Tuesday, December 19, 2017

The Non-physical Properties of Genetic Information Have Verified Creation

It seems to have become fairly common these days for atheists to argue that some of the properties of genetic information are not real, and to pretend that scientists only label them as they do because it provides a convenient way to describe them. When you point out to an evolutionist that DNA is encoded information, they will argue it's not actually code, and not actually information. When you point out that there are algorithmic processes in genetic information, they argue that they are not real algorithms, but that it is simply convenient for us to describe them as algorithms for the purpose of describing them. When we point out that DNA is language, the evolutionist will argue that there is no actual language to genetic information, but that it is simply described as language because it makes it easy to discuss genetic processes. This is as rational as two people talking about an automobile standing in front of them and one of them saying, "It's not actually a car, we just describe it that way because it is convenient to do so."

It has been my experience that when debating, evolutionist will consistently make similar denials because they are aware of the implications. If DNA is in fact encoded information which possesses linguistics properties and algorithmic processes, the obvious inference is that it was designed by a mind, and that this mind is of unfathomable intelligence having abilities vastly superior to man's -- a designer of man and all organic life. This fact demonstrates that while atheists claim to appreciate science, and claim that science has verified evolution theory, they actually despise the inference provided by scientific discovery because it points us to a designer. This is why when I debate atheists about evolution and provide scientific sources for the fact that DNA is code, information, linguistics, and algorithms, the  atheist will claim DNA does not actually posses these properties, and that I am misrepresenting what is said in scientific sources. It is their way of denying what modern science has discovered for the purpose of denying creation.

The fact is, even secular, mainstream scientists describe DNA as encoded information that possesses linguistics properties and algorithmic processes. The conundrum for the evolutionist is that it is not possible to explain a naturalistic cause for information, linguistics, code, or algorithms. These are all products of intelligence. These is no potential in material processes to produce any of them.

Consider the fact that genetic information defines the structural form of proteins. Proteins are defined by the by the information in the DNA which specifies a chain of amino acids, which when produced by the machinery of the cell, results in a machine component of highly specific structure. A typical protein is 300 or more amino acids long, and some are tens of thousands.

The function of a protein is determined by its shape. The shape of a protein is determined by its primary structure (sequence of amino acids). The sequence of amino acids in a protein is determined by the sequence of nucleotides in the gene (DNA) encoding it. http://biology-pages.info/D/DenaturingProtein.html

There is nothing random about proteins. They are so highly specific that if a mutation replaces an amino acid with the wrong one, the result is almost always a protein which will not fold into it's intended form and will be of reduced functionality or completely nonfunctional.

Stability effects of mutations and protein evolvability Nobuhiko Tokuriki, and Dan S Tawfik, September 2009

The past several years have seen novel insights at the interface of protein biophysics and evolution. The accepted paradigm that proteins can tolerate nearly any amino acid substitution has been replaced by the view that the deleterious effects of mutations, and especially their tendency to undermine the thermodynamic and kinetic stability of protein, is a major constraint on protein evolvability--the ability of proteins to acquire changes in sequence and function. Mutations, and mutations that alter protein function (new-function mutations), in particular, are generally destabilizing, and can reduce protein and organismal fitness. The destabilizing effects of mutations comprise a major constraint for protein evolution, be it the accumulation of neutral, or adaptive variation. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26823449_Stability_effects_of_mutations_and_protein_evolvability

Consider also that language is a property of genetic information. Language depends upon symbolism. If we have a plastic text character shaped like the letter "A", there is nothing we can do materially to cause the sound of the letter to come from this character. The shape of the character represents a sound. The sound is not a property of the text character - it is not a property of matter. This symbolism is part of genetic information as well, wherein codons represent amino acids for the production of proteins, entire genetic sequences represent proteins, and RNA sequences represent switches to regulate protein production. This symbolism is not a property of the DNA molecule, but rather the information with which it is encoded. Symbolism does not exist in material processes, and chemistry cannot produce it -- it is non-material. An intelligence is necessary to apply a meaning or purpose to an object. Since matter is not sentient, it cannot tell us, "I represent a sound!". Symbolic representation requires intelligence.

In this short chapter you will learn how modern molecular biologists manipulate DNA, the blueprint for all of life. The four letter alphabet (A, G, C, and T) that makes up DNA represents a language that when transcribed and translated leads to the myriad of proteins that make us who we are as a species and as individuals. - C. The Language of DNA:https://bio.libretexts.org/TextMaps/Map%3A_Biochemistry_Online_(Jakubowski)/04%3A_DNA_AND_THE_CENTRAL_DOGMA_OF_BIOLOGY/C._The_Language_of_DNA

The Linguistics of DNA: Words, Sentances, Grammar, Phonetics, and Symantics

There are reasons to believe that biological systems and processes cannot be fully accounted for in terms of the principles and laws of physics and chemistry alone, but they require in addition the principles of semiotics--the science of symbols and signs, including linguistics. For convenience, we may refer to the belief, common among contemporary molecular biologists, that the laws of physics and chemistry are necessary and sufficient to account for life as the PC (physics and chemistry) paradigm, while the alternative view that principles of semiotics are additionally absolutely required for a complete understanding of living systems and processes as the PCS (physics, chemistry, and semiotics) paradigm.


Algorithms are known to exist in DNA as well, even in immune system functions. Scientists discern them by writing algorithms and applying them to the genetic sequence of DNA to discover how the cell finds information in one location of the DNA that is interdependent with information in a different location. When the algorithms they have written works in finding the information, they have discovered how the cell is doing this trick. The process is algorithmic.
We present evidence supporting the idea that the DNA sequence in genes containing noncoding regions is correlated, and that the correlation is remarkably long range-indeed, base pairs thousands of base pairs distant are correlated. We do not find such a long-range correlation in the coding regions of the gene; we utilize this fact to build a Coding Sequence Finder algorithm, which uses statistical ideas to locate the coding regions of an unknown DNA sequence. We resolve the problem of the «non-stationarity» feature of the sequence of base pairs (that the relative concentration of purines and pyrimidines changes in different regions of the mosaic-like chain) by describing a new algorithm called Detrended Fluctuation Analysis (DFA). - Statistical and linguistic features of noncoding DNA: A heterogeneous  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02462019

Modern biology has revealed things that evolutionists simply could not imagine in the days of Charles Darwin, or even the early 20th century. It has revealed that life is a product of creation because it's properties - complexity, irreducible complexity, interdependences, features of design in the form of nanotechnological machinery, information, linguistics, and algorithms. The properties of information alone have verified for us that not only is evolution false and creation is true, but that evolution is in fact scientifically impossible. The following information, provided by Dr. Werner Gitt, has made this most clear.

