October 12, 2012

Author: Nicholas Scott Hertzman Christian Apologist/Theologian/Philosopher Sermon 1

To the skeptics: You need to stop wasting your time on trying to find errors in the Bible. There are none period. It is the inerrant and infallible Word of God. Not only do you draw your conclusions based on your own misinterpretations of the Holy Scriptures, but you also read things in an extra-literal perspective with the goal of trying to refute biblical inerrancy, which only proves that you cannot decipher a metaphor, analogy, allegory, or anything symbolic. There are lists of supposed contradictions of scripture that have been disproven and explained with simplicity and reasoning by others including myself. If you would like, I would recommend that you read the book, Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions, or just go on Google.com and search something along the lines of, Bible contradictions disproven, and Im sure youll find something. You could read what the skeptic has to say and then read the logical explanation refuting his/her skeptical remark. To those in favor of Charles Darwins Theory of Evolution: I do not know why this is still talked about as if it were valid. In addition to the fossil record which has no evidence for the case of macroevolution, including human origins, but instead shows evidence of a designer/creator (See: Earths Catastrophic Past- Andrew A. Snelling, and/or The Fossil Record and the Origin of Man, Parts 1-8 http://www.youtube.com /user/BibleScienceCa), science itself through the Law of Biogenesis (life can arise only from pre-existing life and will perpetuate only its own kind), has disproven it entirely. With what we know now, Darwin would change his mind. As a matter of fact, biochemist Dr. Michael Behe, who argues that evolution could never have given rise to the intricate structures of life, has identified something he calls irreducible complexity. This refers to an organism which is so complex that it could not have come together piece by piece and still function; all the parts must have come about at once in order to have any function at all. And Charles Darwin himself admitted that an idea such as irreducible complexity, if proven true, would demolish his theory. In The Origin of Species he wrote: If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. So now I have to ask you this question. Why would someone choose to believe by faith in evolution, which has no evidential proof and which, in fact, the evidence disproves but not believe by faith in a Creator for whom we do have evidence?

The visible marks of extraordinary wisdom and power appear so plainly in all the works of the creation that a rational creature, who will but seriously reflect on them, cannot miss the discovery of a Deity. John Locke

Questions To Ask Yourself 1. When, where, why and how did life come from non-living matter? 2. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? 3. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? 4. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? 5. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? 6. Biophysicist Dr. Lee Spetner says, All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it. (See: Not By Chance; P.138). Natural selection works only with the genetic information available, and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true? 7. Where are the fossils that show the intermediate processes of macroevolution? Darwins theory proposes that for things to evolve it had to be a very slow and gradual change over long periods of time. If that is the case, then there should be millions of fossils showing these changes in the rock strata, and yet there is none. Some scientists may say that things evolved too quickly for any fossils to be left behind due to something called The Cambrian Explosion. But if that is the case, then there should still be things evolving rather quickly to this day and there isnt! How do you explain this? 8. Dr. Werner Gitt, one of the worlds experts on Information Science says, There is no law of nature, no known process, and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter. (See: In The Beginning Was Information; Theorem 28). Where did the DNA code (the focus of life and the most complex thing on the earth) come from? Where did the information thats on the DNA code come from? 9. When, where, why, and how did: a) Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two- and three-celled intermediates?) b) Fish change to amphibians? c) Amphibians change to reptiles? d) Reptiles change to birds? (Their lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different.) How did the intermediate forms live? e) Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?

10. Which of the following evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others?) a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the bodys resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)? b) The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce? c) The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs? d) The plants, or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants? e) The bones, ligaments, tendons, bloods supply, or muscles to move the bones? f) The immune system or the need for it?

Now take a minute to thoughtfully consider your answers. Are you sure theyre reasonable and scientifically provable, or do you just hope and believe that it may have happened that way? Do you really think evolution makes sense? Common sense should tell us the answer. If you want to learn more facts about why evolution is well stupid, you can go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM and watch Dr. Kent Hovind 100 Reasons why evolution is stupid! Dr. Hovind also has many seminar videos which touch on creation science. For more information on that go to drdino.com. Also, The Darwinists are going to have to BURY this if they want to continue perpetuating their worldview: http://www.living-fossils.com.

"Atheism is so senseless & odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds beasts & men have their right side & left side alike shaped (except in their bowels) & just two eyes & no more on either side the face & just two ears on either side the head & a nose with two holes & no more between the eyes & one mouth under the nose & either two fore legs or two wings or two arms on the shoulders & two legs on the hips one on either side & no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel & contrivance of an Author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom & the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside an hard transparent skin, & within transparent juices with a crystalline lens in the middle & a pupil before the Lens all of them so truly shaped & fitted for vision, that no Artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light & what was its refraction & fit the eyes of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These & such like considerations always have & ever will prevail with mankind to believe that there is a God Who made all things & has all things in His power & Who is therefore to be feared." - Sir Isaac Newton

Big Problems With The Supposed Missing Links Nebraska Man, Piltdown Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Neanderthal Man, and Lucy are all supposed to be missing links. But did you know that every single one of these has been disproved scientifically? Yet although disproved, they can still be seen in textbooks today! Lets take a look at the evidence: Nebraska Man was created from a single tooth discovered in Nebraska. Based on only one tooth (and a lot of imagination), Nebraska Man was sketched complete with a skull, skeleton, tools, and even a family. The only problem is that the tooth was later found to have come from an extinct pig! Piltdown Man has been revealed to be a deliberate hoax. The skull fragment actually came from a modern human, and the jawbone portion and two teeth were from an orangutan. The teeth had been filed down to make them look human, and the bones and teeth had been stained to give them the appearance of being ancient. The entire discovery was forged from the outset to fool people who would not search for the truth. Java Man was constructed from widely-scattered bones a skullcap and femur found far apart in a gravel deposit. They were actually unrelated parts of a human being and a giant gibbon. Peking Man was based only on monkey-like skulls that were bashed in at the back. Because they were found with various animal bones and tools, it was assumed that these tool-using apes were mans ancestors. Instead, it was discovered that these animals were mans meal, and the tools were used on them rather than by them. Neanderthal Man was determined to be completely human just plain, modern people with a well-developed culture, art, and religion, but who suffered from dietary deficiencies. Lucy could not be a missing link because it has been determined that man walked upright before the time of Lucy. F.Y.I. Sure, there are all kinds of different looking dogs, but a dog has never produced a nondog, so why would a monkey produce a human, or anything else for that matter? Genesis 1:21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. Genesis 1:25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds.

