Jesus Christ Creator

[Soldier4Christ]

SIZE OF THE ARK

First of all, let us look at the size of the ark to see if the Biblical account is reasonable. In Genesis 6:15 we read, "And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the heighth of it thirty cubits." With a cubit of approximately eighteen inches, the ark was approximately 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. It was built in the shape of a giant rectangular box, more like a railroad boxcar than the ocean going vessels of today. It did not include a rudder, enabling Noah to steer it. The ark would have an extra-large capacity, float well, be exceptionally stable and capable of withstanding the Flood waters and the breaking up of the fountains of the deep. People claiming to have seen the ark of Noah resting on the mountain of Ararat report that there is a catwalk several feet wide down the center of the top with a row of windows under it and extending the entire length of the ark. The 16th verse says, "A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above." Notice that it does not require one little square window in the top that is a cubit, but that "a cubit shalt thou finish it above." The roof was raised and had windows all along the side which possibly were used for trapping fresh water, according to those who have seen this object on Ararat.

One question seems paramount: is it possible for such a ship to hold all of the animals needed to preserve life upon the earth? Ernst Mayr, an outstanding taxonomist and evolutionist, offers an estimate of well over one million species of animals living on the earth today, and that does not include the 850,000 species of insects. It would obviously be impossible to place a million species of animals in the ark. However, if we analyze Ernst Mayr's figures as discussed in The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb, Jr. And Henry Morris, we find that we can eliminate a large number of animals which could survive in the water. Noah did not have to take goldfish into the ark, nor did he build tanks for piranhas or killer whales. The seventh chapter specifies that "all in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land" - man, cattle, creeping things, fowl of the heaven, every living substance - "was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground." Fish are not mentioned anywhere in that seventh chapter, so Noah did not have to account for fish, sponges, echonoderms, protozoa and all other sea animals. For that matter, we could also eliminate amphibious animals who survive in the sea, but for the sake of argument we will account for these. Using Mayr's figures again, we need only 17,500 species of animals to preserve life on earth. The preservation of life requires one male and one female, so now we need 17,500 pairs of animals, or 35,000 animals, in the ark.

One may immediately envision very large animals, such as elephants and giraffes, but most animals are smaller than sheep. In fact, the average size of all animals is about the size of sheep. Since God sent the animals to Noah, in His wisdom He probably supplied small young animals to be taken into the ark because they would live longer, survive the voyage better and fulfill the purpose of continuing life on the earth. Taking into consideration that we are accounting for amphibious animals, we will also assume the animals were full grown. Thirty five thousand sheep can be placed in 146 railroad boxcars. In accounting for insects and creeping things, we will give insects two inches of flying room and creeping space, provide another twenty-one railroad boxcars. A total of 168 railroad boxcars, then, could accommodate the animal species living on the earth if we adopt Mayr's figures. Using the smallest cubit known, 17.5 inches (though it may be as long as 22 inches), the ark has a capacity of 522 railroad boxcars. This means that all of the animals in the ark could be placed on one of the decks, Noah and his family on another deck, and an entire deck remain for the bowling alley, badminton area, shuffle board and swimming pool. Or perhaps that space was used for animals which have become extinct before our time.

DINOSAURS

What about some of the large, extinct animals such as dinosaurs? Let us first discuss how dinosaurs are dated. When finding dinosaur bone, a paleontologist or geologist will look at the rock strata as well as carefully examine the bone. The dinosaur is determined to be 70 million years old. But how do we know the dinosaur is 70 million years old? Such a time period is advanced because the fossil appears in Cretaceous strata, which are designated as being 70 million years of age. This is reported in all of our textbooks and all of our encyclopedias. Obviously anything found buried in rock laid down 70 million years ago had to be buried when that rock formed and would have to be 70 million years old also. But how do we know Cretaceous strata are 70 million years old? Simply because dinosaurs are found in it. Though this illustration is oversimplified we are confronted with a classic example of circular reasoning. The fossil is dated by the rock in which it is found and the rock is dated by the fossil it contains.

Carl Dunbar, in his book on historical geology, admits the circular reasoning involved. A few years ago the Encyclopedia Britannica, in an article on fossil dating, made a statement that circular reasoning is indeed involved in the dating of fossils, but since it is so consistent it must be correct! Actually, there is no accurate way to date a fossil. Carbon 14, granting all of its assumptions, is accurate to about 30,000 years. How can a 70 million-year-old fossil be dated with a dating method only going back 30,000 years? For this reason scientists do not use Carbon 14 to date fossils.

Sedimentary strata are laid down by water; one can date them by an intrusion. If some lava flow, granite, or other type of igneous rock intrudes through the sedimentary strata, one can date the intrusion and know that the sedimentary layer above had to be laid down before the date of the intrusion. But since there is no accurate way to date the sedimentary rock, there is no accurate way to date the fossil. The geologic column, or fossil record, is built upon the assumption that evolution is true. The geologic column is established by accepting an evolutionary sequence for the fossils and by estimating the time required for one form to evolve to another. The picture of geologic history supposedly recorded in the geologic column is based upon the fact of evolution, which in turn is built on the fact of the geologic column. Again, circular reasoning is involved; neither item can be demonstrated or proved.

All we can really tell about dinosaurs and other large animals is that they lived sometime in the past. If you converse with the paleontologist who is digging at Dinosaur Monument in Vernal, Utah, he will tell you that the dinosaurs did not die in the park area, but were living up-state somewhere. They were crossing a sand bar, or they were walking in a swamp - something happened such as a local flood which caused these dinosaurs to die out; they were then washed downstream by water and buried in the sandstone at Vernal, Utah - destroyed and buried by some type of water action. There is no way to tell when such an event took place. Scientists can only state that dinosaurs lived sometime in the past and were buried sometime in the past by water action. This can easily be placed into a Biblical perspective.

