Matthew 5:45 “That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”
‘Carbon dioxide is a wonderful gas. It occurs in the atmosphere at an average concentration of 404 parts per million by volume (ppm). Plants need carbon dioxide to grow. This is the principle source from which plants derive the carbon compounds that they require. Green plants use chlorophyll to catalyze a reaction between carbon dioxide and water vapor that produces sugars and also some free oxygen. Greater concentrations of carbon dioxide will cause faster growth in plants. For example, large greenhouses in Britain used to pump in extra carbon dioxide to help tomato plants grow. The optimum concentration of carbon dioxide for plant growth is 2,000 ppm – 5 times greater than normal concentrations. Yet, climate change advocates claim that even the 400 ppm that we have is too high. So the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has declared that carbon dioxide is a pollutant.
The IPCC has determined that human-generated carbon dioxide – generated by industrial processes – is causing the Earth to get warmer. That there is a continuous increase in global temperature is by no means certain. Nevertheless, 20th century data does indeed suggest a correlation between carbon dioxide concentration and average global temperature. Could this be a case of cause and effect?
Increase in concentration of carbon dioxide actually follows temperature rises rather than the reverse. If there is any cause and effect, it would appear that it is the temperature rises which causes the increase in carbon dioxide – possibly by warmer oceans dissolving less CO2.
Whether you are a creationist or not ICR’s website is worth going to and seeing what is available. Hopefully after a visit you will visit often and perhaps if you are an evolutionist you will even begin to question evolution and just believe the Word of God.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Matthew 10:24 “The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.”
‘As Christians, and especially as Christian parents, many of us have negative comments to make about what happens in school science lessons. In so many areas, it is often easier to criticize and break down than to build up something new. Many years ago, I came across a fascinating yet simple curriculum model idea that would be of considerable help in many Christian education situations.
In their book, Fighting the Secular Giants, Stephen Thomas and David Freeman outline their ideas for a so-called Trinity Curriculum Model. The three-part framework sees the Father as the source of all things, Jesus as the means of demonstrating God’s love to the world, and the Spirit as the fulfillment. Thomas and Freeman are wise enough to state that this is not an analogy of the Trinity because analogies of the Trinity always fall short of the full Trinitarian doctrine.
For example, suppose we are teaching children about the water cycle. The source concept is that God is the provider of all the water needed for creation. The water cycle therefore reveals God’s wise provision. The means would be the usual experiments about the water cycle, boiling water, condensing the steam, building charts, diagrams, and maps of the process. The fulfillment will be to see how much each student has learned about the process, especially that they have understood what this tells us about God.
‘Many people today do not seem to realize that the same poisonous philosophy (evolutionism) that justified killing under Hitler1has also infected the American abortion mentality.
According to documents released in February 10, 1992, “Joseph Mengele, the Auschwitz death-camp doctor known as the ‘Angel of Death’ for his experiments on inmates, practiced medicine in Buenos Aires for several years in the 1950s. He ‘had a reputation as a specialist in abortions,’ which were illegal.”2 It should not be surprising that one who extinguished life at Auschwitz would practice a similar grisly crusade on life in the womb.
Humans Emerging From Embryos?
Carl Sagan encouraged the fiction that life in the womb traces an evolutionary history. We “must decide,” he wrote, “what distinguishes a human being from other animals and when, during gestation, the uniquely human qualities—whatever they are—emerge.”3 He compared the appearance of the developing embryo to “a segmented worm” and added that “something like the gill arches of a fish or an amphibian…become conspicuous, and there is a pronounced tail.” The face becomes “reptilian… (then) somewhat pig-like.” Eventually, it “resembles a primate’s but is still not quite human.”
In the article, evolutionary thinking offered yet again “justification” for extinguishing life thought to be subhuman. This, of course, is pseudo-science and nonsense. The science of genetics has confirmed that the embryo is identifiably human from the moment of conception.
Sanger—“Babies in the Womb”!
Another insidious development occurred earlier in the century (about the time Hitler himself was forming his ideas). It involved Margaret Sanger (1879–1966), the founder of Planned Parenthood (a major promoter of abortions in America today). She has been given the unusual title, “Father of Modern Society.”4 Her evolutionary mentality will be documented below, but first there should be a consideration of her views relating to abortion.