To those in favor of the Big Bang theory: Think about it. They say it all started with an explosion from a primeval atom. Now where did this atom come from is my first question. They might say something along the lines of virtual particle pairs. Virtual particles appear in the quantum vacuum which is a sea of fluctuating energy. It is a rich physical reality endowed with a structure and is governed by physical laws, which means it could not have just come into being out of nothing; and logistically, Out of nothing, NOTHING comes! Where did the laws that govern everything and allow it to exist come from anyways? The Distant Starlight Theory and the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) does not prove the Big Bang. Since nobody knows exactly when this radiation actually started traveling, how do we know when the start date was and thus the period of time which it has been traveling? It is peculiar that secular scientists point to Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation as being proof of the Big Bang when the very fact that the CMB temperature is uniform everywhere presents a tremendous problem for the Big Bang. There just wasnt enough time for the exchange of radiation (i.e. light) to allow the temperature to reach equilibrium. Secular scientists believe in a natural cause for the origin of the universe without divine intervention. Whats ridiculous about that is that for physical space and time to come into being out of nothing would defy the law of causality, which naturalism requires to have, thus rendering it impossible for the universe to have come into existence without some supernatural cause, and so the theory in itself is a self-contradiction. Also, to say that the universe had a beginning but that it brought itself into existence is complete nonsense; because for the universe to have brought itself into existence it wouldve had to already exist, which is also self-contradicting! The whole thought of a self-existing universe is ludicrous, and only presents itself as a mockery to science since its the best they can come up with. However, I will grant that the atheistic hypothesis is not that something came from nothing. They typically believe that the universe is one of many and that it arose out of what they call a 'multi-verse', which is a greater physical reality. So while the universe itself had a beginning, the multi-verse is thought to be eternal. They have no evidence for it, but that is their view nonetheless. To be fair, it is a 'something coming from something' religious view. And I say religious because it is a faith based belief, and personally, I dont have enough faith to be an atheist. But anyways, the problem they still cannot escape is the existence of motion. Motion is not a physical thing. It is a non-physical process by which physical causation operates. There cannot be an infinite regress of motion, not even in the imagined multi-verse. So the big question is, how did motion begin? It could not have been started by a physical cause because such a physical cause would already need motion in order to operate. Therefore, logic necessitates a nonphysical first cause. We can ask the question, is our human logic authoritative for drawing the above conclusion? Well, we would have to evaluate whether or not our human logic has provided sufficient demonstrations of authority on the subject of causation, and I do think causation is something that human logic has generally proven authoritative on. So it is very likely we can trust our logic on this one. So the multi-verse need not come from anything; it just 'is' ...in the same sense that God just 'is' for the theist. The atheist can accept physical causes only. But this presents a serious problem because physical causation cannot work without motion. But if you hit the cosmic 'rewind' button, so to speak, it is impossible for physical causes to rewind forever. That is what philosophers call an 'infinite regress'. In this case it would be an infinite regress of

physical causation. That is impossible, even with a multi-verse. Logically speaking, there had to be a first cause. Aristotle wrote about this and he was right. The atheist cannot explain the origin of motion itself. If the physical multi-verse is eternal and operates through strictly physical causation, then when and how did motion begin? Motion itself cannot be eternal because again, that would lead to an infinite regress of motion; which is impossible. But if motion itself had a beginning, then the only possibility for a first cause is a 'supernatural' first cause, not a natural one. A natural, or physical first cause could cause absolutely nothing without motion. So, if the motion of the physical world had a beginning, then something supernatural must have caused it, i.e., a Prime Mover. The physical world cannot just start moving on its own, without some kind of supernatural 'will' or 'desire' and 'purpose' to do so. This is what the atheist cannot explain. Give it some thought and I think you'll agree. Clearly, on any naturalistic worldview, you've got to have a non-physical first cause to get motion going ... which would mean the view is not truly naturalistic. To call it naturalistic would be to simply ignore the clear need for a non-physical first cause. That's basically what atheists do. They just ignore the need for God to get things going. They don't want to admit that motion + logic = God ...so they just evade the issue as best they can ("science will figure it out one day") ...yea right, give me a break. This is not a scientific matter. It is a strictly philosophical/logical issue and as much as they would like it to, it's not going away. And before you go on to even consider that the universe might be eternal, it has been proven that it cannot be as it is refuted by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy): Stars nuclear fuel eventually runs out. All lighter elements (hydrogen, helium) are eventually converted to heavier elements. Bottom line science is often used to discredit the existence of God. Yet, naturalistic science cannot be objective because it presupposes no God. It cannot address the question of Gods existence without committing the logical fallacy of petitio principii a circular argument. The universe is a physical thing that we can detect, thus it falls into the boundaries of time and reality, which means it could not have come about uncaused out of nothing creating unimaginable complexity and complete order from disorderliness by chance. To try and disprove that God exists is the same as a cartoon character using the elements within the cartoon to disprove the cartoonist. But all in all, it is confirmed that the universe began to exist, thus, it had a cause. In my opinion, God is that cause. He lives outside the boundaries of time and space and so it doesnt affect Him. He is the Alpha and Omega. He is a transcendent Being Who is beyond the universe, and so He is not limited and confined to our concepts. It would only be rational to believe that God is the best explanation for the cause of the universe, since there are no other explanations that make any sense whatsoever. For those who say that nothing will happen after you die: If you really believe that there is nothing after you die, then I believe that your life is ultimately meaningless. In the atheistic view we are just the accidental byproduct of nature, a result of matter + time + chance. There is no reason for our existence. All we face is death. You live and then die and thats it. Why bother? For if there is no God then mans life becomes ultimately absurd. It is without ultimate meaning, without ultimate value, and without ultimate purpose. Both man and the universe are inevitably doomed to death. Man, like all biological organisms, must die. And the universe too faces a death of its own. Scientists tell us the universe is expanding, and as it does so, everything in it grows further and further apart. As it expands it grows colder and colder as its energy is used up. Eventually