The word "dinosaur" means terrible lizard. A dinosaur is nothing more that a large reptile. But a reptile affords a most unusual growth phenomenon: the longer a reptile lives, the larger it grows. It is certainly not like man, who lives for twenty years growing upward and then (unfortunately) the rest of his life grows outward. If reptiles live for 100 years, they grow for 100 years. The Bible establishes the framework that God created animals, plants and man, placing them into a perfect environment. It was so perfect that even after man fell into sin, he lived 930 years before he died. The average life span during the time of the Flood was 911 years, whereas our average life span today is about 70 years. We would have to increase our present life span some thirteen times to match the former life span. Increase the life span of a reptile proportionately, some thirteen times, and it is not too hard to picture how the iguana, growing for this period of time, could become large enough to look like a dinosaur. Picture the twelve foot reptile living in China today and increase his size to account for another of those gigantic reptiles which lived on the earth.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Consider also that in this pre-Flood world man was instructed to eat from the vegetation. Before the Flood there were tremendous amounts of minerals and trace elements in the soil necessary to produce vitamins and proteins needed for man to gain all the nutrition necessary for life from the vegetation. Animals would share this same food. After the Flood these trace minerals no longer remained in the soil but washed out to sea. This may account for the fact that the largest animal living today, the whale, exists in the sea.

Ted Mantei has developed some interesting studies of minerals in the sea. He has taken the trace minerals out of a lake bed, used this for fertilizer, and grown tomatoes larger than average. The fruits of these plants are disease resistant and bug free, with a lasting quality. They will eventually dehydrate and dry up, but they do not rot. Today man needs to take supplementary vitamins because there is not enough protein or minerals in the soil to enrich the vegetation. Before the Flood the earth had a tropical climate and mineral enriched vegetation, quite conducive to producing large forms of life.

How did these animals die out? The evolutionist has about seventy different answers, which can be divided into some thirty-five categories. In fact, evolutionist answers are largely contradictory. The climate was too hot or too cold, there was too much food or not enough food, and so on. Yet it is agreed that if large fossils are buried in sedimentary strata, some type of water action was responsible.

When did these animals die out? In a river bed in Glen Rose, Texas, dinosaur prints are found in the same strata with human prints. Dinosaur eggs, or large reptile eggs, were found along the coast of Madagascar up to 1000 years ago. Cave paintings in Rhodesia show a brontosaurus painted by bushmen, known to have left the caves about 1500 B.C. The interesting factor here is that the bushmen painted only things they could really see. How then can we account for the painting of a brontosaurus unless one was actually seen living at the time (a much more recent dating than evolutionists allow)? Everett Purcell of the Creation-Science Research Center wrote to a paleontologist in Rhodesia and asked him about this. The reply was classic. He answered that obviously the painting could not be of dinosaurs because dinosaurs died out 70 millions years ago (this conclusion was made without even going to view the paintings). The cave paintings must be either of giraffes or ant bears (an ant bear is a type of aardvark or anteater). We decided that any paleontologist who could not tell the difference between a giraffe and an anteater probably would not know a brontosaur if he saw one! The point is, he would not even leave his office to investigate; his mind was made up.

If we re-evaluate the position of the geologic column, the age of the earth, and even the position concerning the evolutionary bias, we can come up with better answers. The Biblical framework allows for dinosaurs: they would have been created in the Garden of Eden, died out or destroyed in the Flood, and buried in various sedimentary strata.

Why did these large animals die out? After the Flood conditions necessary for longevity of life no longer existed. Even man's life's span dropped to 400 years, then to 200 years at Babel; after another 200 years, in Abraham's time, Sarah was too old to have children at age 90. Man's life span has been dropping ever since. (Incidentally, today's increase in life spans does not mean that we live longer but that fewer children die at birth. The average life span in the United States is 70 years; in India it is only 35 years because more children die at birth in India than in America. People in India live as long as people in America, but the infant mortality rate lowers the average life span).

The ninth chapter of Genesis says that the day Noah left the ark "the fear of you [man] and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, an upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all thing" (verses 2-3). For the first time Noah is instructed to eat meat, and man and best are now at enmity one with the other. This is necessary because the earth lacks the foliage and vegetation necessary to sustain man's life.

The fact that dinosaurs and other large animals are extinct is not an unusual problem. Over the years many animals have become extinct - for instance, we are in danger of losing the bald eagle and man's destruction almost eliminated the buffalo. If it were not for our wild life and game preserves, many more animals would probably be extinct.

We often think of dinosaurs as being terribly ferocious. Two evolutionary scientists in England who have done research on the tyrannosaurus rex and allosaurus conclude that both were vegetarians. The teeth are quite strong, suggesting a carnivorous animal, but the shape of the jaw and the nature of the upper arm is such that they would no be able to rip and tear, much less grab at their prey. The shape of the jaw indicates a tendency for them to lean upward and take things from a tree. Thus they do not at all seem the ferocious animal we envisage. Few complete skeletons of dinosaurs are found, and thus our information is extremely limited. In fact, museum reconstructions and drawing in books may not give a true picture of the animals at all.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

ANIMALS IN THE ARK

God told Noah to take all of His animals into the ark. Poor Noah - sitting with 35,000 animals and 850,000 species of insects. He and his family must care and feed all of these animals for a year, which would certainly tax the strength of any individual. But observe one verse in passing: Genesis 8:1, "And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark . . ." That word "remembered" is an interesting word. Usually we think of remembering as recalling something we forgot. This definition would convey the idea that God was so busy destroying the whole earth that suddenly He looked down and remembered Noah was there. For an explanation of the term, we find a parallel in the New Testament. The thief on the cross said to the Lord Jesus, "Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom." Was it only after the Lord died, was resurrected and ascended into heaven that He thought, "I remember the thief on the cross"? Not at all. While still upon the cross He told the thief, "This day thou shalt be with me in paradise." He not only remembered but gave full assurance that He would take care of his need. This is what the Genesis text conveys. God remembered Noah, all the cattle and every living thing that was in the ark, and He cared for their needs.

Many animals living today hibernate. Scientists, though studying these animals, cannot fully understand why animals hibernate, with some animals sleeping through the winter, some through the summer (called aestivation), living the whole time in a type of suspended animation. What is the reason for this? A close study of the Bible discloses that tropical conditions existed throughout the world before the Flood. There were seasons, but they were very mild, for it did not rain upon the earth before the Flood, and there was a tropical climate throughout the Earth so animals would not need to hibernate. Why do animals go into hibernation? To escape drastic seasonal changes. This is possibly a carry-over from the animals who were on the ark. God slowed down their metabolic processes to such a level that they spent their time in the ark in a state of hibernation. This would make it easier for them to survive the voyage and would simplify Noah's care for them. There is good evidence from the text that such an event took place, because the Bible tells us that the animals entered the ark two by two and left the ark a year later two by two - including the rabbits. God's purpose according to Genesis 8:17 was to preserve life on the ark so that after the Flood they could multiply and repopulate the earth, not the ark. It seems logical that God performed this miracle and slowed down the metabolic processes.