10 Laws of nature Regarding Information, which prove evolution false and prove creation is true:

1. Anything material, such as physical/chemical processes, cannot create something non-material
2. Information is a non-material fundamental entity and not a property of matter
3. Information requires a material medium for storage and transmission
4. Information cannot arise from statistical processes
5. There can be no information without a code -- no thought or idea can be shared without a code
6. All codes result from an intentional choice and agreement between sender and recipient
7. The determination of meaning for and from a set of symbols is a mental process that requires intelligence
8. There can be no new information without an intelligent, purposeful sender
9. Any given chain of information can be traced back to an intelligent source
10. Information comprises the non-material foundation for all:
    a. technological systems
    b. works of art
    c. biological systems

1. Since the DNA code of all life is clearly within the definition domain of information, we conclude that there must be a sender
2. Since the density and complexity of the DNA encoded information is billions of times greater than man's present technology, we conclude that the sender must be supremely intelligent
3. Since the sender must have
    a. encoded (stored) the information into the DNA molecules,
    b. constructed the molecular biomachines required for the encoding, decoding, and synthesizing process and,
    c. designed all the features for the original life forms,
We conclude the sender must be purposeful and supremely powerful.
4. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, we conclude that the sender must have a non-material component
5. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, and since information also originates from man, we conclude man's nature must have a non-material component (spirit)
6. Since information is a non-material entity, we conclude that the assumption "the universe is comprised solely of mass and energy" is false.
7. Since:
    1) biological information originates only from an intelligent sender and,
    2) all theories of chemical and biological evolution require that information must originate solely from mass and energy alone (without a sender), we conclude that all theories or concepts of biological evolution are false.

Anyone who disagrees with these laws and conclusions must falsify them by demonstrating the initial origin of information from purely material sources.

Therefore, the laws of nature about information have:  1. refuted the assumption of scientific materialism and the theories of chemical and biological evolution  2. all philosophies or theories based on the assumption of scientific materialism including chemical and biological evolution are falsified by the laws of nature about information

Sunday, October 29, 2017

Atheists should be kept away from science and academia in the same way a small child should be kept away from a box of matches.

Once upon a time, we all believed in creation. Then came the rise in secular humanism energized by the laziness of Christians to defend the truth against new "ideas" that were nothing more than replacements for one truth or another, as well as the outsourcing academic and scientific control to those who are non-believers. Then no longer did we all believe in creation, but many fell into believing that philosophical ideas from the secular world scientific because secular men of science said it was so. Today the tables are now turning, and there is a rise in the force of creationism and the Intelligent Design movement that has so greatly threatened the control over academia that secular men of science are resorting more than ever to harsh treatment of Darwinism doubters or disbelievers, that the preachers of evolutionism are now typically afraid to debate the subject of evolution and creation on college campuses for fear of being refuted in front of their own students and the media. Eugenie Scott has stated,

"If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to "defend evolution," please decline. Public debates rarely change many minds; creationists stage them mainly in the hope of drawing large sympathetic audiences. Have you ever watched the Harlem Globetrotters play the Washington Federals? The Federals get off some good shots, but who remembers them? The purpose of the game is to see the Globetrotters beat the other team. And you probably will get beaten."

Evolution is disproved by millions of facts, such as the fact that polymerase is a product of it's own translation, which proves Special Creation. Atheists are obligated to explain how all things can exist if God does not exist. Their claim that God does not exist is in effect a statement that all that exists can come into being without God. The laws of nature about information have refuted the assumption of scientific materialism and the theories of chemical and biological evolution.

Over 100 yrs ago, Evolution Theory was plausible for naturalists because of their rejection of God. Biological science was rudimentary and archaic, and provided no information about the operations of the cell. Modern biology has very greatly changed what is known of genetics and biology. It has been discovered that life is based upon information which is digitally encoded and stored in a more compressed form than man's best computer compression schemes.

DNA possesses thousands of 3-dimensional information hierarchies directed to the cell. When the DNA molecule is supercoiled as chromatin, some of it's information is available to the cell which is not available when the molecule is uncoiled, and when it is not supercoiled, some of it's information is available to the cell which is not available when it is supercoiled. Genetic information when read by the cell's machinery in one direction produces different information than when it is read by the cell's machinery in the other direction. This feature of design alone is so far superior to man's computer software that it is not currently possible for us to conceive how this could have been done while making all of it's information relevant and critical to the organism. It's individual information sequences are overlapping and nested sharing nucleotides between sequences across the entire molecule. It's sequences across the entire 7 ft. long molecule are organized to conform to linguistics laws which go beyond Zipf's law of Linguistics. It contains codes built upon codes which regulate the use of each other, even when they are distant from each other in the molecule.

A recent discovery is that there is a code which lies upon codes for proteins, sharing it's base pairs, and regulates how to express those sequences for proteins. If we liken the mechanical functions of the protein machines of the cell as it interacts with DNA, then the operations mirror the human language properties of phonetics, semantics, syntax, and grammar, and punctuation. The information input and output processing of DNA includes the analytical operations of proofreading, information comparison, cut, insert, copy-and-past, backup and restore, all of which operate by algorithmic operations which possess "if" and "when" statements, just like computer programs. Information, algorithms, and linguistics are all immaterial nature has no potential to produce them. They are products only producible by a mind.

During an organism's development, the genetic information instructs the cell on how to turn on and off, like chemical light switches, many sequences of information of the DNA in a supremely complex and yet to be understood orchestral arrangement of various groupings and orders so as to build the structures of the organism. These patterns of genes being switched on and off is so complex that man will likely never be able to decipher it.

If you want to believe in evolution because you refuse to acknowledge the existence of our creator, nobody can stop you. But doing so is to be a denialists of the discoveries of modern science - things which the outdated concept of Charles Darwin over 150 yrs ago could not have predicted. Believing in evolution today is as antiquated as it was to believe that flies arose from meat or frogs arose from mud a century prior to Darwin.

Atheists in fact hate the Scientific Method and refuse to employ it. Example: 100 years of random genetic mutation experimentation provides consistent results demonstrating that random mutations are destructive and negative to organisms, both biochemically and anatomically, and does not add anything incrementally to the anatomy of organisms. Conclusion? Mutation cannot be a mechanism for accruing change that results in macroevolution. But what does the atheist conclude despite the evidence? They continue believing that random mutation IS a mechanism for accruing change that results in mind-bending complexity, microscopic interdependent machinery, and macroevolution, not because of science, but because their worldview requires it to be, since if evolution were true, random mutation would have to be the base mechanism for evolution, since genetic information defines organisms. In this way, they refuse to come to the correct conclusion because of their paradigm, tossing out the Scientific Method and the conclusion it would require them to accept.

