Great Evolution Deception Thread Replies To Criticisms

[John Chingford]

This is just an informative thread. The thread entitled "the great evolution deception" raised some very interesting criticisms. I want to send articles which I believe give good solid arguments against the criticisms. If the fact that I have done this offends, you don't need to read it and do not need to reply, just ignore it. It is here for those members or non members who WOULD like to read it.

In the following posts I will cover:

* new evidence found by scientists concluding dinosaurs did not evolve into birds

* Why the bible is trustworthy

* evidence and reasons why carbon dating actually supports a young earth

* the Grand Canyon supports a young earth, evidences of the Noahic global flood

Note I already sent a long article which gives evidence that dinosaurs lived beside mankind

[John Chingford]

new evidence found by scientists concluding dinosaurs did not evolve into birds

Birds did not evolve from dinosaurs: what creationists have been pointing out for years is now buttressed by new research.
The notion that theropod dinosaurs evolved into birds has almost certainly become one of the most widely accepted “facts” of evolution. The question for many evolutionary researchers had transitioned from “if” to “how.”1 Even artists’ depictions of some dinosaurs (such as velociraptors) began to include feathers.2 Except for a few notable critics, such as University of North Carolina paleobiologist Alan Feduccia, evolutionists seem to have all but agreed on birds’ dinosaurian origins.
Now, a new paper in the Journal of Morphology presents the research of two Oregon State University scientists who don’t agree with the evolutionary dogma on bird origins.3 Doctoral student Devon Quick conducted the investigation into bird breathing and its connection with dinosaur-to-bird evolution as part her dissertation.
Background
The research hinges—almost literally—on the femur (upper leg bone) of birds. Unlike other walking creatures, a bird’s femur does not move significantly, and birds instead articulate the lower portion of their leg to walk or run. Quick’s surprising discovery is that this “knee running” anatomy, with nearly fixed femur bones and musculature, is crucial in preventing birds’ air-sac lung from collapsing whenever the bird takes a breath.
Quick explained, “This is fundamental to bird physiology. It’s really strange that no one realized this before. The position of the thigh bone and muscles in birds is critical to their lung function, which in turn is what gives them enough lung capacity for flight.”
Dinosaurs lack this fixed femur, however, and that includes the theropod dinosaurs from which birds supposedly evolved. Oregon State zoologist John Ruben, a coauthor on the paper, commented, “Theropod dinosaurs had a moving femur and therefore could not have had a lung that worked like that in birds. Their abdominal air sac, if they had one, would have collapsed. That undercuts a critical piece of supporting evidence for the dinosaur-bird link.”
He continued, “It’s really kind of amazing that after centuries of studying birds and flight we still didn’t understand a basic aspect of bird biology.” Ruben added that the appearance of birdsbefore dinosaurs in the fossil record is a “serious problem” that is ignored by those who advocate dinosaur-to-bird evolution (see also The Early Bird Catches the Dinosaur).
What Does it Mean?
The conclusion is so revealing—especially considering that it comes straight from evolutionist researchers—that we borrow it directly from the Oregon State press release4:
OSU research on avian biology and physiology was among the first in the nation to begin calling into question the dinosaur-bird link since the 1990s. Other findings have been made since then, at OSU and other institutions, which also raise doubts. But old theories die hard, Ruben said, especially when it comes to some of the most distinctive and romanticized animal species in world history.
“Frankly, there’s a lot of museum politics involved in this, a lot of careers committed to a particular point of view even if new scientific evidence raises questions,” Ruben said. In some museum displays, he said, the birds-descended-from-dinosaurs evolutionary theory has been portrayed as a largely accepted fact, with an asterisk pointing out in small type that “some scientists disagree.”
Our work at OSU used to be pretty much the only asterisk they were talking about,” Ruben said. “But now there are more asterisks all the time. That’s part of the process of science.”
In the research, the scientists also noted other “specialized features” of bird anatomy which allow the substantial oxygen intake required for flight, as well as features present in both birds and mammals but not dinosaurs (the researchers believed these features evolved independently, as evolutionists do not consider birds and mammals closely related).
Conclusion
An Anatomist’s Thoughts
Dr. David Menton, an award-winning anatomist, had this to say about the new research:
So certain are most evolutionists that birds evolved from dinosaurs that birds are now widely regarded as being, in fact, Coelurosaurian dinosaurs. Still, the growing lines of evidence coming from “dinosaurs as birds” skeptics like Ruben and Feduccia are eroding this confidence. This new study by Quick and her mentor Ruben presents compelling evidence from an anatomical feature of birds that was previously ignored—the bird’s femur. Unlike all mammals and reptiles (including dinosaurs), bird femurs are tucked up into the body, and thus the visible part of a bird’s leg is from the knee on down. This curious arrangement was once alluded to in a humorous book title: Do Penguins Have Knees?
The importance of the bird femur to avian respiration has not been appreciated until now. Quick and Ruben point out that the avian style air-sac system of breathing requires support from the uniquely positioned femurs of birds to keep their abdominal air-sacs from collapsing during inspiration. They conclude that “the likely absence of bird-like pulmonary function in theropods is inconsistent with suggestions of cardiovascular anatomy more sophisticated than that of modern crocodilians.”
One hopes that this new evidence will now prompt evolutionists to reconsider their claimed evidence for “feathers” in dinosaurs. No other cutaneous appendages are as strikingly different in their development, structure, function, and mode of replacement as scales and feathers. It appears that both feathers and the avian mode of breathing are unique to birds. But will all of this have any impact on the current birds-are-dinosaurs dogma? I think not: experience has shown that evolutionary dogma, once established, dies hard.
What do the researchers conclude about bird evolution, then? “This discovery probably means that birds evolved on a parallel path alongside dinosaurs, starting that process before most dinosaur species even existed,” Ruben noted.
“That’s quite possible and is routinely found in evolution. It just seems pretty clear now that birds were evolving all along on their own and did not descend directly from the theropod dinosaurs, which lived many millions of years later,” said Quick.
The scientists believe the similarities between birds and dinosaurs show that they possibly shared a common ancestor that eventually gave rise to not only birds and dinosaurs, but also crocodilians. However, their research reported that the lung structure and physiology of dinosaurs was likely much more similar to crocodilians than to birds.
Creationists should keep in mind several important points regarding this research:
 Once again, the evolutionary “facts” have been challenged. What scientists believe about the evidence frequently changes, even while their presupposed belief in evolution is held constant. Don’t be fooled by the “facts” that evolutionists themselves may doubt tomorrow!
 We may well hear a sharp response from other evolutionists attacking this research or, at least, emphasizing that birds still evolved, even if only from an unknown ancestor. Alternatively, we may hear virtually nothing if evolutionists hope the story goes unnoticed.
 Whenever evolutionists demonstrate that specialized features originated separately (i.e., the evolutionary branches are farther apart), it multiplies the number of miraculous mutations that would have had to occur to produce the specialized anatomy in organisms on both branches.
 The “overlap” between bird anatomy and mammal anatomy, and between bird anatomy and reptile anatomy—along with the plentiful uniqueness of bird anatomy—all shouts “design.” Evolution can only explain such recurring anatomical elements with the fanciful justification of “convergent evolution” (i.e., concluding that two similar features evolved separately because the organisms are on different evolutionary branches). Creationists instead have the common-sense understanding that the Creator chose for each organism whatever designs best suited its purpose, and sometimes He reused the best designs.
 Perhaps most importantly, this research identifies an incredible, previously unknown element of bird biology—a sophisticated design that enables bird flight and reflects on the ingenuity of the Creator.
Taking aim at the traditional evolutionary view, Ruben quipped, “A velociraptor did not just sprout feathers at some point and fly off into the sunset.” Sadly, that romanticized view seems to prevail among evolutionists, who have abundant faith—even without scientific justification—that all the biodiversity and incredible “design” we see in nature today is merely a product of natural processes acting on accidents. So, even adding one more “miracle” to evolution—as this new research does—is unlikely to shake their faith.

[John Chingford]

evidence and reasons why carbon dating actually supports a young earth

Scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to estimate the ages of rocks, fossils, and the earth. Many people have been led to believe that radiometric dating methods have proved the earth to be billions of years old. This has caused many in the church to reevaluate the biblical creation account, specifically the meaning of the word “day” in Genesis 1. With our focus on one particular form of radiometric dating—carbon dating—we will see that carbon dating strongly supports a young earth. Note that, contrary to a popular misconception, carbon dating is not used to date rocks at millions of years old.
Basics

Before we get into the details of how radiometric dating methods are used, we need to review some preliminary concepts from chemistry. Recall that atoms are the basic building blocks of matter. Atoms are made up of much smaller particles called protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons make up the center (nucleus) of the atom, and electrons form shells around the nucleus.
The number of protons in the nucleus of an atom determines the element. For example, all carbon atoms have 6 protons, all atoms of nitrogen have 7 protons, and all oxygen atoms have 8 protons. The number of neutrons in the nucleus can vary in any given type of atom. So, a carbon atom might have six neutrons, or seven, or possibly eight—but it would always have six protons. An “isotope” is any of several different forms of an element, each having different numbers of neutrons. The illustration below shows the three isotopes of carbon.
Some isotopes of certain elements are unstable; they can spontaneously change into another kind of atom in a process called “radioactive decay.” Since this process presently happens at a known measured rate, scientists attempt to use it like a “clock” to tell how long ago a rock or fossil formed. There are two main applications for radiometric dating. One is for potentially datingfossils (once-living things) using carbon-14 dating, and the other is for dating rocks and the age of the earth using uranium, potassium and other radioactive atoms.

The atomic number corresponds to the number of protons in an atom. Atomic mass is a combination of the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. (The electrons are so much lighter that they do not contribute significantly to the mass of an atom.)
Carbon-14 Dating
Carbon-14 (14C), also referred to as radiocarbon, is claimed to be a reliable dating method for determining the age of fossils up to 50,000 to 60,000 years. If this claim is true, the biblical account of a young earth (about 6,000 years) is in question, since 14C dates of tens of thousands of years are common.1
When a scientist’s interpretation of data does not match the clear meaning of the text in the Bible, we should never reinterpret the Bible. God knows just what He meant to say, and His understanding of science is infallible, whereas ours is fallible. So we should never think it necessary to modify His Word. Genesis 1 defines the days of creation to be literal days (a number with the word “day” always means a normal day in the Old Testament, and the phrase “evening and morning” further defines the days as literal days). Since the Bible is the inspired Word of God, we should examine the validity of the standard interpretation of 14C dating by asking several questions:
1. Is the explanation of the data derived from empirical, observational science, or an interpretation of past events (historical science)?
2. Are there any assumptions involved in the dating method?
3. Are the dates provided by 14C dating consistent with what we observe?
4. Do all scientists accept the 14C dating method as reliable and accurate?
All radiometric dating methods use scientific procedures in the present to interpret what has happened in the past. The procedures used are not necessarily in question. The interpretation of past events is in question. The secular (evolutionary) worldview interprets the universe and world to be billions of years old. The Bible teaches a young universe and earth. Which worldview does science support? Can carbon-14 dating help solve the mystery of which worldview is more accurate?