FOSSILS AND THE FLOOD

If a worldwide Flood occurred, we would expect to find evidence of animals and plants buried by some type of water action throughout the earth. We find this in sedimentary strata - strata which are laid down by wind or water. The entire geologic column is built of sedimentary strata, even some Pre-Cambrian rocks. This type of strata is found in the Grand Canyon, which is one of the best areas of the earth to study because of the extensive series of strata exposed. A drastic change in strata is brought about by some type of water action. The historical geologist, the evolutionist and the uniformitarian would explain this change as a gradual formation, a gradual laying down of the sediments, based on the present rate of sedimentation. If the rates of erosion and deposition were sufficiently increased, the Grand Canyon could be formed or eroded in a short period of time.

According to the Bible, the Flood was such that the fountains of the great deep were broken up. Throughout the ocean floor in the mid-oceanic ridges, a rift circles the entire earth. This suggests that some time in the past the ocean floor was uplifted about two miles, which would be enough to cause a flood and cover the entire land mass with water. There is enough water in the ocean even now to cover the entire earth if it were rearranged. A study of oceanography points to various places in the earth where water would have drained out; the easiest way to cause that drainage after the Flood would be to raise the land mass and the mountains. Estuaries, oceanic canyons and underwater caverns which go back underneath the seashore are places where drainage and erosion have taken place. Visual evidence at Lake Bonneville today shows that in the past it covered a vast area. The mountains in that area have shorelines where the lake used to be. It has gradually subsided to the present level. Vast portions of land were under water, as shown by the evidences of fossils buried on the tops of mountains by water action. Even on Mount Ararat itself sedimentary strata are found at the 13,000 foot level, an indication that water was at that level. Pillow lava, molten lava cooled under water, is found at the 15,000 foot level on Mount Ararat. The conchoidal fractures indicate that it had to be cooled under water. Found everywhere on the earth's surface, such illustrations offer good evidence for the global effects of water action.

Geology books tend to give the impression that the geologic column is found in the exact order traditionally proposed by historical geology. However, nowhere on earth are the strata laid down in exactly the same order as in the books. In the Grand Canyon, which is probably the best single area for investigation, over half of the geologic column is missing. Such an irregularity is usually explained as due to uncomformities. That is, erosion somehow wiped out the strata which are now missing in that area, and the next stratum was laid down, omitting the eroded layers of strata.

The same type of stratum is not always found directly lying on top of basement rock. Cretaceous rock, supposedly 70 million years old, is found lying right on top of basement rocks, and so is Cambrian, supposedly older than 500 million years, or Permian, frequently dated at 200 million years. In numerous places on earth strata have been found drastically out of order. At Chief Mountain, Montana, at the Lewis Overthrust, the older pre-Cambrian rock lies on top of the younger Cretaceous. A pre-Cambrian rock, according to evolutionary dating methods, would be over 500 million years old. A Cretaceous rock would be 70-100 million years old. This presents a slight problem: a rock which is over 500 million years old is lying on top of one that is 70 million years old; 430 millions years are missing and the rocks are in an upside-down order. The evolutionist explains it quite simply: at one time all were level, but a horizontal thrust took place, forcing the strata to rise up, fold over, shear off all the adjacent strata, and leave this little block lying on top of the younger block. Erosion washed away 500 million years of strata above it leaving a pre-Cambrian block (13,000 square miles in area) on top of a Cretaceous block.

In opposition to this, there is no real physical evidence of a thrust fault or a theory to explain the origin of the thrusts. There is no evidence of sliding, of pressure, of any rock movement between the two strata at the contact line between the two layers at Chief Mountain. In fact, the older layer lies conformably on top of the younger layer. In checking out overthrusts, such as the Owl's Head formation at Tortillita Mountains in Arizona and other places, evidence of small overthrusts clearly exists; up to forty feet of ground-up rock are found between the strata. At Chief Mountain 350 billion tons of rock must slide a distance of fifty miles in order to leave this block of pre-Cambrian strata on top of the Cretaceous, but there is absolutely no evidence of rock movement. Some say that you would not expect to find evidence of rock movement because it would be possible for the rock to slip in on kind of a plastic flow and drop into place. But that is a theory without any physical evidence to support it. There is simply no evidence of such an event. Fossils are found out of order in the Swiss Alps also. Some scientists would suggest that at one time the Alps were in Africa and slid magically into Europe. At Chief Mountain, however, 430 millions years of geologic column have been done away with and reversed. All that can be deduced by looking at the geologic column and studying the fossils in any local area is that the stratum on the bottom was laid before the stratum on top, unless one can find real evidence of thrusting, folding or faulting. In the absence of such evidence it cannot be determined if the strata were laid down a week apart, two days apart or a year apart.



cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

If there were a worldwide Flood, we would expect to find evidence of the destruction of plants and animals on a large scale. For instance, to form a seam of coal in the earth one foot thick, about twenty feet of vegetation is needed, compressed adiabatically - i.e., compressed under pressure without the loss of the heat of compression. Theories for the formation of oil demand the burial of animal life on a large scale, again compressed adiabatically. If you were to bury me in the earth under the proper conditions and proper amount of pressure, supposedly you could later come along, stick a tube into me, pump me out, put me into your car and drive down the street. The formation of coal and oil does not require millions of years as the evolutionist sometimes claims but, can really be accomplished in relatively short periods of time. Recently oil has been formed by converting a ton of garbage into a barrel of oil with the proper pressure and temperature conditions. In an hour and a half a piece of wood was converted to coal in Germany by using a pile driver. This was not their intention, but they applied the right amount of pressure and converted the material into coal. The proper amount or pressure determines the formation of coal or oil, not long periods of time.