Examples of how atheists refuse to comply with the Scientific Method are nearly countless, and found in all fields of science. I would say that based upon this fact, atheists are incapable of being objective, responsible scientists in any field of science which relates to the universe, organic life, or history.

The word's foremost atheist academic, who's former arguments are the poster upheld by atheists today, converted to theist and creationist because of the biological evidence:

Friday, August 11, 2017

The Bible: Inspired or Fabricated.

Only one of the two can be true!

It can be demonstrated that the Bible is inspired by discussing two of it's astonishing features which conclusively verify it's inspiration. The first is prophecies which have been fulfilled and the second is scientific foreknowledge. First, let's consider the most common objections to these evidences. The number of evidences at my disposal are tremendous -- about 2,000 prophecies in the Old Testament, of which Jesus Christ fulfilled 365 by himself. 465 characteristics of the messiah are given in the Old Testament, and Jesus had them all. In his talk, "Are these the Right Words", Dr. Dan Olinger has stated,

"Fulfilled prophecy is an objective demonstration that scripture has a supernatural source. ... These prophecies are so accurate that even unbelievers, even what we would call today liberal scholars, don't dispute that the prophecies are accurate. They have to hold to the fact that the prophecies were written after the fact, because that's how accurate they are, and they have no other evidence than simply that the accuracy of the prophecy exists, and that it couldn't have been done because supernatural things don't happen. By the way there are a number of terms you could apply to that way of thinking, but science is not one of them."

There are also quite a few examples of scientific foreknowledge in the Old Testament which man in ancient times could not have understood because the technology to discover them was not available for many centuries. We'll discuss that subject in more depth in another article.

When debating the inspiration of the Bible, atheist laypersons often resort to  a couple of hand-waving tactics in an attempt to dismiss the evidence forthright. The first of these is to appeal upon secular historical timelines, which are based upon the assumptions of a uniformitarian view of the evolution of human society shortly after the end of the Ice Age, about 10,000 years ago. The most common timelines atheists appeal to are the Sumerian Kings List, which states that Sumeri8an kings have ruled Mesopotamia for tens of thousands of years and therefore do not align with the atheist's uniformitarianism, and the Egyptian King's List, which has been demonstrated erroneous by Christian scholars. It is interesting to note that atheists seem to have no problem adjusting the Sumerian King's List by removing tens of thousands of years from it so that it conforms to their views, while they are unwilling to accept the evidence that the Egyptian King's List has a over 1,000 years of false time within it. With atheists, all things must be adjusted to fit the assumptions built into their paradigm of the uniformitarian history of man's cultural development.

Obviously, both of these secular timelines contradict the scriptures. The atheist's attempt is to show that the Bible is not historically correct so as to supposedly show that biblical events could not have happened, and therefore the Bible cannot be inspired, since if God existed, he would certainly know true history. Regarding prophecies, all that I must do to demonstrate that the Bible is in fact inspired is to show that passages from the Old Testament refer to events described in the New.

The second hand-waving tactic atheists employ when debating prophecies is one commuted almost exclusively by atheists laypersons, but not atheist academics. They often resort to falsely claiming that the prophecy does not say what it clearly does. They will even go so far as to say that certain words in the passages do not mean what they clearly do, all in an effort to dismiss the prophecy. This tactic is easily demonstrated to be false by simply providing the passages themselves, since their words stand on their own for any rational reader.

The before mentioned statement by Dr. Olinger's explains why atheist academics and scholars don't resort to the hand-waving tactic employed by atheist laypersons. This is because the passages stand on their own. It is only atheist laypersons which resort to saying that prophetic passages do not say what they do say, and their words do not mean what they do mean. The majority of atheist academics do not resorting to this tactic because it would reveal that they are not being intellectually honest.

Some atheists have actually resorted to claiming that the prophecies are fabricated, but this is easily shown to be completely illogical and astonishingly implausible for a number of reasons. Firstly, there would be no motivation for anyone in Israel, either layperson or one who is among the religious elite, to fabricate so many fulfilled prophecies. There would simply be nothing to gain from it, and it would only ostracize them from Israeli society and set themselves at odds with the occupying Roman leadership because it would create a rise in dissent. Any theory that the Romans would do this fails because the dissent it would create would not be beneficial. Dissent would disrupt the peaceful relationship which the Romans had with the Jews, which profited Rome financially. The Romans would not cut off the profits they reaped from taxing the Jews by creating havoc. A peaceful relationship with the Jews was what they sought and desperately needed in Israel. Likewise, the Jews needed a peaceful relationship with Rome in order to conduct their daily lives, which ruins any motivation on the behalf of an Israelite to fabricate so many prophecies.

In order to accomplish a fabrication of so many fulfilled prophecies, it would be necessary for the the New Testament writers to possess a copy of at all of the books of the Old Testament, with the exception of the Book of Ruth. This is implausible because it took about eight months for a scribe to carefully copy the texts. Anyone seeking to fabricate fulfilled prophecies would have to either pay a scribes salary for eight months to have them make the copy or they would have to devote eight months of their life to making it themselves. Only scribes would be allowed to handle the texts to make a copy. Therefore it is implausible that a tax collector, physician, or fishermen would be able to obtain a copy of the scriptures for their personal possession. One must ask also how many copies of the Old Testament scriptures they possessed. Did each one of them have their opwn copies to work from, or did they have one copy between them all and secretly meet eachnight after work to study it together and make their copious notes? One can only wonder at the miracle required for such as thing to be true.

In order to fabricate the New Testament, the forgers would have to be a leader of an early church or scribe of the temple. The fabricators would have to devote a tremendous portion of their life to studying the texts. They would have to become experts on the texts and make a great volume of personal notes so as to be able to fabricate stories that fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. It is completely unrealistic to believe that an Israeli layperson would have the time and resources to devote to such a daunting task. Perhaps a wealthy Israelite would have such resources, but to fabricate such lies would only create dissent among their peers, the religious leadership of Israel, the general public, and most importantly, the Roman occupiers, who were intolerant of those social troublemakers. The Romans lined the Appian Way with crucifictions to make clear their brutal intolerance of law-breakers and troublemakers. The message was clear: "You are entering Rome. Obey the law and be peaceful, else you will be like one of these." Fabricating the New Testament for the purpose of fulfilling prophecies would threaten the forger's wealth and well-being, which would be dependent upon peaceful relations with Jewish authorities and the Roman occupiers. One cannot even imagine a benefit of such an arduous, time-consuming, costly, and dangerous venture. How would they benefit from fabricating such tall tales? There simply isn't a plausible motive.

