About Key Words

TRUTH right DESIRE LIFE AUTHORITY ABSOLUTE KNOW EVIL GOOD FANTASY REALITY BELIEVE FAITH WISE LEARN EXPERIENCE OBSERVE EVOLUTION CREATION AGE LIGHT

This website is intended to be, is presented as, a challenge to the highly intelligent and highly educated among us. Especially to those whose Achilles heel is their unwise intelligence which causes them to abandon the SIMPLE truths concluded in the appendices, links: A, B, C, and D. These irrefutable truths are/can be easily understood by ordinary people, even children. (A, B, and C are included as discussions in the subsequent site FlawedProfessors.com. D discusses "how we know" and "what is spiritual".)

The good news is the truth that there is a place of genuine hope in reality. That is the marvelous part of truth. The other part is deadly, totally unforgiving. In reality, when truth meets errors and lies, truth destroys them, annihilates them without mercy. Humans have trouble with reality when they don't like it. For any human thought to be valid there must be an absolute authority that validates the thought. But when humans don't like the truth they tend to dismiss the absolute authority that is required to validate what they think.

To find fundamental truth, humans must exercise some degree of intelligence. How much and what kind? SIMPLE is the answer. SIMPLE is the name I attach to simple, pure, unadulterated, unviolated, uncompromised, unpolluted intelligence (common sense). Intelligence is marvelous when it is not contaminated and violated by emotion and personal preference. All IQ levels have SIMPLE, except perhaps the lowest region of IQ. But the moment emotion and/or personal preference move in, SIMPLE becomes Spintelligence. "Spintelligence" results when the "s" and the "p" of SIMPLE are ripped off and placed in front of "intelligence". Spintelligence spins evidence into conclusions that are liked by emotion and personal preference, disregarding SIMPLE. Genuine truth-seekers must be on guard against that. Those who are highly intelligent and highly educated are most prone to slip into the Spintelligence trap. Spintelligence is a powerful and seductive intellectual cancer. Left unabated, it will take its captive to a genuinely open mind...fully open like a bottomless bucket, which cannot even hold air (air just passes through). Truth finds no place to reside in a genuinely open mind. The higher the IQ, the greater the capacity to spin and the greater the danger, thus the huge variety of spin...faulty worldviews...taught in universities and dreamed up elsewhere.

If you take the core out of an apple you no longer have an apple, just apple related stuff. You have a few slices of apple pulp and an apple core, but not an apple. One of the core words we humans tend to stumble over is the word reality. I say: Reality is absolute truth as opposed to fantasy. Or turned around: Absolute truth is reality. Many who do not want to be bothered by truth will resort to Spintelligence. It is so powerful it will prevent many from even considering the truths presented in the appendices A, B, C, and D. These appendices serve to remove atheism from consideration when pondering reality. The truths described in the appendices are part of the core of reality and are refutable only in fantasy, by Spintelligence. In efforts to refute them even Ivy League professors of philosophy (any professor, any human) must resort to Spintelligence. In Appendix A it becomes obvious that if all CLNF systems on earth suddenly cease to exist, all life on earth will also suddenly cease. Anything devoid of CLNF systems is dead. In Appendix B we find people who worship science but do not believe science. Appendices C and D reinforce the conclusions of A and B.

Refute the appendices if you can. You cannot without perverting your SIMPLE...without stooping to Spintelligence. A small unsophisticated child, can by SIMPLE find truth, can grasp and obtain the genuine hope in reality. The SIMPLE truth is at this link...and that small child, through a mortal lifetime can witness, and have, experiences that confirm the hope is indeed reality. It is also possible for a sophisticated, educated adult to grasp it. To refute that, you will again need Spintelligence...to "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel" (Mat 23:24). God's love for the world is so deep and profound that He made the way to Him simple, it is SIMPLE.

Let me jump to bottom line thoughts that are the absolute boundaries to everything. These boundaries are found within God's indescribably great heart of love (1 Jn 4:16). His desire for reciprocal love is as great as the love He gives. Therein is His motivation for creating humanity and giving individual humans the freedom to choose (Deut 30:19; Deut 30:20). God loves humanity enough to put before individual human beings the full spectrum of choices. All choices have consequences. The grandest of choices result in the grandest of consequences. The most horrific of choices result in the most horrific of consequences. The grandest choice is to choose God. The most horrific choice is to reject God. Within those thoughts are the boundaries of everything. The rest are details. Details are necessary. Many follow. They effect choices. If you remove the sentence "Jesus Christ is God" out of your world-view, you have removed the core center piece of reality, and you no longer have a world-view rooted in reality. The core you have left is---fantasy. SIMPLE understands. SIMPLE concludes: if you do not have the flawlessly perfect God as the core of your thinking, of your worldview, of your philosophy, you have no real, solid base upon which to rely, from which to think.

This website resides at the junction where science and Christianity meet. Is this meeting a violent collision in which one annihilates the other? Or, at the other extreme, is it a marvelous, harmonious meshing of two realms of reality? SIMPLE ultimately concludes it is the latter. Spintelligence denies it. Here's why. Genuine truth seeking thinkers strive to keep their SIMPLE pure. Their SIMPLE informs them that it must remain pure. Otherwise they face the greatest danger known to humanity. Namely, that Spintelligence led by emotion, personal preference, indoctrination, inculcation etc. can lead them into accepting and believing a lie. In its search for truth, SIMPLE must avoid them all.

This website is a deliberate hard look at hardcore reality, intended for the perusal of genuine truth-seekers, intended to filter out, disallow, all rationalization on my part or on the reader's part. Perhaps non-truth-seekers have already departed, if they visited at all. It is heavy life and death stuff. Having said that, I repeat, there is a place of genuine hope in reality, a place of genuine relief. It is in Jesus Christ. God says so. History says so. My experience says so. Within myself I do not have the intellect or strength...no capacity to get to God (John 14:6). I can get to him only by his grace (Ephesians 2:8). Without his grace I would be totally undone. In his grace I am forgiven (Acts 10:43) and heaven bound (1 Peter 1:4). It is SIMPLE.

I will be accused by many of banking on imagination, on Spintelligence. However, I detest lies, including/especially self-deception lies. I hate errors, but like everyone, I have to tolerate them, even confess them much too often. Nonetheless, after a lifetime of truth seeking (nearly eight decades) I say the appendices are accurate. You will ask the big questions and choose a direction; you live in Appendix D. Your choice is your faith, what you live by. You cannot exist as an intelligent human being without deliberately placing your faith in something. You get out of bed in the morning and proceed through your day based on your faith. "Choose life that you and your descendants might live" (Deuteronomy 30:19).

Link to understanding God's proposal to man

Archives (previous essays)

It is fact, despite whatever is thought, felt or said about it. Are you willing to believe the truth, whatever it is? If not, why not? Shouldn’t every human be willing to believe the truth? How intelligent, how profitable is it to deny the truth? What future is there in denying the truth? I submit this statement to you: The greatest challenge in life is to risk the possibility that you might be wrong about the fundamentals of life. This challenge is the subject matter of this website...the challenge to be a genuine honest-with-self...truth-seeker, exercising SIMPLE.

Truth can be compared to mathematics. Math is simultaneously very simple and very complex. 1 + 1 = 2 is a foundational, fundamental, simple fact of math. If you don't get that right you cannot move on to complex math, or to scientific truth. The foundational, fundamental, simple fact of life truth is that God exists. He lives. If you fail to get that right, your understanding of life will be skewed, inaccurate, chaotic.

I am compelled from within my innermost being to present here what I have learned about life. My education and personal experience qualify me to evaluate world views from a scientific perspective. I therefore have presented Appendices A, B, C and D. (I mention them here because they deal with the scientific fallacy of unbelief.) Furthermore, my education and experience qualify me to analyze and evaluate life via reality logic, to reach sound conclusions. I therefore present the body of this website. The core, fundamental, simple truth is: Jesus Christ is God. This website is intended to explain how and why I arrived at this persuasion, and the ramifications thereof.

It appears, many people are unable to find the truth. The most glaringly profound example is in the enormous disparity between theists and atheists. There is nothing as huge in human thinking as believing in God, unless perhaps, it is believing God does not exist. One of those beliefs is absolutely true. The other absolutely misses reality. Which is true? There is no greater need among humans than the correct answer to that question. So why am I persuaded I have absolute Truth...exercising SIMPLE?