When we compare the ratio of carbon to hydrogen contained in the animal kingdom to the corresponding ratio for the plant kingdom, we find an interesting relationship. For when the ratio of carbon to hydrogen contained in petroleum is compared to the ratio of carbon to hydrogen in coal, one finds that that same ratios hold. This indicates that sometime in the past there was an event which destroyed one biosphere, or one total amount of animals and plants, in order to form the amounts of coal and oil found in the earth. When did such an event take place? As we drill into the earth and find oil, we discover that it is still buried under geostatic pressure, which in some places is three times greater than hydrostatic or fluid pressure. This means that overburdens of rock are on top of the oil, trapping it and causing the tremendous pressure. But the pressure would have dissipated if the trap had been formed any longer than 10,000 years ago. In fact, since oil is still found buried under near geostatic pressure, the indication is that it was buried less than 5000 years ago! Further study can be done in this area through a book entitled Pre-History and Earth Models, by Melvin Cook, Ph.D. in chemistry from Yale. Oil may have formed from the animals buried on the earth at the time of the Flood. Because we find oil under geostatic pressure, it is a good indication that this burial took place sometime less than 10,000 years ago - very much in agreement with the Bible's 4000 - 5000 year-old date for the Flood.

FLOOD TRADITIONS

If there were a worldwide Flood, we would expect to find some record of flood traditions around the world. Almost every major culture - Chinese, Indian, Greek, Roman, Babylonian - possesses records of a major flood. Some suggest it was a local flood, but all relate that the entire area and civilization they knew was destroyed. Their hero, whether his name was Utnapishtim or Noah, was instructed to build some type of ark, or raft, and climb to the highest mountain. He was to take his wife and all of his animals with him. They were instructed to take all of their possessions because there was to be a great Flood which would destroy the wickedness of the earth. The Chinese story adds that after the Flood their hero got drunk and lay uncovered in his tent. One of his sons went into the father's tent, saw his nakedness and told the other two sons. These sons, Charma and Japote, backed in and covered their father. It tells of the subsequent judgment of one of the sons and later talks about the building of a tower to heaven.

Near the Fiji Islands a missionary was giving an account of Noah and the ark when one of the natives jumped up and exclaimed, "That is exactly like our account. Our ancestor was instructed to build an ark and take all of his family and animals into the ark. But your ancestors wrote your account down, so it is more accurate than ours, which has been passed on by word of mouth." Though in themselves these Flood traditions would not prove much, coupled with the other evidences they certainly support the premise of a worldwide Flood.

NOAH'S ARK

In addition to what has been discussed, evidence from archeology points to an ark buried on top of a mountain. This ark has been seen on Mount Ararat in Turkey. Ten times in the last 115 years. Three expeditions claim to have gone inside the ark of Noah, and it has been photographed on three other occasions. Wood has been found on the mountain three different times. What is so important about finding wood on a mountain? The wood found is hand-hewn timber, impregnated with a black substance, which has been tooled and worked on. It is said to by cypress, a derivative of gopher wood. It was found buried in an ice cap at the 14,000 foot level of the mountain on top of a lava flow. There are no trees native to that mountain for a distance of 200 miles. Five different laboratories dated the same piece of wood by the Carbon 14 method, providing dates of 1500 - 6000 years (which gives an idea of the accuracy of Carbon 14). In 1883 a group of Turkish commissioners entering the ark reported finding on the side wall of the third compartment a supposed record or log.

There is good evidence that the ark is presently resting on the mountain of Ararat. The Creation-Science Research Center has published Noah's Ark: Fact or Fable? By Violet Cummings, which relates all of the history regarding expeditions in search of the ark.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

CONCLUSIONS

Note the words of the Lord Jesus Christ as found in Matthew 24:37: "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." He warned that at His second coming man would be eating, drinking, giving in marriage and being overly concerned with material things, as in the days of Noah. This was man's condition when the Flood came and destroyed them all. As we consider the importance of the study of creation and the Flood, we find that it declares God's right to judge the world. God is a God of mercy and of love, but He warns of impending judgment. What better way to warn the world than to demonstrate His right to judge the world - I created, I have the right to judge.

As judgment came in the past, destroying perhaps three billion people and saving only eight, another judgment is imminent. God's time of judgment will come. Man today who rejects Jesus Christ and says it is foolish to believe in the Bible will one day meet Jesus Christ as his judge. The One who had the power to create, the One who had the power to destroy, is the One who has the power to save. As eight people were inside the ark of safety in the days of Noah and found salvation, so also today people who are inside the ark of safety, Jesus Christ (those who have accepted Him as Saviour), will be saved from that judgment which is to come.

Where do you stand? Have you assured your eternal safety in Him? Have you placed yourself within the ark of salvation - Jesus Christ?

[Soldier4Christ]

5 The Creator--Who?

    This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days, scoffers, walking after 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 the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.

    II Peter 3:1-6

The scoffers of verse 4 who in mocking tones ask, "Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation," are making reference to the basic doctrine of historical geology. This relates to the teaching of uniformitarianism, the foundation upon which evolution rests. Peter recognized it clearly in his day.

Those who accept historical geology and uniformitarianism insist that the present is the key to the past. What is happening now has happened since time began and will continue to happen and at the same rates until time ends. The Lord Jesus Christ, they say, is certainly not coming again, there never was a creative event that changed anything, and no Flood or world cataclysm ever occurred. Present processes and present rates can be taken back into time indefinitely. Ultimately, these can likewise be projected in to the future, so that when we read that our sun will burn out in five billion years, don't worry about it, for man will be far enough along to create his own sun. Peter says of these individuals, "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water." First, they are willingly ignorant of the fact of creation. Second, in verse 6, they are willingly ignorant of the fact that "the world that then was being overflowed with water, perished." Third, they are willingly ignorant of the coming again of the Lord Jesus Christ (verse 10).

By acceding to the claims of various individuals who say that evolution is a valid law, many people have rejected any consideration of creation. According to these, Peter was a fool. He accepted creation and the account of a Flood, even maintaining that the evidence was so overwhelming that anyone who rejected it was willfully ignorant of the facts. We have already demonstrated what God's Word has to say regarding creation; we must therefore compare the Biblical account to other models in order to determine which position is most consistent with scientific fact.

Let us look first at the evolutionary theory. This model would instruct us that in the beginning life probably developed from a form of matter, such as hydrogen, through numerous processes of blind chance, the meeting together of molecules and electrical sparks (energy). Somehow these various forces joined through purely natural processes, until one day the first cell was formed.