The use of carbon-14 dating is often misunderstood. Carbon-14 is mostly used to date once-living things (organic material). It cannot be used directly to date rocks; however, it can potentially be used to put time constraints on some inorganic material such as diamonds (diamonds could contain carbon-14). Because of the rapid rate of decay of 14C, it can only give dates in the thousands-of-year range and not millions.
There are three different naturally occurring varieties (isotopes) of carbon: 12C, 13C, and 14C.
Carbon-14 is used for dating because it is unstable (radioactive), whereas 12C and 13C are stable. Radioactive means that 14C will decay (emit radiation) over time and become a different element. During this process (called “beta decay”) a neutron in the 14C atom will be converted into a proton. By losing one neutron and gaining one proton, 14C is changed into nitrogen-14 (14N = 7 protons and 7 neutrons).

If 14C is constantly decaying, will the earth eventually run out of 14C? The answer is no. Carbon-14 is constantly being added to the atmosphere. Cosmic rays from outer space, which contain high levels of energy, bombard the earth’s upper atmosphere. These cosmic rays collide with atoms in the atmosphere and can cause them to come apart. Neutrons that come from these fragmented atoms collide with 14N atoms (the atmosphere is made mostly of nitrogen and oxygen) and convert them into 14C atoms (a proton changes into a neutron).
Once 14C is produced, it combines with oxygen in the atmosphere (12C behaves like 14C and also combines with oxygen) to form carbon dioxide (CO2). Because CO2 gets incorporated into plants (which means the food we eat contains 14C and 12C), all living things should have the same ratio of 14C and 12C in them as in the air we breathe.
How the Carbon-14 Dating Process Works
Once a living thing dies, the dating process begins. As long as an organism is alive it will continue to take in14C; however, when it dies, it will stop. Since 14C is radioactive (decays into 14N), the amount of 14C in a dead organism gets less and less over time. Therefore, part of the dating process involves measuring the amount of 14C that remains after some has been lost (decayed). Scientists now use a device called an “Accelerator Mass Spectrometer” (AMS) to determine the ratio of 14C to 12C, which increases the assumed accuracy to about 80,000 years. In order to actually do the dating, other things need to be known. Two such things include the following questions:
1. How fast does 14C decay?
2. What was the starting amount of 14C in the creature when it died?
The decay rate of radioactive elements is described in terms of half-life. The half-life of an atom is the amount of time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to decay. The half-life of 14C is 5,730 years. For example, a jar starting with all 14C atoms at time zero will contain half 14C atoms and half 14N atoms at the end of 5,730 years (one half-life). At the end of 11,460 years (two half-lives) the jar will contain one-quarter 14C atoms and three-quarter 14N atoms.
Since the half-life of 14C is known (how fast it decays), the only part left to determine is the starting amount of 14C in a fossil. If scientists know the original amount of 14C in a creature when it died, they can measure the current amount and then calculate how many half-lives have passed.

Since no one was there to measure the amount of14C when a creature died, scientists need to find a method to determine how much 14C has decayed. To do this, scientists use the main isotope of carbon, called carbon-12 (12C). Because 12C is a stable isotope of carbon, it will remain constant; however, the amount of 14C will decrease after a creature dies. All living things take in carbon (14C and 12C) from eating and breathing. Therefore, the ratio of 14C to 12C in living creatures will be the same as in the atmosphere. This ratio turns out to be about one 14C atom for every 1 trillion 12C atoms. Scientists can use this ratio to help determine the starting amount of 14C.
When an organism dies, this ratio (1 to 1 trillion) will begin to change. The amount of 12C will remain constant, but the amount of 14C will become less and less. The smaller the ratio, the longer the organism has been dead. The following illustration demonstrates how the age is estimated using this ratio.
Percent 14C Remaining Percent 12C Remaining Ratio Number of Half-Lives Years Dead(Age of Fossil)
100 100 1 to 1T 0 0
50 100 1 to 2T 1 5,730
25 100 1 to 4T 2 11,460
12.5 100 1 to 8T 3 17,190
6.25 100 1 to 16T 4 22,920
3.125 100 1 to 32T 5 28,650
T = Trillion
A Critical Assumption
A critical assumption used in carbon-14 dating has to do with this ratio. It is assumed that the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is today (1 to 1 trillion). If this assumption is true, then the AMS 14C dating method is valid up to about 80,000 years. Beyond this number, the instruments scientists use would not be able to detect enough remaining 14C to be useful in age estimates. This is a critical assumption in the dating process. If this assumption is not true, then the method will give incorrect dates. What could cause this ratio to change? If the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere is not equal to the removal rate (mostly through decay), this ratio will change. In other words, the amount of 14C being produced in the atmosphere must equal the amount being removed to be in a steady state (also called “equilibrium”). If this is not true, the ratio of 14C to 12C is not a constant, which would make knowing the starting amount of 14C in a specimen difficult or impossible to accurately determine.
Dr. Willard Libby, the founder of the carbon-14 dating method, assumed this ratio to be constant. His reasoning was based on a belief in evolution, which assumes the earth must be billions of years old. Assumptions in the scientific community are extremely important. If the starting assumption is false, all the calculations based on that assumption might be correct but still give a wrong conclusion.
In Dr. Libby’s original work, he noted that the atmosphere did not appear to be in equilibrium. This was a troubling idea for Dr. Libby since he believed the world was billions of years old and enough time had passed to achieve equilibrium. Dr. Libby’s calculations showed that if the earth started with no 14C in the atmosphere, it would take up to 30,000 years to build up to a steady state (equilibrium).
If the cosmic radiation has remained at its present intensity for 20,000 or 30,000 years, and if the carbon reservoir has not changed appreciably in this time, then there exists at the present time a complete balance between the rate of disintegration of radiocarbon atoms and the rate of assimilation of new radiocarbon atoms for all material in the life-cycle.2
Dr. Libby chose to ignore this discrepancy (nonequilibrium state), and he attributed it to experimental error. However, the discrepancy has turned out to be very real. The ratio of 14C /12C is not constant.
The Specific Production Rate (SPR) of C-14 is known to be 18.8 atoms per gram of total carbon per minute. The Specific Decay Rate (SDR) is known to be only 16.1 disintegrations per gram per minute.3
What does this mean? If it takes about 30,000 years to reach equilibrium and 14C is still out of equilibrium, then maybe the earth is not very old.
Magnetic Field of the Earth
Other factors can affect the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere. The earth has a magnetic field around it which helps protect us from harmful radiation from outer space. This magnetic field is decaying (getting weaker). The stronger the field is around the earth, the fewer the number of cosmic rays that are able to reach the atmosphere. This would result in a smaller production of14C in the atmosphere in earth’s past.
The cause for the long term variation of the C-14 level is not known. The variation is certainly partially the result of a change in the cosmic ray production rate of radiocarbon. The cosmic-ray flux, and hence the production rate of C-14, is a function not only of the solar activity but also of the magnetic dipole moment of the Earth.4
Though complex, this history of the earth’s magnetic field agrees with Barnes’ basic hypothesis, that the field has always freely decayed.... The field has always been losing energy despite its variations, so it cannot be more than 10,000 years old.5
Earth’s magnetic field is fading. Today it is about 10 percent weaker than it was when German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss started keeping tabs on it in 1845, scientists say.6
If the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere was less in the past, dates given using the carbon-14 method would incorrectly assume that more 14C had decayed out of a specimen than what has actually occurred. This would result in giving older dates than the true age.
Genesis Flood
What role might the Genesis Flood have played in the amount of carbon? The Flood would have buried large amounts of carbon from living organisms (plant and animal) to form today’s fossil fuels (coal, oil, etc.). The amount of fossil fuels indicates there must have been a vastly larger quantity of vegetation in existence prior to the Flood than exists today. This means that the biosphere just prior to the Flood might have had 500 times more carbon in living organisms than today. This would further dilute the amount of 14C and cause the 14C/12C ratio to be much smaller than today.
If that were the case, and this C-14 were distributed uniformly throughout the biosphere, and the total amount of biosphere C were, for example, 500 times that of today’s world, the resulting C-14/C-12 ratio would be 1/500 of today’s level....7
When the Flood is taken into account along with the decay of the magnetic field, it is reasonable to believe that the assumption of equilibrium is a false assumption.
Because of this false assumption, any age estimates using 14C prior to the Flood will give much older dates than the true age. Pre-Flood material would be dated at perhaps ten times the true age.
The RATE Group Findings
In 1997 an eight-year research project was started to investigate the age of the earth. The group was called the RATE group (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth). The team of scientists included:
 Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
 Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
 Eugene Chaffin, PhD Physics
 John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
 Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
 Steven Austin, PhD Geology
 Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
 Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate Studies
The objective was to gather data commonly ignored or censored by evolutionary standards of dating. The scientists reviewed the assumptions and procedures used in estimating the ages of rocks and fossils. The results of the carbon-14 dating demonstrated serious problems for long geologic ages. For example, a series of fossilized wood samples that conventionally have been dated according to their host strata to be from Tertiary to Permian (40-250 million years old) all yielded significant, detectable levels of carbon-14 that would conventionally equate to only 30,000-45,000 years “ages” for the original trees.8 Similarly, a survey of the conventional radiocarbon journals resulted in more than forty examples of supposedly ancient organic materials, including limestones, that contained carbon-14, as reported by leading laboratories.9
Samples were then taken from ten different coal layers that, according to evolutionists, represent different time periods in the geologic column (Cenozoic, Mesozoic, and Paleozoic). The RATE group obtained these ten coal samples from the U.S. Department of Energy Coal Sample Bank, from samples collected from major coalfields across the United States. The chosen coal samples, which dated millions to hundreds of millions of years old based on standard evolution time estimates, all contained measurable amounts of 14C. In all cases, careful precautions were taken to eliminate any possibility of contamination from other sources. Samples, in all three “time periods”, displayed significant amounts of 14C. This is a significant discovery. Since the half-life of 14C is relatively short (5,730 years), there should be no detectable 14C left after about 100,000 years. The average 14C estimated age for all the layers from these three time periods was approximately 50,000 years. However, using a more realistic pre-Flood 14C /12C ratio reduces that age to about 5,000 years.

