Search This Blog

Saturday, November 22, 2008

"You Foolish Anglicans"

How wonderful man is - taking just a minute glob of chemicals he has been able to create a new windpipe for a needy woman, Claudia Castillo.

Part of a windpipe had been taken from the dead body of a 51 year old woman, it was washed to remove all her own cells. At the same time stem cells were taken from Ms Castillo's own bone marrow and grown to produce about six million cartilage cells, which were grown on the scaffold that was the part of the windpipe taken from the dead woman and had been grafted into Ms Castillo.

In a short space of time, the long term bedridden and breathing afflicted Ms Castillo was able to breath normally and resume a normal life.

I repeat, how wonderful man is! This is the herald of many body part creations we will see in coming years.

Contrast this wonder of man with the stumbling, bumbling, time consuming, frustration, death, disease and mutation riddled manner used by the 'god' of the bible many Theistic Evolutionists of the the Sydney Anglican Diocese present to the world as the creator of life.

What a sham! Who in their right mind could believe in such a god when man will able to do far better in shorter time. Nothing will be beyond man as he accelerates the arranging and rearranging of globs of chemicals. Man is the master of his own destiny. He has destroyed any slender reed of credibility that had been given to metaphysical source of origins. All religions will have been consigned to the heap of invention of primitive man bereft of understanding.

As one Theistic Evolutionist once said "Jesus didn't have the scientific knowledge we now have!"

You foolish Anglicans! Who has bewitched you?

Can't you even see the true God when He has revealed so much of Himself to you? Reflect for a moment what was done to Ms Castillo to retrieve her stem cells. Doesn't it take your mind back to the Genesis 2 incident when God created woman in the first place. God put Adam to sleep and took one of his ribs. Why? Because within the marrow of Adam's rib were his XY chromosomes. All God had to do was remove the Y chromosome and what happens? The X chromosome repeats itself and there you have woman - Eve. Additionally, if God, when removing Adam's rib, 'peeled' it out of the periosteum and left the periosteum intact then Adam's rib would have regrown.

The aforesaid criticism of Theistic Evolutionism is a simplistic observation but remains the valid vacuum Theistic Evolutionists will find themselves in.

On a greater level, stem cell research and manipulation makes it abundantly clear that life is much more than a minute glob of chemicals - despite the contention of Darwinists that life arose from the latter base ingredients.

The DNA that rides on stem cells is an ordered information system - a code for life - the genetic code. A fixity of code that makes it possible for researchers to conclude prospects for success in Ms Castillo's case. Had there not been any fixity, had there only been prospects of randomness then what would be the hope of pursuing this operation? Darwinism's key foundation is randomness. The genetic code is ordered to a certain fixity - it does allow variation within a kind - and it is why women don't give birth to crocodiles or other species.

When have you ever seen a coded system (ie information system) arise without an intelligent mind behind it? eg Morse Code, Rosetta Stone, music score, language, computer software/hardware and building plans. How much more then is it necessary for a super mind to be behind the genetic code for all living things?

Whoever heard or saw an intelligent mind purposely order through a process of redundancies? Yet such is what Theistic Evolutionists attribute to their creator. To these I say consider what the Lord Jesus Christ was doing when turning water into good quality wine in an instant through only a thought. Consider also the feeding of the 5,000 and the 4,000. Behold here is your Creator! In Him all things hold together (Col. 1:17).

You Theistic Evolutionists need to consider very carefully what you are doing. The creator you present to the world is not the true Creator. What you are doing is degrading Jesus Christ.

You are there among those who spat on the Lord Jesus Christ when He was under assault from the world.

Neil

Thursday, November 20, 2008

New Blog

Critias, thanks for your info about the new blog. I'll add it to the blog list soonish. I wonder if it's Moore plant?

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Chesterton

Nice blast from the past in this article on Chesterton.

Funny how the basic arguments remain unrebutted, and ironically overlooked by the Lords of the Hill up at Moore College.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Leupold Genesis part 4 date of comp

In answering the question, At what time was Genesis written? We are, of course, entirely, in the field of conjecture. It seems highly probable that the bulk, if not practically all of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, was written after the fashion of a kind of journal, especially those parts embodying specific words of direction given by God. This would naturally suggest some introductory work like Genesis, which could easily have been written by Moses during the time of the Wilderness Wanderings, which extended over thirty-eight years.