There has never been an adequate explanation for the origin of the solar system--not even for the origin of matter itself. One falls into the trap of having either to make matter eternal or to propose the deification of matter. Or perhaps we could echo G. G. Simpson's approach: make this matter of origins one of the major mysteries of life itself--something we may never understand just because we will never understand it.

The evolutionist explains that life began in some primordial sea. According to the Russian scientist Oparin, life began in an atmosphere of methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor. Electrical discharges coming through this atmosphere created the first building blocks of life, amino acids. In 1953 Stanley Miller performed the classic experiment in which such a mix of gasses was subjected to an electrical discharge and the products collected. They included amino acids. Though far from being life amino acids are the basic building blocks of living cells, and from them other developments could ultimately produce the first cell. This would be like having a fraction of one brick in the corner of a fifty story building (considering the building as a cell). It is a long way from the whole, but evolutionists insist that it represents a step in our understanding of how life began.

Interestingly, however, the sun's rays penetrating through an atmosphere of methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor would destroy any amino acids to a depth of fifteen meters in the ocean. Amino acids formed in the upper atmosphere would quickly disintegrate again. The way to prevent that is to add oxygen to the atmosphere. If there is oxygen in the atmosphere, ozone (O3) will form; but the ozone filters out the ultraviolet light, which is so lethal that it could kill almost every form of life on the planet, even penetrating as much as 30 feet under the surface of the oceans. With the addition of oxygen the ultraviolet light from the sun is filtered out and amino acids are no longer destroyed.

But note an additional problem: in an atmosphere of methane, ammonia, hydrogen, water vapor and oxygen one can generate electrical sparks all day long and never produce any amino acids. With oxygen present they cannot exist. A scientist may demonstrate something within a controlled situation in a laboratory, but in the earth itself he would encounter this interesting paradox. Life could not come about this way.

We frequently hear about experiments creating life in the laboratory. Suppose man develops an apparatus allowing him to duplicate, make, or form life in a laboratory? Does that disprove the Bible? Does it prove evolution to be true? Not at all. It would merely show that it takes intelligence to create life. Man with all of his accumulated scientific knowledge since the beginning of time, man with all his technological advances, man with all his billions of dollars of laboratory equipment would finally have been able to duplicate something that God originated in the beginning. But at the same time that would hardly prove the claim that life could ever come about by chance. The creation of life demands intelligence, design and planning. Neither chance nor matter have these properties. It is totally unreasonable to believe that dead matter is responsible for life and all the complexities we observe today. Yet evolutionists continually speak about life beginning in such a manner.

In Berkeley, California, where scientists reportedly created life in a test tube, they took living cells and extracted from them the DNA molecules which contain the coded information of cells. When this DNA was placed in a test tube with an energy-supplying chemical, nothing happened. But when the DNA-producing enzyme from other living cells was added, the DNA was reproduced. But this is like cutting your hand off, sewing it back on again, and saying you created a hand. Actually, all you have done is rearrange life. You may have learned a few things, but you have not created because you began with life and ended with life. Only an experiment beginning exclusively with the molecules would fairly test the hypothesis.

Most evolutionists declare that life somehow began by spontaneous generation from non-living material. Life came from some type of matter. But about the same time that Charles Darwin and Mendel were performing experiments, a gentleman named Louis Pasteur startled the scientific world. One of his experiments concerned spontaneous generation. Until his day it was believed that if one left rags in the corner, mice would appear. Frogs were created spontaneously in pond water. Meat left unrefrigerated would produce maggots. Wheat would generate rats. Experiments by Francisco Redi and others had demonstrated that this did not hold true, but people still believed that on the bacteriological level bacteria were formed spontaneously. Pasteur announced that because of his belief in God he would disprove the idea of spontaneous generation. He accordingly developed a flask with an "S" curve on the end which allowed air to enter but trapped dust and bacteria in the neck of the flask so that the nutrient broth in the bottom remained germ free. He performed the experiment several times. Each time he demonstrated something, scientists set up an objection, but he answered that objection the next time he performed the experiment. Some of these flasks are still in a museum in France, and even after more than 100 years there are no bacteria in the broth. He demonstrated once and for all that life does not come from non-living material. He helped to establish the great law of biogenesis. A sub-law states that life reproduces after its kind. Cats give birth to cats, dogs to dogs; two rabbits never give birth to an elephant. Pasteur helped to establish this law.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

One would think that this signaled the death blow to the idea of spontaneous generation. We cannot observe it, we cannot demonstrate it, we cannot prove it, we cannot verify it - and all experiments confirm just the opposite. Yet we find scientists such as George Wald, a recognized evolutionary biologist, asserting that we teach the experiments of Pasteur to our students as if this were a triumph of science over mysticism. He personally believes that life in the beginning did arise by spontaneous generation because the only other alternative is to believe in God, and he regards this as unscientific. We ask in turn, how much science is involved in believing something which is totally negated by all scientific experiments? He holds this position not because of great overwhelming scientific evidence for spontaneous generation, but because of his preconceived ideas, personal prejudice, opinion, and disbelief in God. And he holds that position on faith.

Calculate, if you like, the odds against life ever coming about spontaneously. Take an 8 1/2 x 11 inch sheet of paper and put the number "1" in the upper left-hand corner. Type zeros after it, single-spaced, until you fill up the whole page with zeros; turn the sheet over and type additional zeros upon the entire page. Continue filling pages with zeros until you produce a volume three inches thick. Compile enough volumes to spread across the whole United States. Stack volumes until they reach past the moon. That is the number of volumes necessary to contain the number of chances to one that life would ever come about by spontaneous generation. Not impossible, but highly unlikely. To hold that position, one is exercising faith, not upholding evidence which is overwhelmingly in his favor. Such a position is held basically because, as Wald says, one chooses not to believe in God.

The thesis here again is that with infinite time and no creative power life could appear. Yet the Bible maintains that with no time at all and God as absolute power, life came into existence. Recognize that infinite time and zero power can accomplish nothing, but no time at all and infinite power can accomplish anything.