These results indicate that the entire geologic column is less than 100,000 years old—and could be much younger. This confirms the Bible and challenges the evolutionary idea of long geologic ages.
Because the lifetime of C-14 is so brief, these AMS [Accelerator Mass Spectrometer] measurements pose an obvious challenge to the standard geological timescale that assigns millions to hundreds of millions of years to this part of the rock layer.10
Another noteworthy observation from the RATE group was the amount of 14C found in diamonds. Secular scientists have estimated the ages of diamonds to be millions to billions of years old using other radiometric dating methods. These methods are also based on questionable assumptions and are discussed elsewhere11. Because of their hardness, diamonds (the hardest known substance) are extremely resistant to contamination through chemical exchange. Since diamonds are considered to be so old by evolutionary standards, finding any 14C in them would be strong support for a recent creation.
The RATE group analyzed twelve diamond samples for possible carbon-14 content. Similar to the coal results, all twelve diamond samples contained detectable, but lower levels of 14C. These findings are powerful evidence that coal and diamonds cannot be the millions or billions of years old that evolutionists claim. Indeed, these RATE findings of detectable 14C in diamonds have been confirmed independently.12 Carbon-14 found in fossils at all layers of the geologic column, in coal and in diamonds, is evidence which confirms the biblical timescale of thousands of years and not billions.
Because of C-14’s short half-life, such a finding would argue that carbon and probably the entire physical earth as well must have a recent origin.13
Conclusion
All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored. When the assumptions were evaluated and shown faulty, the results supported the biblical account of a global Flood and young earth. Christians should not be afraid of radiometric dating methods. Carbon-14 dating is really the friend of Christians, and it supports a young earth.
The RATE scientists are convinced that the popular idea attributed to geologist Charles Lyell from nearly two centuries ago, “The present is the key to the past,” is simply not valid for an earth history of millions or billions of years. An alternative interpretation of the carbon-14 data is that the earth experienced a global flood catastrophe which laid down most of the rock strata and fossils.... Whatever the source of the carbon-14, its presence in nearly every sample tested worldwide is a strong challenge to an ancient age. Carbon-14 data is now firmly on the side of the young-earth view of history.14

[John Chingford]

the Grand Canyon supports a young earth, evidences of the Noahic global flood

The Grand Canyon
by Dr. Gary Parker
First published in
Creation: Facts of Life
Chapter 3: The fossil evidence
There’s no doubt about it: the best place to see, study, and put together all these ideas about stacks of fossil-bearing rock is the Grand Canyon.
Grand Canyon is an awesome gash in the earth, running for about 200 miles (300 km) along the Colorado River in the northwest corner of Arizona. The Canyon is about a mile (1.6 km) deep, and about 10 miles (16 km) from north to south rims. The walls of the narrow, zig-zag inner gorge expose tilted and faulted Precambrian rock, while the walls of the outer and upper gorge are streaked with thick, colorful, horizontal bands of fossil-bearing rock, representing roughly the “bottom half” of the geologic column.
I once believed and taught, like so many others, that the rock layers in Grand Canyon represented stages in evolution laid down over vast eons of time. But, after leading over 15 week-long backpacking trips for university students through the Canyon and studying the rock layers and fossils close-up, I’m ready to stake the place out with Bible verses! What I once assumed was a record of a lot of time, now looks like evidence of a lot of water instead!
Actually, the Canyon seems to provide an excellent contrast between rocks laid down slowly and gradually on a local scale and those laid down rapidly and catastrophically on a colossal scale. Evolutionists have argued that fossil-bearing rocks were largely laid down in local floods and/or by rivers dumping sediments into lakes or seas. Those processes do build up sediment layers; the Mississippi River, the classic example, is continuing to build up its delta right before our eyes.
When the Mississippi is flowing full and fast (often after spring rains and snow melt), gravel is carried relatively far. Later, often during the drier summer season, the river slows, so that sand is dumped where gravel was, then silt on the sand. Such slow and gradual processes produce “lumpy” sediment layers that thicken and thin over short distances and contain virtually no fossils.
Actually, the Precambrian sedimentary rocks in the inner gorge probably do represent sediment laid down somewhat slowly and gradually. Like Mississippi delta deposits, these units thicken and thin, disappear and reappear, over short distances, and they contain very few fossils. They don’t have the “layer-cake” appearance—deep and wide horizontal bands of fossil-rich rocks—characteristic of rapid flood deposits. Instead, they have the “swirl-cake” appearance—lumps of fossil-poor rock—like the sediment layers being produced at the mouth of the Mississippi River right now. To Biblical creationists/Flood geologists, the Precambrian rocks at Grand Canyon look like pre-Flood or early Flood rocks formed by processes occurring like those today during the many centuries before the Flood.
But then the Flood came! There are still countless research projects to be done and questions to be answered, but let me share with you a simple model for the basic formation of Grand Canyon that ties together most of the ideas we’ve been discussing. Please treat these ideas as a stimulus to thinking, not, by any means, as the last word on Grand Canyon.
Although most people relate the Flood to “forty days and forty nights of rain,” the Bible says that the Flood began when “the fountains of the great deep burst forth.” It seems that most of the water came from below, not from above. Few people realize what a tremendous amount of water is found in molten rock (magma) trapped beneath the earth’s surface! When a hole or crack develops in the solid rock capping the more liquid magma, the pressure release causes the super-super hot water to flash into steam, and “BOOM” we have an upward-outward rush of vapor, gas, dust, and ash, producing a volcanic explosion and/or an outpouring of liquid rock on the surface (lava)! A geologist looking for a way to start a worldwide flood could hardly come up with a better mechanism than breaking up the “fountains of the great deep!”
As the volcanic fountains opened up in what is now the Grand Canyon area, the colossally stupendous force just pushed the pre-Flood or early Flood rock aside and tilted it up. The Precambrian rocks in the inner gorge are indeed cracked and tilted, and igneous intrusions cut across and between them, marking, I am suggesting, the beginning of Noah’s Flood, recorded for our study.