Because of these facts, we can see that the wealthy of Israel would have no motivation for fabricating so many prophecies, and the layperson would not have the resources to do so in their work-a-day lives. Therefore, it is simply utterly implausible that anyone could have fabricated the many fulfilled prophecies in scriptures. The best explanation is simply that the many fulfilled prophecies are inherent to the texts as they were provided by God's inspiration.

Moreover, the New Testament era Jews did not have a belief in a dying and rising messiah. To fabricate such a messiah would be impossible, since they would have to have also added to the Old Testament texts all of the allusions to Christ's death and resurrection, such as Isaiah 53, in order to make their New Testament fabrications work. But this cannot be true since scholarship verifies that the Old Testament was written before Christ over a period of many centuries dating back to approximately 1,450 B.C.

When it comes to the scientific foreknowledge in the scriptures, the only tactic an atheist is able to employ is to say that the words of the passages do not say what they are said to say, or that their words do not mean what they are said to mean - a tactic I have already explained is employed by atheist laypersons relating to prophecy. Once more, all that must be done to discredit this tactic is to provide the passage and a simple explanation of what they say so as to show that the argument against them is without merit.

From these facts we can see that no fabrication theory is plausible. The texts simply are what they are, and no work has been done to fabricate fulfilled prophecies or scientific foreknowledge. The passages are part of the inspired texts and nobody has fabricated them either before the fact or after it in order to create the impression of inspiration, either in the Old Testament or the New Testament. These facts verify that the scriptures are in fact the inspired Word of God because they require unfathomable supernatural power over human actions and history from someone who exists outside of time.

Here I will provide evidence of inspiration for the scriptures from the Heptadic Structure of the genealogy of Jesus in the Book of Matthew. It is comprised of numerous layers of complexity, all relating to the number 7, which God uses throughout the Old and New Testaments in relation to Himself. These numerous layers make it clear that man could never have formulated the genealogy of Christ, even by employing the world's best code writers and a computer to assist them.  To fabricate this genealogy would require the writers of the entire Old Testament to work together in collusion for the purpose of fabricating this genealogy before the fact, each producing a portion of it towards the goal of creating the whole. This is completely irrational since the authors of the Old Testament books lived in different centuries and most of them could not have known one another, and because some of the persons in this genealogy are historically verified persons, and others are paramount to the events in the books of the Old Testament. Any collusion theory for the fabrication of this genealogy before the fact is therefore irrational and utterly implausible, and any theory that it was produced after the fact by New Testament authors would be disproved by their inability of them to have produced the Old Testament.

In the genealogy of Jesus Christ in the Book of Matthew,

The number of words which are nouns is 56, or 7 x 8.
The Greek word "the" occurs 56 times, or 7 x 8.
The number of different forms in which the article "the" occurs is 7.
There are two main sections in the passages: verse 1-11 and 12-17. In the first main section, the number of Greek vocabulary words used is 49, or 7 x 7.
Of these 49 words, the number of them beginning with a vowel is 28, or 7 x 4.
The number of words beginning with a consonant is 21, or 7 x 3.
The total number of letters in these 49 words is exactly 266, or 7 x 38-exactly.
The numbers of vowels among these 266 letters is 140, or 7 x 20.
The number of consonants is 126, or 7 x 18-exactly.
Of these 49 words, the number of words which occur more than once is 35, or 7 x 5.
The number of words occurring only once is 14, or 7 x 2.
The number of words which occur in only one form is exactly 42, or 7 x 6.
The number of words appearing in more than one form is also 7.
The number of 49 Greek vocabulary words which are nouns is 42, or 7 x 6.
The number of words which are not nouns is 7.
Of the nouns, 35 are proper names, or 7 x 5.
These 35 nouns are used 63 times, or 7 x 9.
The number of male names is 28, or 7 x 4.
These male names occur 56 times or 7 x 8.
The number which are not male names is 7.
Three women are mentioned -- Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. The number of Greek letters in these three names is 14, or 7 x 2.
The number of compound nouns is 7.
The number of Greek letters in these 7 nouns is 49, or 7 x 7.
Only one city is named in this passage, Babylon, which in Greek contains exactly 7 letters.
The 72 vocabulary words add up to a grammatical value of 42,364, or 7 x 6,052.
The 72 words appear in 90 forms-some appear in more than one form. The numeric value of the 90 forms is 54,075, or 7 x 7,725. Exactly.

The genealogy of Jesus in the Book of Matthew is astonishing verification that God inspired the texts because he has power over the actions of human beings and historical events. Human engineering cannot account for it. It requires someone of supernatural authority over people, events, and time.

Friday, July 21, 2017

The Heavy Hammer of Information

The discovery that all biological systems are information driven has refuted evolution theory. The features and biochemical functions of organisms are defined by prescriptive genetic information. Information is produced by intelligence. Without intelligence being involved in the formation of genetic information, the theory of evolution cannot be correct. In like manner, the fact that humans employ their non-physical intelligence to create information refutes atheism because it provides evidence that we are not merely a complex collection of matter which results in an automaton.

Information is a non-physical entity which is meaningful and purposeful, yet physical processes produce physical products. If we strike a billiard ball in the direction of another, the first ball will strike the second producing a physical product - the movement of the second ball. It is illogical however, to belived that physical processes produce non-physical products or to attribute mental properties to matter. The fact that human intelligence produces information demonstrates that a human is more than just a material automaton, but are also non-physical causal agents. The fact that information is non-physical provides astonishing evidence of what a Christian would call "spirit" so that we are able to create non-physical entities such as information, algorithms, linguistics, aboutness, intentionality, etc. When humans beings produce information, it cannot be that the material processes do so because information is non-physical. These facts clearly discredit the physical materialism, naturalism, and evolutionism of atheism.

When atheists do their apologetics, they consistently borrow concepts from the theist in order to attempt to make atheism seem to be supported by our reality. Atheists often try to remodel reality by re-defining words and concepts so as to remove the inference of the supernatural. I have debated many atheists on subjects relating to information, and it has been my experience that atheists consistently operate the same way when dealing with the evidence that information provides inference of the existence of the human spirit. For the atheist, humans cannot have a spirit since they hold to physical materialism and claim we are merely soulless bags of matter. Atheists understand that if humans have a spirit, then we have reason to believe God exists since our spirits did not create themselves, but were created by a higher spirit - God. This is unacceptable to the atheist, and so they must attempt to remove the evidence of the non-physical cause for the creation of information since atheists are stuck with believing is produced by physical processes. An example of how atheists do this is that when discussing the cause of information, atheists will typically attempt to merge information with it's medium in order to claim information is not no-physical. They understand that if information is non-physical, that it is not comprised of matter, that these must be a non-physical component to a human being which is producing it since it is illogical to believe that physical processes produce non-physical products. The refutation for the atheist is that it is demonstrable that information is not bound to it's medium and therefore not comprised of matter.