The evolutionist would tell you not only that life by some miracle advanced to that first cell, a medical miracle, but when life evolved to the first one-cell ameba, it was more than halfway to man. That cell which is vastly different from man, that little protozoan, was more than halfway up on the evolutionary scale. We have already observed the complexity required to come up with that first cell itself. Undaunted, however, evolutionists usually begin with the single cell and proceed to tell us how it could diversify. We begin to hear of natural selection and mutations. Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer are famous for their views of natural selection and survival of the fittest. Basically this means that of any given set of animals on the earth, those that are more fit to survive will survive. This is supposed to explain why certain animals exist presently and others are extinct. But that type of explanation still does not account for the existence of the fit. The premise advances a survival of the fittest, natural selection: nature weeds out those that are unfit. But it does not explain how animals got here, and again the law of the biogenesis must be in effect. How do we explain the different species, the different varieties of animals on the earth?

Hugo DeVries introduced the idea of mutations - random changes in the generic structure. What this really means is that some freak accident or change takes place in the organism. Huxley, a leading evolutionist, proposed that 99 out of 100 mutations are lethal or harmful, and Dobzhansky raised that figure to 999 out of 1000. Dr. Walter Lammerts, a Ph.D. in genetics from the University of California, producer of sixteen prize-winning American roses and former director of research for the German Seed Company, states that all mutations are lethal or harmful or at least neutral. He speaks with authority, for he obtained his rose varieties by exposing them to neutron radiation and other influences in order to induce them to grow differently. From his college studies he was under the impression that one could take a rose and continue to improve on it by artificial selection until one produced a rose with petals six to eight inches long. But he found certain limits. He was able in one generation to increase the growth and gain a petal one-quarter inch longer, the second generation another one-eighth inch -- but then the process reached a point where increased petal length was no longer produced. It had evidently come to the potential of that particular plant. One thing he learned for certain: he was never able to change one species of plant into another species of plant.

Dr. Lammerts also refers to the experiments performed on the fruit fly. Scientists have taken this fly and bombarded it with gamma rays, X-rays, and the like, producing numerous mutant forms of flies. They have developed a little fruit fly with no wings, with wrinkled legs, with half wings, with eight legs, with six legs, with red eyes, black eyes, no eyes. But they have never turned a fruit fly into a mosquito or anything else. The experiment began with fruit flies and ended with weaker forms of fruit flies. In the experiments most of the mutations were lethal. Causing a mutation is like trying to improve your television by throwing rocks at it with the hope that one out of 1000 rocks will improve it and change a black and white set into a color set. What is not considered in mutations is that 999 steps are in the wrong direction. One could walk from America to China by taking one step forward and 999 steps backwards. He may get there, but he will be going in the wrong direction. That is not progress. Mutations always take away. In fact, no single favorable mutation has ever been found.

In biology one learns about Kettlewell's research with moths and reads that this is "'an excellent evidence of evolution." Here we are supposed to have an example of evolution in progress. There are dark moths and white moths. At the beginning of Kettlewell's research he found that in England there were more white moths than dark moths. The trees in the area were light-colored; the white moths blended into the trees very well, whereas the darker ones were easily seen by the birds who picked them up for food. Because of the Industrial Revolution smoke and soot began to fill the trees, and now the dark moths blended in better and the birds found the white moths. After a while he noticed that there were more dark moths than white moths. He reported that he had observed evolution. To the contrary, he had white moths and dark moths in the beginning and white moths and dark moths in the end. He had perhaps demonstrated survival of the fittest -- that one is a little more fit to survive because it blends in with the protective environment -- but he had not demonstrated evolution because the moths had not really changed.

Scientists speak about the fly becoming resistant to DDT as an evidence of evolution. However the fly was a fly before and is a fly now. No one has ever demonstrated or proved that a fly more resistant to DDT has evolved. All that can really be said is that a number of flies were sprayed, and those not resistant to DDT died. Are we observing evolution when we take a fly that is now supposedly resistant to DDT and note that it produces fewer offspring and its life span is shorter than flies that were not sprayed? Is that favorable to the fly as a whole? He has adapted, perhaps, but the process does not explain how flies could change into mosquitoes or whatever is higher than flies for it was a fly before and remains a fly after.

Mutations do not explain anything new appearing, but instead show degeneration. They merely tell us that if there were a time on earth when nothing lived but fish, by mutations alone one could never find anything but different forms of fish. Horses could never be produced because horses have characteristics that fish do not.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Evolutionists would tell us that things are getting better and better. We are going from the simple to the complex. We are working on a system which progresses from a one-celled animal to multi-celled organisms such as man. How do we know we are going from simple to complex? "Because given enough time, it works out." Given a little time, the impossible becomes possible. Given a little more time, the possible becomes probable; given enough time, the probable becomes virtually certain. Time is the hero. Given enough time, things can evolve from the simple to the complex. Even though we cannot observe the process, even though we cannot demonstrate it, even though we cannot prove or verify it, what we need is time.

All of this is interesting because there happens to be a law of science, the first law of thermodynamics, which states that in every physical process there is a conservation of matter and energy. Matter is converted into energy, energy into matter; matter-energy cannot really be created or destroyed. This law asserts that the energy-conversion processes of the present have no relation to creation or innovation, but only to conservation.

Even more pertinent is a second law of thermodynamics, which states that in any experiment or in any use of energy, an amount of energy is lost for future experimentation. In other words, things are running down. When we burn wood, chemical energy is converted into heat; this can be used in an engine to do work, but a certain amount of energy is never available again -- not destroyed, but degraded into non-usable heat energy. Essential to an understanding of the second law of thermodynamics is the law of entropy: the irreversible tendency of any system toward disorder. This is why man dies, why things grow old. If you leave your car out in damp air, it never has a tendency to gain more chrome, but to rust. Any machine must eventually wear out; the human body constantly pursues a state of decay. Ultimately, the entire universe is like a giant clock which is running down. How can one explain a building-up world with a running down clock?

Because evolution clearly violates three well known laws of science, its validity must be urgently questioned. First, it negates the law of biogenesis, which states that life comes only from living organisms. Second, any attempt to explain the origin of matter and energy without a Creator violates the first law of thermodynamics. Third, evolution declares that things are building up from simple to complex, whereas the second law of thermodynamics insists that everything is moving from complex to simple--the wrong direction for evolution.

Now we come to the creationist's position. Paul says in Romans 1:20, "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse."