Figure 34. Grand Canyon: a lot of time, or alot of water? … a record of evolution? Or of the Biblical outline of history: Creation, Corruption, Catastrophe, Christ!
The first Flood current in the area came with such tremendous force that it sheared off the tilted Precambrian rocks in virtually a straight line, producing the so-called “angular unconformity” diagrammed in Fig. 34. Science tells us that the tilt-and-shear could nothave happened slowly and gradually. One of the tilted units (the reddish Hakatai Shale) is so soft and crumbly you can dig it out with your fingernails. Another is so incredibly hard (the Shinumo Quartzite) that researchers can barely knock off a piece with a hammer. Had the rocks been tilted up slowly and eroded gradually by rain drops and rivers, the crumbly rock would be all gone, leaving valleys, and the hard unit would stick up in ridges and hillocks. The two different rock types would result in a very wavy contact being formed at the angular unconformity between the tilted layers and the first horizontal unit, the Tapeats Sandstone. Instead, it looks as if the Flood current that eventually deposited the Tapeats came in with such titanic force that the hard and soft rocks were sheared off almost equally in a nearly straight line.
Actually, the Shinumo Quartzite is so hard that parts of it do occasionally stick up through the Tapeats. But the force of the Flood was so great that it broke off huge boulders of this incredibly hard rock, picked the boulders up, and carried them miles (kilometers) away before finally dropping them! Wow! Many devastating floods have been observed in historical times, but none with such power! So far as I know, there are no evolutionary (“uniformitarian”) theories to explain how such huge boulders could be picked up and slowly and gradually moved by ordinary river and raindrop erosion! Even the Colorado River today, a classic example of strength and power, is unable to move lesser boulders downstream from the mouths of its side canyons.
Once the Flood got started, it began to deposit rock layers deep and wide and full of fossils, the “layer-cake” effect characteristic of floods—but on a scale far greater than anything recorded by human observers (except Noah and his family).
We do get some inkling of the kind of geological processes involved from the study of “underwater landslides” called turbidity currents. In 1929, an earthquake loosened sediment lying on the ocean floor off Newfoundland near the continental slope. The loosened sediment roared down the slope at freeway speeds, up to 60 miles or 100 kilometers per hour! How do we know? The dense, muddy slurry flowing along the bottom severed transatlantic telephone cables one after the other, so the time of travel could be calculated from the time telephone service stopped on each line. The roaring sediment spread out over the deep ocean’s abyssal plain, covering an area of hundreds of square miles (kilometers) in a matter of hours! Many boulder flows, megabreccias, and other deposits which once mystified geologists are now interpreted, even by evolutionists, as huge layers deposited rapidly by turbidity currents. Some evolutionists estimate that perhaps 40% of the geologic column was formed by these stupendous flows!
When Biblical creationists/Flood geologists offer explanations for the rock layers in Grand Canyon, they appeal neither to Biblical authority (the Bible doesn’t mention Grand Canyon!) nor to mystical or supernatural processes. They appeal, instead, directly to the evidence we can see, touch, and measure. That evidence seems to suggest that processes we do understand, like turbidity currents, explain what we see—except that the evidence also tells us that the scale was regional, continental, or even global, not just local.
Consider this dramatic statement from the secular (evolutionary) textbook by Levine that I have used with my college Earth Science classes.
Many channels on Mars dwarf our own Grand Canyon in size, and in order to form, would have required torrential floods so spectacular as to be hard to visualize by earth standards.
Note three things: First, it’s normal for a scientist to interpret channels like Grand Canyon in terms of flooding. Second, it’s possible for a scientist to accept cataclysmic flooding on a planet that presently has little or no surface water. Third, a scientist can infer from the evidence left behind “torrential” and “spectacular” flooding on a scale far greater than anything ever recorded in scientific journals! Certainly there’s nothing unscientific about inferring a colossal flood at Grand Canyon from the evidence on a planet (Earth) whose surface is drenched in water!
I’ve mentioned that, because of the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence, many evolutionists are now calling themselves neo-catastrophists. They want nothing to do with old-fashioned catastrophism (Noah’s Flood!), but they agree that most layers of fossil-bearing rock were produced rapidly and broadly by flooding on a catastrophic scale, what Derek Ager compared to “short periods of terror” in the life of a soldier.
It’s these short periods of terror, it seems, that caught plants and animals off guard, buried them too deeply and quickly for them to escape or to be obliterated by scavengers, and turned them into fossils. Clams and snails, for example, are not normally knocked dead and fossilized by a few sand grains or even by huge shifts of sand induced by hurricanes. But zillions were buried and fossilized, it seems, in the first overwhelming deposits of “Flood mud.”
At Grand Canyon as around the world, the “first” or “deepest” layer to contain an abundance of fossil remains is called the Cambrian geologic system. As discussed earlier, these Cambrian “stones cry out” for Creation! Instead of a few simple life forms, hard to classify and apparently thrown together by time and chance, as an evolutionist might expect, we find a dazzling variety of complex life forms, apparently well-designed to multiply after kind: clams, snails, lampshells, echinoderms, and the most complex of all invertebrates, the nautiloids (“shelled squids”), with an eye that sees the world as we do, and the trilobites, with their geometrically marvelous compound eyes.
But why should Cambrian deposits contain only (or almost only) the remains of sea creatures? A professor debating me in Australia put it this way: “If God created everything in six days, why don’t we find mice with trilobites in Cambrian rocks?” My simple reply: “Because mice don’t live on the sea floor.” Ecology, not evolution, is the key. (He then said he meant his question only as a joke.)
Many people have the completely mistaken notion that the Biblical Flood covered the whole earth almost instantly, stirred everything up, and then suddenly dumped it all. Not at all! According to the Biblical record, Noah was in the Ark for over a year. It was about five months before “all the high mountains under the whole heavens” were covered, and it took several more months for the water to subside as “the mountains rose up and the valleys sank down” at the end of the Flood. As the Flood waters “slowly” rose over the earth, plants and animals were buried in a sort of ecologic series: sea-bottom creatures, near-shore forms, lowland plants and animals, then upland (with sea creatures deposited from bottom to top, as the sea eventually covered everything). Evolutionists and Flood geologists may agree that the fossil-bearing rocks were laid down in “short periods of terror,” but Flood geologists see the “long periods of boredom” between layers as minutes or months, not millions of years!
Indeed, once the rock layers at Grand Canyon began to stack up, it seems they “forgot” all about “evolutionary time.” In one small step (especially small with a heavy backpack!), a hiker can step right across “150 million years” of “missing evolutionary times”! I’m talking about the contact between the Muav and Redwall Limestones (Fig. 34).
The Muav is Cambrian (supposedly, “evolution stage 1”), while the Redwall is Mississippian or lower Carboniferous (“evolution stage 5”). If Grand Canyon is assumed to represent stages in evolution laid out for all to see, where are evolutionary stages 2, 3, and 4 (Ordovician, Silurian, and Devonian)? Evolutionists recognize that’s a serious question. Grandparents can’t have grandchildren without first having children, and plants and animals can’t evolve directly from stage 1 to stage 5 without evolving through stages 2, 3, and 4 first. Everyone agrees that in any “chain of life,” you can’t skip generations!
Evolutionists recognize the problem of rock layers (“150 million years’ worth”) missing from Grand Canyon—but they also have a ready solution to the problem: erosion. Stage 2, 3, and 4 rocks really were deposited, they suggest, but they were uplifted and eroded away; then stage 5 rock (Mississippian Redwall) was laid down directly on top of stage 1 rock (Cambrian Muav). It’s as if erosion tore out three chapters from the story of evolution!
That evolutionary argument is certainly logical and potentially correct. We see erosion erasing rock layers today, and we can infer that erosion also did so in the past. So evolutionists went looking for evidence of erosion, but they were honest enough to admit that they did not find it, at least not on a sufficient scale.
When a rock layer is eroded slowly and gradually by streams and rivers, as discussed earlier, an irregular surface is produced. When sediment later accumulates on this surface and hardens, the wavy contact line produced is called a disconformity, and often old stream beds may be identified along its surface. That’s not what we find at the Redwall/Muav (Mississippian/Cambrian) contact. Over hundreds of miles of exposure in and out of various side canyons, the two rock layers are in smooth, horizontal contact. There are occasional small erosional dips called Temple Butte Devonian, but the regional picture is clear: it looks like one rock layer was deposited directly on top of the other with very little time break. According to the evidence, those 150 million years never existed at all!48
If there were strong evidence for 150 million years of erosion, geologists would call the contact adisconformity. Because the evidence suggests, instead, smooth, continuous deposition with little time break, the contact should be called a conformity. But admitting a 150-million-year “hole” in evolutionary theory would be far too difficult for most evolutionists, so they use the contact term we discussed earlier: paraconformity. Flood geologists just accept the evidence as it stands: no 150 million years. But evolution requires 150 million years at that point. Hence, the term “paraconformity” is offered, not as a solution to the problem of all that missing time, but as a label for a problem to be solved by future research.
Evolutionists believe that other evidence for evolution is so strong that paraconformities can be regarded as just minor glitches in an otherwise convincing story. That’s exactly how I dealt with “minor mysteries” when I believed and taught evolution. There’s certainly nothing wrong with that approach, but, note, that it’s an act of faith, not science. Flood geologists can simplyaccept the directly observable evidence for rapid, continuous deposition, the more scientific choice at this point.
There’s further evidence to encourage Flood geologists to think that they have made the correct scientific choice. If individual sediment layers were hardened, uplifted, eroded, then covered again with water, it’s likely that the lower hardened layers would crack in a pattern different from cracks formed in layers above them, and produced and moved millions of years later. In other words, there should be “buried faults,” cracks through one layer not continuing into the layer above. But there are virtually no buried faults above the Precambrian in the Canyon. There are faults, all right, but they cut continuously through the whole sequence of Paleozoic layers present (Cambrian, Mississippian, Pennsylvanian, and Permian), not just part of it. That evidence suggests the whole “layer cake” was formed rapidly and continuously, without a major break in time—just as you would expect from understanding Grand Canyon in terms of what the Bible says about Noah’s Flood.
But then we come to the Coconino Sandstone. Above the Redwall are several other major layers (Supai Group, Hermit Shale, Coconino Sandstone, Toroweap Formation, and Kaibab Limestone, as shown in Fig. 34). All these were obviously laid down as water-borne sediment (i.e., flood deposits)—except the Coconino. The Coconino is a cross-bedded sandstone usually interpreted as a huge desert dune deposit.
Now why did I have to bring that up? I’ve been trying to encourage you to think about the horizontal bands of Grand Canyon rock as a “layer cake” formed by global flooding. How could 400–600 feet (100–200 m) of desert dune get sandwiched between two layers of sediment deposited during the year of Noah’s Flood?
The first time someone asked me that question, I didn’t know what to say. Admitting the problem, I sputtered something about how the Bible talks about a great wind that blew back and forth over the earth as the Flood subsided, but then I also admitted that the layers above the Coconino suggested the Flood was still depositing.
Then somebody reminded me of what I should have known already: dunes also form underwater. Ripple marks in sand at the beach are just “mini-dunes,” and my students and I have actually watched much bigger dunes form and travel underwater while on scuba dives (in rough seas) to the Florida Keys. The weight of evidence now favors the formation of the Coconino as anunderwater dune deposit. Most telling is the work by Dr. Leonard Brand on the abundant animal trackways for which the Coconino is famous.49
In this case, my confidence in Flood geology was confirmed by further research. It remains to be seen whether the evolutionist’s confidence will ever be encouraged by further study of paraconformities. There are surely many other questions to be researched, but the weight of evidence we have available now (and that’s as far as science can go) seems to suggest strongly that the horizontal rock layers at Grand Canyon were formed rapidly, not by a lot of time, but by a lot of water instead!
But if the rock layers got stacked up under water, we have another problem. The North Rim of Grand Canyon is now over 8000 feet (over 2500 m) above sea level. How did that happen? How did the rock layers end up far above sea level, and where did that big gash, the Canyon itself that cuts through all those layers, come from?
The Bible tells us that at the end of the Flood “the mountains rose up and the valleys sank down.” An evolutionist friend of mine once told me that the best evidence for the Creation/Corruption/Catastrophe model he knew was that any land existed at all on the earth. If our planet had spun down from a gas cloud, he said, the outer layers would consist of basaltic ocean crust (density 3.5 g/cm3), covered by a concentric layer of granite (3.0 g/cm3), the whole thing covered by over 2 miles (3 km) of water (density 1.0 g/cm3)! He said it looked as if “someone with big hands” (the closest he could come to saying “God”) took the granite and shoved it up into a pile to form the dry land. Then he added that the “guy with big hands” was also smart enough to thin the basalt under the granite piles to maintain the earth in gravitational balance (isostasy) so that it wouldn’t fracture as it rotated.
Perhaps God did use supernatural means to raise the land after the Flood as He did on the third day of the creation week. Or perhaps He used secondary means not yet discovered. A Biblical creationist/Flood geologist would never want to rule out God’s direct supernatural intervention (our salvation and resurrection depend on it!), but neither would he or she appeal to supernatural processes unless logic or the evidence clearly pointed in that direction. Actually, neither creationist nor evolutionist is satisfied with present models for “upwarp” and “downwarp,” moving big chunks of land above and below sea level.
However the land was raised, the next question is this: Where did the Canyon itself come from? The Flood may have stacked the rock like a giant layer cake, but what cut the cake?
One thing for sure: the Colorado River did not do it. The Colorado River starts about 12,000 feet (ca. 3,500 m) up in the Rocky Mountains of western Colorado. By the time it gets to the Grand Canyon area, it’s at about 5,000 feet (1,500 m). And that’s the problem. Grand Canyon is definitely not a lowland valley. The North Rim of the Canyon is over 8,000 feet (2,500 m) high! For the Colorado River to carve the Canyon, it would first have to hack its way half a mile (over 700 m) uphill! Water just doesn’t do that, especially when there’s the opportunity to flow downhill in a different direction. For this and several other reasons, even evolutionary geologists no longer believe that the River slowly cut the Canyon over 60 million years.
The Kaibab upwarp (monocline) through which the Canyon is cut seems to have dammed up a great deal of water. It is possible to map the outlines of a giant “fossil lake” that once covered parts of Arizona, Colorado, and Utah. Since there seems to be no renewable source for such a vast amount of water, it may have been “leftover” Flood water trapped as the mountains rose and valleys sank.
Then the dam broke! The Grand Canyon area is crisscrossed with earthquake fault lines, so it might have been some sort of rift or fault that tore a breach in the dam. The water impounded by the dam would have rushed through the crack, probably cutting the essential features of the Canyon very rapidly indeed. The Colorado River (which is not even able to move the boulders at the mouths of its side canyons) is just a modest trickle caught in the twists and turns where the dam was breached. The Canyon came first; the River came second.50
Now, if the evidence is as clear and simple as I’m suggesting it is, then even evolutionary geologists who were totally unwilling even to consider my Biblical conclusions could at least accept the individual points as scientifically logical—and they do.
Consider Harlan Bretz. For years and years, he studied the “Channeled Scablands” of eastern Washington, a area of 15,000 miles2 (40,000 km2). It looks as if a giant, braided stream cut channels up to 900 feet (250 m) deep in hard basaltic lava (much harder to cut than most of the Grand Canyon layers). Bretz postulated that a tongue of glacial ice blocked off what we now call the Columbia River near Spokane, damming up a huge body of water called glacial Lake Missoula. Then the ice-dam broke. And, according to Bretz, the stupendous drainage from that lake cut the essential features of those channels 900 feet (250 m) deep over 15,000 miles2 (40,000 km2) in—one or two million years?—no, in “a day or two.” That’s the conclusion presented by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) in its pamphlet51 “The Channeled Scablands: the Story of the Great Spokane Flood.”
At first, the “slow and gradual” school of evolutionary thought (“uniformitarians”) laughed Bretz to scorn. But after examining his evidence, a team of geologists decided Bretz was right after all, and they gave him geology’s highest award, the Penrose Medal. In accepting the award, Bretz said that his greatest contribution to geology was reviving the idea that great catastrophes have shaped the physical features of the earth (“neo-catastrophism”).52

Figure 35. The eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1982 formed a 1/40 “scale model” of Grand Canyon in just 5 days. Other effects observed at Mt. St. Helens dramatically and visibly supported Creation/Flood geologist theories about the rapid formation of coal, polystrates, and sediment banding. (There is an excellent video by Dr. Steven Austinavailable.)

Less dramatic in scale, but directly and awesomely visible, was an eruption of Mt. St. Helens. We have described the first eruption in May of 1980, as the force of water flashing to steam blew the top 1300 feet (400 m) off the north side of the volcano. More to the immediate point was the explosion in June of 1982. The heat generated from that explosion melted frozen mud, producing a mud flow that filled up the North Fork of the Toutle River. The smoke cleared five days later to reveal that the mud flow had been eroded into a zig-zag main channel with many sharply tapered side canyons. Horizontal bands of sediment, some thick, and some exceedingly fine, lined the walls of the newly formed canyon. Right before our eyes, a small volcano (which never even produced a lava flow) had stacked up horizontal bands of sediment, and cut channels through it, forming a 1/40th size “scale model” of Grand Canyon in just five days! All sorts of features once thought to take millions of years of time were formed, instead, by a lot of water in just five days! And my wife and I got to see it on a dizzying flight down the length of that “Little Grand Canyon.” (See Austin video,53 Morris,54 and Fig. 35.)
Although very dramatic, both the Channeled Scablands and Mt. St. Helens are quite modest events compared to the epic geologic work that would have been done by a Global Flood like that described in the Bible.
At least the worldwide evidence is now so clear that even evolutionists are talking about worldwide catastrophes. The most highly touted is supposed to be an asteroid impact that wiped out the dinosaurs and a host of other life forms. Scientists have calculated that if an ocean were hit by an asteroid about 6 miles (10 km) across (and several that size pass near earth’s orbit!), a wave of water would slosh over all the continents and bring nearly instant destruction on an unimaginable scale!
The Bible doesn’t say whether God used secondary agents, such as an asteroid impact, to trigger the Flood. Either way, it’s encouraging to see that evolutionists recognize the evidence that points toward global catastrophe. Indeed, some evolutionists now believe the earth has sufferedmultiple global catastrophes, and I mentioned that others even see evidence of colossal flooding on Mars, a planet that presently has no significant surface water!
The asteroid catastrophes some evolutionists postulate are dramatic, and so is the Biblical narrative, as it tells how “all the high mountains under the whole heavens” were once covered with water. If that were so, we ought to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. Grab your pick and shovel and go looking, and what do you find? Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth! Right up to sea creatures fossilized in the high Himalayas, it looks like the scientific evidence in God’s world encourages us to trust the Bible as God’s Word!
Sometimes, I imagine a geologist who has spent 20 years roaming through Grand Canyon. Finally, he decides to take a break and hike up to the rim. There, on a park bench, he finds a Bible. As he opens it and reads the first few chapters, he jumps excitedly to his feet. “Eureka! I’ve found it! That’s what I’ve been seeing here in Grand Canyon!”
1. “Now I know why the first forms of life to leave an abundance of fossil remains are so complex and varied, and classify into groups like we have today. They were created well-designed to multiply after their kinds.”
2. “Now I know why the ‘geologic column’ shows a decline in variety, even extinction, for so many groups. We’re not looking at a record of evolutionary progress, but a record of death—a Corruption of the world God had created all very good. Grand Canyon is really a vast, open graveyard.”
3. “Now I know how fossils were preserved, how the Precambrian rocks were tilted up and sheared off, how the huge Tapeats boulders were moved great distances, why 150 million mythical years are missing at the great paraconformity, how trackways were preserved in the Coconino, and why the Colorado River is trapped in the sharp curves of the Canyon. We’re not looking at a record of a lot of time, but of a lot of water—the tremendous worldwide Catastrophe of Noah’s Flood!”
4. “Now I know I can look to Christ to raise me to new life. Nobody could ever have survived the awesome destruction of the world we see reflected at Grand Canyon. And if Christ could save Noah from the Flood, He can save me from death, too!”
When I started working on my doctoral minor in geology, I really thought my study would make it very hard to accept the simple truths and promises in the Bible. My excellent professors all believed evolution, but what I learned about fossils made it hard to believe evolution and very easy to believe what the Bible teaches about Creation, Corruption, Catastrophe, and Christ!
We find evidence of Creation not only in the design and complexity of the “first” fossils found of each group, but also in the wonderfully constructed “language” of DNA; in the intricate way a baby develops in his or her mother’s womb according to the plan fully presented at conception, in the similarities that point to “common Creator,” not common ancestry, in classification; in marvellously interdependent adaptations, like those of the woodpecker; in the incredible variability, like all the human skin colors, stored in the first parents of each created kind.
We find evidence of Corruption, the way God’s Creation was ruined by man’s self-centered arrogance, not only in the death, decline, and extinction seen in all the fossil groups, but also in the effects of mutations producing disease, disease organisms, and other defects, and in the struggle to the death that is an essential part of Darwinian selection.
Evidence of a great Catastrophe, like the world-wide Flood described for Noah’s time, is clear from the billions of dead things buried as fossils, extinction, rapid formation of huge sediment layers by turbidity currents, polystratic fossils that cut through many rock layers without evidence of falling over or rotting, paraconformities (vast amounts of supposed evolutionary time missing without evidence or erosion), the tilting and shearing and boulder flows in Grand Canyon, etc., etc., etc.
All the above can be inferred directly from the scientific evidence, although it’s the Bible that really puts these together in a pattern of meaning. Evolution is based on genetics that have never been observed and fossils that have never been found. The Bible is supported by laws of heredity we put into practice every day and on thousands of tons of fossils buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth.
In short, evolution is a faith that the facts have failed. Biblical Christianity is a faith that fits the facts.
As I told you in the beginning, I didn’t always believe that. It took me three years of trying to “prove” evolution to two colleagues, professors of chemistry and biology, before I saw that the scientific evidence available disproves the traditional view of evolution taught as “fact” to millions of young people worldwide.
Does that mean I’ve proved Creation? Not at all. Contrary to a popular misconception, scientists can only disprove or support a theory, never prove it. As every working scientist knows, you can never tell when some new discovery will shift support to a competing theory. People (including scientists!) are finite, limited by space and time. As finite creatures, we must live by faith; there is no other choice.
But we can choose the object of our faith. We can put our faith in our own opinions or the words of “experts,” as I did through my first several years of teaching university biology. Or we can put our faith in the Word of the Living God, who stands outside our limits of space and time. Only God can tell us what is truly true, now and forever.
The difference between evolution and the Bible is certainly evident when we look back at where we’ve come from, but the difference is even greater when we consider where we’re going! I once let my students watch two well-known evolutionists on a TV talk show that aired during class time. The audience wanted to know, “What does the future hold?” The fossil expert said the fate of essentially every species is extinction, and that mankind, too, would someday become extinct. The audience broke into applause, although I’ve never figured out what’s so wonderful about becoming extinct! When they asked the evolutionist astronomer about the future, his reply was that one day the sun would expand and all life on earth would be burned to death, and again the audience broke into applause.
However, the Bible offers a more lively hope! The same God in Christ who created us, is the same God who did not turn away from us when we turned away from Him. Indeed, Jesus Christ paid the penalty for our rebellion, died to conquer death, and rose again to raise those who believe to new life in Him.
Jesus Himself asked, “How can you believe me when I tell you heavenly things if you don’t believe me when I tell you earthly things?” Science shows us we can trust the Bible when it tells us earthly things about Creation, Corruption, and Catastrophe. That encourages us to trust the “Fourth C,” Jesus Christ, for the promise of a new and abundant life now and forever, and of a “new heavens and new earth,” where God will “wipe away every tear” and restore the Creation to the way He made it for us in the beginning: a garden of Eden, a garden of Delight. Then once again, “the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb … and a little child shall lead them … . They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea” (Isaiah 11:6–9).
It’s a wonderful, wonderful story, full of love and meaning for each person on earth. And what we see in God’s world encourages us to trust the Bible as God’s Word. Then those wonderful promises can be ours, guaranteed by the power of the Lord God, Maker of heaven and earth, the God of all people, all times, and all places. If God made us, we can trust Him to make usanew! Won’t you choose to trust Him now?
The study of science offers more than science lessons. There are spiritual lessons as well.




Grand Canyon—what is the message?
by Tom Vail, Canyon Ministries
December 22, 2005
The Grand Canyon in N. Arizona, USA is an awesome spectacle, a classic example of erosion unequaled anywhere on earth.
Carved through sedimentary layers of limestone, sandstone and shale, and into the bedrock of schist and granite, this great chasm stretches 277 miles through the Colorado Plateau. It descends over a mile into the earth and extends as much as 18 miles in width.
The Grand Canyon is also a place to find and explore the wonders of God’s creation. When viewed from a biblical perspective, the Canyon has “God” written all over it, from the splendor and grandeur of the entire area, to the diverse and unique design of the plants and animals that inhabit this “magical” place. They all display the magnificence of the hand of our Creator.
AiG speaker, dinosaur sculptor and musician Buddy Davis (far left) enjoys the splash of cold water on last year’s trip through the Grand Canyon.
Not only is the Canyon a testimony to the Creator, but it also presents evidence of God’s judgment of the world. It was a judgment by water of a world broken by sin. The Canyon gives us a glimpse of the effects and scale of a catastrophic global flood, the biblical Flood of Noah’s day.
Visitors to the Grand Canyon generally find it to be awe-inspiring, but at the same time, too strange and overwhelming to be fully understood on its own—for the Canyon can’t tell us about itself.
As humans, we tend to ask two questions as we view this vast, grand, mysterious hole in the ground: how and why?
We do have the one and only true history book, the Bible, that can help answer these questions. Even though Scripture does not mention the Grand Canyon, we can do some theorizing based on the evidence that we see and examine in light of the Bible.
The “how”
As we consider the “how,” we find that virtually all geologists agree that the Grand Canyon was carved by water. The question is how quickly and when. If we examine the prevailing interpretive literature about the Canyon, we find that the views presented are predominantly based on evolutionary theories. For the Canyon, this means that the rock layers were laid down over literally hundreds of millions of years, and that the Canyon was later carved slowly by the Colorado River. These theories tend to deny God’s involvement.
But, if we look at the Canyon through the eyes of a biblical, or scriptural, geologist (those who believe in the Bible’s timeline of a young earth), we will see a very different Canyon. These geologists see a young canyon carved with a massive amount of water, likely in a matter of just days, shortly after the global flood of Noah’s day about 4,300 years ago.
So is there evidence to support a biblical model? Yes. Let’s briefly examine a couple of the areas which do just that.


According to the biblical model, the vast majority of the sedimentary layers we see in the Grand Canyon (and in the rest of the world for that matter) were deposited as the result of a global flood that occurred after, and ultimately as a result of, the initial sin that took place in the Garden of Eden about 6,000 years ago.
Let’s look at the folding that is found in the sedimentary rock layers of the Canyon. The picture to the left is a fold in the Tapeats Sandstone in Carbon Creek, one of the side canyons within Grand Canyon. You can plainly see here that the rock was bent, or as the geologist would say, “folded,” while still soft or pliable. Notice that this folding has taken place without cracking the rock.Folds like this indicate that the folding had to happen soon after deposition, and that the deposition and the upheaval responsible for the folding were in fact one event.
Another area that supports the biblical model is the contact lines between the layers themselves. When evolutionists look at this contact point between the Coconino Sandstone and the Hermit Shale, as seen to the right, they see 10 million years of “missing” time and material.


But the creationists, using the biblical model, don’t see “missing” material at all. They see classic flood geology, only on a scale so large that it boggles the mind of the evolutionist.
Note the knife-edge line of the contact point; this contact is the same throughout the length of the Canyon. If this represents 10 million years of missing material, why don’t we see any sign of either physical or chemical erosion between the layers?
So does this “prove” the Grand Canyon is the result of a global Flood or how it was formed? No. It does show, however, that there is a legitimate, scientific alternative to the evolutionary dogma that has permeated our society.
The “why”
As to the “why” of the Grand Canyon, that is somewhat more speculative. The Canyon is often called “Exhibit A” in support of a young earth, and with the wonderful design of its animals and plants, it also confirms the Master Designer, the Creator God of the Bible. The Bible says: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20). What we see in the Canyon only supports and upholds what we read in the Word of God. And only from down in the Canyon can so much of it be seen.

So is the Grand Canyon there to provide the skeptics with evidence that may be “clearly seen” if only they were willing to see? The heart of the issue is clearly addressed inColossians 2:8 which reads, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.” It is the elementary principles of the world (or those of man) that have developed the evolutionary theories that reject the Word of God and God Himself.
As you view the Grand Canyon, remember that it is the result of God’s judgment of the world, not just His creative design. As with everything around us, a simplistic “God made this” is really inadequate, as what we see today is not the world He originally made, since it has all been corrupted by the global judgment of sin—Noah’s Flood.
Could God have started a process (evolutionary uniformitarianism) that would have carved the Canyon over millions of years? Perhaps some would say yes, but the issue isn’t what God “could have done.” He could have done it any of a million ways. The issue is what God said He did in His Word.
You can trust God’s Word, right from the very first verse, and the Grand Canyon is one of His most magnificent examples of that.
________________________________________
Tom Vail is the author of Grand Canyon: a Different View and will be the guide on three AiG Grand Canyon river trips next summer. He is a twenty-five year veteran of guiding in the Canyon and with his wife, Paula, runs Canyon Ministries, which provides Christ-centered rafting trips through the Grand Canyon. Tom welcomes opportunities to share the biblical message of the Grand Canyon. You can find out more about their ministry and how to join them on one of their trips by calling (602) 254-5798 in the USA or visitingwww.CanyonMinistries.com.


he scenic grandeur of Grand Canyon stirs awe-inspired emotion in the millions of visitors who make their way every year to northwestern Arizona. Hardly anything else in the world gives such insight into the geologic timescale of the earth better than this “hole in the ground.” And no other natural wonder causes more contention either. Grand Canyon extends over 250 miles (400 km) through the Colorado Plateau, stretches from 4 to 18 miles (6–30 km) wide and reaches down more than a mile (1.6 km).

Layer after layer of exposed strata provide a spectacular sight for each Canyon guest. The lowest and first of the four major divisions of rock units is made up of many granites, including the Zoroaster Granite, and the Granite Gorge Metamorphic Suite, which includes the Vishnu Schist, forming the crystalline basement of igneous and metamorphic rocks, respectively. Directly above them is the second major division, the Grand Canyon Supergroup, which are tilted layers of strata showing evidence of tectonic activity. The third major division contains horizontally stratified layers in the walls of the Canyon made up of sedimentary deposits in nine distinct layers. The fourth major division includes strata which have markings of erosion on their surfaces and is followed by the very top layer (the Kaibab Plateau), which is made of river gravel, lake sediments, landslide deposits and lava flows. Throughout many of the layers of Grand Canyon, one can find fossils of amphibians, reptiles, ferns, and other plants, as well as marine organisms, such as brachiopods and mollusks. Many of these show evidence of rapid burial.
Formation
Evolutionary explanation
The evolutionary explanation of the Canyon’s formation begins many years ago—in fact, billions of years ago. The basement rocks in Grand Canyon are metamorphic rocks, seen as remains of a variety of sedimentary and extrusive igneous rocks deposited nearly two billion years ago. After igneous intrusion episodes and erosion, beginning about 1 billion years ago, the whole region was under water. Over hundreds of millions of years, each of the sedimentary layers was formed by a different period in which the ocean moved in and covered the land, stayed for a while, and then retreated, thus building up over a mile (1.6 km) of sedimentary rock. Over about 70 million years, the Colorado River threaded through the Colorado Plateau and flooded numerous times, changing the river’s path again and again until it reached its present course. As the flooded river changed its drainage basin, the increased momentum picked up rocks and other debris which tore away the river’s bottom and thus changed the landscape of the plateau. The water also filled the cracks in the plateau and froze during the winter months and caused these cracks to expand and break the rock apart. Over time, this action changed the topography of the entire plateau, gradually digging deeper and deeper into the rock and forming Grand Canyon.
Biblical explanation
The biblical explanation for how the Canyon formed is actually quite simple. The “basement” layers, consisting of granites and metamorphic rocks, were formed on Day 3 of Creation Week. Many of the other layers were deposited by the waters of the global Flood as described inGenesis 7–8. These unhindered, swirling currents picked up, transported and eventually deposited tons of sediment in layers. These strata were then tilted and bent through great tectonic activity during the final stages of the Flood. The sedimentary layers which make up the nine distinct layers of the third major division of the Canyon walls show that they were soft and unconsolidated when they bent, unlike the basement rocks which fractured. The sand grains in these sedimentary layers show no evidence that the material was brittle and rock-hard, and neither has the mineral cementing the grains been broken. Instead, the evidence points to the whole 4,000-feet (1.220 m) thickness of strata being still “plastic” when it was uplifted and bent. Once the Flood waters receded, the newly placed layers of sediment continued to harden into rock. As the Flood waters receded, the uplifted plateau acted like a dam wall, trapping the waters behind it. In a catastrophic event, this earthen dam ruptured, releasing a barrage of water that carved the Canyon itself.

Dating
Evolutionary view
As evolutionary geologists have studied Grand Canyon, many rock samples have been taken to recognized laboratories in attempts to date these rocks. The main method used in these studies is the radioisotope dating method, which is based on the rate of decay of radioactive isotopes. However, it is important to realize that the results of such tests yield only relative amounts of the parent and daughter isotopes, not an actual “age”—it is from these measurements that an “age” is calculated. Because all such age-dating methods are based on assumptions, these methods tend to be unreliable. It has been shown many times that samples taken from the same rocks produce different dates! Additionally, tests on rocks of known age have yielded false results. Many times scientists overlook these “incorrect” dates in order to fit them into their presuppositions about the earth’s age.
Biblical view
Since the Bible says that the earth is only about 6,000 years old, Grand Canyon could not have formed millions of years ago. The layers, fossils and other natural wonders of Grand Canyon confirm that the earth was transformed from its original state by a world-altering catastrophe and its after-effects. That catastrophe was the global Flood as recorded in Scripture.
Consider it
Grand Canyon cuts through the landscape of northern Arizona as no other natural feature on Earth. It also cuts through the shaky foundation of evolutionary interpretations that are given to each of the Canyon’s layers. Grand Canyon does not speak of millions of years of formation; it clearly testifies of rapid formation by a land-transforming catastrophe and its after-effects. Thefossils entombed in the sediments of the Canyon also remind us of God’s terrible judgment on sin and of the salvation He offers.

[John Chingford]

is the bible trustworthy

Manuscript Evidence for the Bible
Reliability of the New Testament as Historical Documents
• "Astounding" number of ancient manuscripts extant: 5,000 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin and 9,000 other--totaling over 24,000 manuscript copies or portions of the New Testament. These are dated from 100 to 300 years after the originals. (There are no original manuscripts ["autographs"] extant, but the number and similarity of copies allows scholars to reconstruct the originals.)
• Early fragments: John Ryland manuscript 130 A.D. in Egypt; Bodmer manuscript containing most of John's gospel 150-200 A.D.; Magdalen fragment from Mat. 26 believed by some to be within a few years of Jesus' death; Gospel fragments found among the Dead Sea Scrolls dated as early as 50 A.D.
• Comparison with other ancient documents (available copies versus the originals):
Caesar—10 copies—1000 year gap
Tacitus—20 copies—1000 year gap
Plato—7 copies—1200 year gap
• F. F. Bruce: "There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good attestation as the New Testament."
• William F. Albright: "Thanks to the Qumran discoveries, the New Testament proves to be in fact what it was formerly believed to be: the teaching of Christ and his immediate followers circa.25 and circa. 80 AD."
Quotations from Early Church Fathers:
• Clement of Rome (a disciple of the apostles) cited Matthew, John, and 1 Corinthians in 95 to 97 A.D. Ignatius (who knew the apostles well) referred to six Pauline Epistles in about 110. Polycarp (disciple of apostle John) quoted from all four Gospels, Acts, and most of Paul's Epistles from 110 to 150. Taitian's harmony of the Four Gospels completed in 160 A.D. Irenaeus (who apparently heard the apostles) quoted from Matthew, John, Acts, and 1 Corinthians in 160 A.D.
• Of the four Gospels alone, there are 19,368 citations by the church fathers from the late first century on. Even if we had no manuscripts, virtually the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from these quotations. This argues powerfully that the Gospels were in existence before the end of the first century, while some eyewitnesses (including John) were still alive.
Primary Source Value
• Testimony of the New Testament authors themselves: Luke 1:1-3, 3:1, John 21:24, Acts 26:24-26, 2 Peter 1:16, 1 John 1:3.
• Both liberal and conservative scholars in recent years have moved to the view that ALL of the New Testament was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. (Liberal scholar John A. T. Robinson's book Redating the New Testament. Conservative scholar Kenneth Gentry's book Before Jesusalem Fell). One reason for their argument for early date for the New Testament is because there is no mention in the past tense of the devastating destruction of Jesusalem and the temple anywhere in the New Testament, and there is consistent mention of it still standing (even in the book of Revelation). Though the Gospels include prophecies of such a destruction, they are prophetic stock-in-trade. These prophesies lack any details that certainly would have been added if written after this important historical event.
• Substantial other evidences of New Testament being written between 40 and 60 A.D. See Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics.
Reliability of the Old Testament
• Jewish scholars performed "unbelievable" care in copying and preserving Scripture.
• The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in 1947 are dated from the third century B.C. to the first century A.D. These manuscripts predate by 1000 years the previous oldest manuscripts. They represent every Old Testament book except Esther (as well as non-biblical writings). There is word for word identity in more than 95% of the cases, and the 5% variation consists mostly of slips of the pen and spelling.

Archaeological and External Evidence for the Bible
Archeology consistently confirms the Bible!
Archaeology and the Old Testament
• Ebla tablets—discovered in 1970s in Northern Syria. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. In use in Ebla was the name "Canaan," a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The tablets refer to all five "cities of the plain" mentioned in Genesis 14, previously assumed to have been mere legends.
• Greater proportion of Egyptian words in the Pentateuch (first five books) than in rest of the Old Testament. Accurate Egyptian names: Potiphar (Gen.39),Zaphenath-Paneah (Joseph's Egyptian name, Gen. 41:45), Asenath(Gen.41:45), On (Gen. 41:45), Rameses (Gen. 47:11), Oithom (Exodus 1:11).
• Finds in Egypt are consistent with the time, place, and other details of biblical accounts of the Israelites in Egypt. These include housing and tombs that could have been of the Israelites, as well as a villa and tomb that could have been Joseph's.
• Confounding earlier skeptics, but confirming the Bible, an important discovery was made in Egypt in 1896. A tablet—the Merneptah Stela—was found that mentions Israel. (Merneptah was the pharaoh that ruled Egypt in 1212-1202 B.C.) The context of the stela indicates that Israel was a significant entity in the late 13th century B.C.
• The Hittites were once thought to be a biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered in Turkey.
• Crucial find in Nuzi (northeastern Iraq), an entire cache of Hittite legal documents from 1400 B.C. Confirms many details of Genesis, Deuteronomy, such as: (a) siring of legitimate children through handmaidens, (b) oral deathbed will as binding, (c) the power to sell one's birthright for relatively trivial property (Jacob & Esau), (d) need for family idols, such as Rachel stole from Laban, to secure inheritance, (e) form of the covenant in Deuteronomy exactly matches the form of suzerainty treaties between Hittite emperors and vassal kings.
• Walls of Jericho—discovery in 1930s by John Garstang. The walls fell suddenly, and outwardly (unique), so Israelites could clamber over the ruins into the city (Joshua 6:20).
• In 1986, scholars identified an ancient seal belonging to Baruch, son of Neriah, a scribe who recorded the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer. 45:11).
• In 1990, Harvard researchers unearthed a silver-plated bronze calf figurine reminiscent of the huge golden calf mentioned in the book of Exodus.
• In 1993, archaeologists uncovered a 9th century B.C. inscription at Tel Dan. The words carved into a chunk of basalt refer to the "House of David" and the "King of Israel." And the Bible's version of Israelite history after the reign of David's son, Solomon, is believed to be based on historical fact because it is corroborated by independent account of Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions.
• It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded in the palace walls! Even more, fragments of a stela (a poetic eulogy) memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.
• Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named inDaniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Tablet was found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son.
• The ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered southeast of the Dead Sea. Evidence at the site seems consistent with the biblical account: "Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens." The destruction debris was about 3 feet thick and buildings were burned from fires that started on the rooftops. Geologist Frederick Clapp theorizes that that pressure from an earthquake could have spewed out sulfur-laden bitumen (similar to asphalt) known to be in the area through the fault line upon which the cities rest. The dense smoke reported by Abraham is consistent with a fire from such material, which could have ignited by a spark or ground fire.
Archaeology and the New Testament
• The New Testament mentions specific individuals, places, and various official titles of local authorities, confirmed by recent archeology. Luke sites exact titles of officials. (Titles varied from city to city so they are easily checked for accuracy.) Lysanias the Tetrarch in Abilene (Luke 3:1)—verified by inscription dated 14-29 A.D. Erastus, city treasurer of Corinth (Romans 16:23)—verified by pavement inscription. Gallio—proconsul of Achaia (Greece) in A.D. 51 (Acts 18:12). Politarchs ("city ruler") in Thessalonica (Acts 17:6). Chief Man of the Island on Malta (Acts 28:7). Stone Pavementat Pilate's headquarters (John 19:13)—discovered recently. Pool at Bethesda— discovered in 1888. Many examples of silver shrines to Artemisfound (Acts 19:28). Inscription confirms the title of the city as "Temple Warden of Artemis". Account of Paul's sea voyage in Acts is "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship."
• Census of Luke 1. Census began under Augustus approximately every 14 years: 23-22 B.C., 9-8 B.C., 6 A.D. There is evidence of enrollment in 11-8 B.C. in Egyptian papyri.
o Problem: Historian Josephus puts Quirinius as governor in Syria at 6 A.D. Solution: Recent inscription confirms that Quirinius served as governor in 7 B. C. (in extraordinary, military capacity).
o Problem: Herod's kingdom was not part of the Roman Empire at the time, so there would not have been a census. Solution: it was a client kingdom. Augustus treated Herod as subject (Josephus). Parallel—a census took place in the client kingdom of Antiochus in eastern Asia Minor under Tiberius.
o Enrollment in hometown? Confirmed by edict of Vibius Maximus, Roman prefect of Egypt, in 104 A.D. "...it is necessary for all who are for any cause whatsoever way from their administrative divisions to return home to comply with the customary ordinance of enrollment."
• Opinion of Sir William Ramsay, one of the outstanding Near Eastern archeologists: "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense; he fixes his mind on the idea and plan that rules in the evolution of history, and proportions the scale of his treatment to the importance of each incident. He seizes the important and critical events and shows their true nature at greater length...In short, this author should be placed among the very greatest of historians."
• Diggers recently uncovered an ossuary (repository for bones) with the inscription "Joseph Son of Caiaphas." This marked the first archaeological evidence that the high priest Caiaphas was a real person. According to the gospels, Caiaphas presided at the Sanhedrin's trial of Jesus.
External References to Jesus and the Christian Church.
• Josephus. Born to priestly family in A.D. 37. Commanded Jewish troops in Galilee during rebellion. Surrendered, and earned favor of Emperor Vespasian. Wrote 20 books of Antiquities of the Jews. Refers to John the Baptist (killed by Herod) and to James, the brother of Jesus (condemned to death by stoning by the Sanhedrin). He referred to Jesus in his Antiquities 18:63. The standard text of Josephus reads as follows:
"About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was the achiever of extraordinary deeds and was a teacher of those who accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When he was indicted by the principal men among us and Pilate condemned him to be crucified, those who had come to love him originally did not cease to do so; for he appeared to them on the third day restored to life, as the prophets of the Deity had foretold these and countless other marvelous things about him, and the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day." (Josephus—The Essential Works, P. L. Maier ed./trans.).
Although this passage is so worded in the Josephus manuscripts as early as the third-century church historian Eusebius, scholars have long suspected a Christian interpolation, since Josephus could hardly have believed Jesus to be the Messiah or in his resurrection and have remained, as he did, a non-Christian Jew. In 1972, however, Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem announced his discovery of a different manuscript tradition of Josephus’s writings in the tenth-century Melkite historian Agapius, which reads as follows:
"At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day."
Here, clearly, is language that a Jew could have written without conversion to Christianity. (Schlomo Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications [Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1971.])
According to Dr. Paul Maier, professor of ancient history, "Scholars fall into three basic camps regarding Antiquities 18:63: 1) The original passage is entirely authentic—a minority position; 2) it is entirely a Christian forgery—a much smaller minority position; and 3) it contains Christian interpolations in what was Josephus’s original, authentic material about Jesus—the large majority position today, particularly in view of the Agapian text (immediately above) which shows no signs of interpolation. Josephus must have mentioned Jesus in authentic core material at 18:63 since this passage is present in all Greek manuscripts of Josephus, and the Agapian version accords well with his grammar and vocabulary elsewhere. Moreover, Jesus is portrayed as a 'wise man' [sophos aner], a phrase not used by Christians but employed by Josephus for such personalities as David and Solomon in the Hebrew Bible. Furthermore, his claim that Jesus won over “many of the Greeks” is not substantiated in the New Testament, and thus hardly a Christian interpolation but rather something that Josephus would have noted in his own day. Finally, the fact that the second reference to Jesus at Antiquities 20:200, which follows, merely calls him the Christos [Messiah] without further explanation suggests that a previous, fuller identification had already taken place. Had Jesus appeared for the first time at the later point in Josephus’s record, he would most probably have introduced a phrase like “…brother of a certain Jesus, who was called the Christ.”
• Early Gentile writers, referred to by Christian apologists in 2nd century.
o Thallus—wrote a history of Greece and Asia Minor in A.D. 52. Julius Africanus (221 AD), commenting on Thallus, said: "Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness [during the crucifixion] as an eclipse of the sun—unreasonably, as it seems to me [since the Passover took place during a full moon.]"
o Official Roman records of the census, and Pontius Pilate's official report to the Emperor. Justin Martyr wrote his "Defense of Christianity" to Emperor Antonius Pius, referred him to Pilate's report, preserved in the archives. Tertullian, writing to Roman officials, writes with confidence that records of the Luke 1 census can still be found.
• Roman historians
o Tacitus—Greatest Roman historian, born 52 A.D., wrote a history of the reign of Nero in 110 A.D. "...Christus, from whom they got their name, had been executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate when Tiberias was emperor; and the pernicious superstition was checked for a short time only to break out afresh, not only in Judea, the home of the plague, but in Rome itself, .. " (Annals 15:44)
o Suetonius—AD. 120. In his Life of Claudius: "As the Jews were making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."
o Pliny the Younger—Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, wrote the emperor in A.D. 112 about the sect of Christians, who were in "the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day, before it was light, when they sang an anthem to Christ as God."
Note: A good web site for biblical archaeology is www.christiananswers.net.


Fulfilled Prophecy as Evidence for the Bible's Divine Origin
• 2,000 prophecies including some 300 prophecies and implications about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
• There are no prophetic failures.
• While there are both obvious and subtle prophecies, most are very detailed and specific.
• No other religion has specific, repeated, and unfailing fulfillment of predictions many years in advance of contingent events over which the predictor had no control.
• Studies of psychics show only around 8% of their predictions come true and virtually all of these can be attributed to chance and a general knowledge of circumstances.
• Mathematicians have calculated the odds of Jesus fulfilling only 8 of the Messianic prophecies as 1 out of 1017 (a 1 followed by 17 zeros). This is equivalent to covering the entire state of Texas with silver dollars 2 feet deep, marking one of them, mixing them all up and having a blind-folded person select the marked one at random the first time. For more on this, see What Are The Odds?
• Fulfilled prophecy is powerful evidence that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin.
• Objection: Jesus manipulated events to fulfill prophecy. Answer: (a) Many prophecies were out of his control (ancestry, place of birth, time of death). (b) His miracles confirmed Jesus to be the Messiah. (c) There is no evidence that Jesus was a deceiver. (d) In order to manipulate all the people (including his enemies) and even his disciples to make it appear that he was the Messiah, Jesus would have needed supernatural powers. If he had such powers, he must have been the Messiah he claimed to be.
Examples of Non-Messianic Prophecies
• The Succession of Great World Kingdoms (Daniel 2:37-42). Even negative critics agree that Daniel foretold the governments in order of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
• Cyrus King of Persia (Isaiah 44:28-45:1). Since Isaiah lived between about 740 and 690 BC and Cyrus did not make his proclamation for Israel to return from exile until about 536 (Ezra 1), there would have been no human way for him to know what Cyrus would be named or what Cyrus would do.
• Israel to Be Returned to Its Land A Second Time (Isaiah 11:11-12). The first time God reclaimed a people was from Egypt through the Exodus; the second time is from the Babylonian Exile (Isaiah 51:9-11).
• The Closing of the Golden Gate (Ezekiel 44:2-3). The Golden Gate is the eastern gate of Jerusalem, through which Christ made his triumphal entry on Palm Sunday before the crucifixion (Matthew 21). Ezekiel predicted its closing and in 1543 Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent closed the gate and walled it up, not knowing he was fulfilling prophecy. It remains sealed to this day exactly as the Bible predicted.
• The Destruction of Tyre (Ezekiel 26:3-14). The prophecy was partly fulfilled when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city and left it in ruins. Alexander the Great later attacked the seemingly impregnable Island of Tyre by taking the stones, dust, and timber from the ruined mainland city to build a causeway to the Island. This prophecy is comparable to saying that Chicago will be destroyed and never rebuilt.
• The Doom of Edom (Petra) (Jeremiah 49:15-17). Given the virtually impregnable nature of the ancient city carved out of rock and protected by a narrow passageway, this was an incredible prediction. Yet, in 636 AD it was conquered by Muslims and today stands deserted but for tourists.
• Flourishing of the Desert in Palestine (Ezekiel 36:33-35). Since before the turn of the twentieth century, Israel has been renovated and Israel's agriculture is flourishing.
• Destruction of Jerusalem (Mark 13:1-2). Fulfilled literally when the Romans completely destroyed Jerusalem and the temple buildings. According to historian and eyewitness Josephus, some of the stones were 37 feet long, 12 feet high and 18 feet wide. Stones were even pried apart to collect the gold leaf that melted from the roof when the temple was set on fire.
Examples of Messianic Prophecies
Topic Old Testament New Testament
Messiah to be the seed of the Woman Genesis 3:15
Luke 2:5-7
Galatians 4:4