I will speak to atheists first. Your primary problem is that you simply refuse to believe. You ask, "What is the big deal about belief?" The answer is exceedingly simple. God requires belief. You refuse. You cannot get to God without belief. He will not allow it. You love science, you say. But you won't believe the evidence of science presented in the Appendices. Even if you have an IQ of 250, it is useless to you unless you accurately analyze all the evidence. You don't have the capacity to get to the truth about God because of your death-grip on unbelief. You may be thinking of clicking on the X on this tab. If you click on it you will be exhibiting the kind of attitude toward belief that will turn your death-grip into a fatal-grip. Not only do you refuse to believe the evidence of science, you also refuse to believe the testimony of those who have genuinely believed. You take the foolish approach of calling them fools. You cannot get to the truth about God unless you loosen your grip on unbelief. Furthermore, if you ever arrive at the realization of the absolute truth "God exists" you will face the question "Who/what is God?"

The answer to that question is also rooted in belief, belief that God requires. A crowd once asked Jesus, "What must we do to do the works of God?". Jesus answered, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (John 6:29). If you wish to examine what that means click here. It speaks of the spiritual birth Jesus said we must have if we are to get to God. It is not difficult. It is SIMPLE.

A challenge to non-Christians: Can you say the following sentence out loud so you can hear yourself say it, and mean it? "If Jesus Christ is God I am willing to believe it." If not, why not? If you can, repeat it for forty consecutive days to demonstrate you mean it. During those days study the gospel of John. On November 29, 2007 I began the reverse challenge and said on 40 consecutive days "If Jesus Christ is not God I am willing to believe it". If you wish to see a confirming video click here.

Now I will speak also to theists and the undecided. How is it that otherwise smart, even brilliant, people end up being atheists? In an effort to be kind and say it softly, I say atheists suffer from an intellectual preference-block coupled with a survival instinct. They prefer that reality be something that it is not. They profoundly prefer that there be no deity with power and authority over them, no being that holds them accountable. So they allow that preference to shape their thinking in a way that provides what they prefer. In other worlds they violate their intelligence. They abandon SIMPLE. A prime example is the book The Blind Watchmaker, exposed in Appendix B. The Bible says they are fools, Psalms 53:1. Understandably, they don't like that. They especially don't like the God of the Bible. Based on what they say, they think they know more about being deity than God. In their minds the God of the Bible simply did not get it right. Therefore, in their thinking, the God of the Bible cannot be God. In their minds they elevate themselves above God. In effect they worship themselves. That's the way Lucifer got himself cast out of heaven and became Satan.

I find it astoundingly amazing that many people arrive at the following conclusions and actually stop there. They allow themselves the fallacy of resting their world views on these exceedingly erroneous thoughts.

A challenge to Christians: Can you say the following sentence out loud so you can hear yourself say it, and mean it? "If Jesus Christ is not God I am willing to believe it." Again I ask, Shouldn't everyone be willing to believe the truth, whatever it is? However, if you are a Christian and the challenge seems inappropriate or alarming to you, I say forget the challenge. The Bible says "everything that is not from faith is sin." (Rom 14:23 HCSB) Some of God's assignments are to all of his children, others are specific to individuals.

Being a Christian, the challenge to non-Christians seemed quite appropriate to me. But the challenge to Christians caused some soul searching. That statement seemed unacceptable, perhaps dangerous, even blasphemous. How could I make such a statement, even hypothetically. But if the hypothetical was true I should be willing to believe it.

As she was leaving my study recently, I spoke to my wife of half a century, as a test for a similar statement:

Me: "See if this statement offends you." (She stopped to listen.) "If you are not my wife, I am willing to believe it."

She: "I am not offended. But it makes no sense" And as she closed the door, "When you have something to say that makes sense let me know."

Similarly, I believe, Jesus was not offended, and he knew why I would make the statement. I believe he approved.

Eventually I concluded I must meet the challenge to Christians before I could present the counterpart to non-Christians. November 29, 2007 was the first of 40 consecutive days I met the challenge, confirmed by Video 1. Video 2 and Video 3 describe fundamental, profound experiences that were life changing for me. In Video 3 I mention many prayers. I recently (May, 2018) realized I should have ended all of those prayers with a request for wisdom. That request would have avoided multiple profound errors in judgement.

There are countless writings, books and essays, which have been written through the ages defending theism. The subject matter is too huge for anyone to master. I do not have the mentality or the desire to study them all. However, I can read some of them to partake of and review the fundamental truths they present. And I enjoy and am encouraged and strengthened by seminars and conferences led by scholars and scientists defending theism and Christianity. But being quite unable to retain all I read and hear, I am thankful for the simple arguments I present in the Appendices, CLNF systems, The Blind Watchmaker and Integrity Hall. I am persuaded they are irrefutable, and virtually anyone can understand them. To deny them is to abandon SIMPLE, to think in and rely upon fantasy.

So having presented the Introduction, referred to the Appendices, presented the challenges, and drawn the conclusion that God lives, I move on to the subject of knowing God, of Christian living.

So, what have I learned about God in 77 years? I will begin answering that question with a series of Biblical reasons why God is worthy of our worship, loyalty, praise, love. He is worthy because:

This entire list is Biblical. The list becomes a prayer of worship if the word his is changed to your, and he is is changed to you are. That prayer of worship "in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24) has become a regular spiritual activity for me. I have discovered it is as necessary for the health of my soul as breathing is for my body. I have also realized it is an interactive activity with God. I worship. "He restoreth my soul..." (Ps 23:3 KJV)

God has a way for us to life. It is right, right because He declares it to be right. There is no authority to modify His declaration. Jesus said: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. (Matt 22:37-39) NIV That declaration renders me guilty, often. Often, I must say “I’m sorry” to God. Among my greatest needs is the need for God’s forgiveness.

Forty years ago, in my mid to late thirties, I sunk so low I didn’t know which end of my life was up. I was failing every aspect of life. One night in bed, being unable to sleep, I just gave up. I was out of strength, didn’t know what to do, and really didn’t have the capacity to do it if I had known what to do. A simple prayer came to my mind, which I pondered and prayed: “God, do whatever you need to, to make me what you want me to be”. Having prayed that, I was able to relax and drift to sleep. It occurred to me that was a good prayer, that I needed to continue praying it. Spread though out the following decades I prayed that prayer thousands of times. Countless times God used it to encourage and sustain me, to keep me going.

The prayer grew through the years. Now it goes like this: “Father, in Jesus’ name, pleading the power of His shed blood on the prayer, I pray that you will do whatever pleases you within the entirety of my being, leaving nothing undone, to form, fashion and dress me into precisely what you want me to be, for your honor and glory, pleasure and purpose, in Jesus’ name, pleading the power of His shed blood on the prayer”. My revealing that prayer is not a boast. The prayer expresses the single greatest need in my life, which is for God to answer the prayer. I have made it my covenant prayer, which means I cannot rescind it. I cannot take it back. I don’t want to take it back. I am thankful for that prayer. I pray it virtually every day and intend to as long as I am able to think. So why do I include this in a discussion about wisdom and God’s grace?

About six weeks ago (as of August, 2018), on the tail end of those four decades, I believe the Holy Spirit gave me a personal revelation, a revelation about me to me. It was both appalling and liberating. I realized there was an inadvertent but costly omission. I had failed to pray regularly for wisdom. It should have been a daily request. I would remember it if it had been. It was not. It is now. Surely I must have prayed for it at some time, or on occasion. But that is not enough, not even close. I am confident the omission of regularly praying for wisdom accounts for numerous unwise, costly mistakes…unwise and costly both spiritually and materially. Life would have been vastly different if I had consistently and regularly asked for God’s wisdom. I am persuaded my covenant prayer is wise, but much wiser when it includes a request for God’s wisdom “for today”. The Bible book of Proverbs promotes wisdom by using the word 51 times and adding abundant commentary. And in James:

If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does. (James 1:5-8) NIV

Where is God’s grace in this context? If I had not received God’s grace to deliver me through the consequences my absence of wisdom I would not have survived. The weight of my profound failures, ungodly attitude, thoughts and actions would have become too heavy to bear. I have been an ongoing recipient of God’s grace as revealed in:

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9) NIV

Decades ago Bill Bright referred to the effects of this verse as “spiritual breathing”. We exhale genuine, repentant, confession to God and inhale His forgiveness and cleansing.