The power of God - how can this be seen? Very definitely in the laws of thermodynamics. Psalm 19:6 tells us "there is nothing hid from the heart thereof." Thermodynamics basically deals with heat energy. Ask any evolutionist how long the first law of thermodynamics has been in effect, how long matter and energy have been consistent in quantity. He will tell you, "Forever." To his knowledge the present is the key to the past; present processes dictate the past. Thus the first law has been in effect forever. What about the second law? How long have things been running down? "Forever." If everything has been running down forever, if everything is totally down, then obviously no further processes such as life and solar radiation can take place. If matter and energy have been quantitatively constant forever, the universe by the second law has been running down forever and no further change can occur. Obviously there is still a high system of order in the universe. Obviously ordered things are here - man, sun, universe - and thus everything has not run down. What does this mean? It means that sometime in the past things were more highly ordered than they are now. If they have been running down, then some time in the past they were in a state of higher order; matter and energy were in their maximum state of order. In other words, some time in the past the universe had to be created, put together in a higher order than its present state, everything more perfect than it is now.

God says in the first chapter of Genesis that He finished all His work of creating and making. From this point on, matter would be neither created nor destroyed. At the end of the sixth day He was finished with the laws utilized in creating and making. The universe was to maintain itself in perfect order until man fell into sin and ruined God's creation. At that point man began to die, animals began to die, the universe started to run down. Sin would no run rampant until the last days. With man's sin at the fall entered the degenerative effect of the second law of thermodynamics.

The Bible is consistent with the first and second laws of thermodynamics. It is likewise consistent with the law of biogenesis--that life came from life. The Bible says that life in the beginning was created by God, the great Intelligence, the great Life. He alone was responsible for life. God created two of every kind - cattle, creeping things, crawling things, fowl, fish, plant life - these to reproduce after their kind. The Bible does not say that God created every species of animal but that he created kinds. One can begin with two dogs, for instance, and develop varieties within that kind. But one cannot develop chimpanzees from rabbits or horses from cows. It should also be remembered that the species classifications are man-made categories which have carried and are varying with time and with different classifiers. Of one thing we can be certain: the Bible is consistent with the law of biogenesis.

The Bible is also in accord with what we know of mutations, for it says that every animal and Adam and Eve were created perfect. In fact, the whole universe was perfect until man fell into sin. Now all began to die. Life spans were shortened. The Bible says that before the Flood man lived to an average age of 911 years - after the Flood about 400 years. Age kept decreasing to where Abraham and Sarah at 90 were too old to have a child. At present the life span is about 70. In the last few years medical technology has allowed us to raise the average life span in the United States because fewer children die, but in India the average life span is closer to 35 partly because they continue to have a high infant mortality rate.

At man's fall man and animals began to die. Two perfect animals after the fall began to have offspring, and just as man produced offspring in bondage to sin, animals now produced fewer perfect offspring. In a few generations an animal might be found which was not as fit as the parents. When mutations occurred, as might be expected - because the Bible is true - they were in a downward direction. In accord with Darwin's proposition concerning the survival of the fittest, the Bible explains how the fit got here and clarifies that the world cursed with sin would be less fit as time went on because of the second law of thermodynamics. Some animals would even go into extinction as the result of Adam's sin. Adam's one act of disobedience had tremendous implications when we consider to what extent the whole universe was affected. As Paul says in Romans 8:22, "For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now" because of Adam's disobedience. All people and animals were to die because of his act - a sin-cursed world propagated because he insisted on satisfying his own appetites in opposition to God's mandate.

Because of the systematic gaps in the fossil record and his failure to observe gradual evolutionary change in living populations, an excellent scientist named Goldschmidt proposed a theory to explain evolution by sudden jumps. He proposed that, for example, two reptiles mated and an egg was laid which carried a mutation that changed the relative rates of development of certain parts of the embryo. Only a slight genetic change could result in an adult having large and striking differences from its parents. But this "hopeful monster" supposedly mated within the population to produce offspring inheriting its changes, and these could mate with each other to fix the change in population. Thus Goldschmidt explained the evolution in jumps, He also presented an interesting case against Darwinian gradualism. The neo-Darwinists who accept natural selection and mutation feel that they present an equally good case against Goldschmidt. I tend to disagree with both. The Bible provides an excellent explanation and lacks the inherent problems of the other theories.

A group of evolutionary mathematicians held a symposium at the Wistar Institute, the report of which was published under the title Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution. Mathematicians and a group of evolutionary biologists met to make presentations on natural selection and mutations. The mathematicians assumed that only one out of 1000 mutations are favorable. Not considering the effects of the 999 harmful mutations, they still showed it to be mathematically impossible for evolution by mutations and natural selection alone to account for all of the various forms of life living on the earth today, even allowing for six billion years of evolution - or, for that matter, 36 billion years.



cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Evolution is hopelessly inadequate to explain the many wonders we find in the animal world today. Take as an example the little brachinus beetle, the bombardier beetle. This beetle has two chambers within its body: in one chamber a catalyst and in the other an explosive mixture. When he is about to be attacked, he mixes the catalyst and explosive, blows it through two tubes in his tail, and explodes the mixture in the face of the enemy at a temperature of 212 Fahrenheit. While the enemy is gagging, the beetle runs away. This is only its defense mechanism. Natural selection would say that without this mechanism, the beetle would be exterminated. This is true, but the mechanism has to work the first time he tries it. There is no time for trial and error. And this is the only beetle with such a defense; it is completely unique in nature. What are the chances that such a defense mechanism could evolve? Can you picture the little beetle who tries it the first time and gets a little to much explosive and not enough catalyst? Boom, no beetle. Or what happens to the timid beetle who gets more catalyst and not enough explosive? He shoots it out, the enemy swallows it - and then swallows the beetle, with only a trace of heartburn later. Either way, you have wiped out the beetle.

What about the little water beetle, Stenus bipunctatus? This little beetle has an amazing ability to drop a detergent solution on the water when chased by a water strider or some other enemy. The detergent breaks up the surface tension of the water, creating a large wave that propels the beetle away at about ten times its normal swimming speed, and the pursuing enemy sinks. Calculate the chances of that defense coming into existence by evolution.

Another interesting biological development is the sonar capability of the dolphin, a very intelligent creature which can be trained by man. Compare the sonar of the dolphin to the best sonar man has produced for a submarine and estimate the superiority of the dolphin's. Two, three, ten times better? The dolphin's sonar capability is over 100 million times better than anything man has been able to produce. Yet the dolphin "evolved." Would anyone in his right mind tell you that he could take all the parts and transistors necessary to form sonar, put them in a room shake them out and construct sonar? The dolphin is supposed to have developed it by chance - no purpose or design in his development.

