In Awe of God’s Creation – AUDIO – Cum se aude zgomotul universului? What does space sound like? Coplesit de Creatia lui Dumnezeu

Photo credit http://www.dailygalaxy.com Pillars of Creation – Stalpii Creatiei

From the University of Leicester (http://www.le.ac.uk) via www.alphagalileo.org-

Far from the booming space battles and roaring warp drives of blockbuster movies, we think of the airless immensity of outer space as being as quiet as it is empty—but it is, in fact, as noisy as anywhere on Earth. But what kind of noise is this? To try and answer that question with his installation, Andrew Williams gathered sounds and data from space—including recordings made by satellites and long-wave radios.

The sound for the installation comes from two main sources:

  • Electrons hitting the Earth’s upper atmosphere – recorded using Long Wave Radio by Cluster II satellite on the 9th of July 2001. The recording is entitled Chorus. The title comes from the brief, rising-frequency tones caused by the impacts of electrons, which sound like a chorus of birds singing.
  • A deep pulsing sound emanating from the Sun, recorded by the European Space Agency Soho spacecraft and caused by bubbles emanating from deep within the star.

The unique project involves projecting the sounds through multiple speakers and also features projections of still images and videos on multiple screens.

Trajectory will develop over the two days—immersing visitors in the artist’s vision of Earth, and space, as well as an exploration of current research and future challenges for humanity.

As well as Earth’s relationship with the sun and “space weather”—the kind of phenomena that produced the sounds—Andrews’s installation explores the history of our relationship with space from Sputnik to the present day. To create the visual imagery for the show Andrew tracked the trajectories of 250 satellites that are looking at the Earth.

Andrew said: “The installation itself looks at several aspects of space in detail, whilst also providing an opportunity to reflect upon the future in terms of future space research, the effects of space research upon our lives and the big question – the future of humanity. No answers are provided, of course!

“The sound is what inspired me – once I had started to create audio from space data I wanted to find a way of presenting it. Much of the data comes from Satellites (in particular Cluster II) and it seemed natural to find the exact location of this when the data was collected. I then realised that the trajectories of satellites created a transfixing and beautiful visual landscape. It also shows how much—or little—of space we currently colonise.”

Andrew Williams became one of the University’s Artists in Residence in 2012, and began a mission with the Space Research Centre to explore new ways of presenting and explaining scientific research to the public.

ROMANIAN:

Andrew Williams de la Centrul de Cercetări Spaţiale din Leicester a folosit datele colectate de sateliţi şi de navete spaţiale pentru a genera sunetul pe care l-am auzi dacă am regla un radio în timp ce ne-am afla în spaţiu.

Cea mai impresionantă realizare a cercetătorului este „Chorus”, o înregistrare ce surprinde zgomotul făcut de electroni în timp ce lovesc atmosfera superioară a Pământului. Sunetul produs de acest fenomen se aseamănă cu cel făcut de nişte grauri aflaţi deasupra unui pârâu.

Sunetul a fost înregistrat de satelitul Cluster II în 2001 folosind un receptor de bandă largă. Williams afirmă că sunete erau în afara spectrului auzului uman, astfel că a fost nevoit să reducă înălţimea sunetelor şi să le filtreze pentru ca oamenii să le poată auzi. (Traducerea via Descopera.ro)

CHORUS 1

CHORUS consists of brief tones which sounds like a chorus of birds at daybreak created when electrons hit the Earth’s atmosphere. This new audio composition has been created for the Trajectory Installation at Leicester University by Andrew Williams. It makes use of data collected by the Cluster 2 Satelite in 2001 using LWR (long wave radio) Through a process of transposition and filtering the signal (which are naturally outside of the range of human hearing) the tones become audible. Andrew has shaped the material and developed a performance structure using a multi speaker difussion system to recreate the spatial qualities of the Earth Chorus within the gallery space. Andrew is Leverhulme Artist in Residence at the Space Research Centre, Leicester University.

VIDEO by Andrew Williams

Does the Universe Go On Forever or Come to An Edge? and If Time Continues Forever, Is That An Actual Infinite Amount of Time?

English: This photo was taken by my wife durin...

In 2011 Dr William Lane Craig spoke at the Forum of Christian Leaders (FOCL) in Hungary. While they he spoke on the topic, “Five Arguments for Theism” and took questions from the audience to accompany his lecture. In this clip, Dr Craig answers the question, “Does the universe go on forever or does it come to an end?”

Spatial infinity of the universe

There is no evidence that the universe is infinite in the spatial sense. All the evidence is consistent with the universe not only being finite in time, but also being finite in space. And you wouldn’t come to an edge of the universe, if the universe is finite. The universe could have the geometry of the surface of a sphere, for example, like the surface of the earth, which is finite. But, if you go around the earth, you never come to an edge where you fall off. You’ll just come back to where you started again. Similar to the geometry, the universe could be spherical like that so that it could be finite and yet, unbounded.

VIDEO by drcraigvideos

If Time Continues Forever,
Is That An Actual Infinite Amount of Time?

Let me address the question about the infinity of the future. I think it is important to differentiate between two concepts of the infinite. The actual infinite and the potential infinite. According to Aristotle, actual infinities never exist. Infinity exists only in potentiality. For example, if you take any finite distance, you can divide it in half, and then in half again, and then in half again. And that can go on to infinity. And what Aristotle would say is that that finite distance is potentially infinitely divisible. It is infinite in the sense that infinity  is a limit which you can endlessly approach, but at which you will never arrive. And that’s in contrast to the idea of an actual infinite, where you have an actually infinite number of definite and discreet finite individuals that make up this collection.