The root of the word 'information' is inform for a reason. If there is no informing, no information can be created. Although we colloquially use the word 'information' to describe knowledge that has been recorded upon a medium, such as the genes of our DNA, this technically is not information until and unless it is transcribed by the cell to become useful. The designer of our genetic information must speak and understand the same language as the cell in order for the information to be useful, purposeful, and to be conveyed. Technically, the knowledge recorded in a book with text symbols is not information until the book is read. The designer of the information in the book encodes the book in a language intended for readers who also understand their language, in order for the knowledge of the book to be conveyed. While humans deign information encoded in books, we are not the designers of the information in our genome. Nonetheless, we are justified in saying that the words recorded in a book are information because the purpose of the book, just like the purpose of genetic information, is to be read and used for a purpose, and it was recorded in it's medium for that purpose.

The root word of "information" is the word "inform". The suffix "-ation" indicates an action, process, state, condition, or result. To cause information to come into existence, there must be an action, process, state, condition, or result which causes one party to inform another. There must be the action of informing, or the state of the conveying of information taking place, or the condition of having been been informed, or the result must be that one party has been informed by another.

Knowledge does not adequately define information because knowledge can be squired by observation without any means of informing. The sun is not a causal agent with intelligence and cannot inform anyone of knowledge, since matter does not posesses knowledge. In order for information to exist, knowledge must be conveyed.

In order to attempt to make a case that information is physical, atheists attempt to merge components of information so as to remove the non-physical nature of information. Before explaining this, we need to have a good understanding of what information is. The best definition of information has been provided by Dr. Gitt Werner,  President and Professor of the German Federal Institute of Information Technology. He defines it as follows:

"Information is knowledge conveyed from a sender to a receiver using a language agreed upon by both parties."

We can test this, as well as the atheist claim that information is physical, by examining how information is created. An example might be that one star-gazer observes a star and learns that it is distinctly blue in color. As yet, no information has been produced. This gazer has simply gained knowledge that the star is blue. But now the gazer turns to his friend, and pointing to the star, he informs his friend that the star is blue. Information has now been created. The gazer has conveyed knowledge from himself (the sender of the knowledge) to his friend (the receiver of the knowledge) and he did so using a language spoken by both. If one of them spoke and understood only Portuguese and the other only French, the language barrier would prevent the transmission of knowledge, and no information would be created. The sender might as well be babbling incoherently. Using a language both agree upon, the knowledge can be conveyed and the receiver can become informed.

Explaining this further, let's imagine that someone enters an empty room and says, "Dogs.". In this case, there has been no information created, since nobody has been informed of anything. If there were two people present and one said to the other, "Dogs." there is still no information. Information is meaningful and purposeful. Simply saying the word "dogs" conveys no knowledge because of the absence of context, such as a prior question or assertion to which the word "dogs" can provide meaning or purpose. If one person is in an empty room says, "Dogs are animals." there has still been no information produced, because while the statement is meaningful, nobody has been informed of anything. If two people are present and one of them speaks and understands only Yiddish and the other only Italian, and one says to the other, "Dogs are animals.", no information has been produced because a language barrier has prevented the transmission of knowledge, and nobody has become informed of anything. However, if both speak and understand the same language, the knowledge that dogs are animals can be conveyed from the sender to the reciever, and information can be created.

In their attempt to reduce information to matter, atheists try to merge information with it's medium by pointing out that information does not exist unless it is conveyed through a physical medium. We live in a physical world, and nothing happens here, outside of our concious mental processes, without something physical taking place - matter will be moved and energy will be expended. It is understandable therefore that in order to convey information in a physical world we must use a physical medium, unless we were able to communicate strictly by mental processes with another person. If knowledge is to leave our body to go to another person, it is necessary that information be conveyed through a physical medium. However, while information does require a physical medium to be conveyed, the information is not it's medium because information is not bound to it's medium. We can demonstrate this with another example

Let's imagine that a university professor is giving a talk. If the atheist's ideas were correct, then since atheists claim the brain is the seat of human sentience and producer of information, and since they claim information is comprised of matter, the professor would have to share his brain matter with every member of the audience in order to convey information. But does brain matter leave the professor by some mystical superhighway and enter into and become part of the brain of everyone in the audience? Certainly not. It this were true, and if we could physically measure information, we should see a continuous reduction in brain size and intelligence of persons who do a lot of talking on their jobs or lecture regularly, ultimately resulting in that person becoming an imbicil.

Another example is that the knowledge recorded in a book is demonstrably not any part of the book itself since the book can be read aloud, printed from an electronic file onto paper by a computer, or copied by hand. In all cases the information is conveyed to the receiver, but not one atom of matter need be moved from the book to the receiver because the information is not the matter which comprises the book.

Inevitably, secular scientists cannot avoid the implications of the fact that biology is information technology. By itself, this fact has driven much controversy in that the secular scientists have a hard time dealing with the implications this makes for their naturalistic theory of evolution. Many science papers have been published which explore the information properties of genetics. For example, in 2009, the paper "The digital code of DNA." was published in the journal of the National Center for Biotechnology Information, which states in it's abstract,

"The discovery of the structure of DNA transformed biology profoundly, catalyzing the sequencing of the human genome and engendering a new view of biology as an information science. Two features of DNA structure account for much of its remarkable impact on science: its digital nature and its complementarity, whereby one strand of the helix binds perfectly with its partner. DNA has two types of digital information--the genes that encode proteins, which are the molecular machines of life, and the gene regulatory networks that specify the behavior of the genes."

The ever-increasing understanding that biology is information-driven technology is in my opinion the single greatest factor in the downfall of evolution theory. It is inevitable that in order to fully face the this reality, it will become continuously more difficult for proponents of evolution theory to argue that evolution explains the existence and diversity of biological systems. The complete demise of evolutionism is inevitable because of this alone, though because of the stalwart determinism and disdain for Intelligent Design Theory, proponents of evolutionism will only give it up by the process of their death. As one generation of evolutionists yields another, fewer and fewer will be able to promote or even believe in evolution. In the end, evolutionism will dissapear from academia as generations of students who have been able to see and hear the evidence of design in biology find themselves unable to believe that matter in motion is the explanation for their existence.