In her Woman and the New Race, Sanger offered a conflicting message about this issue. On the one hand she wrote, “I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”5 Pro-lifers would heartily agree! She even referred to “babies” in the womb—not using the now “politically correct” term, fetuses: “There will be no killing of babies in the womb by abortion.”5
Her message was inconsistent, however. Not only did Linda Gordon, author of Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right—a major work dealing with the history of birth control in America—indicate that Margaret Sanger “defended women’s rights to abortion,”6 Sanger herself, in the very volume denouncing abortion already cited, wrote, “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”5 This hardly sounds pro-life.
Whatever may be said of Sanger’s confused views, her legacy is an organization that certainly encourages and participates in the killing of thousands and even millions of, to use her phrase, America’s “infant members.” What was it about her philosophy that allowed for this?
“Defectives,” “Dependents,” and “Morons”!
Hitler’s link to evolution has already been documented.1 He put survival-of-the-fittest into action, and millions of “unfit” people died as a result. Many Americans believe that something comparable to what happened under the leadership of Hitler is happening now in America. “Babies in the womb,” most of them healthy and fit, have been slaughtered by the tens of millions in the United States of America—1.21 million in 2008 alone!11
What some may not realize is that the same poisonous philosophy that infected Hitler also influenced Margaret Sanger. She said Charles Darwin observed “that we do not permit helpless human beings to die off, but we create philanthropies and charities, build asylums and hospitals and keep the medical profession busy preserving those who could not otherwise survive.” Her view was that such philanthropies and charities were “ameliorative” at best, and that some so-called benevolences were “positively injurious to the community and the future of the race.”
Her following words (content-wise) sound like they could have been spoken by Adolf Hitler himself: “The most serious charge that can be brought against modern ‘benevolence’ is that it encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents and dependents. These are the most dangerous elements in the world community, the most devastating curse on human progress and expression.”
One wonders how far Sanger would like to have taken her eugenics. She reported a study of the United States Army and concluded that “nearly half—47.3 percent—of the population had the mentality of twelve-year-old children or less—in other words, that they were morons.”7
On the racial dimension, Linda Gordon (cf. above) quotes from a letter written by Margaret Sanger to Clarence Gamble on October 19, 1939: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”6 Many years prior, Sanger said, “Whether or not the white races will be ultimately wiped off the face of the earth depends, to my mind, largely upon the conduct and behavior of the white people themselves. (Applause.)”8
Birth control for Sanger was “nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit.” A eugenist, she defined the field as “the attempt to solve the problem from the biological and evolutionary point of view.” She wanted to change things “to the construction and evolution of humanity itself.”8 She advocated applying “a stem and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”9 Revealing pro-choice tendencies, she went on to promote the notion of giving “certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilizations.”8 Ms. Sanger assumed “the evolutionary process of man”10 and argued that the “intelligence of a people is of slow evolutional development”5 She hoped for a motherhood that would refuse “to bring forth weaklings.”5 Such a motherhood “withholds the unfit brings forth the fit.”5 She wrote of “woman’s upward struggle”5 and described the “lack of balance between the birth rate of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘fit’” as “the greatest present menace to civilization.”7
Rejection of the Only Solution!
The Lord Jesus Christ sanctified life in the womb by living there Himself for nine months (Is 49:5, cf. Lk 1:35). He also created every womb that was ever made (Jn 1:3). As the promised “seed” of the woman (Gn 3:15), He came to rescue daughters (like those for whom Margaret Sanger expressed concern throughout her writings) from their burdens of pain, suffering, sin, and death. He came to set them free (Jn 9:36), and many women would testify that they have indeed been set free and will be set free even from death.
Margaret Sanger, however, wrote of a different Jesus—“a Jesus who (would) not die upon the cross.”5 In place of the real Jesus who understands suffering intimately, she chose the hollow shell of evolutionary “science.” Sadly, she wrote, “Interest in the vague sentimental fantasies of extra-mundane existence, in pathological or hysterical flights from the realities of our earthiness, will have through atrophy disappeared, for in that dawn men and women will have come to the realization… that here close at hand is our paradise, our everlasting abode, our Heaven and our eternity.”7 But how is Margaret Sanger qualified to make such pronouncements?
Her present bodily “abode” is very undesirable (coffin? charred remains?), but Jesus is alive with a resurrected body in heaven! After He was resurrected, He proclaimed, “I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death” (Rv 1:18, KJV).
Jesus’ teachings about the future, contrary to Margaret Sanger’s preachings, were neither “vague sentimental fantasies” nor “pathological,” and they will never “atrophy.” Heaven and earth may pass—but His words will never pass away (Mt 24:35). He emphatically said, “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die” (Jn 11:25–26, KJV).