The weight of all my failures, sin and shame becomes nothing in the enormous strength of God’s grace as seen in the revelation beginning at Romans 7:21,

So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. (Rom 7:21-8:4) NIV

The application goes like this: I (or any born again child of God) sometimes find that I have by some thought, word or action fallen back into life in the sinful nature, or influenced by it, even if for just a moment. I genuinely confess and receive God’s forgiveness and cleansing and His deliverance into the blessed condition “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus”. When I comprehend and actually believe this, I find the burden of guilt is gone all the way to the point there is not even self-condemnation. Dare I offend God by refusing to forgive myself when I have received His forgiveness? Dare I tell God that He made a mistake? Heaven forbid.

I can, should, must receive what God has done for me (or I offend Him) so that I can move on to…

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. (Rom 8:28) NIV

31 What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all — how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died — more than that, who was raised to life — is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36 As it is written:

37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Rom 8:31-39) NIV

Such is the measure of God’s grace poured out on His born again children…worthy of HALLELUYAH repeated continuously.

In the summer of 2018 I did some computer searches following the “Test” and “Do not add” instructions of:

21 But test and prove all things [until you can recognize] what is good; [to that] hold fast. AMP

I looked for several common words and phrases used by Bible scholars, clergy and laymen. I was amazed and startled by what I discovered.

* - Prov 30:30 Easy-to-Read Version, a lion—he is the warrior of the animals and runs from nothing, * -"nothing" NIV, 229 times in OT, 113 in NT, zero before Gen 11:6

** - Acts 1:3 KJV and similar in NKJV To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God

***-Jer 2:35 [that is everywhere evident.] AMP… Acts 28:22 is everywhere denounced. AMP… Isa 59:14 Injustice is everywhere CEV…Hos 4:2 Violence is everywhere CEV

The first phrase I searched for was “out of nothing”. I first searched the New International Version (NIV). The phrase is not there at all, zero times it occurs…in the entire Bible. I searched eleven other English translations. Zero.

“Out of nothing” could be added to Genesis 1:1 in multiple ways (Keep in mind the “Do not add” instruction in Proverbs 30:6.):

Did the translators of the dozen versions not know what they were doing? Or were they simply obeying the “Do not add” instruction? Didn’t God choose to reveal himself in the Bible? Why did the Holy Spirit not inspire the profound words “created out of nothing”, but did inspire:

“Numbered hairs” seems like absolute trivia to me, compared to the magnitude of the phrase “created out of nothing”. But the Holy Spirit deemed it important that we be told our hairs are numbered…and not be told that creation was “out of nothing”??!! Why would the Holy Spirit leave that out? Could it be that it is not true?

English translations do not include the words “out of nothing”. So why is the “out of nothing” claim made when scripture clearly says “do not add”, seriously warning against it? To be careful one must ask if the scriptures somehow indicate creation was “out of nothing”.

I submit the thought that “out of nothing” has been added by well-intended folk… perhaps thinking that is what the Bible should have said, or that it is a proper interpretation of what the Bible does say. However, what if the translators are correct and “out of nothing” is an improper addition to scripture?

I further submit that “out of nothing” dishonors God. It presents a diminished view of God. A creator “out of nothing” is a fantasy being, commonly called a genie, which magically zaps into existence whatever some wisher wants. It does not use intelligence to plan or design or create. It just zaps. It needs no plan or design, which requires intelligence. God is not the ultimate genie. He is not a genie at all. He possesses boundless intelligence and He uses it…as He plans and designs and creates what He plans and designs. What if it was God who inspired the statement “Nothing ever came from nothing”?

Furthermore, I submit that “out of nothing” robs God. It robs Him of the thought conveyed in Psalms 19:5…”like a champion rejoicing to run his course”. I say that from my perspective as an electrical engineer. I have been blessed many times personally with the great pleasure, satisfaction and sense of fulfillment of arriving at a concept and, through design and construction, successfully bringing it into reality. I don’t mean pride here, but simple, pure pleasure and satisfaction of accomplishment, of finishing well, of seeing that it was/is good. In every case it took time and intellectual effort, one project spanning years. The satisfaction is not only in the finished product. The process itself is laced with exhilarating fun, the fun of designing. The idea of zapping into existence “out of nothing” robs God of that…especially in light of the fact that we are created in the image of God. Does that not mean that God has traits that we have? Does that not include getting pleasure and satisfaction out of designing and creating?

Max Lucado in his devotional book GRACE FOR THE MOMENT, April 11, Evening (published by Thomas Nelson), conveys a sense of what I am trying to say:

The following verse has been presented as supporting evidence that “out of nothing” is a correct interpretation of Genesis 1:1.

3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. NIV

The words “formed” and “made” (begun, done and finished) do not mean nor imply “zapped” (immediate). But the sentence clearly indicates that “what is seen was”… “made out of what was invisible". There are a wide variety of gases that are “something” invisible. Energy is invisible. Could it be that God took a little pinch of his boundless energy and transformed it into the stuff of our universe? That assertion does not violate scripture. To examine the thought consider what energy is. It is the undefined unknown that must be present for anything to be done, to take place. And it must be present in the amount necessary for accomplishment of what is done. Scientists do not claim to know what energy is. It is commonly called the capacity or ability to do work. It is called “capacity” because with it we can do something. Without it we can do nothing, no breathing, eating, thinking…nothing. Energy exists in various forms: heat, light, electricity, etc. Scientists have learned that, whatever energy is, it can be quantified, i.e., measured. Energy is the “E” in Einstein’s famous equation E=MC².

God, being eternal and almighty has always had boundless energy, or the supernatural equivalent to natural energy. God and God’s energy are not the same. Energy was/is what he uses to do what he does. He has eternally possessed it. He does with it whatever he chooses.

Scientists in the twentieth century demonstrated conclusively that the matter in the universe is made of energy. Search the internet for the “largest bomb”. Watch the videos that show the effect of the energy in matter being released in nuclear explosions. A few pounds of matter contain enormous amounts of energy. How was all that energy bound up in the matter? Where did it come from?

This begs the question “If God created the universe out of energy, why doesn’t Genesis 1:1 read ’In the beginning God created, out of energy…’”? It seems to me that God purposely omitted the words “out of”. Perhaps discovering the “out of” was part of all the learning necessary to subdue the earth, which God commanded in Genesis 1:28, “…fill the earth and subdue it”. If “out of” had been included in Genesis 1:1, it would have distracted from the huge point…God did it. He created.

A full description of all the details of the creation event would have been a meaningless revelation in Moses’ day. The vocabulary was not available. No one could have understood it. The task of writing it would have been too much. There would have been no way to keep all the scrolls needed. Only a few could have been read. God had Moses write what we needed to know in outline form, truths that we must know. What Moses wrote was understandable then, and it remains so now. We are still learning, discovering, the full story…still subduing the earth.

The Bible does not say that God created “out of nothing”. Nor does it say “out of energy”. The word “nothing” appears 342 times in the New International Version (NIV). It seems to always mean…nothing…the opposite of something. “Nothing” is not in the creation narrative. The word “energy” appears just one time in the NIV. Whatever it is, energy is something, not nothing.

To this end I labor, struggling with all his energy, which so powerfully works in me. NIV

For this I labor [unto weariness], striving with all the superhuman energy which He so mightily enkindles and works within me. AMP

The message is that God is applying and activating in Paul that which God possesses, namely his energy. To repeat, scientists have conclusively demonstrated that the elements in the universe embody gigantic portions of energy. The same word is used by scientists and NIV and AMP translators, energy. Other Bible translators use the word “power” or “working” or “strength”, all of which involve expended energy. “Energeian” is the Greek word in Col 1:29.

So, where are we at this point? It is clear that the Bible does not say “out of nothing”. Nor does it say “out of energy”. The Bible does not teach “out of nothing”. Nor does it teach “out of energy”. To add either to the creation narrative would be to violate the “do not add” command in Proverbs. One would be well advised to not declare or proclaim either. To do so would be adding. If one is to speak about it all the wise choice would be “I think” or “I believe” or “It seems” or “It appears”. In that vein it appears to me that “out of nothing” is wrong and “out of energy” might be true.

Furthermore, referring to the creation event the scripture says that God worked for six days, the opposite of zapping. The words “let there be” can be said many times in just a few seconds.

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. NIV

“Work” appears three times in that passage. Doesn’t this add credence to the “out of energy” thinking?

