Science pretends to be God

What is the difference between trusting science and trusting God? Doesn’t God use science to save us from disease? The difference is that we trust God even if He does not save us from disease.

Job 13:15 Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him:

This cartoon has many problems; mainly, that the “God” that is speaking is more like “science” than the God of the Bible.

Much of the opposition to the Biblical account of creation is due to a deeply ingrained worship of science in modern society as able to discover the mysteries of the universe. The popular conception of the universe is due to the appeal of science fiction, and the mental exercise of imagining the expansion of the human spirit into space, and church people fall for it and use the excuse of “seeing the glory of God in the stars.”

But science fiction is fiction. It is fully compatible with atheism, and is exciting to the fallen human spirit because it is an escape from the constraints imposed by God in the Bible. Science fiction is worship of a different god, and it lets us know why the Israelites had so much trouble doing what God said, and instead following the gods of the Canaanites. It’s just plain fun for the mind not renewed by the Bible.

April Fool Joke

By their own free will, the leaders of our local church, affiliated with the Southern Batist Convention, have declared their church irrelevant. They have been tricked into agreeing to shut down at least until Wednesday service on April 1, which is very appropriate, because a very smart influence, which we could call Bigfoot, has played a really good April Fool joke on them. They have admitted to society that attendance at their church is not as important as shopping at Walmart, which continues to be open and available. 

I am horrified at this. They are actively imposing a shutdown on the members, as if the church itself were under their control, not that of God. They argue that practical considerations override the need for meeting in worship. There were no doubt practical considerations that the martyrs of the church should have taken into account, using the same reasoning. They should have denied Christ, and lived. God help us all.

No doubt they will practice social distancing on me for having pointed this out to them, but they are free to do so.

The pastor tells me I am being “divisive.” I believe that this means that my viewpoint, and consequently  I myself, will be no longer welcome at his church, since I know he uses the ESV:

Titus 3:10–As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him. [The ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®) is adapted from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. All rights reserved.]

He has an excuse for the mistake he is making, in that the ESV tells us to have nothing to do with Jesus.

In the ESV, Jesus says: 

Luke 12:51 — Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. (ESV)

Then it uses the exact same word to tell us to have nothing to do with such people.

Titus 3:10,11 — As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. (ESV)

Real Giants

This photo above is the only part of the giant ape that the scientific community calls Gigantopithecus that has been found, except scattered teeth. It looks rather human, don’t you think? Maybe they just don’t recognize that they have the jawbone of a real giant? The photo is from the History Channel.

Gorilla jaw

This is a gorilla jawbone. Note the large canines not found in the Giganto jaw. I understand they have never been able to get DNA from a Giganto bone or tooth. But if they got human DNA from it, they would just think it was contamination, and not report it. So that would be consistent with at least some of these bones and teeth being from giant humans.

A big foot

This photo of a 29-inch-long footprint was reported in the New York Journal, August 30, 1896. It was one of a series of left-right prints found with footprints of Pleistocene mammals on the island of Victoria in northern Canada, which is isolated enough to be a hideout of Bigfoot. Some scientists believed it to be the footprint of a giant human, but others rejected that and said it had been made by known animals.

Humans with dinosaurs

The Taylor trail area of dinosaur and human footprints, as shown on the website of Dinosaur Valley State Park.

The Taylor trail of human footprints with dinosaurs is usually under water and is filled in with silt. No attempt is made to preserve it, and nothing in the state park leads to it or marks where it is. It is only preserved by exhibits in the local Creation Evidence Museum, and this overlay which conveys the impression that all prints are dinosaurian.

This is an analysis of 14 prints in the trail, which I think refers to the trail starting at the lower right and going to the left upward at about 20 degrees from horizontal. It was done by Dr. Don Patton, whose degree is in education with undergraduate work in geology.

One of the prints, -3B, is preserved as a copy in an exhibit in the creation museum. This is the one that was said to have been destroyed by pro-evolution zealots, so there would not be evidence to support doubt of the atheistic religion that says that dirt did magic and turned itself into people over millions of years. We see that humans often stepped in dinosaur prints rather than in the deep mud, and multiple dinosaurs often stepped in one track for the same reason.
Taylor -3b

There is no way for these prints to exist if one presupposes that man evolved from an apelike ancestor, which did not arise until long after the dinosaurs died out. They simply cannot exist, so they are ignored or explained away rather than looking at the evidence and reevaluating the dogma.  The dogma of evolution as the final answer about the origin of humans disproves any and all evidence that shows that it is false, rather than the evidence disproving the dogma.

We see this logical fallacy, called “affirming the consequent,” often in the scientific establishment. It is why bloodletting was used as a common treatment for disease as late as the eighteenth century. Bloodletting persisted into the 20th century and was recommended by Sir William Osler in the 1923 edition of his textbook The Principles and Practice of Medicine.