"Since the 1950s, the concept of information has acquired a strikingly prominent role in many parts of biology." - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

When will the end come for evolutionism? It is difficult to say, but i suspect, as some scientists do, that evolutionism will not survive another century because of the continuous discoveries in microbiology. Perhaps it will come to an end in 50 years, perhaps 100. Nonetheless, it will end. Unfortunately, I do not believe that the world's academics will come to believe that God has created us. I fear that though they will be proponents of Intelligent Design, they will, because of the rebellious nature of the human heart, not be willing to accept that God has made us because of His moral law and authority, but will instead continue to replace God with some other intelligence. Instead of God as our creator, they will be willing to accept another creator, but only so long as that creator's morality is not that of God, which is a frightening, but all-to-likely scenario of how it will play out.

“It was already clear that the genetic code is not merely an abstraction, but also the embodiment of life’s mechanisms; the consecutive triplets of nucleotides in DNA (called codons) are inherited but they also guide the construction of proteins. So it is disappointing, but not surprising, that the origin of the genetic code is still as obscure as the origin of life itself.” John Maddox, “The Genetic Code by Numbers,” Nature, Vol. 367, 13 January 1994, p. 111.

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

Block Duplication & 2R Hypothesis

Recently, I debated Dr. Dan Larhammar of Uppsala University on the subject of evolution relating to biology and genetics. Dr. Larhammar is a proponent of the 2R Hypothesis which is the belief that the genomes of many organisms experienced duplication events in the distant past. What this means is that a genetic error took place which copied the entire DNA then bound both DNA molecules together to form a single, much larger genome. 2R Hypothesis has been a controversial idea since it was first put forth in the 1970's, even amongst some geneticists who are believers of evolution theory. Some published scientific whitepapers have questioned the validity of 2R Hypothesis since the early 1980's.1

Like most evolutionist scientists and university professors today, he also believes that the genetic redundancy which exists in the genomes of most plants and animals is a result repeated block duplications over vast ages of time during the process of evolution and provides raw material for evolution by producing new copies of genes that are free to mutate and take on other functions. This assumption is held because there are many redundant genes in the genomes of various creatures, and the evolutionist assumes that genetic similarities between gene families in different species (i.e. human and fly) is evidence that the species are related over time. Block duplication is a known but uncommon genetic error in which sections of DNA are duplicated and joined by mutation during cell duplication, resulting in what is called polyploidy.

However, polyploidy cannot be the reason for the genetic redundancy in the genomes of creatures. There are many problems associated with these ideas, which evolutionists typically gloss over and ignore, as they do the degenerative effects of mutation in general in order to believe that mutation is the designer of the marvelous genetic material of creatures. While block duplication may occur occasionally in extant organisms, it has negative consequences, and like genetic mutation in general, it is not plausible to believe that a genetic error process which causes many degenerative effects is the result of all of the genetic redundancy known to exist in the genomes of various creatures for the following reasons, and others not listed:

A. It has been known for many decades that random gene duplication mutation in general is degenerative, contrary to the absurd belief of evolutionists that it is a designer of new information which codes for new viable anatomical features and biological functions.2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

B. Since block duplication mutation is degenerative to an organism, entire genomic duplication is deadly or highly degenerative.

C. If block duplication were the explanation for the genetic redundancy and similarity between species, it could only be because numerous block duplication had taken place over vast ages. However, the effect of block duplication is highly degenerative, so it is not plausible that many repeated block duplications could take place to produce viable, healthy genomes which Natural Selection would select as the phenotype of the organism.11,12,13

D. Block duplication is known to cause a loss of genetic information at the loci where the block is spliced into the genome because genes at the loci are broken. This loss of genetic information caused by block duplication is known to be the cause of disease.11,12,13 Over the vast ages of the evolution theory, this would result in a very high number of genes being lost during block duplication or chromatid recombination.2,11,12,13

E. Since regulatory sequences may be dozens, hundreds, or thousands of base pairs away from the sequences which they regulate, one would have to believe that contrary to the odds, an almost magical perfection occurred each time a block duplication took place so that all related regulatory sequences were not broken and were duplicated with the sequences which they regulate. Unless one believes this, repeated block duplication would rapidly degenerate the genome.2,14

F. Believing that block duplication explains the redundant genetic similarities between species requires one to believe that a process which causes genetic disorder is instead a designer of new viable features and functions.2,11,12,13

G. While duplicated sequences may in the imagination of the evolutionist provide raw material for mutation to transform into new information that codes for new features and function for evolution to occur, the simple truth is that gene duplication causes diseases and malformations, and duplicate genes would only become more potential for increased degenerative random mutation. Repeated instances of block duplication could only continuously increase disease in any given species over time.12,15

H. It has been shown with many studies that random mutation is degenerating the genomes of all life, moving all species towards extinction.

Evolutionists refuse to accept scientific knowledge which refutes their theory. Most specifically, they refuse to accept the astonishing volume of consistent and correlating evidence accumulated over many decades that random genetic mutation is degenerative to genomes. Despite the overwhelming body of scientific evidence, evolutionists continue to hold to the long-disproven idea that random mutation and chromosome errors are the producers of raw material which subsequent mutations then transform into new information which codes for all manner of anatomical biological designs and interdependent biological functions. It is a sad sort of state which one can liken to a dying person refusing to let go of the pitcher of poison they have been drinking while medical personnel tussle with them over it, repeating to them, "But it's poison! You must give it up!".

When will it ever end? Eventually, it must. There will come a time when scientists who are willing to believe that there cannot be a divine cause for man's existence will give up the absurd idea that random genetic mistakes are the most ingenious designers known to exist, and capable of designing technology at the molecular scale which vastly exceeds mankind's abilities. It will be shame and embarrassment that does it. Unfortunately, when this time comes, they will not acknowledge our Creator, Jesus Christ, but will instead point to the heavens, as some are already doing, and tell us that aliens are responsible for the existence of mankind. This will only push the problem away from the earth however, as one must then ask, "Who created the aliens?"

1. 2R or not 2R: testing hypotheses of genome duplication in early vertebrates, Hughes AL1, Friedman R. 1983 "Comparison of gene family size in the human genome and in invertebrate genomes shows no evidence of a 4:1 ratio between vertebrates and invertebrates. Furthermore, explicit phylogenetic tests for the topology expected from two rounds of polyploidization have revealed alternative topologies in a substantial majority of human gene families. Likewise, phylogenetic analyses have shown that putatively duplicated genomic regions often include genes duplicated at widely different times over the evolution of life. The 2R hypothesis thus can be decisively rejected."