The notion of a potential infinite, which is Aristotle’s idea, dominated  mathematics right up to the 19th century and is the role of the infinite in calculus, where infinity is just a limit. The idea of the actual infinite was pioneered by Gayard Cantor and is the role of the infinite in set theory, which thinks of sets, like the sets of natural numbers, as having an actual infinite number of members in the sets. Now, how is this relevant to the question about the future? What I would say is this. If time is dynamic, in the sense that the future does not yet exist, but is a realm of pure potentiality only, the, what that means is that the series of events that have occurred at any time is always finite, but increasing toward infinity as a limit. So that, the numbers of events in any point in time toward the future is always finite, but growing. That is to say that it is a potential infinite. And, I agree with Aristotle that there’s nothing objectionable about a potential infinite. So, I would differentiate  between the future and the past in that respect. If, the universe is beginning less, then there has actually occurred an infinite number of events. But, if the universe will go on forever in the future, the number of future events will never be actually infinite. We will never arrive at infinity. It is infinite purely in the sense of potentiality. It will go on and on forever, but will always be finite, but growing toward infinity as as the limit.

It Is Not “Special Pleading” to Say God Is Without A Cause and Has God Existed for an Infinite Number of Years?

English: This photo was taken by my wife durin...In 2011 Dr William Lane Craig spoke at the Forum of Christian Leaders (FOCL) in Hungary. While they he spoke on the topic, “Five Arguments for Theism” and took questions from the audience to accompany his lecture. In this clip, Dr Craig answers a question concerning how the Kalam Cosmological Argument concerns God. Is it ‘special pleading’ to say God is without a cause?

Why it is not ‘special pleading’

Very often, it will be said by people, “If everything has a cause, what is God’s cause?” This objection is based upon a confusion between the contingency argument and this cosmological argument. The contingency argument says that everything that exists  has an explanation of its existence. This argument says that everything that begins to exist has a cause. And by conflating these two together, people have come up with the idea that everything that exists  has a cause. And that’s just a confusion. It is everything that begins to exist has a cause. If something begins to exist, that means it comes into being. And, given that out of nothing, nothing comes. The things cannot pop into being from nonbeing. Anything that begins to exist must have a cause.

But, God doesn’t need to have a cause, because He never came into being. He’s an eternal reality. And, this isn’t special pleading for God. That is what the atheist has always said about the universe- that matter and energy are eternal. The universe has always existed, and therefore, the universe doesn’t need a cause. It’s just that in light of premise 2, that explanation has now been called into question.

So, all this argument requires is that anything that comes into being, or begins to exist needs a cause. It wouldn’t apply to an eternally existing thing. If you want to ask about eternally existing things, then go back to the contingency argument, which says that everything that exists has an explanation, either in a necessity of its own nature or in an external cause. And, I think this helps to clarify again why in that first argument in that contingency argument, I differentiate it between explanations and causes. God, on that first argument does have an explanation as to why He exists, but He doesn’t have a cause.

VIDEO by drcraigvideos

Has God Existed for an Infinite Number of Years?

Dr. William Lane Craig:

Doesn’t the eternity of God imply that God has existed for an infinite number of years? Or an infinite amount of past time? No, I don’t think it does. In fact, what I’ve argued is that God’s eternity means he’s timelessness, at least without the universe. That God is the Creator of time and space, transcends time and space, so that God existing alone, without the universe is timeless. And time had a beginning.

Time is only finite, according to modern cosmology. It’s about 13.7 billion years ago. And there simply is no such thing as 15 billion years ago, or 20 billion years ago. That’s pure imagination. But, there really is no such time because time began about 13.7 billion years ago. So, God existing alone without the universe would simply be timeless. He wouldn’t exist through an infinite number of years, or an infinite number of hours. And that’s why the question is meaningless. Why didn’t God create the world sooner? If God had existed through an infinite number of years prior to creation, we could meaningfully ask, “Well, why did he wait so long? Why didn’t God create the world sooner?

But, if time begins at the moment of creation, then I think you can see that’s a meaningless question. There is no point ‘sooner’ at which He could have created the universe. Time simply begins at the moment of creation. So, even eternity wouldn’t involve an actual infinity in God, given that He transcends time and created time.

John Piper – Why did God forbid one tree?

Of the many trees in the Garden, God banned Adam and Eve from eating from one — just one (Genesis 2:16–17, 3:1–3, 11). Why?

You can listen to the full episode here:

John Piper recently gave the question some fresh thinking, which he shares in today’s episode of Ask Pastor John:

The function of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is to make sure that the pleasures of all the other trees in the garden are supremely pleasures in God.

The command went like this: “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die’” (Genesis 2:16–17).

So what was God saying in prohibiting the eating of one tree out of a million trees? He was saying, “I have given you life. I have given you a world full of pleasure, pleasures of taste and sight and sound and smell and feel and nourishment. Only one tree is forbidden to you. And the point of that prohibition is to preserve the pleasures of the world, because if you eat of that one you will be saying to me, ‘I’m smarter than you. I am more authoritative that you. I am wiser than you are. I think I can care for myself better than you care for me. You are not a very good Father. And so I am going to reject you.’ So don’t eat from the tree, because you will be rejecting me and all my good gifts and all my wisdom and all my care. Instead, keep on submitting to my will. Keep on affirming my wisdom. Keep on being thankful for my generosity. Keep on trusting me as a Father and keep on eating these trees as a way of enjoying me. There are 10,000 trees, every imaginable fruit. Just go eat. Be thankful. I have given them to you and see them as expressions of my goodness and savor them that way.”

And Satan comes along, and he takes that arrangement and says, “Hey, Eve, the meaning of that arrangement is: God is selfish. God is stingy. He is a skinflint.” So he took the prohibition of one suicidal tree and treated it as a prohibition of everything.

So the issue of the tree is this: Will we keep looking to God as the giver and lover and treasure of this garden so that all our eating is thanking and all our savoring is a savoring of God? Will we keep on experiencing every one of these tastes as a tasting of something like what God is, and in that sense a tasting of God? Will we keep on enjoying God in the enjoying of the trees?