all the stars will burn out, and all matter will collapse into dead stars and black holes. There will be no light; there will be no heat; there will be no life. Only the corpses of dead stars and galaxies ever expanding into the endless darkness and the cold recesses of space a universe in ruins. So not only is the life of each individual person doomed, but the entire human race is destined to destruction. There is no escape. There is no hope. So ultimately, if you have nothing to look forward to after death then this is all just a waste, because in your eyes we are only seen as planet Earth, the insignificant spec of dust in the universe where its inhabitants are to die individually and collectively over time in an eventual heat death for no purpose whatsoever. I do not live with this mentality because I know that I was made in Gods image, and that I have a mission on this earth to form a relationship with Him so it may continue on forever; and by staying faithful to Christ and following Him in obedience, I will be a part of His kingdom that is to come, and I, along with the righteous, will reign with Him for all eternity, which gives me something to look forward to after death.

A true scientist cannot be an atheist. When you peer so deeply into God's workshop and have so many opportunities to marvel at His omniscience and eternal order, as we have, then you should humbly bend your knees before the throne of the Almighty God. - Johann Madler

Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart "There is no God.

Some Philosophical Arguments 1. The Kalam Cosmological Argument: a) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence. b) The universe has a beginning of its existence. c) Thus the universe has a cause of its existence. d) This first uncaused cause must transcend physical reality. e) This uncaused cause that transcends physical reality is the description of God. f) Therefore, God exists. 2. The Ontological Argument: a) There is existence b) Existence is a perfection above which no perfection may be conceived c) God is perfection and perfection in existence d) Existence is a singular and simple reality; there is no metaphysical pluralism e) That singular reality is graded in intensity in a scale of perfection (that is, a denial of a pure monism). f) That scale must have a limit point, a point of greatest intensity and of greatest existence. g) Hence God exists. 3. The existence of contingent beings (Contingency Argument): a) Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence (either in its own nature or in an external cause). b) The universe exists. c) If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God. d) Therefore, the explanation of the universe is God. 4. The fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life (Teleological Argument): a) The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design. b) It is not due to either physical necessity or chance. c) Therefore, it is due to design. 5. Objective moral values and duties in the world (Moral Argument): a) If God did not exist, objective moral values and duties would not exist. b) Objective moral values and duties do exist. c) Therefore, God exists. 6. The historical facts concerning Jesus of Nazareth: a) There are three established facts about Jesus: his empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples belief in his resurrection. b) The statement God raised Jesus from the dead is the best explanation of these facts. c) The statement God raised Jesus from the dead entails that God exists. d) Therefore, God exists.

Evidence For A Young World Here are fourteen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old: 1. Galaxies Wind Themselves Up Too Fast. The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape. Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this the winding-up dilemma, which they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same winding-up dilemma also applies to other galaxies. For the last few decades the favored attempt to resolve the puzzle has been a complex theory called density waves. The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescopes discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the

Crab Nebula (photo courtesy of NASA) Whirlpool galaxy, M51. 2. Too Few Supernova Remnants. According to astronomical observations, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 25 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.

3. Comets Disintegrate Too Quickly. According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of less than 10,000 years. Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical Oort cloud well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed. So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the Kuiper Belt, a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Some asteroid-sized bodies of ice exist in that location, but they do not solve the evolutionists problem, since according to evolutionary theory, the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it. 4. Not Enough Mud On The Sea Floor. Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean. This material accumulates as loose sediment on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the sediment in the whole ocean is less than 400 meters. The main way known to remove the sediment from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) Rivers and dust storms dump mud into the beneath the continents, taking some sea much faster than plate tectonic sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently subduction can remove it. removes only 1 billion tons per year. As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with sediment dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of sediment within a short time about 5,000 years ago. 5. Not Enough Sodium In The Sea. Every year, rivers and other sources dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this

sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year. As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at todays input and output rates. This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, three billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations that are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years. Calculations for many other seawater elements give much younger ages for the ocean.

Electrical resistance in the earths core wears down the electrical current which produces the earths magnetic field. That causes the field to lose energy rapidly. 6. The Earths Magnetic Field Is Decaying Too Fast. The total energy stored in the earths magnetic field (dipole and non-dipole) is decreasing with a half-life of 1,465 ( 165) years. Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years are very complex and inadequate. A much better creationist theory exists. It is straightforward, based on sound physics, and explains many features of the field: its creation, rapid reversals during the Genesis flood, surface intensity decreases and increases until the time of Christ, and a steady decay since then. This theory matches paleomagnetic, historic, and present data, most startlingly with evidence for rapid changes. The main result is that the fields total energy (not surface intensity) has always decayed at least as fast as now. At that rate the field could not be more than 20,000 years old. 7. Many Strata Are Too Tightly Bent. In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be

still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition. 8. Biological Material Decays Too Fast. Natural radioactivity, mutations, and decay degrade DNA and other biological material rapidly. Measurements of the mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA recently forced researchers to revise the age of mitochondrial Eve from a theorized 200,000 years down to possibly as low as 6,000 years. DNA experts insist that DNA cannot exist in natural environments longer than 10,000 years, yet intact strands of DNA appear to have been recovered from fossils allegedly much older: Neandertal bones, insects in amber, and even from dinosaur fossils. Bacteria allegedly 250 million years old apparently have been revived with no DNA damage. Soft tissue and blood cells from a dinosaur have astonished experts. 9. Fossil Radioactivity Shortens Geologic Ages To A Few Years.