Since all the things recorded in Genesis transpired before Moses' day by more than four hundred years at the least, the question arises, Did Moses have sources available for compiling the Genesis account as we have it? We cannot deny the possibility that God may have revealed to Moses the entire subject matter of Genesis. On the other hand, since sources were, , no doubt, available and reliable, we see no reason why Moses should not have used all available material and, being guided in his task by the Spirit of inspiration, have produced an essential portion of divine revelation. For it seems highly probable that godly men preserved a reliable record of God's revelation and dealings with men, and that with most painstaking care. The Creation record was obtainable only by revelation, which revelation would have seemed essential for Adam. This as well as all other truth that was left to him, as well as a record of his own experiences required but few links in the chain of tradition to bring it down to Joseph's time. For a careful examination of the Biblical genealogies (Gen. 5 and 11) reveals that Adam lived till the time of Lamech; Lamech to the time of Shem; Shem to the time of Jacob; Jacob would, without a doubt, transmit what he knew to Joseph. Since even Abraham already lived in a literary age, and Judah carried a seal (Gen. 38:18), and Joseph was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, it seems utterly impossible that these men should have refrained from committing this valuable and reliable tradition to writing. Such tradition in written form Moses might well have found in his day and made extensive use of, nor would such use conflict with inspiration in as much as later historical books, especially Kings and Chronicles, testify to the abundant use of source materials.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Down Among The Dead Men.

Moore Theological College is the driving force behind the Episcopalian Diocese of Sydney for it is from this institution that Clergy are trained who go out to be the "Cure of Souls" and fulfil the Divine Mission in the Diocese. Indeed, it is the desire of many within the Diocese that graduates of Moore Theological College engage in church planting outside the Diocesan boundary.

More than that, some seek to have Moore graduates installed into theological institutions around the globe (doesn't that strike you as odd - a Diocese failing to achieve church growth within itself except, as some have reported here, without transfer growth from declining denominations, having the audacity to inflict its inadequacies on another Diocese which may already be experiencing what Sydney Diocese cannot achieve - church growth!). Consider the recent comments of Robert Doyle in the recent 'Moore Matters" publication where he says "Moore College has considerable experience preparing people for missionary service. ... When you take into account our networking with institutions other than Anglican, the list, is of course longer [he had earlier named some non Episcopalian theological colleges]. In a hostile world, and too often in the context of deeply unfaithful Christian denominations, we need to support each other. Several of these colleges have our graduates on faculty; many others have a history of contact, support and service. The abundant gifts and resources that God has blessed us with at Moore and amongst our constituency, and the law of the nearest neighbour, make it imperative that as far as God continues to give us opportunity, we need to produce more theological educators, and work outside our comfort zones."

Yeah! that'd be right! A Diocese in an African country has been blessed with a large congregation of believers who accept God at his word in Genesis and its reward is to be inflicted with the Moore collage of possible beliefs on origins none of which involves taking God at his word.

I wonder whether it ever enters the head of Moore 'Collage' (for that may be the more apt title) graduates that they might be more a hindrance to church growth than a help? A Diocese so reliant on what comes out of its theological institution for the growth of the Diocese ought easily be able to assess the health of its theological institution by the church growth seen shouldn't it? Of course! Well how does it look? Not good at all when you remove the "smoke and mirrors" of transfer growth from denominations experiencing advanced theological decline.

Perhaps you might hold out hope for the future because of the Diocesan Missionary Statement and the much anticipated (or is it feared?) Connect 09? Well, let me inform you of an incident giving clear insight into the future for the Diocese, its Mission and its worth to the church abroad. Remember, Moore Theological 'Collage' is the engine room for mission flowing from the Diocese.