That is what the forbidden tree was there to test.

I think a lot of people try to set that up as merely arbitrary: Will man obey? Or will he not obey? And they don’t put it in the context of his fatherly care and all the goods that he has given. I don’t think it is arbitrary like that.

It was a warning. “If you choose independence instead of God-dependence, you will lose the pleasure of the garden and God with it.”

“If you keep trusting me and enjoying me as your greatest delight and highest treasure, you will have this garden and I will be the pleasure of all your pleasures.”

The forbidding one tree is a way of securing that the pleasures of all the other trees in the garden are supremely pleasures in God.

Ask Pastor John is a daily podcast series of 3–8 minute conversations released each weekday at 10:30am (EST) through the DG Facebook and Twitter feeds. You can tune in to the new episodes through the free Ask Pastor John mobile app for iPhone and Android. We’re currently hosting all the recordings on SoundCloud, a website making it easy to listen to several of the podcasts in one sitting. They’re also archived on the DG website and syndicated in iTunes. To submit a question to Pastor John please include your first name, hometown, and question in an email to AskPastorJohn AT desiringGod DOT org.

By John Piper. ©2013 Desiring God Foundation. Website: desiringGod.org

Darrell Bock on the (New) Queen James (Bible) Part 1 – Passages in the Old Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary

darrell bockIn this episode, Dr. Darrell Bock, Dr. Robert Chisholm, Dr. Joe Fantin, and Dr. Jay Smith examine biblical passages often bought up in discussions about homosexuality, focusing on material in the Old Testament.

Bock:

Within the last year, there is a Bible that is called the Queen James Bible. You heard that right. That was not King James, that was Queen James. I remember telling my wife this in preparation for this podcast, and she said, “You’ve got to be joking”. There is a group who sat down with the King James Scripture and worked their way through 8 passages (we’ll be discussing more than that today), but, 8 passages that they altered in light of what they claim is the proper way to render these texts. And so, we thought, this is great way into discussing this material:
00:12 Guest introductions and the goals of revisions in the Queen James Bible

04:13 Does Noah’s situation in Genesis 9 contribute to a biblical perspective of homosexuality?

09:03 Does the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 contribute to a biblical perspective of homosexuality?
http://www.dts.edu/thetable/play/quee…

15:08 Does the prohibition in Leviticus 20:22 contribute to a biblical perspective of homosexuality?

23:11 What does the term “abomination” mean in Leviticus 20:22?

29:22 Israel’s call to holiness and the code for serious offenses in Leviticus 20
http://www.dts.edu/thetable/play/quee…

34:03 Does David’s description of Jonathan in 2 Samuel

1:26 contribute to a biblical perspective of homosexuality?

38:33 Responding to the challenge that Jesus did not object to homosexuality
http://www.dts.edu/thetable/play/quee…

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/t…  Youtube VIDEO by dallasseminary

In awe of God’s creation – 50 unbelievable facts about earth

If you like photography and info charts, there is a great website ‘All that is interesting’ that you might want to check out. This photo is from that wonderful site:

10 Dangers of theistic evolution

Photo credit epignosisministries.com

The doctrines of creation and evolution are so strongly divergent that reconciliation is totally impossible. Theistic evolutionists attempt to integrate the two doctrines, however such syncretism reduces the message of the Bible to insignificance. The conclusion is inevitable: There is no support for theistic evolution in the Bible.

What Does Theistic Evolution Involve?

The following evolutionary assumptions are generally applicable to theistic evolution:

  • The basic principle, evolution, is taken for granted.
  • It is believed that evolution is a universal principle.
  • As far as scientific laws are concerned, there is no difference between the origin of the earth and all life and their subsequent development (the principle of uniformity).
  • Evolution relies on processes that allow increases in organization from the simple to the complex, from non-life to life, and from lower to higher forms of life.
  • The driving forces of evolution are mutation, selection, isolation, and mixing. Chance and necessity, long time epochs, ecological changes, and death are additional indispensable factors.
  • The time line is so prolonged that anyone can have as much time as he/she likes for the process of evolution.
  • The present is the key to the past.
  • There was a smooth transition from non-life to life.
  • Evolution will persist into the distant future.

In addition to these evolutionary assumptions, three additional beliefs apply to theistic evolution:

  1. God used evolution as a means of creating.
  2. The Bible contains no usable or relevant ideas which can be applied in present-day origins science.
  3. Evolutionistic pronouncements have priority over biblical statements. The Bible must be reinterpreted when and wherever it contradicts the present evolutionary worldview.

Danger no. 1: Misrepresentation of the Nature of God

The Bible reveals God to us as our Father in Heaven, who is absolutely perfect (Matthew 5:48), holy (Isaiah 6:3), and omnipotent (Jeremiah 32:17). The Apostle John tells us that ‘God is love’, ‘light’, and ‘life’ (1 John 4:161:51:1-2). When this God creates something, His work is described as ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31) and ‘perfect’ (Deuteronomy 32:4).

Theistic evolution gives a false representation of the nature of God because death and ghastliness are ascribed to the Creator as principles of creation. (Progressive creationism, likewise, allows for millions of years of death and horror before sin.)

Danger no. 2: God becomes a God of the Gaps

The Bible states that God is the Prime Cause of all things. ‘But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things … and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him’ (1 Corinthians 8:6).

However, in theistic evolution the only workspace allotted to God is that part of nature which evolution cannot ‘explain’ with the means presently at its disposal. In this way He is reduced to being a ‘god of the gaps’ for those phenomena about which there are doubts. This leads to the view that ‘God is therefore not absolute, but He Himself has evolved—He is evolution’.