Radio Halo (photo courtesy of Mark Armitage) Radiohalos are rings of color formed around microscopic bits of radioactive minerals in rock crystals. They are fossil evidence of radioactive decay. Squashed Polonium-210 radiohalos indicate that Jurassic, Triassic, and Eocene formations in the Colorado plateau were deposited within months of one another, not hundreds of millions of years apart as required by the conventional time scale. Orphan Polonium-218 radiohalos, having no evidence of their mother elements, imply accelerated nuclear decay and very rapid formation of associated minerals. If you would like to learn more about these radiohalos, read nuclear physicist Robert V. Gentrys book, Creations Tiny Mystery. 10. Too Much Helium In Minerals. Uranium and thorium generate helium atoms as they decay to lead. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research showed that such helium produced in zircon crystals in deep, hot Precambrian granitic rock has not had time to escape. Though

the rocks contain 1.5 billion years worth of nuclear decay products, newly-measured rates of helium loss from zircon show that the helium has been leaking for only 6,000 ( 2000) years. This is not only evidence for the youth of the earth, but also for episodes of greatly accelerated decay rates of long half-life nuclei within thousands of years ago, compressing radioisotope timescales enormously. 11. Too Much Carbon 14 In Deep Geologic Strata. With their short 5,700-year half-life, no carbon 14 atoms should exist in any carbon older than 250,000 years. Yet it has proven impossible to find any natural source of carbon below Pleistocene (Ice Age) strata that does not contain significant amounts of carbon 14, even though such strata are supposed to be millions or billions of years old. Conventional carbon 14 laboratories have been aware of this anomaly since the early 1980s, have striven to eliminate it, and are unable to account for it. Lately the worlds best such laboratory which has learned during two decades of low-C14 measurements how not to contaminate specimens externally, under contract to creationists, confirmed such observations for coal samples and even for a dozen diamonds, which cannot be contaminated in situ with recent carbon. These constitute very strong evidence that the earth is only thousands, not billions, of years old. 12. Not Enough Stone Age Skeletons. Evolutionary anthropologists now say that Homo sapiens existed for at least 185,000 years before agriculture began, during which time the world population of humans was roughly constant, between one and ten million. All that time they were burying their dead, often with artifacts. By that scenario, they would have buried at least eight billion bodies. If the evolutionary time scale is correct, buried bones should be able to last for much longer than 200,000 years, so many of the supposed eight billion stone age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artifacts). Yet only a few thousand have been found. This implies that the Stone Age was much shorter than evolutionists think, perhaps only a few hundred years in many areas. 13. Agriculture Is Too Recent. The usual evolutionary picture has men existing as hunters and gatherers for 185,000 years during the Stone Age before discovering agriculture less than 10,000 years ago. Yet the archaeological evidence shows that Stone Age men were as intelligent as we are. It is very improbable that none of the eight billion people mentioned in item 12 should discover that plants grow from seeds. It is more likely that men were without agriculture for a very short time after the Flood, if at all. 14. History Is Too Short.

According to evolutionists, Stone Age Homo sapiens existed for 190,000 years before beginning to make written records about 4,000 to 5,000 years ago. Prehistoric man built megalithic monuments, made beautiful cave paintings, and kept records of lunar phases. Why would he wait two thousand centuries before using the same skills to record history? The Biblical time scale is much more likely

Error: Reference source not found Some Geological Evidences For The Genesis Flood The Grand Canyon - One piece of evidence out of many is the Grand Canyon, which has no evidence in its rock strata to show for a gradual formation. I just think of the litany of arguments against creation that were blown away by the Mount St. Helens eruption. They used to say that it takes such long periods of time for rocks to be laid down and canyons to be carved out; and of course Mount St. Helens laid down many layers of rock quickly, and cut canyons very quickly. These are conditions that would have happened during a worldwide flood. And so there are these very fine layers in the canyon that was formed by the Mount St. Helens eruption layers that they used to say take one year, and then the next, and then the next, and so on but no they happened quickly. Also, the Colorado River, which they say carved out the Grand Canyon, flows at 2,800 ft above sea level. As it goes down through the canyon the ground is rising up (the Kaibab uplift). The uplift is seven to eight thousand feet above sea level and the river flows downhill like it should. So when the river reaches the 1,800 ft elevation mark, how is it possible that it would be able to flow one mile upward when it reaches the uplift? This isnt a magical river that defies gravity my friends. Thats something to think about. And just so you know, theres a reason why most of the arguments people try to use to establish an old Earth deny the worldwide/biblical flood, because the flood could accomplish a lot of geological activity very quickly, such as the formation of the Grand Canyon we see today. Fossils Of Sea Creatures High Above Sea Level Due To The Ocean Waters Having Flooded Over The Continents - We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents. For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are even found in the Himalayas. Rapid Burial Of Plants And Animals - We find extensive fossil graveyards and exquisitely preserved fossils. For example, billions of nautiloid fossils are found in a layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon. This layer was deposited catastrophically by a massive flow of sediment (mostly lime sand). The chalk and coal beds of Europe and the United States, and the fish, ichthyosaurs, insects, and other fossils all around the world, testify of catastrophic destruction and burial.