The evolutionary mentality behind abortion is bad science and leads to bad ethics. On the positive side, Margaret Sanger did encourage attention to a very important subject—to what she called “the titanic strength of the sexual instinct.”7 Indirectly, she was affirming the Scriptural truth that “love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave…Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it: if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be condemned” (Sgs 8:6–7, KJV).
She sought to promote birth control. The ultimate need, however, is for Holy Spirit control. The Lord Jesus Christ, after receiving from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, shed Him forth upon the earth for the benefit of His followers (Acts 2:33). The only way an unbeliever can experience this loving presence and control is to bow the heart in repentance and faith before the Sovereign Creator-Savior, Jesus Christ.
(This article is an update of one originally published in Impact #27, May 1992, by the Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA. Reprinted by permission of the author.)
1. Paul G. Humber, “The Ascent of Racism,” Impact (Institute for Creation Research, February 1987). 2. Nathaniel C. Nash, “Mengele an Abortionist, Argentine Files Suggest,” The New York Times, February 11, 1992, p. A8. 3. Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, “Is It Possible To Be Pro-Life And Pro-Choice?” Parade Magazine, April 22, 1990, pp. 5, 7. 4. Elasah Drogin, Margaret Sanger: Father of Modern Society (New Hope, Ky: CUL Publications, 1989). 5. Margaret Sanger, Woman and the New Race (New York: Brentano’s Publishers, 1920), pp. 44, 45, 63, 126, 159, 226, 229, 232, 234. 6. Linda Gordon, Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right (New York: Grossman Pub., 1976), pp. 223, 332–33. 7. Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization (New York: Brentano’s Publishers, 1922), pp. 8, 25, 103, 113, 123, 170-171, 263, 275–76. 8. Raymond Pierpoint, Editor, Report of the Fifth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference (London: William Heinemann [Medical Books] Ltd., 1922), pp. 31, 199. 9. Margaret Sanger, “A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April, 1932, pp. 107, 108. 10. Margaret Sanger, Editor, “Self Preservation,” The Woman Rebel, April 1914, p. 16. 11. See http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html (accessed December 14, 2011).’https://biblearchaeology.org/research/contemporary-issues
1 Thessalonians 5:21 “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
‘Science has an elevated position in Western society. There are those who would try to put Christians down, by saying “You have faith, but I have science”. Science, in the abstract, is therefore assumed to be the ultimate truth, and the universal standard, against which everything must be tested.
This, it is suggested, is because science is tested. As a high school science teacher, I would suggest to my students that scientific processes could develop as follows: The problem to be investigated is stated. A hypothesis is then developed, which seems to explain this problem, and accompanying observations. After this, an investigation—often by experiment—is designed to test the hypothesis. For this to occur, the hypothesis must be testable, and, indeed, falsifiable. To say that a hypothesis is falsifiable does not imply that it is, or even could be, false. It simply means that it is theoretically possible that an investigative result might disprove the hypothesis.
For example, our hypothesis that hot water hurts is falsifiable, given that you could plunge your hand into boiling water, to see if it feels comfortable. In practice, we know that this would indeed hurt, supporting your hypothesis. Finally, you would carry out your investigation or experiment, record the results, and from them draw a conclusion, that your investigation either supports or disproves your hypothesis.
Genesis 1:14-15 “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.”
‘Many secular cosmologists believe that the universe came into existence in a singularity, as a result of a quantum event about 14.7 billion years ago. However, this so-called Big Bang theory is not without its problems. Principle among these is the Horizon Problem, which refers to the fact that Big Bangers cannot account for the Cosmic Microwave Background being the same temperature in all directions. This phenomenon would have required different parts of the universe coming to thermal equilibrium by radiation moving at the speed of light. Yet the maximum distance this radiation could travel is considerably less than the size of the universe.
In the 1980s, theoretical physicist Alan Guth proposed the Inflation Theory. In this model, a very rapid expansion of the universe happened from 10-36 seconds to 10-32 seconds after the Big Bang event. This allowed the entirety of the universe to be in close contact for a while, enabling transfer of energy between all parts of the universe.
There is no scientific evidence for this inflation, which is sometimes called the Big Fizz. The extremely short timescale of the event, at the beginning of a period of extremely deep time, gives the whole theory an impression of being a convenient construction, just to make the math work.
Moreover, it creates new problems of its own. There are several different models of inflation, and recent work suggesting that evidence for inflation is now available, turns out simply to disprove some of the models, without validating the concept itself.
‘The judge asked: “Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?”