It also appears to me that “out of nothing” is a stumbling block to unbelieving scientists and/or lay people who are aware that matter contains such huge amounts of energy. Pure, accurate analysis of complete, pure, accurate scientific data will never be wrong. After all, it is a study of God’s creation. It will never be in conflict with scripture. Problems occur when human scientists use bad or incomplete data to arrive at false conclusions and erroneously report that “science says”.

Concluding this discussion, I ask what authority allows anyone to finish the phrase “out of…” when speaking of creation. The Bible does not finish it. And we should not argue about it.

Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. NIV

None of these words occur in the English translations. They apply to the Bible because 2nd Peter 1:20,21 is in the Bible.

20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. NIV

These verses proclaim that we cannot interpret the Scripture without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. And they validate the terms infallible, inerrant, without error, errorless. They also proclaim that the Scripture must be interpreted. So what did Jesus mean when he said:

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. NIV

18 For truly I tell you, until the sky and earth pass away and perish, not one smallest letter nor one little hook [identifying certain Hebrew letters] will pass from the Law until all things [it foreshadows] are accomplished. AMP

The application is that as inspired, and as interpreted, by the Holy Spirit, the Bible is infallible, inerrant, without error, errorless. No one can interpret the Bible correctly without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A semantics issue has existed for the entire history of human language. What do the words of scripture mean? Without the Holy Spirit we cannot find our way through the semantics to the true meaning, to let scripture explain scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit we could easily, probably would easily, conclude that even Jesus made a mistake. He said “…with God all things are possible” (Matt 19:26 NIV). But the Bible also says “God cannot” multiple times:

So, when 2nd Peter 1:20-21 is not referenced, the words infallible, inerrant, without error, errorless, can be a hurdle. Without the guidance of the Holy Spirit the “cannot” word in the latter verses cited directly contradict Jesus’ statement that “all things are possible with God. And the one speaking the topic words can be thought of as ignorant or demented, causing the hearer to retreat. On the contrary, Holy Spirit guidance and scriptural context lead to the conclusion that God is not bound by the limitations of humanity. Anything that requires power he can do. So, improper use of the topic words can be destructive rather than instructive.

The Bible never says God is everywhere. Why should he even want to be everywhere? Doesn’t everywhere include infinite space with infinite x,y,z coordinates? Why should God want to be everywhere in an infinite expanse of apparent nothing. The Bible definitely does teach that no human can go where God is not. If one of his children goes somewhere, Goes arrives with the child. Or he goes ahead because the child is coming. He is wherever he wants to be, when he wants to be there.

Nearly a century ago the Southern Baptist Faith and Message was edited to include the claim that Jesus was/is “fully God and fully man”. Neither of those terms are in the English Bible translations, together nor separately. So why are they used currently at all? The Holy Spirit did not inspire any original language words or wording that should be translated “fully God and fully man”. Or the translators failed in their assignment.

Every human needs a Savior, to understand that Jesus was/is God in the flesh, Emanuel…and trust him. Did Jesus need a savior? Certainly not. Without that need how can it be said that he was/is fully human? It would have been exceedingly simple for the Holy Spirit to inspire wording in the original documents that would translate to English “fully God and fully man”, if it was actually true and if we need to know it. The Holy Spirit did not.

Over time, centuries as well as decades, theological culture has embraced various code words and phrases that might be helpful to theologians, but are stumbling blocks to the masses. And some of them are actually false, making matters worse. The gospel does not need these code words and phrases, especially those that are false or have false implications. The gospel is simple:

16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. NIV

1When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. NIV

To fully explain or describe the Trinity is beyond human capabilities. I am not trying to do that here. The effort here is an attempt to present a graphic impression of what transpired within the Trinity during the earthly life of Jesus Christ. The sequence of the seven figures below follow the chronology of Jesus' life on earth. The glowing ember colored area of each figure represents Deity status, which belongs to each of the three Beings of the Trinity: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In each figure all three are shown in this area , which represents their unity. They are One entity...together...God (the name synonymous with Trinity). The glowing ember color can be thought of as representing the passionate, fierce love of God (Eph 2:4), which includes His wrath (Ps 90:11). The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are each represented by identical areas except for the different colors. The colors are different to indicate that each are distinct, individual beings...the same but different (Gen 1:26, Acts 7:55-56, Jn 1:1, 14, Jn 10:29-30). The finger like extensions on each indicate that the three exist perfectly meshed spiritually, each with the other two. The yellow center represents the light that is in God (1 Jn 1:5), and (since we are created in His image) the yellow represents His heart, mind, soul, wisdom, intelligence, knowledge, awareness (Gen 1:26)... The dark corners depict the darkness that is outside of God...away form the light that resides in Him (Mt 25:30).

The BC figure represents the Trinity before the birth of Christ...God's existence through eternity past. The total harmony in all of the characteristics and attributes of the Three-in-One. The Three saw the fallen condition of humanity. Because of their love for humanity the plan for human redemption was formed. The Trinity agreed knowing the profound price all Three would pay. The time approached. The angel proclaimed to Mary that as a virgin she would bare a child, a conception initiated by the power of the Holy Spirit would occur. (Matt 1:18, 23) The solemn, profound, indescribable moment of departure within the Trinity approached. Each knew the plan would require a horrid rupture within their existence. Jesus would ultimately become what God hates---sin. They did it anyway. The only power that could cause them to do it was their love for humanity. Then suddenly that moment of departure arrived, the Immaculate Conception. The plan for the rescue of humanity was initiated.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16

The Holy Spirit triggered the DNA in an ovum in Mary's womb. In an instant God the Son moved into a single human cell. (Don't tell physicists you don't believe such huge events can take place in such a tiny space. They discovered that all the energy in the universe once resided at the point of beginning of the universe,) Scripture tells us that Jesus experienced all the difficulties and temptations of being human, and that He did it with no failure, no sin. Human infants are born knowing nothing. He was in heaven and suddenly He was dormant God in a single human cell, knowing nothing, without memory, powerless...but guarded by the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus had to go through the same development process as all humans, except that He did it as God. (Hebrews 4:15, Philippians 2:6-7) He had to learn that He was God and in the process accumulate the light that he had given up. He was God but He no longer had the same intimate relationship with the Father and the Spirit. He had willingly abandoned it for you and me. In the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION figure His intimate connection to the Father the Holy Spirit and the light of God is gone.

Like all humans Jesus was "tested in every way" (Hebrews 4:15), including conception, birth, infancy and childhood. As a human He was born knowing nothing, understanding nothing, but having intelligence and awareness, the capacity to learn. He left heaven willingly to take on that low personal state. Not only that but he left the splendor of heaven for the lowly status of being born in a stable where livestock are born (Luke 2:7). Keep in mind he did that for you. Being God, He learned fast and baffled the most educated men of the time when he was twelve. The scriptures say that Jesus learned obedience through suffering (Hebrews 5:8) and that where there is no law there is no sin (Romans 4:15 and 5:13). Could it be that as a young child Jesus felt the sting of a switch in Mary's or Joseph's hand? If so, He learned immediately and perfectly, and continued perfectly without sin. It appears He knew His identity by the time he was twelve. But it took another 18 years of learning and preparation before He launched His ministry. Then there was the three years of His teaching, preaching and performing miracles (John 3:2) leading to the crucifixion. As presented in the BIRTH AND MINISTRY figure his connection to the light of God was close to being fully restored. But the previous intimacy with the Father and the Holy Spirit had not been restored.

The climax of the Trinity's plan for human redemption was approaching as the crucifixion began. Everything was happening as planned. The awful moment anticipated in heaven at His departure was approaching. First however, there was the mental, spiritual and physical abuse and mock trial (Matthew 27:23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31). The scriptures do not give a description of crucifixion. Crucifixion was so common then that a description was not needed. But historians and researchers describe the horrors of it in great detail. But an internet search for "description of crucifixion" will lead to detailed descriptions of the horrific pain associated with crucifixion, a method of execution designed to inflict a slow death with maximum pain and suffering. In the CRUCIFIXION figure above, the jagged edges of the areas representing the Father, Son and Holy Spirit indicate the pain and distress all three were experiencing. Remember, we are created in the image of God. The Father and the Holy Spirit were personally and intimately experiencing the extreme agony of the crucifixion. By the fact that Jesus and the Father and the Holy Spirit were enduring the cross, the great love of God for humanity was being exhibited (Romans 5:8-9). He did not have to be there. He chose to be there. The decision had been made before the Immaculate Conception. The crucifixion was deeply stirring the fierce anger of God, His wrath against evil. The Father's only begotten, sinless Son was enduring the extreme suffering the crucifixion delivered, done by the hands of evil humanity.