Rapidly Deposited Sediment Layers Spread Across Vast Areas - We find rock layers that can be traced all the way across continentseven between continentsand physical features in those strata indicate they were deposited rapidly. For example, the Tapeats Sandstone and Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon can be traced across the entire United States, up into Canada, and even across the Atlantic Ocean to England. The chalk beds of England (the white cliffs of Dover) can be traced across Europe into the Middle East and are also found in the Midwest of the United States and in Western Australia. Inclined (sloping) layers within the Coconino Sandstone of Grand Canyon are testimony to 10,000 cubic miles of sand being deposited by huge water currents within days. Sediment Transported Long Distances - We find that the sediments in those widespread, rapidly deposited rock layers had to be eroded from distant sources and carried long distances by fast-moving water. For example, the sand for the Coconino Sandstone of Grand Canyon (Arizona) had to be eroded and transported from the northern portion of what is now the United States and Canada. Furthermore, water current indicators (such as ripple marks) preserved in rock layers show that for 300 million years water currents were consistently flowing from northeast to southwest across all of North and South America, which, of course, is only possible over weeks during a global flood. Rapid Or No Erosion Between Strata - We find evidence of rapid erosion, or even of no erosion, between rock layers. Flat, knife-edge boundaries between rock layers indicate continuous deposition of one layer after another, with no time for erosion. For example, there is no evidence of any missing millions of years (of erosion) in the flat boundary between two well-known layers of Grand Canyonthe Coconino Sandstone and the Hermit Formation. Another impressive example of flat boundaries at Grand Canyon is the Redwall Limestone and the strata beneath it. Many Strata Laid Down In Rapid Succession - Rocks do not normally bend; they break because they are hard and brittle. But in many places we find whole sequences of strata that were bent without fracturing, indicating that all the rock layers were rapidly deposited and folded while still wet and pliable before final hardening. For example, the Tapeats Sandstone in Grand Canyon is folded at a right angle (90) without evidence of breaking. Yet this folding could only have occurred after the rest of the layers had been deposited, supposedly over 480 million years, while the Tapeats Sandstone remained wet and pliable.

2 Peter 3:3-7

scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation. For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Some Archaeological Findings That Support The Bible There have been over 25,000 archaeological finds that provide support regarding people, their titles, and their locations mentioned in the Bible. Interestingly, not one of those finds has contradicted the Bible. Here are just five of them: The Tel Dan Stele (900850 BC) A stele is an upright stone that is inscribed and used as a monument of an important event or achievement. Rulers and peoples from Egypt, Israel, and across Mesopotamia used these steles to commemorate great victories and accomplishments. This particular stele is extraordinary because carved on its stone face is the expression, House of David. This stele affirms that the United Monarchy under King David existed in history and flatly contradicts the long-held opinions of skeptics who denied that David ever existed.

2011 Zev Radovan, www.BibleLandPictures.com The Meesha Stele (846 BC) Popularly known as the Moabite Stone, it records the revolt of Meesha, King of Moab, against Israel. This incredible stele mentions Omri, King of Israel, and David of the United Monarchy. It even refers to Yahweh, the unique name of the God of Israel! Together with the testimony from the Tel Dan Stele, we have a powerful external witness that the Bible records the true history of the kings of Israel and their interactions with foreign kings.

BiblePlaces.com/Muse du Louvre, Paris, France The Nabonidus Cylinder (550 BC) King Nabonidus of Babylonia left a magnificent cuneiform cylinder (wedgeshaped letters inscribed on a clay cylinder) mentioning his elder son, Belshazzar by name. Critics of the Bible had claimed for many years that the account in the book of Daniel was wrong; they said Belshazzar was never a king in Babylon and that Nabonidus was not his father. The discovery of this cylinder clearly showed that these scholars were dead wrong. Indeed, we can now understand the meaning of Daniel 5:16 more precisely where it says, Now if you can read the writing and make known to me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around your neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom (italics added for emphasis). This text now makes perfect sense because Nabonidus was in a coregency with his son Belshazzar, who was the crown prince of Babylon. So that would make Daniel the third ruler in the kingdom.

2011 The British Museum Caiaphas Ossuary An ossuary was a box constructed to hold the bones of the dead after decomposition. In 1990 a startling discovery was made that shook biblical scholars and archaeologists alike. In the Peace Forest section of Jerusalem was discovered a burial cave containing twelve ossuaries, one of them being none other than that of Caiaphas, the high priest who presided at the trial of Jesus. This amazing discovery provides us with a powerful historical connection to the events described in the Gospels.

2011 Zev Radovan, www.BibleLandPictures.com Pilate Dedication Stone In June 1961 an inscription on a limestone block, found at a Roman amphitheater in Caesarea Maritima, rocked the scholarly world. The block, which was once used as a dedication stone of a nearby temple and now reused for seating at the local amphitheater, had an extraordinary inscription. It read: Tiberieum, (Pon)tius Pilatus, (Praef)ectus Iuda(eae). Those scholars who questioned Pilates existence (and the gospel accounts generally) were silenced with this amazing discovery!

2011 Zev Radovan, www.BibleLandPictures.com

F.Y.I. There are more interesting archaeological finds on this website: www.ronwyatt.com.

Luke 19:39-40 And some of the Pharisees called to Him from the crowd, Teacher, rebuke your disciples. But He answered and said to them, I tell you that if these should keep silent, the stones would immediately cry out. The Reliability Of The Gospels It has been called a collection of malicious lies, a collection of stories, the misguided effort of men to describe the unknown, and the infallible word of God. The entire Christian faith rests upon the Gospels being completely accurate, but are they? If they are not, then the role of Jesus as the cornerstone of the Christian faith is in serious jeopardy. However, they can stand up to modern scrutiny, science, and archaeology, and the story of Jesus should be taken seriously. Opinions on the Gospels range from lies, to stories, to the infallible word of God, but what does the evidence say? First, the authors of the Gospels intended to write a historically accurate document. Luke begins his Gospel by simply stating his intention: Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught (Luke 1:1-4). While Luke gives an explicit statement of intent, the other authors, Matthew, Mark, and John do not. However, they are similar to Luke in genre, content, and style. The first three Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are called the Synoptic Gospels because they provide the same general view of the life and teaching of Jesus. They narrate almost the same incidents, often agreeing in the order of narration of events, and are similar in wording. Therefore, it is safe to assume that the intent of the other Gospels would be similar if not identical. Second, the authors of the Gospels were honest people that gave credibility to the Gospels. While they were the disciples of Jesus, and therefore not a neutral source, they were interested in preserving historical accuracy. The Gospel writers were honest and able to include difficult to explain material. The greatest testament to their honesty was the fact that they were persecuted under the Roman government and died for what they believed in. People may die for the truth, but nobody would die for a lie that they conceived.