A bat possesses aerial sonar. He sends and receives signals at a fantastic number of cycles per second, never becoming confused by any other bat sending and receiving signals at the same time. Some are almost totally blind, but while hunting in the darkness, can in full flight detect a moth on sonar and swoop down to secure it.

Each little part of a fly's complex eye is a sensor, approximately 300 million times more sensitive to light than our most refined sensors. But take not of man's eye, too, which is supposed to have evolved from one-celled amoebas and things that did not even have eyes. Doctors today tell us that by looking inside the eye and noting the different colorations in the back of it, we can become aware of all the diseases we have had or are suffering from presently.

Everything we are discovering of the complexity of the human cell, the atom, the universe would negate its possibility of coming about by chance. The evidence is not 50% for evolution and 50 % for God -- not "I'll flip a coin to see which I believe." The apostle Paul contends that the creation of the world is clearly seen and man is without excuse. Creation declares not only His eternal power, but the power of the Godhead - Father, Son and Holy Spirit, God, the All-knowing One, manifests Himself in His Son, Jesus Christ, and is experienced by the Holy Spirit. Similarly, our universe is really a tri-universe made up of three things - space, mass, and time. Space is the all-encompassing backdrop (the Father) in which everything occurs. It is manifest in matter or motion (the Son) and experienced in time (the Holy Spirit). All things work within this framework so that even the Trinity is seen. Space is a one-dimensional representative of the Father, but it is seen in two dimensions and experienced in three dimensions (length, width, height). The same is true of energy or matter. Energy is the backdrop which is manifest in matter and experienced in the various phenomena in motion. Time is another example of the trinity because it includes past, present, and future. The future is the unseen source of all time being manifest in the present and experienced in the past.

God says that His evidence is clearly seen. He is displaying not only His eternal power but also His eternal Godhead, so that man is without excuse. In considering creation, we find that Peter is well vindicated when he says that the man who denies creation "is without excuse." Refer again to Peter's affirmation quoted at the beginning of this chapter. The man who says the present is the key to the past is willingly ignorant "that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water, perished."

There was a Man who was able to convince Peter of such things, and I would like to introduce you to Him. Colossians 1:16-17 states that by Jesus Christ "were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible [thus covering everything we can physically see], whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers [angels, kingdoms, kings]: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things [Jesus Christ existed before that first chapter of Genesis, before time, matter, or space], and by him all things consist." If we are to realize the implications of that last little clause, almost tacked on -- "incidentally, by Jesus Christ all things consist" -- then we can realize why Peter and Paul speak so strongly.

Paul says of Jesus Christ in Colossians 2:3, "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." The root meaning of the word "philosophy" is wisdom; the root meaning in Latin of the word "science" is knowledge. Paul is saying that in Jesus Christ are hid all of the treasures of science and philosophy. In other words, you cannot understand anything about the world in which you live apart from Jesus Christ. You cannot discern the true nature of science apart from Jesus Christ. He is the one who created these things, and by Him these things consist.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

In our study of the atom we used to think it was composed simply of electrons, protons, and neutrons. We wondered how positively charged protons could exist in the same atomic nucleus and still hold together. We wondered about the fact that the atom was mostly empty space. Now we find that there are many more components than just those three in the atom. Indeed, four forces exist within that atom. There are both attractive and repulsive forces in the nucleus of the atom and no one truly understands the atom or how it is held together. We know that each atom is a complex miniature universe. Man has only begun to comprehend a universe of the small, the level upon which he lives, and a vast universe, whose limits are yet far beyond knowledge. But the Bible tells me that by Jesus Christ all these things consist; He is the power holding the atom together.

When we read II Peter 3, we understand how Peter can speak with boldness because he knows the day of the Lord will come when Jesus Christ will no longer be concerned with the saving of souls. He will no longer be occupied in displaying His sustaining power and His love to mankind, but will then stand as a Judge. When Jesus Christ comes as a thief in the night,

    the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat [an atomic destruction if you wish, because Jesus Christ can say one word and release the power he possesses over the atom], the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

    II Peter 3:10-14

Be diligent that He may say of you as He said of Noah (Genesis 6:22), "Thus according to all that God commanded Noah to do, so did he."

"Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness" (II Peter 3:17). Peter admonishes, You, Christian, know the fact of creation, the fact of the Flood. You have met Jesus Christ and know Him who commands all power and has given this promise of judgment. Beware lest you fall into the philosophy, that uniformitarianism, that historical geology which will lead you away by the error of the wicked. He challenges you to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever" (verse 18).

The challenge of Peter's message is profound. The One whose power and dominion has eternally controlled the universe exists today as man's loving and forgiving Saviour. He is eager to enter your life, create within you a spiritual nature, and secure your everlasting future with Him. But one day, when he relinquishes His power as Sustainer of the heavens and earth, He will appear as Judge of all mankind. What a terrible awesome thought: to be finally accountable to the Individual who by His Word created the atom, mankind, the universe. If you do not know Him as Saviour, He will one day, as your Judge, cast you into eternal damnation. If you do know Him and He lives in your life, you have the pleasure of proclaiming His message and anticipating the glory of His presence throughout ages to come.

[Soldier4Christ]

Conclusion

If you do not know Jesus Christ as your Saviour, you will face Him as your Judge. There is only one way you can avoid this condemnation. You must be saved.

But how?

First, you must recognize that the Lord Jesus Christ, Creator of the heavens and the earth, came to this earth to die on the cross for your sins.

Second, you must recognize that as Adam was created perfect and fell into sin, all of the descendants of Adam are sinners, separated from God and in need of the Saviour.

Third, you must obtain forgiveness of your sins by asking the Lord Jesus Christ to come into your life, cleansing you from all sin and giving you eternal life in heaven with Him.

Fourth, you must thank Him for coming into your life and dedicated you life to Him, living in His strength and power, which is the person of the Holy Spirit within you and now the guiding force of your life.

If you have followed these steps and have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, you are now a Christian and will no longer fear the Judgment which is to come. Now you must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is the ONLY WAY to escape the Judgment.