I heard last Saturday morning on the radio three people speaking of the Newtown Festival proposed for the following day (Sunday 9th Nov). It was said that it was a wonderful festival and the previous year it had attracted 80,000 people. Now that is an impressive figure of attendance and certainly worth a look. So off I went the next day and in my journey there I noticed how remarkably close the festival site was to Moore 'Collage', only a few hundred metres from the institution. Upon entry to the site I was overwhelmed by the number of stalls and the multitude of people just browsing around, most of whom I suspect are "dead in their sins". Surely, you would think, there would be at least one church making the most of the opportunity (you know what Robert Doyle said - "as far as God continues to give us opportunity") especially Moore 'Collage' students, but no, my walk around the site failed to identify any stall there representing Moore 'Collage' or a church. What a lost opportunity! A crowd of over 80,000 people ignored by the alleged missionary college to the world and by local churches. I did see one fellow ambling through the milling crowd wearing a name tag with "St Stephens, Newtown" on it but for all it was worth he might have just stumbled out of nearby St Stephens Church, Newtown, having mistaken the festival crowd for the crowd around the church morning-tea urn.

What I did see, however, was group with a stall who were keenly proselytizing the passing crowd. It was a group calling themselves Sydney Atheists. So consider the scene. Here we are on the eve of Connect 09. Within a few hundred metres of the the engine room for mission within the Diocese is a crowd of over 80,000 people just browsing around and who is there to reach them? The Atheists!

My friends, I cannot help but have seen a vision of the effectiveness of Connect 09. In year 2010, when measuring the effectiveness of Connect 09, remember Newtown Festival 2008 ... Atheists 1 vs Moore 'Collage' 0.

Sam Drucker

Sunday, November 2, 2008

In God We Trust, well, it depends ...

The latest edition of Southern Cross, the Sydney Anglican monthly newspaper, has a story with a small and large caption. The small caption reads "DICKSON DOCO IN HISTORIC COUP". The large caption reads "Uncovered: groundbreaking find backs Jesus' divinity".

The article includes a photo of John Dickson squatting beside a floor mosaic containing a memorial inscription saying "God Jesus Christ". The Southern Cross article goes on to speak of the potential the mosaic provides for refuting claims from some atheists and popular authors that early Christians did not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

Christians trusting in the Word of God have no cause to worry about archaeological finds. God's Word is true and we can only expect to find things of the world which confirm this.

There is something telling in this find and the comments of John Dickson.

He is recorded as saying "Here is extraordinary physical evidence from the century before Constantine and the Council of Nicaea that Christians, including Roman officials, were worshipping Jesus as divine." John Dickson gets excited because of the testimony of man (in this instance it was a woman, Akeptous, who commissioned the words "... offered this table in memorial of the God Jesus Christ") yet when questioned about the veracity of the Words of God at Exodus 20:8-11 John Dickson is reported to have said in Sydney a few years ago "Well, I believe God is using a literary device".

Makes you wonder doesn't it as to who he is prepared to give the greater authority to, man or God?

Neil

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Leupold Genesis part 3 Mosaic authorship

We shall not now trace down how the Old Testament in its later books historical as well as prophetic strongly supports the idea of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and by implication also of Genesis. The critic, misreading the evidence, misdates all these books, and so the argument means nothing to him. The man who is not affected by critical arguments can find proof more ample than we can here reproduce in the writings of Hengstenberg, Keil, Rupprecht and Moeller.

The support that the New Testament lends to our position is singularly strong and, for that matter, even decisive on the whole issue, at least for him who believes in the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. It is sufficient in these introductory remarks merely to list the major passages as such, passages that all refer to the Mosaic authorship of the whole or of parts of the Pentateuch. In the Gospels we find: (Mt 8:4; 19:7, 8; 23:2; Mk 1:44; 7:10; 10:3, 4; 12:26); (Lu 5:14; 16:29, 31; 20:37; Joh 3:14; 5:45; 6:32; 7:19; 7:22, 23). Aside from these passages which are from the lips of Christ Himself there are the remarks of the evangelists found (Lu 24:27, 44; Joh 1:17). To the apostles must be ascribed the following words: (Ac 3:22; 13:39; 15:1, 5, 21; 26:22; 28:23; Ro 10:5, 19; 1Co 9:9; 2Co 3:15). To attribute ignorance on matters involved in literary criticism to Christ or to inspired apostles is unwarranted assumption. To class Christ's attitude as accommodation to prevalent opinion grows out of failure to apprehend the fact that Christ is absolute Truth. Any two or three of the above passages are sufficient to indicate to him that weighs their evidence that to Christ and to His apostles the Torah (the Pentateuch) was Mosaic.