Third, they were precise and extensive in their recordings, not leaving out material that may seem embarrassing or contradictory. For example, it would have been convenient to leave out Peters denial of Jesus, especially since he was the leader of the disciple. Neither did they leave out difficult to explain material, such as Mark 15:14, And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which means My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me? While this verse can be easily explained theologically, it would have been easier to omit it, especially considering the uneducated public of ancient Rome. There is also the baptism of Jesus; a perfect man would not need to be baptized, so his baptism could imply that Jesus was not perfect and that would appear to be a contradiction within the Gospels. Further study of this subject leads to a different conclusion; for example, He was setting an example for others and publicly submitting to God. It would have made things simpler had the authors left this out, but they included it anyway and preserved historical integrity.

Fourth, the fact that the Gospels gave rise to the Christian movement in Jerusalem gives them credibility. Jerusalem was the city where Jesus spent most of His time and the city where He was crucified. Had the Gospels been fictitious, it would not have experienced such rapid growth in Jerusalem, since the populace of that city could verify claims in the Gospels themselves. At any rate, the time elapsing between the evangelic events and the writing of most of the New Testament books was, from the standpoint of historical research, satisfactorily short. This allowed for verification, or contradiction, from key eyewitnesses living in or around the city of Jerusalem. The New Testament was complete, or substantially complete, about AD 100, the majority of the writings being in existence twenty to forty years before this. In this country, a majority of modern scholars fix the dates of the four Gospels as follows: Matthew, c. 85-90; Mark, c. 65; Luke, c. 8085; John, c. 90-100.4 I should be inclined to date the first three Gospels rather earlier: Mark shortly after AD 60, Luke between 60 and 70, and Matthew shortly before 70. One criterion that has special weight with me is the relation in which these writings appear to bear to the destruction of the city and temple of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70. My view of the matter is that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written before this event. Fifth, the evidence indicating that the Gospels that we have today are the same as the original texts is overwhelming. The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. Since we do not have the originals, the best way to determine the accuracy of our copies as compared to the original is with the multiplicity of the copies and the length of time between the original and the oldest surviving copy. Having lots of copies allows for cross checking between copies. They may then be determined reliable or unreliable depending on the discrepancies between the copies. The length between the original and the earliest copies also help determine reliability. For example, Homers Iliad has about six hundred fifty surviving Greek manuscripts. These were copied in the second and third centuries, which places them about nine hundred to a thousand years after they were originally written. A Roman historian by the name of Tacitus wrote The Annals of Imperial Rome

around 116 AD, the earliest and only copy is from about 850 AD. In contrast, more than five thousand Greek copies of the original manuscripts have been found, the earliest which date to somewhere between one hundred and one hundred fifty AD, which places it between twenty and one hundred years later than the original. Manuscripts in other languages, including Latin, Ethiopian, Slavic, and Armenian, bring the total to about twenty-four thousand manuscripts. These copies also contain only a few minor discrepancies. These are so rare and minor that scholars Norman Geisler and William Nix concluded that The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book a form that is 99.5 percent pure. The textual evidence decisively shows that the Gospels were written and circulated during the lifetime of those who witnessed the events. Since there are so many specific names and places mentioned, eyewitnesses could have easily discredited the writings. The New Testament would have never survived had the facts been inaccurate. Sixth, there are ancient, non-Christian documents that support the Gospels. For example, Josephus, a Jewish historian from the first century, also wrote about Jesus, such as in the following passage called the Testimonium Flavianum: About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. While most scholars agree that the phrases if indeed one ought to call him a man, He was the Christ, and On the third day he appeared to them restored to life were inserted by early Christians, the rest is accepted as written by Josephus and plays an important part in buttressing the Gospels as corroboration by a non-Christian. In addition, there is the story of Jesus brother, James. The Gospels tell us Jesus family, including James, were embarrassed by what he was claiming to be. They didnt believe in him; they confronted him. In ancient Judaism it was highly embarrassing for a rabbis family not to accept him. Therefore the Gospel writers would have no motive for fabricating this skepticism if it werent true. Later, Josephus tells us that James, the brother of Jesus, who was the leader of the Jerusalem church, was stoned to death because of his belief in his brother. Why did James life change? Paul tells us: the resurrected Jesus appeared to him. Theres no other explanation. There is also an extremely important piece by the Roman historian Tacitus, which helps confirm another basic premise in the Gospels: Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty: then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted,