Danger no. 3: Denial of Central Biblical Teachings

The entire Bible bears witness that we are dealing with a source of truth authored by God (2 Timothy 3:16), with the Old Testament as the indispensable ‘ramp’ leading to the New Testament, like an access road leads to a motor freeway (John 5:39). The biblical creation account should not be regarded as a myth, a parable, or an allegory, but as a historical report, because:

  • Biological, astronomical and anthropological facts are given in didactic [teaching] form.
  • In the Ten Commandments God bases the six working days and one day of rest on the same time-span as that described in the creation account (Exodus 20:8-11).
  • In the New Testament Jesus referred to facts of the creation (e.g. Matthew 19:4-5).
  • Nowhere in the Bible are there any indications that the creation account should be understood in any other way than as a factual report.

The doctrine of theistic evolution undermines this basic way of reading the Bible, as vouched for by Jesus, the prophets and the Apostles. Events reported in the Bible are reduced to mythical imagery, and an understanding of the message of the Bible as being true in word and meaning is lost.

Danger no. 4: Loss of the Way for Finding God

The Bible describes man as being completely ensnared by sin after Adam’s fall (Romans 7:18-19). Only those persons who realize that they are sinful and lost will seek the Saviour who ‘came to save that which was lost’ (Luke 19:10).

However, evolution knows no sin in the biblical sense of missing one’s purpose (in relation to God). Sin is made meaningless, and that is exactly the opposite of what the Holy Spirit does—He declares sin to be sinful. If sin is seen as a harmless evolutionary factor, then one has lost the key for finding God, which is not resolved by adding ‘God’ to the evolutionary scenario.

Danger no. 5: The Doctrine of God’s Incarnation is Undermined

The incarnation of God through His Son Jesus Christ is one of the basic teachings of the Bible. The Bible states that ‘The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1:14), ‘Christ Jesus … was made in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:5-7).

Click here to read the other 5 dangers- http://www.answersingenesis.org

Related articles

The Compromise of Theistic Evolution

What is Theistic Evolution? Theistic evolution, theistic evolutionism or evolutionary creationism is the view that religious teachings about God are compatible with modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. Theistic evolution is not a scientific theory, but a range of views about how the science of evolution relates to religious beliefs. Supporters of theistic evolution generally reject the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science – that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not contradict each other.

Definition: Theistic evolution has been described as the position that “evolution is real, but that it was set in motion by God”, and “Theistic evolution, which accepts that evolution occurred as biologists describe it, but under the direction of God”(wikipedia)

The following excerpt below is from an article,  written by rachel Miller, who is the News Editor at The Aquila Report, ‘an independent online source for News and Commentary from and about orthodox evangelicals in the Reformed and Presbyterian family of churches’.  However, you don’t have to be reformed or presbyterian to recognize the importance of the creation vs. evolution debate raging in the orthodox (as in orthodox doctrines) evangelical circles. Miller reviews Presbyterian Pastor John Otis’ new book on theistic evolution. In his book, Pastor Otis addresses the churches in his denomination, a heed we can all take on here. He specifically addresses Tim Keller, Peter Enns and the Biologos Foundation.

Pastor Otis’ book, Theistic Evolution: A Sinful Compromise, is available for free download here. You can also order a printed copy here. The lecture series is available on Sermon Audio here.

John Otis, pastor of a Reformed Presbyterian Church US (RPCUS) church in Burlington, North Carolina, has written a book on theistic evolution, Theistic Evolution: A Sinful Compromise, based on a series of lectures. His purpose in writing the book was to alert believers, and especially elders, to the danger that theistic evolution poses to the church:

Those that I am really addressing are those who do advocate an evolutionary view, who do believe that man did evolve from lower forms of life, who do teach that God used this means to “create.” These men are the ones who must be silenced; they are disturbing families. In obeying Jude 3, we elders must earnestly contend for the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. This is my purpose (5-6).

Pastor Otis begins his book by considering what Scripture teaches regarding creation, creation days, and the chronologies. From there he moves on to a history of Darwin and evolutionary thought. Lastly, he spends several chapters on what he calls “Compromisers.” He takes time throughout those chapters to address specific concerns about the teachings of specific organizations and individuals.

Pastor Otis’ concern over theistic evolution and its influence in the Reformed church today is due in part to his own background. Before he became a believer, Pastor Otis was an agnostic, evolutionary, Biology student.

Why does Pastor Otis call theistic evolution a sinful compromise?

  • It robs God of His due glory.
  • It elevates science as an equal authority with Scripture.
  • It adopts a faulty hermeneutic.
  • It assaults the uniqueness and dignity of man.
  • It is insulting to Jesus’ true humanity.
  • It can undermine the glorious gospel.
  • It undermines the Bible’s credibility (281-284).

In the second half of his book, Pastor Otis takes on certain individuals and organizations to task, people who are influential and whom he calls out for compromising. They include: the BioLogos Foundation, Dr. Tim Keller, Dr. Ron Choong, Dr. Gregg Davidson, Dr. Jack Collins, and Dr. Peter Enns.

You can read Rachel Miller’s entire article here: http://theaquilareport.com

Sean McDowell – How you approach an unbeliever, armed with facts they will listen to

Sean McDowell, son of Josh McDowell talks about the Intelligent Design option, when speaking to an unbeliever. He recommends this option for high school and college students, that is the primary target of this video, from a talk at Sugar Creek Baptist Church (July 21, 2013) – Lecture by Sean McDowell. For more on Intelligent Design: http://www.youtube.com/idquest VIDEO by religionphilosophy

How has God revealed Himself?

does God exist

Excerpted from http://gotquestions.org from an article titled:

Why does God require faith?

Why doesn’t God prove Himself to us so there is no need for faith?

