but, if we are “abounding in the work of the Lord . . . (our) labor is not in vain in the Lord” (I Corinthians 15:58).

I Corinthians 15:58 - Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

HMM

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113370-labor-profit.html The Higgs Boson: A Blow To Christianity? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113369-higgs-boson-blow-christianity.html Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:51:07 GMT . Image: http://www.icr.org/i/wide/super_collider_wide.jpg *_The Higgs Boson: A Blow To Christianity?_* By: Jake Hebert, Ph.D. ... .

The Higgs Boson: A Blow To Christianity?

By: Jake Hebert, Ph.D.

Scientists from Europe's CERN research center presented evidence last week for a particle that is likely the Higgs boson,[1] the last remaining elementary particle predicted by the Standard Model of particle physics.

Although it has been nicknamed the "God particle," it is widely agreed that the name is more for publicity than accuracy, and many physicists do not like it.[2]

In order to understand the importance of the Higgs boson, it is necessary to review some modern physics.

Quantum mechanics is a very successful theory that describes the behavior of atoms and subatomic particles, and quantum field theory is an extension of quantum mechanics. A field is a quantity that fills space and has a value at each point in space. A temperature field, for instance, might describe how the temperature in a room varies from point to point (this would be an example of what is known as a scalar field). The familiar electric field surrounding a charged object is an example of a vector field.

There is a tendency to intuitively think of particles as being like little round marbles. In modern physics, however, the reality is more complicated. Quantum field theory views the fields as being fundamental; particles may be thought of (with some caveats) as "ripples" in the fields.[3]

One of these fields is a scalar field called the Higgs field. The Higgs field is thought to give particles mass via their interaction with this field. Particles that interact strongly with the Higgs field have more mass, and vice versa. A Higgs particle can be thought of as the smallest possible "ripple" in the Higgs field.[4]

The Standard Model is the theory that describes the relationships between elementary particles and three of the four fundamental forces (it does not include gravity). Physicists had confirmed the existence for all the elementary particles of the Standard Model except one—the Higgs boson. Its discovery, if confirmed, would be a triumph for the Standard Model.

Given the pro-evolution bias of much of the media, it is not surprising that this discovery is being hyped as a blow to Christianity. The Higgs boson is "another nail in the coffin of religion," said one University of Cambridge professor,[5] although it is interesting that well-known professing atheist and theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking lost one hundred dollars betting that the Higgs boson would not be found.[6]

Theoretical physicist and popular author Michio Kaku wrote an ambiguously-worded Wall Street Journal editorial that seemed to suggest that the Higgs boson was the cause of the Big Bang.[7] However, theoretical physicist and Big Bang evangelist Lawrence Krauss contradicted this, acknowledging that the discovery of the Higgs boson does not provide an explanation for the cause of the Big Bang. Krauss went so far as to say that determining the cause of the supposed Big Bang may actually be beyond our present technological capabilities![8]

Reuters ran an article stating that the Higgs field "attracted the flying debris of the big bang and turned it into stars, planets and galaxies."[9] This statement gives the erroneous impression that the Higgs field can explain star and galaxy formation within the evolutionary model.

In the Standard Model, particles have mass due to their interaction with the Higgs field, and evolutionists believe that gravitational interactions between massive particles ultimately led to star and galaxy formation. But their explanations as to how this could occur are unconvincing, and the (likely) discovery of the Higgs boson has in no way changed that.

References

1. Wickham, C. 2012. "It's a boson:" Higgs quest bears new particle. Reuters, July 4, 2012.

2. Moskowitz, C. 2011. What should 'God Particle' Be Renamed? Physicists Weigh In. LiveScience. Posted on livescience.com December 14, 2011, accessed July 6, 2012.

3. Strassler, M. Virtual Particles: What are they? Of Particular Significance Blog. Posted on profmattstrassler.com, accessed July 9, 2012.

4. Strassler, M. The Higgs FAQ 1.0. Of Particular Significance Blog. Posted on profmattstrassler.com, accessed July 9, 2012.

5. 'The Higgs boson is another nail in the coffin of religion'. BBC News Online Video. Posted on bbc.co.uk July 4, 2012, accessed July 6, 2012.

6. Stephen Hawking loses Higgs boson particle bet - video. The Guardian Online Video. Posted on guardian.co.uk July 5, 2012, accessed July 6, 2012.

7. Kaku, M. 2012. The Spark That Caused the Big Bang. The Wall Street Journal. Posted on online.wsj.com July 5, 2012, accessed July 9, 2012.

8. Krauss, L. 2011. What is the Higgs boson and why does it matter? NewScientist. Posted on newscientist.com December 13, 2011, accessed July 6, 2012.

9. Evans, R. 2012. British theorist Peter Higgs lives to see his boson. Reuters, July 4, 2012.

What We Believe

Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles

Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles

]]> Liberty University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/liberty-university/113369-higgs-boson-blow-christianity.html