not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of the hatred of mankind. Not only does this state that Nero persecuted Christians for the fire that he started in Rome, but it also confirms the crucifixion story. Seventh, archaeology also plays an important part in verifying the Gospels. While archaeology cannot confirm whether or not what was written is true, it can check on historical details provided in the Gospels. If those details dont match history, there is a good chance the rest also doesnt. However, if archaeology confirms the Gospel, it gives it more credibility. Hundreds of facts such as the names of officials, geographical sites, financial currencies, and times of events have been confirmed. Sir William Ramsay, one of the greatest geographers of the 19th century, became firmly convinced of the accuracy of the New Testament as a result of the overwhelming evidence he discovered during his research. An example of archaeology confirming a historical document is with a statement by Josephus that states that the harbor at Casarea on the coast of Israel is as big as the one at Piraeus, which was one of the main harbors at Athens. While at first it appeared that the harbor at Casarea was much smaller than the one at Piraeus, an underwater excavation discovered that the harbor had caved in and, though Casarea appears to be smaller now, the two are actually comparable. Josephus was right after all. The same logic applies to the Gospels, and they fare very well. Lukes detailed observations, such as his reference to politarchs, or city officials, in the city of Thessalonica, have been confirmed by archaeology such as the writings on a stone wall which refers to the same politarchs. Matthew, Mark, and Lukes Gospels have also been verified through archaeology with details such as the location of Nazareth, the location of specific wells inside Jerusalem, and the Roman census at the time of Jesus birth. In conclusion, the evidence is very clear on the Gospels, they are reliable, historical documents that should be taken seriously. This comes from literally two thousand years of information that all lends itself to the accuracy of the authors of the Gospels. The authors clearly had the intention of preserving historical accuracy, and they were honest, even to the point of death. They did not exclude difficult or embarrassing material, but included all pertinent material. The Christian religion grew rapidly in Jerusalem, where claims in the Gospels were easily verifiable. More than any other ancient text, it is certain that the Gospels we have today are true to their ancient counterparts, preserving the authors original words. Non-Christian sources confirm parts of the Gospels, as well as the extensive evidence that archaeology has uncovered verifying the Gospels historical accuracy. Based on all of the persuasive evidence we have that corroborates all the essentials found in the biographies of Jesus such as Josephus, the Roman historians and officials, the Jewish writings, the letters of Paul and the apostolic fathers even if you were to throw away every last copy of the Gospels, youd still have a picture of Jesus thats extremely compelling in fact, its a portrait of the unique Son of God. Also, we have to ask, Why is there no other first-century Jew who has millions of followers today? Why isnt there a John the Baptist movement? Why, of all the first-century figures, including the Roman emperors, is Jesus still worshipped today, while others have crumbled into the dust of history? It is because this Jesus the historical Jesus is the living Lord. Thats why. Its because Hes still around, while the others are long gone. Indeed, the Gospels are not just a collection of stories; they are founded in fact.

1 Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. Prophecy One thing that separates Christianity from all other religions is prophecy, which I believe is the most compelling evidence. Over 25 percent of the Bible is prophecy, which foretells the future through visions and other things inspired by God. The book of Daniel is an example. 1. Daniel 2: Daniels interpretation of Nebuchadnezzars dream includes a series of kingdoms that exercise control over Israel. It includes Babylon, the Persian, the Greece, the Roman Empires (east and west), a final empire still future consisting of a conglomerate of 10 kingdoms and the future Kingdom of the Messiah. 2. Daniel 7: Daniels 1st vision provides more details regarding the same series of kingdoms. 3. Daniel 8: Daniels 2nd vision focuses on the defeat of the Persian Empire by Alexander, his death, his kingdoms division amongst his 4 generals, and the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes, and his death (died 164BC). 4. Daniel 9: The most amazing prophecy of all (70 weeks) contains the date of the murder of the Jewish Messiah, (AD30), and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans that followed (AD70). 5. Daniel 10-12 is a single vision, and dialogue between Daniel and an angel. This prophecy mentions: a. the Persians and Greeks by name (10:29 & 11:12) b. adds some very specific details concerning the Syrian Egyptian wars around the time of the Maccabees, including the marriage of Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt, to Antiochus Epiphanes (11:6). c. further information about the final (yet future) kingdom described briefly in chapters 2 and 7. d. the resurrection of the dead at Messiahs Kingdom. (ch.12). The book of Isaiah is another example. Through carbon-dating the Dead Sea Scrolls which were discovered in 1947, we have proof that the scrolls itself were written hundreds of years before the time the actual events it prophesied had occurred and that there are no significant textual differences between them and whats in the Bible today.

Sincerely, the copies of copies excuse is a bad one when referring to the trustworthiness and authenticity of the Bible. The scrolls total up to around 300 prophecies including all of the Messianic ones. The Isaiah scroll contains many Messianic prophecies that were fulfilled hundreds of years after it was written and it has been dated to be from about 250-300 BC, which is interesting because the prophecies were fulfilled in exact detail around 5 BC-30 AD (The time of Christ). The Babylonian Captivity (586BC) & return (536BC) is predicted in undisputed 1st chapter, written in 740BC, predating actual events by 154 years & 204 years. Before 687BC, Isaiah predicted by name the rise of Cyrus the Great of Persia, his military exploits, and his charge to the Jews to rebuild Jerusalem and Solomons Temple in 539BC. He predicted the Virgin birth of the Messiah, 700 years before. He predicted the sacrificial death and resurrection of the Messiah (Isaiah 53). Some of Isaiahs prophecies concern the future. (Isa. 2, 11, 34-35, 65-66). And the list goes on. The prophecies in Isaiah and Daniel are so specific, and have come to pass with such precision, there are only two possibilities: 1. They were all written after the fact. a. The Dead Sea Scrolls have provided positive proof that several of these amazing prophesies were made long before their historical fulfillment. The premise of the skeptic has therefore been overthrown. 2. They are accurate historical documents with which man must reckon. a. The same God who revealed these things to the prophets claims to be the Creator of heaven and earth. b. This God claims to be the only God; there is no other. c. These same prophets predicted the birth of Jesus Christ by a Virgin, His sacrificial atonement (crucifixion) for the sins of all, that the good news would be rejected by the Jews but received by the Gentiles instead, the second destruction of Jerusalem (AD70), a final evil world empire in the last days, and the second coming of the Messiah reigning from Jerusalem. 3. Jesus Himself predicted the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple 40 years before it occurred (Matt. 24:2, Luke 19:41-44, Luke 21:20-24).