If we cannot know our fellow finite human beings fully, how can we expect to fully know an infinite God? Even if He should desire to fully reveal Himself, it is impossible for us to fully know Him. It is like trying to pour the ocean (seemingly infinite in quantity) into a quart-measuring jar (finite)… impossible! Nonetheless, even as we can have meaningful relationships with others that we have grown to trust because of our knowledge of them and of their character, so God has revealed enough about Himself through His creation (Romans 1:18-21), through His written Word, the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17;2 Peter 1:16-21), and through His Son (John 14:9), that we can enter into a meaningful relationship with Him. But this is only possible when the barrier of one’s sin has been removed by trusting in Christ’s person and work on the cross as payment for one’s sin. This is necessary because, as it is impossible for both light and darkness to dwell together, so it is impossible for a holy God to have fellowship with sinful man unless his sin has been paid for and removed. Jesus Christ, the sinless Son of God, died on the cross to take our punishment and change us so that the one who believes on Him can become a child of God and live eternally in His presence (John 1:12;2 Corinthians 5:21;2 Peter 3:18;Romans 3:10-26).

God existsPhoto credit www.newchristian.org.uk

There have been times in the past that God has revealed Himself more “visibly” to people. One example of this is at the time of the exodus from Egypt, when God revealed His care for the Israelites by sending the miraculous plagues upon the Egyptians until they were willing to release the Israelites from slavery. God then opened the Red Sea, enabling the approximately two million Israelites to cross over on dry ground. Then, as the Egyptian army sought to pursue them through the same opening, He crashed the waters upon them (Exodus 14:22-29). Later, in the wilderness, God fed them miraculously with manna, and He guided them in the day by a pillar of cloud and in the night by a pillar of fire, visible representations of His presence with them (Exodus 15:14-15).

Yet, in spite of these repeated demonstrations of His love, guidance, and power, the Israelites still refused to trust Him when He wanted them to enter into the Promised Land. They chose instead to trust the word of ten men who frightened them with their stories of the walled cities and the giant stature of some of the people of the land (Numbers 13:26-33). These events show that God’s further revelation of Himself to us would have no greater effect on our ability to trust Him. Were God to interact in a similar fashion with people living today, we would respond no differently than the Israelites because our sinful hearts are the same as theirs.

The Bible also speaks of a future time when the glorified Christ will return to rule the earth from Jerusalem for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-10). More people will be born on the earth during that reign of Christ. He will rule with complete justice and righteousness, yet, in spite of His perfect rule, the Bible states that at the end of the 1,000 years, Satan will have no trouble raising an army to rebel against Christ’s rule. The future event of the millennium and the past event of the exodus reveal that the problem is not with God insufficiently revealing Himself to man; rather, the problem is with man’s sinful heart rebelling against God’s loving reign. We sinfully crave self-rule.

God has revealed enough of His nature for us to be able to trust Him. He has shown through the events of history, in the workings of nature, and through the life of Jesus Christ that He is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-wise, all-loving, all-holy, unchanging, and eternal. And in that revelation, He has shown that He is worthy to be trusted. But, as with the Israelites in the wilderness, the choice is ours whether or not we will trust Him. Often, we are inclined to make this choice based on what we think we know about God rather than what He has revealed about Himself and can be understood about Him through a careful study of His inerrant Word, the Bible. If you have not already done so, begin a careful study of the Bible, that you may come to know God through a reliance upon His Son, Jesus Christ, who came to earth to save us from our sins, so that we might have sweet companionship with God both now and in a fuller way in heaven one day.

Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org

God deserves ultimate glory because he is the Creator – Bruce Ware (Essential Reading)

glory of GodPhoto credit unknown

God is exclusively God and incomparably God who deserves ultimate glory because he is the Creator of the heavens and the earth. God, as Creator, is independent of all that he has made, whereas we, his creatures, are dependent upon him for everything, and therefore we cannot take credit for anything we have.

Bruce Ware at Mars Hill Church Seattle last week:

Isaiah 46:5 To whom would you liken Me, and make Me equal and compare Me that we would be alike?

Isaiah 46:9-10 “Remember the former things long past, for I am God and there is no other; I am God and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, “My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure.”

My, isn’t it clear that the God of the Bible wants us to know He alone is God and there is no one that is like Him. He alone is deserving of ultimate praise and honor and glory. Now, why is that the case? Why should we be a people who want with all of our hearts, to give to God the glory that alone belongs to Him? And there are many answers in the Bible, but, I picked 3 that I think are very central reasons for understanding the greatness of the glory of God, the exclusivity of His glory, that far surpasses any glory that we would give to anything else or anyone else. Three reasons in particular the Bible upholds.

lake-tekapo-new-zealand

God is exclusively God and incomparably God who deserves ultimate glory because:

1. He is the Creator of the heavens and the earth

Isaiah 40:21-26

21Do you not know? Do you not hear? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22 It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;
23 who brings princes to nothing, and makes the rulers of the earth as emptiness.
24 Scarcely are they planted, scarcely sown, scarcely has their stem taken root in the earth, when he blows on them, and they wither, and the tempest carries them off like stubble.
25 To whom then will you compare me, that I should be like him? says the Holy One.
26 Lift up your eyes on high and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name, by the greatness of his might, and because he is strong in power not one is missing.

My, what an amazing passage that highlights the supremacy of God, and puts an emphasis here on God as Creator. There are 2 things I’d like us to see in relation to God as Creator, that helps us understand why He alone deserves ultimate praise and honor and glory.