2. "It is also important to remember that, in terms of natural selection, “beneficial” means any mutation that leads to greater reproduction, without regard to long-term goals. Under many conditions, that can mean that any mutation that increases efficiency, including mutations that inactivate or delete genes, will be favored [39-41]. Even though genetic information is being lost, such mutations would still be considered “beneficial.” That loss of information is a common evolutionary outcome has been shown repeatedly [41]. Wilf and Ewens’s model, however, assumes that all beneficial mutations lead to more and more “advanced” forms." -- Time and Information in Evolution, William A. Dembski, Winston Ewert, Ann K. Gauger, and Robert J. Marks II, Bio-Complexity 4(2012)

4. "Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in Escherichia coli Excerpt: "At least 80% of the mutations had a significant negative effect on fitness, whereas none of the mutations had a significant positive effect."

5. "It is good to keep in mind ... that nobody has ever succeeded in producing even one new species by the accumulation of micromutations. Darwin's theory of natural selection has never had any proof, yet it has been universally accepted." - Prof. R Goldschmidt PhD, DSc Prof. Zoology, University of Calif. in Material Basis of Evolution Yale Univ. Press

6. "Not even one mutation has ever been observed that adds a little information to the genome." - Dr. Lee Spetner, a scientist and teacher at Johns Hopkins University, Not by Chance! Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution

7. "The actual rate of beneficial mutations is so extremely low as to thwart any actual measurement." - Bataillon, 2000, Elena et al, 1998

8. "But in all the reading I've done in the life-sciences literature, I've never found a mutation that added information. All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it." - Lee Spetner - Ph.D. Physics, MIT, Not By Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution

9. "In medical circles, mutations are universally regarded as deleterious. They are a fundamental cause of ageing,1,2 cancer 3,4 and infectious diseases 5." - Alexander Williams, Botanist, Research Associate at the Western Australian Herbarium specializing in the taxonomy of grasses, Journal of Creation 22(2):60–66 August 2008

10. Haldane’s dilemma:  "The severe contradictions that these findings pose for neo-Darwinian theory corroborate what has become known as Haldane’s dilemma. J.B.S. Haldane was one of the architects of neo-Darwinism who pioneered its application to population biology. He realized that it would take a long time for natural selection to fix an advantageous mutation in a population—fixation is when every member has two copies of an allele, having inherited it from both mother and father. He estimated that for vertebrates, about 300 generations would be required, on average, where the selective advantage is 10%. In humans, with a 20-year generation time and about 6 million years since our last common ancestor with the chimpanzee, only about 1,000 such advantageous mutations could have been fixed. Haldane believed that substitution of about 1,000 alleles would be enough to create a new species, but it is not nearly enough to explain the observed differences between us and our closest supposed relatives.

The measured difference between the human and chimpanzee genomes amounts to about 125 million nucleotides, which are thought to have arisen from about 40 million mutation events. If only 1000 of these mutations could have been naturally selected to produce the new (human) species, it means the other 39,999,000 mutations were deleterious, which is completely consistent with the reviews showing that the vast majority of mutations are deleterious. Consequently, we must have degenerated from the apes, which is an absurd conclusion." - Alexander Williams, Botanist, Research Associate at the Western Australian Herbarium specializing in the taxonomy of grasses, Journal of Creation 22(2):60–66 August 2008

11. Thalassemia is a genetic blood disorder which causes people to be unable to make enough hemoglobin, causing severe anemia. When hemoglobin is lacking in the red blood cells, oxygen can't get to all parts of the body and organs become starved for oxygen and unable to function properly. Gamma thalassemia resulting from the deletion of a gamma-globin gene, P K Sukumaran, T Nakatsuji, M B Gardiner, A L Reese, J G Gilman, and T H Huisman

12. DNA Deletion and Duplication and the Associated Genetic Disorders, Suzanne Clancy, Ph.D. & Kenna M. Shaw, Ph.D. 2008 Nature Education "Duplications may affect phenotype by altering gene dosage. For example, the amount of protein synthesized is often proportional to the number of gene copies present, so extra genes can lead to excess proteins. Because most embryonic developmental processes are heavily dependent on carefully balanced levels of proteins, duplications resulting in extra gene copies (Figure 1) can therefore lead to developmental defects such as those seen in the Drosophila Bar eye mutation."

13. Repeated duplications have been associated with cancer: Lucito, R., Healy, J., Alexander, J., Reiner, A., Esposito, D., Chi, M., Rodgers, L., Brady, A., Sebat, J., Trope, J., West, J.A., Rostan, S., Nguyen, K.C., Powers, S., Ye, K.Q., Olshen, A., Venkatraman, E., Norton, L. and Wigler, M., Representational oligonucleotide microarray analysis: a high-resolution method to detect genome copy number variation, Genome Res. 13(10):2291–2305, 2003.

14. DNA Study Forces Rethink of What It Means to Be a Gene, Eliizabeth Pennisi, Science 15 June 2007, Vol. 316  no. 5831  pp. 1556-1557: "According to a painstaking new analysis of 1% of the human genome, genes can be sprawling, with far-flung protein-coding and regulatory regions that overlap with other genes."

15. Yingguang Liu and Dan Moran: "(1) gene duplications are aberrations of cell division processes and are more likely to cause malformation or diseases rather than selective advantage; (2) duplicated genes are usually silenced and subjected to degenerative mutations; (3) regulation of supposedly duplicated gene clusters and gene families is irreducibly complex, and demands simultaneous development of fully functional multiple genes and switching networks, contrary to Darwinian gradualism."

"In most dioecious (possessing either male or female organs) animals and humans, however, polyploid embryos typically suffer generalized malformation and die during development.8 It is not only sex determination per se (as was proposed by Muller), but more importantly, the delicate balancing between homologous genes, that is disrupted in polyploid individuals of higher animals. For instance, parental imprinting (differences in the expression of maternal and paternal genes) by DNA methylation may be disrupted as the cell endeavors to silence extra chromosomes by extensive methylation."

"Disharmonious interactions between homologous genes are thought to be the reason for most cases of hybrid sterility in allodiploid animals. In plants, neoallopolyploid genomes are often unstable, displaying ‘sterility, lethality, and phenotypic instability’."

"Polyploidy is seen in ferns, flowering plants and some lower animals.7,8 It is usually associated with hermaphroditism, parthenogenesis (mother producing young asexually), or species without disparate sex chromosomes."

