[Elmer G. White]

Re: Well. Hello

anyways, you guys have my number. If you want to contact me about helping me Publicize how I proved Creation is absolutely a scientific fact.

I will not under any circumstance take money without an arranged publisher, and appropriate recognition of the sponsors. Thanks

amen Brothas. sister.

Mr. Gordon,

I do appreciate suspense as much as the next True Christian™, after all, we're eagerly awaiting Jesus's Re-Appearance (Revelation 22:20) any day now and the suspense would be killing me if I didn't know that I still have many souls to Save on Earth. That said, you can only go that far with obscure hints of a giganormous "proof" of Creation. Moreover, it is even more difficult to produce a better proof than the one we already have at our disposal.

The Bible. Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

I do understand that this is not enough for God-mocking atheists who are always demanding extra-Biblical proof. How could anything be extra-Biblical to begin with, as Genesis 1:1 clearly states that the whole Earth is a testimonial of God's Magnificent Handiwork (as so are the Heavens).

So, please be careful. The habit of atheist or Catholic/Muslim scholars is to review each "scientific" attempt to prove Creation and then shred that "proof" into oblivion. Please, be warned that they can do that, because the World is filled with hidden traps to seduce you into unbelief. God Himself has planted clues that lead away from Scripture, as the only Truth™ can be found in His Word (Jesus and obviously, as revealed in the Bible). Instead, the material world is deceptive to the senses and even to the most sophisticated observational devices (tellyscopes etc.) invented bysinners.

Jeremiah 4:10
Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace; whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul.

Jeremiah 20:7
O LORD, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived: thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed: I am in derision daily, every one mocketh me.

Thus, if you start on a path that leads away from the simple Biblical Truth™ and you star to seek other items to supplement the Bible (as if it needed to be supplemented by proof "better" than it is), the outcome is always a rapid descent into twisted Faith!

Isaiah 66:4
I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

By doing this you will place your own "proof" as something better than the Bible that is perfect per se.

However, I do understand the need to interpret observational and philosophical data to harmonize it with the Bible. In Creation Science we do it all the time. Still, also here, be careful. The scientists of the atheist denomination are quick to shoot down your "proofs" unless you have experimental data to support them

• ITEM: "Intelligent design and mutations". Mr. Behe suggested that mutations cannot produce, e.g., drug resistance in the malaria parasite (thus proving Creation), as it requires at least two mutations that the probability of obtaining them is infinitesimally small. The Enemy (atheists) actually looked at it and observed the actual mutations take place spontaneously and saw that...

  Look at what we have here. We have 14 unique combinations of mutations across two different genes, that all result in at least some resistance to the drug. These combinations come from between 1 and 6 mutations unique point mutations from the original genes.Michael Behe says a double event is biologically unreasonable. Yet, here we have two triple events, two quad events, 5 penta events, and 2 hexa events.

• ITEM: "Fine tuning of the Cosmos (by itself a blasphemous skewed concept based on the Firmament (Genesis 1:6) proves Creation", for instance the production of carbon in stars (actually, carbon was Created, see Genesis 1:1) requires resonant energy at 7.68 MeV in 12C and even the slightest deviation (1%) would mean no stars for the Universe (=Heaven and Earth in atheist jargon). Again, the atheist observers looked at it and found out that it is not very "fine-tuned" at all:

  However, as has been realized subsequently after this ‘fine-tuning’ was pointed out, you should really measure the energy level not above the ground state of carbon but above the state of the nucleus Beryllium 8 (8Be) plus a helium nucleus ... In other words, the fine-tuning is not 1% but it’s something like 25%. So, it’s not very impressive fine-tuning at all.