  1. God, as Creator, is then independent  of everything that He has made, while we, the creatures are dependent upon Him for everything. God’s independent of everything He has made: It’s so very clear, because God is eternal and existed prior to the universe, that the universe is not necessary for God to be God. He was God, just fine- thank you- before the universe. So when He creates the universe, that does not indicate that somehow God receives something He needs , because He didn’t need the universe to be God prior. In fact, God is self existent, nothing brings him into existence. He is His own basis for existing eternally, and He is self sufficient. That doctrine affirms of God that God possesses within Himself, intrinsically  and eternally everything that is qualitatively good and He does so in infinite measure. Anything that you thing that is qualitatively good, any perfection, any attribute we might think of, that is a good thing, things like righteousness and holiness, wisdom and knowledge, power and goodness, these are possessed within God intrinsically. Nobody gives anything to God that He doesn’t already possess, because He is the possessor of everything that is good. And He possesses it eternally. So, then, when He creates the world, this is not then a world that He needs. He doesn’t need the world He made. But, rather is creating a world that displays  in physical, visible form certain aspects of His own character. It is His wisdom, His knowledge, His power, His beauty put on display in creation in a physical, visible form. This is why the heavens declare the glory, not of the heavens, cause they don’t account for why they are there, rather the heavens declare the glory of God. Why? Because it’s God’s wisdom, God’s beauty, God’s power manifest in the created order. So, God does not depend on the creation He has made. He existed as God, fully, prior to creation, is independent of that created order…
  2. It is also then true, the other side of the coin is this: That the creature, we included in that,  are dependent upon Him for everything. The way Paul puts it in Acts 17:25 “God is not served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He himself gives to all people life, and breath, and all things.” Well, my goodness, if He gives all things to us, how much are we dependent upon Him for? All things! For life and breath, I mean, every breath you have taken just while sitting here, everyone, no exception, is a gift of God to you. He grants us breath by which we live. He grants us everything that we have. THEREFORE, WE CANNOT TAKE CREDIT FOR ANYTHING WE HAVE!

I oftentimes think that we have really missed the mark here in our evangelical subculture, in helping us understand the basis for our humility before God when we point only to the cross of Christ. And of course, it is right to point to the cross of Christ, as a basis for our humility, I mean what can we do to get rid of our own sin? And the answer is nothing. Christ must do that for us and therefore we are humbled before Him, accepting the gift that we could not make happen on our own. And that’s altogether true, but more fundamental than God as a Redeemer is God as Creator, where our very life and every quality that we have is given to us by our Creator. So Paul will ask the question, for example, in 1 Corinthians 4:7 “What do you have that you’ve not received?” It’s a rhetorical question, but what would the answer be- ‘What do you have that you have not received? Nothing’. In other words, anything and everything we have is giftWe’ve received it, we haven’t earned it, we don’t have any right to it. It’s been given to us. And so, Paul goes on to say, “So if you’ve received it, why do you boast as if you’ve not received it?” Exactly! Right?

So, humility before God is very important, dependence upon Him, understanding  He is the one that is the source of every good thing that there is. Everything that is qualitatively good is in God and in nowhere else. No place else. No one else. So, God alone deserves ultimate glory.

God deserves ultimate glory because he is the Creator

This clip is excerpted from the sermon “The Incomparable Glory of God,” the second part of our sermon series Best Sermon Ever. It was preached by Dr. Bruce Ware out of Isaiah 40–45 at Mars Hill Downtown Bellevue and released on August 18. VIDEO by Mars Hill Church Watch the full sermon here: http://jesus.to/1cTmYRw Check out the full Best Sermon Ever series here: http://marshill.com/bestsermonever

Sinclair Ferguson – Creation: An Arena for Praising God

perfect-lake-norwayNORWAY – Photo credit benisawesome.net

Psalm 19:1-2 The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours out speech,
and night to night reveals knowledge.

In this excerpt from his teaching series Who Is the Holy Spirit?, Sinclair Ferguson considers Psalm 19:1-2 and all of creation as a place of worship.

SInclair Ferguson:

What the Spirit is actually doing in Creation, and this becomes typical of everything He does in the pages of Scripture is that He is creating a temple, a meeting place for God to meet with, and to fellowship with His creation and especially with man, and then, in which man can then happily meet with God, have communion with Him, fellowship with Him. Remember how Adam walks with God. And in this temple that God is creating through His Holy Spirit man might be brought to know God, to love God, to trutst God, to glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever.

So, here are two ways, right at the beginning that we can think about the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and especially about His ministry in our lives. He comes to bring form to our formlessness, to bring fullness to our emptiness. And He comes because He wants to restore us to that kind of fellowship with God in which we worship God in His holy temple.

The Spirit does this, first of all, in creation. I don’t think we often think about that, but, the whole creation is actually a temple created for the worship of God, by His image, man. Turn to the Book of Psalms. A very famous statement at the beginning of Psalm 19, verses 1-2. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. If you think about it, what does it remind you of? A church service. In a church service, in worship, there is the declaration of the glory of God, there is the proclamation of His handiwork, there is an outpouring of speech, and there is a revelation of knowledge. And you see, this is why God, through the Spirit has brought order and fulness into the Creation, in order that through that creation we might come to worship Him. And so, the fullness of Creation becomes a pointer for us to the glory of God, and an arena in which we come to praise Him and adore Him. VIDEO by Ligonier Ministries

Full Transcript: http://www.ligonier.org/blog/creation…
Teaching Series: http://www.ligonier.org/store/who-is-…

In Awe of God’s Creation – Comet colliding with the Sun – O Cometa Loveste Soarele – Coplesit de Creatia lui Dumnezeu

Photo credit http://a57.foxnews.com/global

Romanian:

Recent am fost preocupati de efectele devastatoare pe care le poate avea impactul unei comete cu Pamantul. Pentru a ne face o idee cat de periculos este, NASA a surprins momentul in care o cometa loveste Soarele. Rezultatul: o explozie uriasa.

Desi se credea initial ca nicio cometa nu poate trece de “discul de foc” al Soarelui, se pare ca teoriile astronomilor s-au dovedit a fi gresite. Cu o viteza impresionanta si cu o forta uriasa, cometa a trecut de bariera invizibila de foc si a provocat o explozie mare, urmata de un val de flacari de marimea unui tsunami, spun cercetatorii.