Messiah to be the seed of Abraham Genesis 12:2-3, 18:18
Matthew 1:1-2
Luke 3:34
Acts 3:25
Galatians 3:16

Messiah to be of the tribe of Judah Genesis 49:10
Matthew 1:1-2

Messiah to be of the seed of David 2 Samuel 7:16
Psalm 132:11
Jeremiah 23:5, 33:15
Matthew 1:6, 22:42-45
Luke 1:31-33
Acts 2:29-30
Romans 1:3

Messiah to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14
Matthew 1:18-25
Luke 1:26-38

Messiah to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2
Matthew 2:1-6
Luke 2:4-6

Tribute paid to Messiah by great kings Psalm 72:10-11
Matthew 2:1-11

Messiah to be heralded by a messenger Isaiah 40:3
Malachi 3:1
Matthew 3:1-3

Messiah to be the Son of God Psalm 2:2,7
Matthew 3:17
Luke 1:32-33

Messiah to be anointed by the Holy Spirit Isaiah 11:2
Matthew 3:16-17

Galilee to be the first area of Messiah's ministry Isaiah 9:1-7
Matthew 4:12-16

Messiah to be meek and mild Isaiah 40:11, 42:2-3, 53:7
Matthew 12:18-20, 26:62-68

Messiah to minister to the Gentiles Isaiah 42:1, 49:6-8
Matthew 12:21
Luke 2:28-32

Messiah will perform miracles Isaiah 35:5-6
Matthew 9:35, 11:3-6
John 9:6-7

Messiah to be a prophet like Moses Deuteronomy 18:15-19
Matthew 21:11, 24:1-35
John 1:45, 6:14
Acts 3:20-23

Messiah to enter the temple with authority Malachi 3:1-2
Matthew 21:12

Messiah will enter Jerusalem on a donkey Zechariah 9:9-10
Matthew 21:1-11

Messiah to be betrayed by a friend Psalm 41:9
John 13:18-21

Messiah to be forsaken by his disciples Zechariah 13:7
Matthew 26:31, 56

Messiah will be smitten Isaiah 50:6
Matthew 26:67, 27:26,30

Messiah to experience crucifixion (long before crucifixion was invented) Psalm 22:15-17
Matthew 27:34-50
John 19:28-30

Messiah will be pierced Zechariah 12:10
John 19:34-37

Details of Messiah's suffering and death and resulting salvation (hundreds of years before Christ!) Psalm 69:21
Isaiah 53:2-12,
Matthew 26-27
Mark 15-16
Luke 22-23
John 18-19

Messiah to die in 33 AD Daniel 9:24-26
33 AD is the widely accepted historical date of the crucifixion
Casting of lots for His garments Psalm 22:18
John 19:23-24

Messiah to be raised from the dead Psalm 16:10
Acts 2:25-31, 13:32-37, 17:2-3

Messiah's resurrection Job 19:25
Psalm 16:10
Acts 2:30-31, 13:32-35, 17:2-3
1 Corinthians 15:20-22

Messiah to ascend to heaven Psalm 68:18
Luke 24:51
Acts 1:9
Ephesians 4:8-13

Messiah to be at the right hand of God Psalm 110:1
Matthew 26:64
Mark 14:62
Romans 8:34
Hebrews 1:3

Messiah, the stone which the builders rejected, to become the head cornerstone Psalm 118:22-23
Isaiah 8:14-15, 28:16
Matthew 21:42-43
Acts 4:11
Romans 9:32-33
Ephesians 2:20
1 Peter 2:6-8




Statistics of the Bible's Power
Amazingly Consistent Theme of the Bible
The Bible contains 66 books, written by approximately 40 different writers, over 1600 years, on 3 different continents, in 3 different languages, on thousands of different subjects, yet with one central theme—God's redemption of mankind from sin won for the whole world by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Logical Consistency of the Bible
For a successful debate, show that your opponent's views are arbitrary orinconsistent, and that your position is consistent and not arbitrary. The Bible isinternally consistent ("self consistent" or "logically consistent"). Some debating points:
• Life after death in heaven or hell may be, in one sense, difficult to believe, but it is entirely internally consistent with the rest of the Bible. If there is a truly just God, justice is only certain if there is ultimate justice. The non-biblical view, in contrast, is inconsistent when it holds that we came from nowhere and go to nowhere, but life is filled with meaning in between. Thus only the biblical worldview is internally consistent.
• The statement that "there are no moral absolutes" contains two mistakes:
o The declaration itself is an absolute statement, thus it contradicts itself.
o A person cannot live his life without moral absolutes. Examples: fairness vs. unfairness; kindness vs. hatred.
• For another example, the doctrine of original sin is consistent with the need for a savior.
• If there is an omnipotent God, the miracle of creation, as well as the other biblical miracles, is very plausible.
A logical thought progression to make sense of the Christian faith:
Is there a God? If so,
1. Is it logical to believe that God knows what is going on down here? If so,
2. Is it reasonable to believe that He cares about what is going on down here? If so,
3. Is it reasonable to believe that He cares enough to communicate His concerns to us? If so,
4. How might He communicate truth to us? Can the Bible demonstrate that it is indeed God's Word?
Geisler lists these criteria for establishing if a book was from God:
1. It would claim to be God's Word.
2. It would be historically accurate when it speaks on historical matters.
3. The authors would be trustworthy.
4. The book would be thematically unified and without contradictions.
5. We would have received accurate copies of the original manuscripts.
6. It would make statements that would reveal knowledge about the way things work beyond the knowledge of its day. (See Geisler Encyclopedia pages 692-693.)
7. It would make predictions about the future that could not be known through natural means.
8. The message would be unique.
9. The messengers would be confirmed by miracles.
10. The words would have a transforming power.

[aromulus]

John, with all due respect, whatever you are trying to prove ain't going to work.:NoNo:

I admire your commitment ,belief and fervour in your cause, but now you have to start realizing that the membership here don't really want to know.....:omg:
I am pretty open minded and normally I read anything, but now unfortunately, with this last batch I feel patronized, and am sure some others will too.:doh

Please relax:xxgrinning--00xx3:

[KeithD]

Even the Creationist scientists gave up on trying to dissprove carbon dating and the Grand Canyon, so I won't even bother what crap you've published as I know for a fact you are not a fully qualified scientist that the Creationists employ.

I guess your TV is never working due to the close relationship of it's timing with the close relationship to the carbon dating measuring techniques!.....and for that matter, the clock on your computer must always be wrong, as that is automatically adjusted by atomic time. :doh

That is all evidence you see yourself, yet you deny it....Twilight Zone! :NoNo:

One last thing, you haven't yet explained the evolution of how Swine Flu came about, or cat n dogs (none existed 6000 years ago), as evolution doesn't exist! :Erm:

[somebody]

Hang on if carbon dating doesn''t work how do we know the age of the scrolls?

[KeithD]

Hang on if carbon dating doesn''t work how do we know the age of the scrolls?
:doh Stupid boy. Someone scribbled a date on the bottom in biro! :rolleyes:

[Mrs.JMajor]

Hi John, how many hours you spend to type it all ??:cwm24: Anyhow hope your doing great,:D:xxgrinning--00xx3:

[somebody]

:doh Stupid boy. Someone scribbled a date on the bottom in biro! :rolleyes:


Sorry Boss:doh i guess on the Turin Shroud they forgot to sew the owners name on it:D

[Alec&Davina]

Blimey! I thought I was on the wrong forum..:doh:doh:omg::omg:

I have nothing against with religion or someone's belief but for me this thread is too much:Erm::Erm::ARsurrender::ARsurrender:

[Scouse]

This is just an informative thread. The thread entitled "the great evolution deception" raised some very interesting criticisms. I want to send articles which I believe give good solid arguments against the criticisms. If the fact that I have done this offends, you don't need to read it and do not need to reply, just ignore it. It is here for those members or non members who WOULD like to read it.

In the following posts I will cover:

* new evidence found by scientists concluding dinosaurs did not evolve into birds

* Why the bible is trustworthy

* evidence and reasons why carbon dating actually supports a young earth

* the Grand Canyon supports a young earth, evidences of the Noahic global flood

Note I already sent a long article which gives evidence that dinosaurs lived beside mankind


I know time machines exist because people have written about them, but I've never used one or even seen one. Do you think they exist?

[somebody]

I know time machines exist because people have written about them, but I've never used one or even seen one. Do you think they exist?

Yes a doctor i know of uses one. He parks it outside earlscourt station:D
So must be catching up with his pinoy foods.

[bornatbirth]

i just read all of johns posts and completely agree,can you post any more?

[somebody]

i just read all of johns posts and completely agree,can you post any more?

he has worn out the right hand button on his mouse with all the cut and pasting:D

[vbkelly]

:doh Stupid boy. Someone scribbled a date on the bottom in biro! :rolleyes:

boss have you hired a pastor or preacher in this forum? somebody wants to convert you lol

[bornatbirth]

the boss needs an exorcism first! :xxgrinning--00xx3:

[somebody]

boss have you hired a pastor or preacher in this forum? somebody wants to convert you lol

I want to convert him:Erm::omg::D

[aromulus]

i just read all of johns posts and completely agree,can you post any more?


:censored: Wind up merchant...........:icon_lol::icon_lol:

[somebody]

:censored: Wind up merchant...........:icon_lol::icon_lol:
Bornatbirths plan is going like clockwork