God's plan for the redemption of humanity was almost complete. One thing was lacking. The moment approached. The moment that would be simultaneously the moment in human history of greatest evil and greatest good. The Son of God submitted Himself to the greatest evil, His crucifixion. He did that so he could do the greatest good, which was to become sin for us and pay our sin price for us. He had shed His sinless blood to the point if death. Then the most horrific moment of all arrived, the moment that had been planned before He left heaven. When it happened He cried out, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" As the God-Man He was experiencing the enormous weight, pain and death caused by humanity's sin. He had become what God hates...sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). The severely jagged edges in the FORSAKEN figure indicate the great agony of the Trinity at that moment. Remember again, we are made in God's image, which means God experiences the same emotions we do. God can be hurt and angry. The Trinity was ruptured during this payment made for man's sin. Could it be that all supernatural beings were observing this agony of deity. Could it be that there was an agonized cry so strong that all of creation shuddered. If you are inclined to sneer, snicker, mock at this, you should be very sure you want to do that. You would be mocking the sacrifice that the Sovereign, Creator God made for you. That is the greatest offense you can do to God. Are you sure you want to stir His wrath? ( Psalm 111:10, Proverbs 9:10, Matthew 10:28, Hebrews 10:31, 12:19, 20, 21) God's wrath is fierce and terrible. But it is active only when it is stirred. It is an integral part of His love. It is stirred when what He loves is attacked or violated. Even then, He is willing to forgive. He has formed and executed a spiritual covenant which He offers to all humans and urges all humans to choose the life He offers (Deut 30:19-20). The only remaining choice is the curse, hell.

The only other option is hell. To fail to choose the life God offers, to fail to personally execute the contract God offers is to automatically choose hell. The word hell itself should strike terror in the hearts of unbelievers. But the word has been glossed over. What the hell… Why the hell… Hell no… Hell yes… It was a hell of a… It has been reduced to nothing more than common slang. But the word speaks of the most awful, the most gruesome, the most horrific of realities. It is human emotions, not intelligence, that moves humans to reject hell, to unbelief. SIMPLE has no emotion, unless demand is an emotion. SIMPLE simply demands truth. SIMPLE recognizes the purpose of hell. SIMPLE recognizes that God created hell. SIMPLE recognizes that everything God does is good. SIMPLE recognizes that it is good that hell exists.

Someone says, “I cannot believe a loving God would send me to hell”. That statement does not understand love. Imagine that you are walking down a wooded path. The path makes a sharp turn. You step around it. Two paces in front of you is a grizzly bear cub. Twenty paces in front of you is Mama grizzly. She sees you and instantly charges you. You are instantly terrified. You are just a couple of seconds from experiencing her teeth and claws. Mama bear is simply instinctively caring for her cub. Modify the scenario. You are on that same path. You have ten PhD’s in ten different disciplines. You speak fluently 10 languages. You are an excellent marksman and you have a loaded automatic rifle in your hands. Your child, just old enough to walk, is twenty paces away. Suddenly out of the bushes bursts a grizzly bear charging toward your child. Instantly you take aim and unload the rifle into the heart of the grizzly. You responded exactly as Mama grizzly. Your loving care for your child plunged you into action. Your PhD and your languages did nothing, were not involved at all. You did not ponder and think should I or should I not. You did not wonder what you should do. Your love for your baby exhibited itself. Now consider the meaning of the CRUCIFIXION figure and the FORSAKEN figure above. In light of what God did for you, how do you think God will react if you attack him, reject him, laugh at him, ridicule him, abuse him or simply ignore him. Proverbs 9:10, Deuteronomy 32:35, Luke 12:5, Hebrews10:31.

Jesus had taken the sin of humanity upon Himself and shed his blood for the remission of that sin (Hebrews 9:22). That sent Him to a temporary grave, which could not hold Him. The resurrection followed.

Hell is the most gruesome place I can imagine. So, I won’t seek to describe it here, based on the belief that every reader has a significant feel for what the word alludes. However, SIMPLE takes no notice of how emotions are impacted by the word…hell. SIMPLE understands that the word hell, just as the word God, has been so culturally watered down to being nothing more than common slang…o my God…helluva, etc. Nonetheless, SIMPLE chooses to examine truths associated with the word “hell”. SIMPLE wants to know if hell speaks of a real place. Are its horrors real, regardless of normal emotional reactions to it by humans? Is it credible to say: “Hell is a real place, the destination of certain segments of humanity”?

Based on the conclusion that the Bible is indeed the Word of God to humans (the conclusion reached in the topic, “Why the Bible?”), what does the Bible say about it?

killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. Luke 12:5-6 NIV

o 22 "The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In hell,c where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.' Luke 16:22-24 NIV

o 25 "But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.' Luke 16:25-26 NIV

o 2 Thess 1:8-9 He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power NIV

o Matt 25:41-42 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. NIV

Who will be in hell? Shouldn’t everyone want to know if their destiny is hell? There is segment of humanity that have a guarantee to an end in hell. As examples, this segment includes countless people:

In other words, the people in the hell bound segment of humanity are from every part of every culture. And they have one very distinct characteristic in common. They have all refused to believe in and receive Jesus Christ as who he is, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of all who choose to believe in him and receive him into their lives.

1 John 5:12
He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. NIV

Perhaps you say you cannot believe. SIMPLE notes that the Bible says you refuse to believe. SIMPLE also says you don’t have the authority to rewrite the Bible.

But the Jews who refused to believe stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers. NIV

But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. NIV

37 Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. NIV

So Jesus said to him, "Unless you people see signs and wonders, you simply will not believe." NASU

Jesus answered, "If I tell you, you will not believe me, 68 and if I asked you, you would not answer. 69 But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God."

Perhaps you are one of those people who say a loving God would not send anybody to hell. But you treasure your freedom to make choices...all day long...every day. The loving God granted you that privilege. He even gave you the privilege of either choosing him or not him...the full spectrum of choices...him and his way or not him and not his way. But he does not allow you to choose the consequences of rejecting him. If he does not allow you to choose hell, he has not genuinely allowed you choice. You will not allow just anybody into your home. Don't expect God to be different. He will not accept anyone who rejects his Son. You either accept God's love for you as demonstrated by the crucifixion of Jesus to pay your penalty for your sin, and give your life to Jesus with the benefit of heaven, or you suffer the consequences of rejection in hell.

SIMPLE says hell is and will be indescribably awful. It should be avoided at all cost. The way to avoid it is indeed SIMPLE. It is described in this link. And SIMPLE warns, if you are on your way to hell, anything that makes you feel good is dangerous because it can lure into thinking everything is fine, that in the end everything will be okay. The Bible says that if you have not believed in Jesus and received him, you are on your way to hell.

CLNF Systems

It is a simple concept, anchored in SIMPLE. It works as indicated by the blue circle below. At the bottom is a controller which provides a command to an actuator, a device that moves something. The actuator responds by moving whatever the system is controlling. A sensor checks to confirm what the actuator has done and feeds that information back to the controller. The controller analyzes the information. If the actuator has failed to perform as commanded, the controller modifies the command as needed to correct the error. The CLNF system does this continuously in the circular pattern described. The figure below represents a closed loop negative feedback control system, abbreviated CLNF. (Imagine an “i” in two places and it can be pronounced CLiNiF control system.)

There are multiplied millions of CLNF systems around. Your car has one if it has a speed control. The controller is your car’s computer. It issues a command to the mechanism under the hood that moves the accelerator. There is a sensor monitoring the speed of the car. The sensor’s information is fed to the computer. The computer modifies the command as needed and re-sends it to the actuator to maintain or correct the car’s speed.

Aircraft with autopilots have multiple CNLF systems to automatically move the aircraft’s control components. CNLF systems are used in industry to control the speed of electric motors and the positioning of machine components. Many engineers worked with NASA for years perfecting the CLNF systems that controlled the rocket engines which propelled the Saturn spacecraft to the moon. The applications of CLNF systems are countless with many variations.

It is a no-brainer to say that CLNF control systems are the product of intelligence at work. The general public knows that. You no doubt know that. I know CLNF control systems are the products of intelligence because, as an electrical engineer, I have designed CLNF systems. I am not thumping my chest as I say that. It is on the same order as saying I know I exist. Simple awareness and experience has taught it to me. I know personally of the intellectual effort required to design CLNF systems. Being so thoroughly aware of that, I conclude that all CLNF control systems are the result of intelligence at work. Only dreamers think otherwise.