There is even prophecy in the stars. The zodiac is Gods way of showing a story and His plan from the creation to the end of time in pictures (constellations), and He put these constellations in the sky before the first man ever walked among the earth. The Zodiac Virgo Abrahamic Covenant Libra Mosaic Covenant Scorpio Wilderness Wandering Sagittarius Promised Land Capricorn Davidic Covenant Aquarius Babylonian Captivity

Pisces Return from Captivity Aries Lamb of God Taurus Apostolic Mission Gemini Jew & Gentile United Cancer Great Tribulation Leo Messiahs Kingdom Then pagans perverted it and worshiped these signs in the stars and used them for fortune telling and other things. If you want to learn more about this you can read Tim Warners book Mystery of the Mazzaroth: Prophecy in the Zodiac, or go to http://www.oasischristi anchurch.org/audio.html and listen to The Mazzaroth portion.

Predictive prophecy presents the skeptic with a dilemma: 1. Prove these documents to be fakes, and thus justify his denial of this God. 2. Ignore the prophets, and reap the consequences. 3. Objectively weigh the historical evidence, and then submit himself to this God. Gods predicting the future, and then bringing these things to pass, proves that there is a purpose behind mans existence, and His past record with predictive prophecy is the guarantee of His promises to His faithful followers. Therefore we have hope. (Hebrews 6:13-19) In addition, in 1 Corinthians 15:6, it says that over 500 people saw the resurrected Christ all at once. Luke, who was a traveling companion of Paul, had asked around about Jesus, and every person he talked to, told him about the resurrection. These others that he talked to werent even among those 500, and Luke being a historian, recorded all of the eyewitness accounts so we could have evidence of it today. Now heres the thing about these witnesses. Many of these people faced persecution because of their preaching and claims that Jesus is the Messiah and rose again, and not one of them gave in and turned their back on God. Now why would so many people be willing to live a life of hardship and poverty and then being tortured and killed if they had nothing to gain from it? They risked their lives based on what they said that they saw. Not just what they believed. Nobody would die for a lie that they have conceived. If they knew that they didnt see anything and were just lying initially then it would only be normal for them to have just rejected it so they could be set free from such tribulation. Instead they all faced their fate. It is because they knew that if they betrayed and rejected Christ, then they wouldnt be given the gift of eternal life that they were promised. They came out victorious and stayed faithful till death. Now this is something that can truly attest to the truthfulness of what was witnessed on that day.

Ephesians 4:17-18 This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of he Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart. A Message To All I want you to all understand that the love of God is beyond comprehension. He sent His Son who is without sin, without defect and without anything unclean to suffer and shed tears of blood and die on the cross for our sins because we were all unfit to be in His grace. Jesus was on a divine mission, and the mission was to redeem the people of God. The implication is that the people of God were lost and God had to do something as He had always done to intervene and set them back on the right track. But there was a difference this time. This was the last time. This was the last chance. Now, God, in His divine nature, doesnt die. So how was God going to get this done? How was He going to be the Savior of the human race? He had to come as a human being. Jesus said in Mark 10:45, I did not come to be served but to serve and give my life as a ransom in place of the many. What an awesome God we have; the fact that He would actually step into history and to pay the penalty for our sin, and then offer a free gift of salvation to save us from what we did. You see, in actuality, we committed high treason against the God of creation, and yet, He loved us so much that He stepped into history to provide the payment for our sins so that we could spend eternity with Him. It is because of Christs sacrifice that we even have a chance of having an eternal life with the Father. He is a God of righteousness and so when He sees the evil deeds that we perform it disappoints Him and He separates us from Him. If it wasnt for the sacrifice of His Son, we would all be only worthy of damnation because our unrighteous sinful ways are incompatible with God. But He knows how man is and the things he can do with the free will he has been given, and so through His Sons sacrifice we can repent of our sins and ask for His forgiveness and He will forgive, but it cannot only be shown in words. You need to acknowledge the fact that you are a sinner and something must be shown through a change of heart and of self. He knows if you are truly sorry or not. What I am saying is to not play with Gods mercy. Just because you repent doesnt mean you can deliberately continue on sinning and asking for forgiveness over and over again thinking that you will automatically be saved. It doesnt work that way. (Read James 2:14-26). What good is faith without works? Even the demons believe in Jesus but do not obey Him. Dont be the

same. He gave us the gift of salvation through His only begotten Son and we cannot be ungrateful for that, because I know that if it was you who had to send your only son to suffer and die for others, and people mocked and criticized and rejected the sacrifice that he made, you would be filled with incomprehensible anger. And so is God. It is only understandable to think that He would be. He is long suffering and He is storing up wrath for the day of wrath. He is a just God. Those who will be punished are those who truly deserve it. He looks into the hearts of people and sees if they are to be destined to His wrath, or to His kingdom. He has given us so many chances and so much evidence of His existence. I know that if you seek God, then you will find Him like I have. His mercy is great and so is His love for us all, and I pray that you do not take these things for granted. God be with you. Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. NOTE: Theres an outstanding book by Dr. Jason Lisle called, Taking Back Astronomy. It shows how there are many problems with the Big Bang theory including the thought of an old universe, and shows how the heavens declare creation. I would also like to recommend for you to read/watch, The Ultimate Proof of Creation, also by Dr. Jason Lisle. Some other great books are Evolution Exposed which refutes all of Darwinian evolution, and Reasonable Faith or On Guard by Dr. William Lane Craig. You can also check out Dr. Craig at http://www.youtube.com/user/drcraigvideos. In addition to that, you can read/watch a series by Lee Strobel called, The Case for Christ, The Case for Faith and The Case for a Creator. Or check out these websites: Answersingenesis.org and Reasonablefaith.org (podcasts). These sources provide undeniable/irrefutable evidence in cosmology, history, biology, physics/astrophysics, and more that you could possibly be seeking for. I have a feeling that it will change your view on God and answer the many questions you have concerning Christianity.

Other Recommended Books: Darwin's Black Box The New Answers Books Reason to Believe One Heartbeat Away; Your Journey into Eternity In the Beginning Was Information Not By Chance Signature in the Cell There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind

Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions Refuting Evolution The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution The Dawkins Delusion? Earth's Catastrophic Past Creation's Tiny Mystery and many more

Jeremiah 29:13 "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart."