GSI Streaming Seminar:
* My time is very limited now, so it's your turn.
Seminars (ppts/audios/videos) are being converted and will be uploaded for YOU to use.
Our Creator's Character
or a distorted
Caricature?
© Sid Galloway BS, M.Div. - Updated June 16, 2010
Just an old sheepdog of the Good Shepherd
Genesis 1:1
Communicating conclusions from 100's of PhD scholars
Supporting the authority of His Word
& the consistency of His character
Human Rights? Slavery? - Animal Rights? Cruelty?
What about God's right to command compassion for all of His creatures?
* See also Biblical Biology Course Online: Scores Notes/Lessons available
** From Dr. John Stott's FOREWARD in the Recommended Book, by International Justice Mission founder and director, Gary Haugen, GOOD NEWS ABOUT INJUSTICE: A Witness of Courage in a Hurting World
"First, what sort of God do we believe in? Is he concerned exclusively with individual salvation? Or does he have a social conscience? . . . . To ask ourselves these questions honestly - about God, Christ, human beings and the church - and to answer them biblically, as Gary Haugen does, is to expose ourselves to radical challenge and change. . . . We are reminded of God's character, of his purpose to work through his people . . . . my advice to would-be readers is 'Don't!' - unless you are willing to be shocked, challenged, persuaded and transformed." [Emphasis Added]
Caricature =
"exaggeration by means of ludicrous distortion of ... characteristics"
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caricature)
* Repetition is an effective learning method, so below are summary thoughts repeated throughout the GSI website: What is KNOWLEDGE? What is the source for accurate knowledge?The Greek term for "knowledge" is gnosis, which is why a person who is not yet convinced that God exists is called an agnostic, meaning one "without knowledge". There are numerous realms of knowledge, therefore many fields of study, such as cosmology, biology, geology, psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc. Consider for a moment, even if you do not yet believe in God our Creator, what it would mean if a Creator God really does exist. If He does, then learning and knowing accurately who our Creator is (i.e., what kind of person, what kind of character) would directly impact every other realm of knowledge and study. The study of God's character and his purpose for "his" creation would then logically overshadow and necessarily direct all other areas of knowledge. The "logical study of God" is called "Theology" (from theos & logikos). Consequently, if a Creator God exists, then our first and foremost academic effort should be, theology, that is to "know" our Creator in order to develop the most accurate and full knowledge of anything else we study in His universe. Keep in mind that even agnostics and atheists hold to a theological perspective that under girds their worldview. (John 17:3 and 23; 1 Kings 8:43; Isa 45:6; 2 Chr 6:33; …) In other words, the best study of "science" in a universe created by a Creator God, an Intelligent Designer, should begin by understanding the "theology of science". Similarly, in order for any branch of "Psychology" (that is, the study of the psyche; Greek for study of the soul) to be the most accurate possible, it would logically need to be based upon a careful "theology of the psyche". The same would be true for cosmology, biology, geology, and sociology. Each field of study or realm of knowledge should fit under the overarching realm of "Theology". The existence of God and subsequent priority of theology does not negate man's ability to discover some of the "what" or "how" about the Creator's world. However, it does negate man's ability to know fully and most accurately the "WHY" regarding the creation - apart from the Creator's revelation about Himself and His purpose. Also, finite and temporal man is especially limited in the ability to “know” the past form and function of creation. [* Perhaps this is why man’s amazing, technological advances have not produced World Order, peace, unity, and security, but rather World Disorder, wars, ethnic holocausts, and now the threat of biological, chemical, and nuclear annihilation.] Please consider one more thing. Suppose that in addition to the existence of our Creator, it is also true that one of his most powerful and intelligence creatures (for example an angelic creature) had turned through free will, self-serving rebellion against its Creator God. If this is also true, then logically that rebel angel's most effective attack against its Creator would be to deceive others by distorting the Creator's true character. This begs the question, is God the Designer of "survival of the fittest", pain, fear, suffering, and death, or is He the Good Shepherd? The theology of science is a foundationally ethical issue, not a peripheral one. |
Character of the Creator -
Good Shepherd or Anti-Shepherd
The majority of people on Earth are convinced that creation was created by a Creator who is "good". This means that they believe our Creator is not only an eternal Being who transcends space and time with the attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence, but also a Being who has the character of omni-benevolence (i.e., "all good").
How did the image of God in Christ replace the old Greco-Roman images of malevolent deities like Zeus, et al, in the lives of a whole culture, an entire empire?
Dr. Thomas Matthews, The Clash of Gods: A Reinterpretation of Early Christian Art, Princeton University Press, 2003, 6-8.
"The new images should not be thought of as simply filling up the voids left by the overthrow of the old, but as actively competing with the old images. The lanky Good Shepherd of Early Christian art wrestled with the muscular Hercules and won; we find him replacing the mighty god on the funerary tables used for offerings to the dead." [Emphasis Added]
How is the image of the Good Shepherd now being replaced and returned to the characterless and impotent "values" of the old pagan societies?
Dr. J. D. Hunter, University of Virginia, Dept of Sociology:
"The Evangelical world is not only difficult for outsiders to understand (consider the caricatures that abound) but also nearly impossible for them to penetrate" . . . .
"Character is formed in relation to convictions and is manifested in the capacity to abide by those convictions even in, especially in, the face of temptation. . . . . Values are truths that have been deprived of their commanding character. . . . . We want character but without unyielding conviction; ... strong morality but without the emotional burden of guilt or shame; ... virtue but without justifications that invariably offend; we want good without having to name evil; ... decency without the authority to insist upon it; ... moral community without any limitations to personal freedom ... we want what we cannot possibly have on the terms that we want it."
[Emphasis Added]THE DEATH OF CHARACTER: Moral Education in an Age Without Good or Evil, 2001,
Dr. James Davison Hunter, University of Virginia, Distinguished Professor of Religion, Culture, and Social Theory. Since 1995, Professor Hunter has served as the Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, a university-based, interdisciplinary research center concerned with understanding contemporary cultural change and its implications for individuals, institutions, and society.
Note below Dr. Hunter's analysis of the foundational cornerstone upon which effective character and morality must be based - i.e., the root of "good" consequent fruit:
". . . benevolent consequences ... [are] not rooted in a desire to change the world... but rather ... an expression of a desire to honor the creator of all goodness, beauty, and truth."
TO CHANGE THE WORLD: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World, 2010, Dr. James Davison Hunter, University of Virginia, Distinguished Professor of Religion, Culture, and Social Theory.
** Qualification - while Matthews' and Hunter's books are helpful, scholarly analyses of cultural morality throughout history going back to the beginning - i.e., Creation, nevertheless a consistently moral worldview can only be fully biblical if it is based upon the character of the Creator of Eden ---
not "survival of the fittest", violent pain, fear, dysfunction, disease, death.
When you think about God,
what image comes to your mind?
How do you know if it is accurate?
What about the God of the Bible?
Are you sure you know what it really says about God?
Is the presentation of God in the Old Testament the same as in the New?
Is the Medieval Roman Catholic view of God biblically accurate?
What about the Reformers presentation of God?
How about Oprah's view, or the ones in recent Hollywood movies? Accurate or distorted caricatures?
If the Bible really is God's self-revelation in history (His/story),
then it is our source for knowing His true character as the infinite and eternal Creator of all things from the beginning - transcending His created space/time/matter/energy universe. The Bible from Genesis to the Revelation reveals our Creator as a Good Shepherd of self-sacrificial love, not a Great Predator of "survival of the fittest" (not an Anti-Shepherd).
Sadly, many theological scholars, for whom I have great respect in many areas, are unwittingly locked into traditions. They need to more fully reform their "Doctrine of God". We all are finite, fallible people who see (interpret) things through perceptual filters filled with traditional, cultural assumptions - not to mention the peer pressure of academic political correctness. Please remember that political correctness is not always "liberal". Those of us in "conservative" circles, both theologically and politically, are subject to the same temptations and tendencies to "fear men" and follow the path of greatest peer esteem. I plead with my fellow believers (both scholars and non-scholars) to beware of these peer pressure tendencies.
Please think carefully about the implications that your doctrine of creation inescapably has regarding the doctrine of the character of our Creator. If you and your exegesis bow to the prevailing majority opinion in the shifting fields of science, then your "theos-ology", the conclusions of your study of God, are at risk of becoming less than biblical.
For example, if you include in your theology of creation that suffering, dysfunction, disease, and death (of nephesh creatures) existed before Adam's sin and separation from God, then you have grossly distorted the image and character of our Creator. You have unwittingly portrayed the Creator as a Great Predator, the Author of "survival of the fittest", pain, fear, suffering, and death, instead of the truly "Good" Shepherd. Unintentionally, such compromise become functional blasphemy.
Unavoidably connected to the above compromise is the common error of embracing the majority hypothetical assumptions about the fossil record and the age of the earth. To embrace the majority assumption that the fossils in rock layers represent millions of years of nephesh death and suffering prior to Adam's sin and separation, effectively denies or at least undercuts, the doctrine that "the wages of sin is death". Please remember that the majority does not prove authority. Majority opinion, especially in science, has often been overturned to the shame and embarrassment of those who trusted it as fact.
True science and Scripture are complementary, not contradictory. The globally catastrophic flood, comprehensively understood, fully explains the fossils and rock layers as post-fall effects of sin and separation. Such horror and death did not exist before Adam's sin and separation. Surely it was not the design of God, as if His "Way" was survival of the cruelest.
Please, do your homework. We are all busy and must decide where to invest our time in research, writing, teaching, etc. In this light, be aware that the best research and writings (and profoundly simple yet comprehensive summary DVD's) from leading creationists scholars in science and theology are easily available to you. You have no excuse, my friends. To claim ignorance regarding the basic evidences now known about how the best of science (astrophysics, geophysics, biology, genetics) supports the natural, simple reading of creation and the flood in Scripture, is an intellectual cop out. (see the "Resources" links to get a start)
"Creationists" and the Media
Did you know that thousands of PhD scholars are creationists?
Do you know who they are? If not, then why not?
Is it possible the media & politically correct academia have manipulated you?
Are you certain your image of creationists is accurate and fair?
An example of a false creationists caricature:
Since the following sample scientists do exist ...
. . . why do PBS, Dawkins, et al pretend that
no reputable scientists
doubt macroevolution?
(Macroevolution = vertical change into new kinds by mutational errors)
Are Dawkins, et al simply ignorant of truth or deliberately deceptive?
Is Public Broadcasting Service becoming a Propaganda Broadcasting System?
See below for details on these & other scholars . . . .
Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, PhD (Physical Chemistry)
Dr. Sarfati, blindfold, simultaneously playing 12 chess opponents
"Dr Jonathan Sarfati obtained a B.Sc. (Hon's.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled ‘A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules’. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high-temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring- and cage-shaped molecules."
"One of Jonathan’s other passions is chess, and like most things that he undertakes, he sets a standard few in the world can match. A former New Zealand Chess Champion, he represented New Zealand in three Chess Olympiads, and he has drawn a tournament game with former world champion Boris Spassky (chess players might want to play through the game here). The International Chess Federation (abbreviated to FIDE for its French name Fédération Internationale des Échecs) awarded him the title of F.I.D.E. Master (FM) in 1988. At many CMI conferences and camps, he has become famous for his ‘chess challenges’ against multiple players simultaneously—while blindfolded, with his ‘seeing’ opponents’ moves called out to him. At a recent CMI event in Sydney, Australia, he achieved a ‘personal best’ by playing 12 opponents at once in this way.4 A visiting creationist, a full professor at a leading UK university, was ‘text messaging’ his wife, saying ‘this is astounding—world-class—the world’s media should be here!’"
Atheist, Dr. Richard Dawkins of Oxford says:
"No reputable scientists doubt it [evolution]"
p. 9, The Greatest Show on Earth
However, Dawkins is fully aware of the 1,000's of respected scientists who now reject macro (vertical) evolution. See the following sample lists of scientists:
- Discovery Institute List: Dissent from Darwinism
- CMI List of Creation Scientists
- AiG List of Creation Scientists
The sincere question each of us is responsible to ask & answer
by careful examination of the evidence is:
Which scientific interpretation best fits the evidence?
If you choose to refuse to thoroughly investigate so you can achieve a truly informed and evidential decision, then you have chosen the "blind faith" that you accuse others of embracing.
The choice is yours . . . . .
Christ
vs.
Survival
of the Fittest
Compassion vs. Cruelty
- Creation vs. Evolution DIALOG - Questions & Answers (Sid)
- Did Scientist Create Life (Cell) from Non-Life? (Dr. Sarfati May 2010)
Dr. David Berlinski:
"It is for this reason - no science, little evidence - that the kinship between human beings and the apes has been promoted in contemporary culture as a moral virtue as well as a zoological fact. It functions as a hedge against religious belief, and so it is eagerly advanced." [emphasis added]
(from Berlinski's book, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism & Its Scientific Pretensions, 2008)
Berlinski received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University and was later a postdoctoral fellow in mathematics and molecular biology at Columbia University. He has authored works on systems analysis, differential topology, theoretical biology, analytic philosophy, and the philosophy of mathematics, as well as three novels. He has also taught philosophy, mathematics and English at Stanford, Rutgers, the City University of New York and the Université de Paris. In addition, he has held research fellowships at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria and the Institute des Hautes Études Scientifiques. He lives in Paris.
"Christ vs. Survival of the Fittest" Presentation . . .
-- Power Point Presentation
----- PDF version 6 slides per page
----- Expanded version (much more evidence, yet a larger file)
What do I personally believe about "evolution"?
It's been my privilege not only to sit under the teaching of world renowned scientists who have become creationists due to new evidences, but also to interview many of these internationally respected scholars personally. The result has been my deepening conviction that macro (vertical) evolution is mathematically and scientifically impossible. Natural selection and adaptive change within genetic limits are real, but particles to people evolution is an unsubstantiated, nonscientific, hypothetical belief.
* Why do most scientists believe the Earth is old and not young?
-- Excellent article by Dr. Russ Humphreys, astrophysicist
- Atheistic evolution says God does not exist -
Theistic evolution proclaims God to be a monster.
"Informed historians of science, including non-Christians,
have pointed out that modern science first flourished
under a Christian worldview,
while it was stillborn in other cultures
such as ancient Greece, China, and Arabia."
Jonathan Sarfati, PhD,
THE GREATEST HOAX ON EARTH:
REFUTING DAWKINS ON EVOLUTION, p. 310
UK Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher:
"I think back to many discussions in my early life when we all agreed that if you try to take the fruits of Christianity without its roots,
the fruits will wither. And they will not come again
unless you nurture the roots.
But we must not profess the Christian faith and go to Church simply because we want social reforms and benefits or a better life,
the responsibility that come with freedom
and the supreme sacrifice of Christ expressed so well in the hymn:
'When I survey the wondrous Cross,
On
which the Prince of glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.'"
Thatcher, M., Christianity & Wealth, Speech to the
Church of Scotland General Assembly, 21 May 1988; www.margaretthatcher.org
Is this "NATURE'S WAY"? - It's not God's Way
A radio caller said:
"Disasters are NATURE'S WAY of weeding out the weak"
- the caller does not know the Good Shepherd's Way
- her heart sounds hardened by an evil philosophy
Haiti Earthquake: The above quote was spoken by a woman radio caller to a talk show in New Orleans about the quake (FM 95.7 at 9am Wednesday January 20th)
So why do disasters happen in God's creation?
Please study the articles and links in our GSI website to find out.
To help the hurting through trustworthy ministries:
Recommended Services . . .
- Doubleharvest: Sowing Seeds of Life (100% to the needy in Haiti)
- Our young friend Jeremy Schurke (Hatian orphanage missionary)
DEVOLUTION / DEGENERATION
Cultural cruelty is the consequence of evolutionary philosophy:
(Hitler, Stalin, Marx, Manson, Dahmer, et al . . . )
- Darwinian Roots of Nazi Legal System,
by Dr. Augusto Zimmerman, PhD
Brazilian-born internationally known legal scholar and a Vice-President of the Australian Society of Legal Philosophy
Charles Darwin and the children of the evolution
Nov 8, 2009,
Times online UK
By Dennis Sewell
RE: Shooter, Pekka-Eric Auvinen
styled himself a 'social Darwinist'
"[Darwin] The naturalist outraged the church, prompting a bitter debate that still sets creationists against evolutionists. Now a sinister link has emerged between his work and the recent spate of high-school killings by crazed, nihilistic teenagers."
"You wouldn't know from the celebrations of Charles Darwin's life this year that the amiable Victorian gent portrayed in those TV drama-docs pottering around the garden of his home in Kent has been fingered as a racist, an apologist for genocide, and the inspiration of a string of psychopathic killers."
"With hardly a mention that his name has been associated with some of the most infamous crimes of modern history, it is as if there has been an unspoken agreement to accentuate the positive. . . ."
* See related, recommended Resources, Media, Organizations
REMEMBER,
- Biblical Creation is in sync with 1000's of respected PhD scientists:
* Dr. Raymond Damadian, Inventor of the MRI
* Dr. John Baumgardner, World renowned geophysicist, Los Alamos
* Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist, author Earth's Catastrophic Past
* Dr. John Sanford, Respected geneticist, Cornell University
-- author of Genetic Entropy: The Mystery of the Genome
* Dr. Russ Humphreys, Astrophysicist, Sandia National Labs, etc.
-- author of (Starlight and Time) (Evidences Young World Booklet)
* Dr. John Hartnett, Prof. Univ. West Australia, astrophysics, etc.
-- author: (Dismantling the Big Bang) (Starlight Time New Physics)
* etc, etc . . . . .
Why are so many fossils found in piles
with hundreds of dead things?
Do animals normally die in massive piles,
or is this evidence of a flood?
Would a good God design "survival of the fittest" as the WAY of life?
"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, . . . .
. . . having been originally breathed by the Creator . . .
. . . from so simple a beginning
endless forms
most beautiful and most wonderful
have been,
and are being evolved."
Charles Darwin
(Quoted from Washington State University - world civilizations reader)
What kind of character does Darwin's "creator" of death reflect?
More Sample Power Point Slides:
What big teeth you have. Why? Designed for what purpose?
Have things changed since the original design of the Designer?
Is human nature "good" or naturally selfish?
By the way, why have insects not changed since fossil formed?
What is the fruit of the evolutionary philosophical root?
If God did NOT design violence, then why the big teeth?
And claws were for digging and climbing,
yet have adapted within limits of size and shape
after the fall in a sin caused "survival of the fittest"
Could "survival of the fittest"
have been
the Creator's original Way?
Please apply "critical thinking" (logikos biblical reasoning)
If 0 + 0 = 0, then how can
Nothing + Nobody produce Everything?
If mutations cannot generate the new information, then . . .
"Ancient" ants "fossilized", trapped, in amber tree resin
- identical to modern ants -
why no change over time?
What do fossil dinosaurs really tell us?
What can we "know" from them?
Animal kinds go extinct every year
- extinction does not require eons of time -
How can multiple sets of tracks be preserved so well?
What is more logical - slow sediment or rapid flood deposition?
What frightening catastrophe event were they ALL running from?
Astrophysics, the Age of the Universe
- Time Scales - Einstein's Relativity . . .
The following quote from creationary astrophysicist Dr. John Hartnett demonstrates the wonderful way science magnifies the accuracy of God's Word in Genesis:
"The simplest way to calculate the age of the universe, within the Big Bang worldview, is to wind its expansion back to zero. This is called the 'Hubble Age' because it is the inverse of the Hubble expansion constant. The best current estimate is 15 billion years, with an uncertainty of +/- 2 billion years."
". . . . While we do not accept all the assumptions that underlie these figures, there is no doubt that distance alone, plus a constant speed of light, yields a light-transit time far in excess of the biblical time scale, so we do accept the idea of an "old" cosmos within its own frame of reference, but the entire universe is young in earth-clock terms."
"Time dilation models can explain . . . . light from those distant galaxies took billions of years of galaxy time to reach earth, but the light that arrived here on creation day 4 (of earth-time, having traveled billions of years in galaxy-time) was the first light emitted from the newly created galaxies. So Adam and Eve would have been able to view them (had they been able to see them through a modern telescope) in their created positions. We today are seeing them 6,000 years after their creations as measured by earth clocks (even though the light took billions of years as measured by galaxy clocks to get here)."
[emphasis added]
Dismantling the Big Bang: God's Universe Rediscovered, pp. 199-201, by John Hartnett, PhD (astrophysics - University of Western Australia)
- See also Starlight, Time, and the New Physics, by Dr. Hartnett, in which he expands mathematically on the models of Einstein and Carmeli to answer many of the past problems associated with both the big bang and creation models.
- See also the article by Dr. Mark Harwood entitled, "How can distant starlight reach us in just 6,000 years?". Dr. Harwood's research has focused around the development and use of radio telescopes.
Please remember that:
- Einstein showed time is a real property of the universe . . .
- Time is relative and actually changes due to gravity, velocity . . .
- Einstein's theories have been expanded by Carmeli, Hartnett . . .
- The universe expanded (God "stretched out the heavens")
- Its age literally depends on your space/time perspective . . .
- So a relatively young universe can be billions of light-years in size.
Seminar Brochure:
Past Power Point (200 Slides - This presentation is updated regularly)
SEMINAR: "Creator's Way: Never Survival of the Cruelest"
Past articles, ppts, and seminars on this subject are being reworked ...
Two Decades writing - 100's of articles - 1,000's of files -Not gone
- The OLD resources are not gone, just retired (archived).
* As I upgrade the site piece by piece, trying to teach myself Dreamweaver CSS :-), some pages could temporarily not work well . . .