I said there are multiplied millions of CLNF systems around. That is a severe understatement. There must be trillions raised to some huge power of 10. Every living organism having the built-in capacity to move has at least one CLNF control system. The tiniest insect has multiple CLNF systems. Each segment of each moving part has its own dedicated CLNF control system. It is necessary for it to be able to move. The movement of each segment of each leg must be synchronized and coordinated with the movements of the other segments. The movement of each leg must be coordinated with the movement of the other legs. The synchronizing and coordinating is done by the insect’s master CLNF system directing all the sub-CLNF systems. So it is also with the muscles of the largest whale.

The supreme CLNF system is contained within the human body, the brain being the controller. No other living organism can move like the human body. All the functions of the human body are controlled by the supreme CLNF system with all of its subsystems. Breathing. standing, walking and running are four major functions resulting from CLNF control. Think for a moment about the finger movements of a pianist playing some famous masterpiece. The direction and speed of every movement, as well as the force applied, by every segment of every finger is controlled by the system. Every movement, however slow or however fast, is the result of the supreme CLNF system control. All of your movements, all day every day, are the results of your personal supreme CLNF system's control, your brain's control.

The simple concept of CLNF control is common to each one of the multiplied trillions of living organisms having movement capability,. The concept is simple. The details are complex. I know by personal experience that CLNF systems are the result of intelligence at work. This conclusion stems from my experience, not in my imagination, not my assumption. The plan for the human supreme CLNF control system is in the DNA. Intelligence formed the plan and put it in the DNA. Intelligence preceded DNA. To think otherwise is to fantasize. Thinking otherwise is to rely upon imagination and assumptions. It is to force the evidence to say what you want it to say. Again, I don’t imagine that CLNF control systems are the result of intelligence at work, I know it by personal experience.

When ambulatory life began, it began with the insertion of CLNF control. This is not imagination or assumption. Controlled pushes and pulls cause ambulatory movements. Animal life could not have survived without ambulatory movements. No animal, no insect, no reptile, could have found food. If food had been placed before them they could not have chewed it. If all food had been liquid they would not have been able to swallow it. Even the movement of a single cell ameba is done by cyclical CLNF control. Life cannot exist without the consume-digest-use-dispose CLNF control system, or call it simply the food CLNF control system. The very simple deduction is: Intelligently designed food CLNF control systems were part of the beginning of life. Therefore, it follows that life did not begin simply, it was complex at its beginning. It is simple, SIMPLE.

Furthermore, not only was CLNF control necessary for the first cell to survive. It was also necessary that compatible food be present when the first life appeared. The first CLNF system had to work successfully with the food. According to Darwinism that food CLNF system came into being without any consideration of the need for food, nor did it consider what the substance of the food had to be. Natural selection does not consider, does not have the capability to consider. The food and the CLNF system in the living organism were two different items, each totally unrelated to the other. But for the overall food system to work, the function of the CLNF system that was in the first living organism had to match the makeup of the food, without any knowledge of what was in the food. Furthermore what was in the food had to match the function of the CLNF system without any knowledge of the CLNF system. According to Darwinism this matching had to take place without any knowledge, any intelligence, at all. Question: how many quad zillion years of trial and error was required for natural selection to arrive at this exceedingly complicated food system? Especially when it was not trying to produce the matchup. Natural selection does not try to do anything. It has no purpose. CONCLUSION: LIFE WAS EXCEEDINGLY COMPLEX AT ITS BEGINNING. It did not evolve from simple. Scientific integrity, pure science and pure statistics proclaim that the universe is not old enough for Darwinism to work. Richard Dawkins knows that and ignores it, which reduces his book The Blind Watchmaker to rubbish, written by Spintelligence.

And someone says "It is a chemical process". It is not just a chemical process. The system includes a chemical process, digestion. The functions are ready. The ingredients are present. The process begins when the conditions are right. The process ends when the functions are completed on the ingredients, i.e, ingestion, digestion, expulsion of waste...CLNF control. SIMPLE.

Question: How did the intelligence get in the DNA that resulted in the initial CLNF systems? Answer: The Designer/Creator put it there.

Note: A child can understand the simple concept of CLNF control without having knowledge of, or concern for, its complex details. In like manner a child can, by SIMPLE, understand and know God without knowledge of, or concern for, the complexities of theology. To examine how click here.

The Blind Watchmaker

Let’s take a brief (depending on your perspective) SIMPLE tour of the imagination and assumptions Richard Dawkins put in The Blind Watchmaker (Publisher: W.W Norton and Company Ltd., 1996,1987, 1986.) This will not be an imaginary tour. It will be a very real tour about imagination and assumptions. Based on the accolades presented by the publisher, The Blind Watchmaker is apparently a premier book regarding Darwinian evolution. If The Blind Watchmaker falls so does Darwinian evolution.

The number in parentheses after each quotation below is the page number on which the quotation occurs. There is also a list of words used in The Blind Watchmaker preceded by the page numbers on which they are found.

Dawkins puts pure scientists on guard in the preface. Note the use of the words “satisfying”, “a good case” and "believe" in the following quotes.

… I want to persuade the reader, not just that the Darwinian worldview happens to be true, but that is the only known theory that could, in principle solve the mystery of our existence. This makes it a doubly satisfying theory. A good case can be made that Darwinism is true, not just on this planet but all over the universe wherever life may be found. (xvi, xvii)

I may not always be right, but I care passionately about what is true and I never say anything I do not believe to be right. (xvii)

“It took a very large leap of the imagination for Darwin and Wallace to see that, contrary to all intuition, there is another way and, once you have understood it, a far more plausible way, for complex ‘design’ to arise out of primeval simplicity. A leap of the imagination so large that, to this day, many people seem still unwilling to make it. It is the main purpose of this book to help the reader to make this leap [into imagination].” (xix).

Imagination is the method Dawkins uses in forming the basis for his book, as described in chapter 1. This basis seems to be summarized in the following quote.

A true watchmaker has foresight: he designs his cogs and springs, and plans their interconnections, with the future purpose in his mind’s eye. Natural selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for the existence and apparently purposeful form of all life, has no purpose in mind. It has no mind and no mind’s eye. It does not plan for the future it has no vision, no foresight no sight at all. If it can be said to play the role of watchmaker in nature, it is the blind watchmaker. (9)

Let me emphasize that Darwinian evolution, from its beginning until now, is a theory contrived by human imagination. Natural selection is purposely injected in the theory to accomplish survival. We are here. We exist. We survived. Darwinian evolution is an effort to explain why that is true. Natural selection was injected into the theory to bring us to our current status. We are here. We exist. We survived. Natural selection has the purpose of survival imposed on it by human imagination. Within the freedom of imagination and assumptions it performs quite well indeed. Of course, anything can be done in imagination. One can even imagine that intelligence sprang from nothing without cause. That particular imagination must be accepted if one accepts Darwinian evolution.

If I was an atheist I would love the theory. But as I said in the beginning there is no intelligent basis for atheism. Dawkins certainly likes the theory. Notice that the adjective fulfilled in the following quote. The fulfillment is achieved by freely using imagination and assumptions over and over and over in The Blind Watchmaker and making that the basis for saying “we now know” in the previous quote.

Here follows a fundamental assumption used by Dawkins, with no proof whatsoever that it is true. Well, the only place proof exists anyway is in the mind of the perceiver. So I concede it is ‘proven’ to Dawkins' satisfaction apparently, which seemingly makes him comfortable in saying, ”Natural selection…we now know is the explanation for the existence…of all life”…(in the page 9 quote above). But knowing Jesus Christ is God, and knowing about CLNF systems, and other things, I know the following assertion is false.

There is nothing supernatural, no ‘life force’ to rival the fundamental forces of physics. (17)

In order to avoid writing a book about a book I will focus on my main point, imagination and assumptions that together form the fantasized backbone of Darwinism. Here follows a list of page numbers and words that appear on those pages, followed by occasional comments in parentheses.

183 must somehow, we may suspect, is unlikely, would spring into existence, probably, it seems likely, should, should have, likely

237 We still don't know how natural selection began on earth...it must have...probably

I have omitted many page numbers that could have been added in this list, and many blanks could be filled with similar words. Perhaps I will add some of them at a later date. But for now, having provided a litany of words that imply hypotheses, I will move to the last two pages of The Blind Watchmaker.