• ITEM: It is said that the abiogenetic origin of DNA requires probabilities so small that the atheistically observable universe would not be enough to produce it. Again, the atheists have actually tested this at the laboratory and in simulations and seen that RNA is OK both as genetic code and catalysis, it is stable for 17000 years at hot temperatures (the intelligent designers say this is too little time but they fail to see the atheist argument that there would have been myriads of simultaneous chemical trials going on), that certain amino acids have affinity towards certain tRNA molecules, that rRNA can function without the proteins quite well and that abiogenetic assembly of molecules into copying seems to be inevitable rather than improbable.
• ITEM: Many have tried to prove Creation based solely on philosophy, i.e., by saying that "Nothing will Come of Nothing". These people are forgetting that, by making a definition of "nothing" that attaches to it a property "it can produce nothing", they are actually transforming the "nothing" into something with rules, whereas in the real "nothing", the Void, there are no philosophical rules, not even the rule of it being incapable of producing something.

Genesis 1:2
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Again and again, these "proofs" fail to impress anyone else besides the people who already DO believe in Creation. Instead, the Mercy of Jesus (Jonah 4:2) can touch even the vilest atheist. His (Jesus's, not the atheist's) proof is much better than the ones listed above. I am always unbiased and give everyone the benefit of doubt, so I wish you the best of luck with your endeavor. I do have my doubts that the simple and plain Proof by Jesus (Genesis 1:1) will still remain the treatment of choice for curing unbelief.

The others are delusion. They make us put more emphasis on the tellyscopes than on the Bible. They all fail miserably, as God does not want to have the Bible replaced with bytes of data or philosophical structures that can be blown away by the laboratory colonies of artificial nucleic acids that yield the atheists new, powerful weapons to combat Christ come Rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:17).

The main goal of Creation Science is to see, which observations, which kinds of data, are compatible with the Bible. The Bible takes precedence. Based on my presentation above, the other pieces of knowledge (99.9%) are delusions, lies that many so-called Christians believe because they are on the path away from the Word!

Psalms 12:6
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.




Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[GordonJ]

Re: Well. Hello

Ummm. Statements are not 'proofs.'
So the Bible does not prove itself valid once from beginning to end. Never within the scriptures are they vindicated through themselves. Testimony can prove scriptures, facts can prove testimonies and evidence.


I am looking for a Publisher WHO ACTUALLY believes or has interest in, the fact that, "Yes, if God is real then there are scriptures and proof." I come to present evidence of both.


I took the time to do it. So it has been done. It cannot be undone. It is a flawless science in method, approach, sustenance and findings.


Amen. Bye

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: Well. Hello

I am looking for a Publisher WHO ACTUALLY believes or has interest in, the fact that, "Yes, if God is real then there are scriptures and proof." I come to present evidence of both.

Gordon, dear, as people have repeatedly said, you should feel free to publish your work on our forums.


YiC
JL-V

[Didymus Much]

Re: Well. Hello

Ummm. Statements are not 'proofs.'
So the Bible does not prove itself valid once from beginning to end...

Of course, it doesn't. God (throughout the Bible) states that He wants your faith, which is belief despite the absence of evidence. If there was proof, no one could have faith, and everyone would be destined for Hell.

Someone who can't grasp that most simple fact about religion is now claiming to have proof that everyone else has been doing it wrong for 2,000 years (yet refuses to reveal the slightest detail), and wonders why those very people aren't slavering over the whole thing.

F***, I love this place.

[I Man Rastafari]

Re: Well. Hello

Mr. J since you have ignored my gracious offer of friendship I must conclude that you are a white racist who hates Black men. I doubt that God would allow the proof of his existence to fall into the hands of some kind of Ku Klux Klan man so I have to accuse you of being a liar. If you were telling the truth you would have posted your proof here on this site where millions of Christians and others who come to this site could see it. I overstand what you are doing and I think my nonracist white friends here also see through you. You are trying to get attention like the white girl Paris Hilton so that you can be invited to cocktail parties with other white people who dress up in black and chat about the disgraceful treatment of Black people while eating Vienna sausages on toothpicks. I would wager that the white people know where you are by now and they will come and demand your proof. When you can not produce it they will probably take away your computer and tie you naked to a tree in the front yard.