The ten words “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, gets to the crucial point in this phrase used for centuries to “quicken the conscience” of those giving testimony in court. A lie is commonly what we might call a half-truth – or even mostly all true! It’s simply not the whole truth. We’ve all seen the crime shows where the evidence all appears to lead to one conclusion. But at the last minute, another piece of evidence reveals the falsehood and the true criminal. Indeed, partial truths are frequently used to support a grand lie.
Thus, the grand lie of evolution starts with the truth of adaptation and natural selection. But then are added untruths, conjecture and wishful thinking on the part of rebellious mankind. And natural selection – to support evolution – becomes a grand lie. The truth is that natural selection cannot migrate out from the created “kinds” – the distinct species groups. The truth is that natural selection and mutations cannot add new creation, new complexity and new information to the genome. It can only shuffle the genetics that are already there!
The truth is that in nature the laws of probability are governed and indeed overwhelmed by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics – the incessant move toward increasing entropy (disorder). The truth is that new specified complexity requires an outside energy and intelligence! The truth is that creation requires God.
Epitomizing the Nazi genius of propaganda under Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels famously and correctly said: “If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will come to believe it yourself.” Herein lies the secret to the grand lie of evolution, and to so much of the other disinformation being thrust upon us in the world today.
Climate Change as Climate Alarmism, for example, begins with the undeniable truth that climate changes. But added to a few truths about greenhouse gases are a lot of assumptions, conjecture and agenda-driven grant money for desired research outcomes with computer models. Another grand lie then becomes the drumbeat that is heard everywhere and has been now for 30+ years: We must unite globally to reset world economics and save the planet!
Subverting democracy under the pretense of protecting it is another grand lie. The lie includes people saying: “We must suppress their ‘disinformation’” (which is frequently truth) “in order to advance ‘our truth’” (which is frequently disinformation). And so they feel we don’t actually need free speech at all! They want more authoritarian powers to target political opponents who dissent from their approved narratives – whether that be disagreement with school boards about gender confusion and race theory indoctrination, or disagreement about COVID policy, or pointing out the various problems in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. They cannot and will not allow true reporting or debate on these issues!
Interestingly, Goebbels also said, “This is the secret of propaganda: those who are to be persuaded by it should be completely immersed in the ideas of the propaganda, without ever noticing that they are being immersed in it.” This is the great subtlety of the deception.
These grand lies are from “the father of [lies]” (John 8:44), “which deceiveth the whole world” (Revelation 12:9), i.e., the devil. And they are quite ugly upon examination. Lies, like any evil thing, are inherently ugly. Nobody, not even the worst perpetrators of the worst crimes, would honestly describe immoral acts as “beautiful”. The morally deformed is not beautiful.
Here is where the truth of Biblical Christianity also shines through uniquely. We believe in the Creator Almighty who established His original perfect order and is truly glorious in His perfection. In addition, we define human nature as inherently flawed because of Adam and Eve’s decision to disobey God and to listen to the devil. Understanding the truth about man’s depravity is satisfying because it is true and makes our redemption all the more lovely! Our liberty in Christ from the ugly bondage of evil is truly a beautiful thing!
Truth is vital. Without truth, we are left, in the end, with meaninglessness. We are left unable to detect propaganda, lies and disinformation. Therefore, we are at the mercy of evil, as well as despair. But the absolute truth of God – His righteousness and complete integrity, His omniscience and holiness, His love of liberty and His word – grounds us with meaning, purpose, joy and goodness so that we are able to trust Him and love Him.
We rightly appreciate the created beauty and freedom that God has given us. It is ultimately an appreciation of perfection – a perfectionwhich derives from and is a joyous, marvelous reflection of the truth and nature and personality of the Lord. He is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And that truth is beautiful! As the poet John Keats wrote, “Beauty is truth, truth is beauty.”
Divine beauty is characteristic of God and is vastly superior to even the very best of created splendors. Our great calling is to dwell in His house, “to gaze upon His beauty and to inquire in His temple,” as the Psalmist expresses his desire. The Lord is the purest loveliness and the very essence of joy and wisdom, perfect in all His ways without end.
So it is no wonder that saints throughout the centuries have experienced an inexpressible delight in worship, prayer and studying His word, even though the Truth is veiled in this fallen world. Through the lenses of our redeemed nature, we can appreciate the Lord as we survey the reflections of His creation. We were redeemed for an interior, supernatural joy as we indulge and even over-indulge our new nature! It is the meaning of “to be blessed”.