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter. The essence of life is just a single improbability on a colossal scale. Whatever is the explanation for life, therefore, it cannot be chance. The explanation for the existence of life must embody the very antithesis of chance. The antithesis of chance is nonrandom survival, properly understood. Nonrandom survival, improperly understood, is not the antithesis of chance, it is chance itself. (452)

Survival, whether it is random or nonrandom, requires the intelligence in CLNF control systems. Intelligence, that stuff that preceded DNA.

To ‘tame’ chance means to break down the very improbable into less improbable small components arranged in series. No matter how improbable it is that an X could have arisen from a Y in a single step, it is always possible to conceive of [?] a series of infinitesimally graded intermediates between them. However improbable a large-scale change may be, smaller changes are less improbable. And provided we postulate [?] a sufficiently large series of sufficiently finely graded intermediates, we shall be able to derive anything from anything else [?] , without invoking astronomical probabilities. We are allowed to do this only if there has been sufficient time [?] to fit all the intermediates in [?] . And also only if there is a mechanism [?] for guiding [?] each step in some particular direction [?] otherwise the sequence of steps will career off in an endless random walk.

It is the contention [?] of the Darwinian worldview that both these provisos are met, and that slow, gradual, cumulative natural selection is the ultimate explanation for our existence. (453)

Notice the words “conceive of” and “postulate”, the stuff of imagination. And the words “guiding” and “direction”, the stuff of intelligence. Darwinism, the product of imagination, cannot even be imagined without including the stuff of intelligence.

If proponents of Darwinism would guard the integrity of science like they guard their lives, they would drop Darwinism instantly, as if it was a very hot potato. See Integrity Hall in Appendix C. How many do you think will walk ten paces to pick up a $10M dollar reward (or for any other reason) if they know their chance of surviving the walk is only 1 in a million. The improbability of surviving that walk is totally negligible compared to the improbability that the multitude of imaginations and assumptions of Darwinism are true. What other scientific discipline goes to such exhaustive lengths of imagination and assumption to avoid the conclusions called for by probabilities. Avoiding the conclusions called for by probabilities is the cover-to-cover purpose of The Blind Watchmaker.

A creature appears in a back yard. It has not been seen there before. The owner sees it. Immediately he notices it looks like a dog. Then a squirrel moves in the yard. The creature sees it and begins a chase. Then a cat appears. The creature chases it with a vengeance. Then along the back fence a couple of kids pass by. The creature begins barking and wagging its tail. Then it starts whining because the kids are moving on and it cannot get to them. The owner walks out to a friendly greeting from the creature. He reaches out to pet the creature. His hand is sniffed, then licked. He concludes with no doubt what the creature is.

If the owner is a physicist he immediately concludes the creature is a dog. If the owner is an engineer he immediately concludes the creature is a dog. If the owner is a chemist he immediately concludes the creature is a dog. If the owner is a politician he immediately concludes the creature is a dog. If the owner is a housewife she immediately concludes the creature is a dog. If the owner is a medical doctor he immediately concludes the creature is a dog. People of every sort known to humanity, except one, would exercise SIMPLE and conclude the creature is a dog. A Darwinist would immediately conclude the creature is not a dog. Would he really? Probably not, in such cases as this the Darwinist thinks normally. He would likely conclude the creature is a dog, he would exercise SIMPLE. But in science, when something having all the attributes of design is the subject, like DNA, they refuse to rely on SIMPLE, refuse to call it a design. It doesn't suit their preference. They resort to Spintelligence.

Without imagination and assumptions The Blind Watchmaker has no binding. It falls apart. So it is with Darwinism. On the other hand, it is easy to provide objective proof that CLNF systems are the product of deliberate premeditated design. This makes intelligent design distinctly more scientific than Darwinism. The creature, whatever it is, in the backyard is loaded with CLNF control systems. A Darwinist says CLNF control systems are not designs. He has no scientific basis for that claim. He simply prefers the idea that CLNF systems are “design like”. A Darwinist cannot accept the possibility of a Designer. But Darwinism cannot provide any objective alternative. Darwinism is in fact based on an imaginary faith hypothesis, namely, that there was/is no Designer. When the issue is CLNF control systems a Darwinist abandons normal thinking. When the issue is CLNF control systems, despite all the obvious, objective evidence, a Darwinist concludes natural selection can do that which requires intelligence even though it has no intelligence.

Fantasy is seductive. It seems to be a trait universal among humans. It is especially useful in avoiding truth that one does not like. The Blind Watchmaker = Darwinism = The Blind Watchmaker = Fantasy + imagination + assumption = False. Oh yes, there are multitudes of good, solid scientific data that biologists have. The problem is, Darwinism perverts it.

To repeat, atheism is not smart. It is emotional, driven by personal preference. It is Spintelligence. To arrive at and defend what they prefer, atheists defy/abandon their own intelligence, and choose imagination plus assumption, Spintelligence. SIMPLE recognizes it and calls it Spintelligence.

From its beginning, Darwinism has sought an answer to our existence that does not require a Creator. The words theism and Darwinism are contradictory. I know there are theists who seek to incorporate Darwinism into their worldview. That does not work. And it is not necessary, should not be thought to be necessary. Science has not proven Darwinism, cannot prove it. But there are other forms of evolutionary thought. What about them? Is/was there any evolution at all? I don't know. The Bible does not say. The word evolution is not evil. The Genesis account of creation does not describe an instant creation of the contents of the universe. There is a progression in the description. The description is outline in nature. The description itself evolves from the beginning of verse one. That does not require the conclusion that some biological evolution, some chance took place. But it leaves room for it. I ask myself, "How could it be?

The answer is found in the Genesis account. Gen 1:26. , "Then God said, Let Us make man in our image, according to our likeness..." That says you and I are made in the image of God. So let me describe a couple of things about me that are part of the image of God, perhaps you are the same. I am addicted to at least two things, truth and designing. The obsession with truth is a motivation for this website. The obsession with designing is in my DNA. I could not quit if I tried to. Thankfully, I don't have to. I don't have to choose to move into the design mode. I do it automatically. In fact, I often have to squelch it to do other things (like write). In the late 1970s, I had the idea that was eventually named Random Power Controller. With that idea in mind, I began designing. I had many thoughts, discarded many and used others. The design evolved to the final configuration over a period of months. I was engrossed in, focused on, and enjoyed the design process. The satisfaction of watching it work was worth the effort. It was good. Being made in the image of God, I believe God enjoys designing. He does not have to design, but He certainly can if He chooses.

In Genesis chapter 1, eleven times God said, "Let..." (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 22, 24). The first 10 times could be easily interpreted that He spoke the subject into existence. But it could also be interpreted as the initiation of the natural laws with the resultant effects. The final time, Gen 1:26, He said, "Let Us make man..." He did not say, "Let there be man". The design of the human body and the design of its master CLNF control system is wrapped up in that word "make". The human body and its master CLNF control system were made, but the body was not human. Something was missing. Chapter 2 expands the outline of chapter 1. Gen 2:7 says, "Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." In this verse the body with breath added is a human being. Chapter 1 uses the word "good" seven times. Gen 1:31 says, "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good". God liked what He had done. Again, being made in the image of God, I say He enjoyed doing it. I also say, if I could include chance in my design, God could have also, to whatever degree He chose. Doesn't mean He did, but He could have.

Imagine that you are standing at the entrance of Integrity Hall. There is a truth at the other end that you deeply want. You desperately need it. You must have it to preserve your life, to survive. You have just three routes available to get to it. The first is through a door that opens to a route of fantasy. You immediately reject it. The only way you would take that route would to be forced down it. Route number two looks inviting. There is a pot of gold you can pick up on the way. You are assured it is tax free, worth $10M. But then you are told it is booby-trapped. You are also assured there is only one chance in ten million that you will survive the walk. Glance down the hall and immediately reject that route. Your intelligence tells you that you would not survive. You have zero confidence in either route 1 or route 2. Your need and desire for the truth are both quite real. You open door 3 and stride down the path of reality logic. Even atheists and evolutionists take route 3 when their lives are at stake. But when the integrity of science is at stake they walk right through door 1 and down the path of fantasy. Intellectual/scientific hypocrisy exposed by SIMPLE.

