I simply can’t comprehend how an individual can hold to …

Comment on Dr. Jason Rosenhouse “Among the Creationists” by Gene Fortner.

I simply can’t comprehend how an individual can hold to the ideas of scientism and also be a Christian. The basic philosophy of scientism contradicts explicitly the “mind of God” as described within the Bible. A Christian is supposed to believe that God created the universe. Paul states that it’s our observation of God’s creation that yields His invisible qualities. Every place in the Scriptures where the “mind of God” or God’s abilities are compared with the “mind” of His creations or His creations abilities, the “mind” of His creations and His creations abilities are substantially inferior. Consider for example Isaiah 55:8-9.
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than you thoughts.” (KJ)
Then consider Romans 11:33.
“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” (KJ)
Consequently, it should be impossible for scientists to describe or comprehend all of the details of how our universe and the entities it contains were created or sustained from the beginning of creation. Later in this book when I discuss in more detail the D-model, you’ll see that this scientific model actually establishes as mathematical truth such statements as Isaiah 55:8-9, Romans 11:33 and many more.

Dr. Robert A. Herrmann
Professor of Mathematics (Ret.)
U. S. Naval Academy**

Gene Fortner Also Commented

Dr. Jason Rosenhouse “Among the Creationists”
Pauluc,

It would seem to me that a more appropriate test would be to map the requirements from a fish to man, find your inner fish so to speak.


Dr. Jason Rosenhouse “Among the Creationists”
@george:

The way I understand the Bible, we will all be able witness a miracle when Christ comes. Be patient.


Dr. Jason Rosenhouse “Among the Creationists”
@george:
George,

The “Pillars of Evolution” are decaying rapidly,
Human Origins(?) by Brian Thomas, M.S. – December 20, 2013 (Link)

Excerpt: Three major pillars supporting a human-chimp link crashed in 2013.

1. Genetic similarity (70% instead of 98%)
2. beta-globin pseudogene (functional instead of leftover junk)
3. Chromosome 2 fusion site (encodes a functional feature within an important gene instead of a being a fusion site) All three key genetic pillars of human evolution (for Darwinists) turned out to be specious—overstatements based on ignorance of genetic function.

The Fossil record does not support it, long term experiments in genetics do not support it.

So why is it still popular dogma;

Lynn Margulis Criticizes Neo-Darwinism in Discover Magazine (Updated) – Casey Luskin April 12, 2011

Excerpt: Population geneticist Richard Lewontin gave a talk here at UMass Amherst about six years ago, and he mathemetized all of it–changes in the population, random mutation, sexual selection, cost and benefit. At the end of his talk he said, “You know, we’ve tried to test these ideas in the field and the lab, and there are really no measurements that match the quantities I’ve told you about.” This just appalled me. So I said, “Richard Lewontin, you are a great lecturer to have the courage to say it’s gotten you nowhere. But then why do you continue to do this work?” And he looked around and said, “It’s the only thing I know how to do, and if I don’t do it I won’t get grant money.”

– Lynn Margulis – biologist


Recent Comments by Gene Fortner

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
yes


GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Bill “How inane would it be to claim an apple tree is not an apple tree unless and until it has apples on it?”

Bill,

Comparing babies and apple trees is a bit more inane than comparing apples and oranges.

BTW,

“The ONLY DEFINITION FOR SIN that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law… IT CONDEMNS EVERY SIN, AND REQUIRES EVERY VIRTUE.” E.G. White, ST, March 3, 1890 par. 3.

If it is a sin to possess a fallen nature then there must be a law against it. Has God given a law forbidding anyone from being conceived with a fallen human nature? If there ever was a law that was impossible to keep, this would be it, for how could one choose not to violate it before one existed?!


Summary of 60th General Conference Session (2015)
Thanks Sean


GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Ethan,

IMHO,

No statement was necessary.

In fact I consider it thoughtless.

FB#6 should have absolutely no effect on their ability to support the world church and perform work faithfully and with integrity.


GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Bill Sorensen:

Bill,

Sin is transgression of the law.

Where does it say being born is a sin?