Asta ne da o perspectiva realista asupra a ce se va intampla daca un corp celest va intra in coliziune cu planeta noastra. Tari, sau chiar continente vor fi rase de pe fata pamantului in momentul impactului.

In urma acestui video, multi cercetatori s-au intrebat daca nu cumva impactul provocat de comete da nastere la exploziile violente ale soarelui, care ne afecteaza si pe noi. Insa in urma unor studii mai amanuntite, s-a ajuns la concluzia ca exploziile solare sunt independente de impactul cometelor.

(sursa video originala: NASA Goddard’s Flickr)

ENGLISH:

NASA’s solar observatory captured a stunning video of a comet streaking towards the sun between Tuesday and Wednesday — and the aftermath when it collided with the tremendous ball of plasma.

The video, captured by NASA’s Solar & Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), appears to show a fireball jet out following the collision. That’s not quite what happened, NASA explained. Instead, a coronal mass ejection coincidentally blasted out to the right just as the comet approaches and is vaporized by the sun. (Source http://www.foxnews.com)

Report from spaceweather.com: “The comet appears to be a member of the Kreutz family. Kreutz sungrazers are fragments from the breakup of a single giant comet many centuries ago. They get their name from 19th century German astronomer Heinrich Kreutz, who studied them in detail. Several Kreutz fragments pass by the sun and disintegrate every day. Most, measuring less than a few meters across, are too small to see, but occasionally a bigger fragment like this one attracts attention.”
LASCO C3 (2013-08-18 12:42:05 — 2013-08-20 08:42:05 UTC)
Kreutz Sungrazers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreutz_S…
Sungrazing comet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungrazi…
Credit: Helioviewer.org Images provided by SOHO (ESA & NASA)
VIDEO by VideoFromSpace

 

Why does the multiverse need a beginning? Why can it not just be eternal? + What is cosmology and the multiverse

William Lane Craig answers:

The reason the multiverse cannot be beginningless… see his answer by watching the video or my transcript below  the video.

But first:

What is Cosmology?

from Wikipedia, read more here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmology:

Cosmology is the study of the origins and eventual fate of the universe. Physical cosmology is the scholarly and scientific study of the origin, evolution, structure, dynamics, and ultimate fate of the universe, as well as the natural laws that keep it in order. Religious cosmology (or mythological cosmology) is a body of beliefs based on the historical, mythological, religious, and esoteric literature and traditions of creation and eschatology.

Physical cosmology is studied by scientists, such as astronomers, and theoretical physicists; and academic philosophers, such as metaphysicians, philosophers of physics, and philosophers of space and time. Modern cosmology is dominated by the Big Bang theory, which attempts to bring together observational astronomy and particle physics.[2]

Although the word cosmology is recent (first used in 1730 in Christian Wolff’s Cosmologia Generalis), the study of the universe has a long history involving science, philosophy, esotericism and religion. Related studies include cosmogony, which focuses on the origin of the Universe, and cosmography, which maps the features of the Universe. Cosmology is also connected to astronomy, but while the former is concerned with the Universe as a whole, the latter deals with individual celestial objects.

Modern metaphysical cosmology tries to address questions such as:

  • What is the origin of the Universe? What is its first cause? Is its existence necessary? (see monismpantheismemanationism and creationism)
  • What are the ultimate material components of the Universe? (see mechanismdynamismhylomorphismatomism)
  • What is the ultimate reason for the existence of the Universe? Does the cosmos have a purpose? (see teleology)
  • Does the existence of consciousness have a purpose? How do we know what we know about the totality of the cosmos? Does cosmological reasoning reveal metaphysical truths? (see epistemology)

Photo via Wikipedia

Photo description: The Hubble Extreme Deep Field (XDF) was completed in September 2012 and shows the farthest galaxies ever photographed by humans. Except for the few stars in the foreground (which are bright and easily recognizable because only they have diffraction spikes), every speck of light in the photo is an individual galaxy, some of them as old as 13.2 billion years; the observable universe is estimated to contain more than 200 billion galaxies.

What is the Cosmological Argument?

from Carm.org 

  1. Things exist.
  2. It is possible for those things to not exist.
  3. Whatever has the possibility of non existence, yet exists, has been caused to exist.
    1. Something cannot bring itself into existence, since it must exist to bring itself into existence, which is illogical.
  4. There cannot be an infinite number of causes to bring something into existence.
    1. An infinite regression of causes ultimately has no initial cause, which means there is no cause of existence.
    2. Since the universe exists, it must have a cause.
  5. Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause of all things.
  6. The uncaused cause must be God.

Also see this article on ReasonableFaith.org

What is a multiverse?

Also from Wikipedia, read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time,matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them. The term was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James.[1] The various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel universes.

The structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the relationship between the various constituent universes, depend on the specific multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiple universes have been hypothesized incosmology, physics, astronomy, religion, philosophy, transpersonal psychology and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts, parallel universes are also called “alternative universes”, “quantum universes”, “interpenetrating dimensions”, “parallel dimensions”, “parallel worlds”, “alternative realities”, “alternative timelines”, and “dimensional planes,” among others.

VIDEO by drcraigvideos Reasonable Faith forums: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Reasonable Faith’s other Youtube channel:http://www.youtube.com/reasonablefait…

William Lane Craig:

Dr William Lane Craig answered during the 2013 Apologetics Canada Conference question and answer period. (Photo on left via www.faithinterface.com.au)

Any universe that is in a cosmic expansion, on average, over its history cannot be past eternal. And that is true of the multiverse as well, it is true that it is in a state of expansion on average, in its past history. So that can’t be extrapolated to past infinity. And that’s why, remarkably, this amazing theorem shows that even trying to resort to the multiverse to escape the beginning of the universe won’t work. And, by the way, if people are interested, a lecture that Vilenkin gave at the conference in Cambridge last April, celebrating Hawking’s 70th birthday is on youtube. It is very accessible. It is a wonderful lecture that lay people can understand and has power points and in this lecture he surveys contemporary cosmologies, including these multiverse models that try to avert the beginning of the universe, and shows how they fail.

See the Alexander Vilenkin video Dr. William Lane Craig just referred to here:

Did the Universe have a Beginning? Alexander Vilenkin

at the University of Cambridge

VIDEO by firstcauseargument

Alexander Vilenkin (Tufts University) discusses 3 candidate scenarios with ‘no beginnings’ for the universe:

  1. Eternal Inflation
  2. Cyclic evolution
  3. Static seed (emergent universe)

He says, “I’ll tell you my conclusion right away (at the beginning of lecture), that basically, none of these approaches that try to avoid the beginning of the universe work (they are not successful).” Then he discusses the options, one by one:

The question of the historical Adam and why evangelicals are capitulating on this

by STEVEN WEDGEWORTH

creation of man

creation of man (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Modern evangelicalism has always had something of an identity problem. Wanting to be neither Fundamentalism nor Liberalism, it has often found itself unable to sit comfortably in the middle. More often than not, and sometimes with a bit of pressure from either side, it ends up swinging back and forth between the poles, often unable to explain why it isn’t one or the other. Traditionally a commitment to Biblical inerrancy was the one sure thing that all evangelicals could agree upon, but even that, in light of contemporary challenges, is proving inadequate. The question of hermeneutics must (again) be dealt with, as more and more professing evangelicals are re-reading the opening chapters of Genesis as myth. While the particulars of the discussion are not fully uniform (whether one must or should be a “literal” six-day creationist or not), the question of the historical Adam is now quite definitely the new lynchpin. We would like to here lay out some of the consequences of denying the historical Adam in order to substantiate our claim that this is a boundary of orthodoxy, but first a bit of context.

The reason that evangelicals are losing the historical Adam are several, but they all boil down to the dominance of the Darwinistic evolutionary theory, both in the academies and in the media. For both academic and cultural reasons, the denial of this evolutionary theory is shameful, and it is becoming increasingly clear that this theory also demands a sort of polygenesis. Thus the historical Adam cannot be retained. There are certainly those on both sides of the issue who hold out hope for a middle position, but as it currently stands, naturalistic science is basically agreed that the early chapters of Genesis cannot be historical. And so, in the face of this pressure, evangelicals are falling in line.

Read the entire article here - http://calvinistinternational.com/2013/05/10/what-depends-upon-an-historical-adam/

Also read Denny Burke’s article here -

More on the Poison Pill: Responding to Stanley, McKnight, and Bird - The doctrine of scripture is foundational, and at a time when it is so contested it is worth every effort to get it right

A challenge to evangelicals who have backed away from an historic Adam – Vern Poythress

Vern PoythressSCIENCE  A challenge to evangelicals who have backed away from an historic Adam, using a theologically informed look at ape ancestry genetic claims

As the battle between Darwinism and the Bible rages, some evangelicals have backed away from maintaining that Adam and Eve were real, historical individuals created in the way Genesis 2 relates:

“… the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. … So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.” 

In a just-published article from the Westminster Theological Journal, Westminster Theological Seminary professor Vern Poythress brilliantly explains why such a surrender is wrong biblically and scientifically. Poythress, with both a Th.D. and a Harvard Ph.D. in mathematics, is well-positioned to write about both theology and evolutionary theory. He has published 13 books, including Redeeming Science and Redeeming Sociology, and numerous scholarly articles. We post this new one with the author’s andWTJ’s permission. —Marvin Olasky

ADAM VERSUS CLAIMS FROM GENETICS

Did Adam and Eve exist? Does science say otherwise? The human genome project has produced voluminous data about the information contained in human DNA. Various news media and scientists tell us that this information demonstrates our ape ancestry. How do we evaluate these claims?

Click here to read the entire story on Worldmagazine – You will be prompted to scroll through 8 short pages: http://www.worldmag.com/2013/05/a_biblical_and_scientific_adam

Evolution vs. God (38 min Video)

Thanks to Gabi Bogdan for this video!

Read more here - http://www.evolutionvsgod.com

VIDEO by thewayofthemaster

In Awe of God’s Creation – the Asperatus Clouds of New Zealand – Norii Asperatus din Noua Zeelanda – Coplesit de Creatia lui Dumnezeu

Asperatus Clouds Over New Zealand 
Image Credit & Copyright: Witta PriesterExplanation: What kind of clouds are these? Although their cause is presently unknown, such unusual atmospheric structures, as menacing as they might seem, do not appear to be harbingers of meteorological doom. Known informally as Undulatus asperatus clouds, they can be stunning in appearance, unusual in occurrence, are relatively unstudied, and have even been suggested as a new type of cloud. Whereas most low cloud decks are flat bottomedasperatus clouds appear to have significant vertical structure underneath. Speculation therefore holds that asperatus clouds might be related to lenticular clouds that form near mountains, or mammatus clouds associated with thunderstorms, or perhaps a foehn wind – a type of dry downward wind that flows off mountains. Such a wind called the Canterbury arch streams toward the east coast of New Zealand’s South Island. The above image, taken above Hanmer Springs inCanterburyNew Zealand, in 2005, shows great detail partly because sunlight illuminates the undulating clouds from the side.

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries

Vizite unicate din Martie 6,2011

free counters

Va multumim ca ne-ati vizitat azi!


Zilele trec…

Click pe harta pt ora actuala World Time Click on map for timezone

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,422 other followers