To contents

I heard someone say once that there is no such thing as chance. I disagree totally. Let's just assume here that chance does happen and take a venture into imagination. We know that CLNF systems exist. But we don't know how the first CLNF system came into existence. Unless there was a Creator, it had to be a random chance event that suddenly brought the whole first CLNF system into existence. Or it had to be a single random chance event that began the process by which the first CLNF system was developed. I say chance because, in this assumption, there was no intelligent mind to accomplish the feat. Intelligence did not exist. No being existed. We could imagine the first system just suddenly sprang into existence without a cause. You can accept that bit of imagination if you like. But I do not. That puts imagination beyond limits that reason can except.

So I must imagine a single, random chance event that began the process...and another single, random chance event connected to that one...and another...and another...and another...and another. On and on until over a period of limited time (the age of the universe we live in) single, random chance events accumulate, seemingly infinite in number. They diverge into long countless branches. A vast tree is formed. At the end of each branch is a currently living organism, or one that is extinct. All of them are there. I have repeatedly used the word random. I had to do that in order to exclude anything that implies some form of intelligence. Please note that the only kind of random chance events that are in this tree are a set of exact right random chance events required to arrive at the current configuration of the tree, that is, with all living organisms on it. It also assumes that all random chance events, that might have prevented the development of the tree, failed to prevent it.

This is the kind of imagining that Darwinism does. It is easy to imagine. And it is unbelievable. A tree that vast could never form by random chance. Richard Dawkins knows that. To his credit he states it in his book, The Blind Watchmaker. So, what Darwinism does reminds me of what Albert Einstein did. He did not believe what his equations were telling him. So he inserted a factor to make the equations say what he believed to be true. He later called that the greatest blunder of his professional life. Darwinism inserts pseudo-intelligence into the theory. Proponents of Darwinism call it a mechanism and name it Natural Selection. It is the imagined way that avoids the word random. Furthermore, Darwinism assigns imaginary abilities to natural selection, abilities that reality reserves for intelligence. To Charles Darwin's credit, he indicated that the fossil record should confirm his theory. The fossil record has not done so, note at least the Cambrian period.

In 1982 I was granted US Patent number 4318008, entitled Random Power Controller. In it I deliberately incorporated chance, chance within set boundaries. It set upper and lower limits on the magnitude of power. The magnitude of power is controlled randomly within those limits. It could be described as an application of controlled randomness. Let me pause here and say that I did not give myself the ability to learn how to design the Random Power Controller, it was given to me in my DNA at conception. God put it there. (Atheists do not like that statement. But no amount of dislike and mocking can change absolute truth.) Trying to describe the satisfaction I received from watching my design function as designed, the adjectives pleasant, full and pure come to mind. I don't remember, but very likely misguided look-at-me pride was in the mix. Not now, whatever I have been able to do, or can now do, I gladly confess was/is by God's enabling. The biblical report is that we have been created in God's image. That being said, I find myself imagining how great God's pleasure and satisfaction must be when He watches the magnificent functions at work in the human bodies that He designed and created. And how agitated He must be when humans refuse to recognize what He has done. And how great His wrath must be when humans refuse to acknowledge what His Son did.

A couple of decades after receiving the patent, it occurred to me that if I could use chance in a design, God certainly could have as well. So I began imagining how God might have done it. (Imagination is a very useful tool. However, it can become destructive and even dangerous when people become so bound in their imagination that they think what they imagine is knowledge. Things like Darwinism result.) My imagining here will include real, known capabilities of human ingenuity, including implementing chance. In a nutshell, we humans use fancy equations in computers to design three dimensional objects. We can even program the computers to change the parameters in the equations to put the objects in motion. That is not imagination. We can do that. we can even have the computers make still frame shots of the objects. We can have the computers make still frame shots at random times. The still frame shots can be kept for reprint and actual manufacture. Reality, not imagination. We can in reality do these things.

God of course is far more capable than humans. God could have done a similar scenario in the design of each living organism. Consider just one, butterflies. The size, shape and coloration of the many different varieties of butterflies could have been determined by a similar scenario. The variety of different species could have been determined similarly. I am not saying that it happened that way, just that it could have. But I doubt that it was, since God does not need computers. So what is the point? This discussion renders moot a statement that Darwinists like: Our ecosystem looks like what one would expect naturally selected from random chance mutations.

So, in summary, what is the big deal about CLNF control systems? CLNF control systems are the products of intelligence. They are not the products of a slow trickle of precisely right random chance mutations from a vast reservoir of virtually 100% precisely wrong random chance mutations. Life requires food along with the capacity to consume and process food. Food itself is the result of special CLNF control systems. The processing of food in living organisms is done by CLNF systems. Life, food and CLNF control had to arrive simultaneously, or CLNF control arrived first. Why would Intelligence design CLNF control without a purpose in mind? Life, food and CLNF control were all three put in place by the Designer/Creator. God! It is SIMPLE.

The Darwinian theory of evolution has been formed by accumulative imagination and assumptions. Richard Dawkins’ book The Blind Watchmaker demonstrates and confirms the basis for Darwinism is major streaming of imagination (countless imagined evolutionary micro-steps) punctuated by many assumptions. SIMPLE observes quite conclusively that in not the way pure science is done.

HOW DO WE KNOW?

This website is about confirmation that has caused me to say I know Jesus Christ is God. How can we know? What is knowledge? I say it is this: awareness + understanding + confirmation = knowledge. Intelligence applies the + and = signs. Infants are born with intelligence and awareness, but without understanding and confirmation. An infant uses its first breaths wailing. It does not choose to cry. It simply reacts with emotion. It emotes loudly. It has just been violently thrust from its comfortable surroundings into a new, uncomfortable, foreign environment. Was it aware of the violence that moved it? We can’t say. It cannot say. But we know infants cry. We have a word that describes it…crying. We understand what they are doing. And it is confirmed to us over and over…. However, a crying newborn infant does not know it is crying. It is aware that it is crying. But has no understanding of it. It has no word to describe it. It has no vocabulary at all. It does not know that babies cry. It does not know that it is a baby. It does not know that there are other babies. It, in fact, knows nothing. As it grows older its awareness will provide information. Its intelligence will add understanding. Multiple exposures to babies crying will provide confirmation. Then the child, no longer a baby, knows babies cry. As the child matures into adulthood this process is repeated over and over again about many subjects. Knowledge increases. So it is with all knowledge. In that manner I continue to receive confirmation that Jesus Christ is God. There were moments in my life when I wondered if I would pass a lie detector test with a "Yes" if asked "Do you believe in God?" There is nothing more profound, more vast and massive in effect, than believing in God. All said and done, all my cognitive input channels converge, in agreement, on the single key statement: Jesus Christ is God. Everything hinges on that truth.

What is spiritual? You are! So say the physicists of the world. Well, they don't use those words necessarily. But what they claim, what they teach, implies very clearly that we humans are spiritual beings. Atoms, physicists say, are made up of three-dimensional stuff, electrons, protons and neutrons. There are no other three-dimensional items in atoms, except when some tiny particles show up briefly. So according to one calculation based on the size of atoms and the three-dimensional stuff in atoms, atoms are 99.9999999999996% empty space, except for energy that resides in all space. For confirmation check this link http://education.jlab.org/qa/how-much-of-an-atom-is-empty-space.html.

Your body is made totally of nothing but electrons, protons and neutrons. I am ignoring the energy, which does not have spatial dimensions, is not mass. This means your body is virtually 100% empty of 3D stuff. You are virtually 100% empty, just like a slab of concrete. Pardon me, I should've said your body is virtually 100% empty like a slab of concrete. Your body and a slab of concrete are the same thing, a collection of electrons protons, neutrons and empty space. The collection in your body is just more elaborate than the collection in the concrete. Your body has a brain, which is also just a collection of electrons, protons, neutrons and empty space.

So, what is the difference between your body and a slab of concrete? It is not in the electrons, protons and neutrons. The difference is, you reside in the empty space of your body. Electrons, protons and neutrons have no intelligence, are not conscious, have no emotions, do not love, do not hate, do not get angry, do not ponder, do not make decisions, are not happy, are not sad...do nothing that you do. You have and do all those things. What you see in the mirror is not you. You see in the mirror the vehicle that gives you, your life, mobility. When your body dies you leave. All of the electrons, protons and neutrons remain, to continue being what they are. The brain remains, intact, having lost none of its electrons, protons or neutrons. But it shuts down. Did it shut down because you left? Or did you leave because it shut down?

Link to understanding God's proposal to man

Archives (previous essays)

CLNF Systems

The Blind Watchmaker

To contents

HOW DO WE KNOW?