16. Contamination of the genome by very slightly deleterious mutations: why have we not died 100 times over? Alexey S. Kondrashovf, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 175, Issue 4, 21 August 1995, Pages 583–594

17. Rates and Fitness Consequences of New Mutations in Humans, Peter D. Keightley, 2012, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh

18. All multicellular organisms are undergoing inexorable genome decay from mutations because natural selection cannot remove the damage: Baer, C.F., Miyamoto, M.M. and Denver, D.R., Mutation rate variation in multicellular eukaryotes: causes and consequences, Nature Reviews Genetics 8:619–631, 2007.

19. "The decay in the human genome due to multiple slightly deleterious mutations each generation is consistent with an origin several thousand years ago." -- Sanford, J., Cornell University Geneticist, inventor of the Gene Gun, Genetic entropy and the mystery of the genome, Ivan Press, 2005

20. "Thus, all multicellular life on earth is undergoing inexorable genome decay because the deleterious mutation rates are so high, the effects of the most individual mutations are so small, there are no compensatory beneficial mutations, and natural selection is ineffective in removing the damage." - Alexander Williams, Botanist, Research Associate at the Western Australian Herbarium specializing in the taxonomy of grasses, Journal of Creation 22(2):60–66 August 2008

21. Human Molecular Genetics,  4th Edition, April 02, 2010, Chapter 9: instability of the human genome: mutation and repair, Tom Strachan and Andrew Read, Garland Science

22. Human mutation rate revealed, Next-generation sequencing provides the most accurate estimate to date, Elie Dolgin, August 2009, Nature: Every time human DNA is passed from one generation to the next it accumulates 100–200 new mutations, according to a DNA-sequencing analysis of the Y chromosome.

23. Estimate of the Mutation Rate per Nucleotide in Humans, Michael W. Nachman and Susan L. Crowell, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, Corresponding author: Michael W. Nachman, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Biosciences West Bldg., University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

24. "Thus the estimate from the Biochemical Method is 130 mutations per generation." - Larry Moran, Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Toronto

25. 70 new mutations per generation: Analysis of Genetic Inheritance in a Family Quartet by Whole-Genome Sequencing, Published Online March 10 2010, Science 30 April 2010: Vol. 328  no. 5978  pp. 636-639 

26. Rate, molecular spectrum, and consequences of human mutation, Michael Lynch:  Although the human per-generation mutation rate is exceptionally high, on a per-cell division basis, the human germline mutation rate is lower than that recorded for any other species."

27. 89 new mutations per person per generation : Rate, molecular spectrum, and consequences of human mutation, Michael Lynch

Monday, April 20, 2015

Where is Eternal Torment Taught in the Scriptures?

The idea that the unsaved will be tormented perpetually is dependent upon the idea that the human spirit is still immortal after the fall. However, God declared that because of sin Adam would die the day that he ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In order to keep this belief that the soul is immortal, proponents argue that because Adam did not physically die the day he ate of it, that the death suffered by Adam was a permanent separation from God, and that therefore those who are not saved will not die but live perpetually separated from God. It is true however that if the spirit died there would indeed be perpetually separated from God. The apostle Paul told us clearly, as do many passages in the Old and New Testaments that we are mortal because of the fall, and that God has taken away both the immortality of the body and that of the soul. First he explains that all those who have physically died will all be sleeping in the earth but those who have not physically died will be walking the earth when Christ returns and we are resurrected:

1Corinthians 15
[51] Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

He then explains that when resurrected, the saved will be "changed".

[52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

We see also the change of the saved from corruptible flesh to incorruptible at the resurrection in Job:

Job14[14] If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.

Paul then explains that the earthly body we once had, which had decayed and disappeared, will be replaced with a new, incorruptible body, and that we then become physically immortal and our sprit will become immortal as well:

[53] For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

We know from a great many passages in the Old and New Testaments that this immortality is not only bodily, but also the immortality of the spirit because of Christ, that we live because He lives, for without Him we would die:

Romans6[23] For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Paul explains that this means the saved will be immortal and never die, but the wicked, because they have earned the wages of sin, will die:

[54] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Without the belief that the spirit is eternally living though it has not received the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ even though it is a sinner and has earned the wages of sin, the idea that the unsaved will live perpetually in a place of torment cannot be supported. The perpetual torment idea completely depends upon the idea that the spirit is immortal even without the gift of eternal life, and that the sinner who dies without Christ as the payment for their sin will also have the gift of eternal life!

The Greek word aion and the term "eis aion aion", which literally reads "into age age" have been mistranslated by those who translated the scriptures into English. The translators did not know that this Greek word's meaning depended upon context. Because they did not know this, they indiscriminately translated aion as perpetuity (ever). The ancient Greeks used this word to mean either "age" or "perpetuity" (ever, forever, eternal). Had the translators known this, they would have used the word correctly. If you will patiently read what I am writing, you will see that this is the truth because the texts will bear it out. The incorrect translation of the word aion has produced a slander against the character of God, making it seem as though God will torment the wicked perpetually and never stop doing so. This is a contradiction to the merciful, compassionate character of God. It makes God into a monster who's vengeance cannot be satisfied, and who is incapable of bringing a conclusion to his justice. Proponents of the eternal torment idea argue that the unsaved must be tormented perpetually because God Himself is eternal, though this is a non-sequitor. It does not logically follow, and argues that God is somehow bound to the necessity of eternally tormenting the unsaved and has no power to determine the exact punishment anyone receives! This idea is absurdity, and has no explanatory power whatsoever.

You know as well as I that there is no contradiction in scripture, which atheists falsely claim. However, if you study the passages that have translated the word aion into "ever" or "forever" or "forever and ever", you will discover that there is a contradiction in your English Bible. Some of these passages contradict other passages. This is because the word aion has been incorrectly translated. When we understand what some of these passages mean, we see the contradiction. If we change the translation of aion from "ever" to "age" in certain passages, their contradiction of other passages disappears!

This is because there is no contradiction in scripture, and the word has been translated to it's secondary meaning when it should have been translated as it's primary definition, which is "age".

The ancient Greeks wrote that the meaning of word aion was determined by the nature of the thing about which it is used. If that thing is finite, the meaning of aion is of a finite period of time. If that thing is eternal, such as the kingdom of God or God Himself, then the word means "perpetuity" or "eternal". Those who translated the scriptures into English were not aware of what the ancient Greeks themselves said of the meaning of the word aion or how they used it in their works. Had they been aware of the fact that context determines the meaning of the word aion, they would not have incorrectly translated it.

Before going to the scriptures themselves to see for ourselves the problems that the incorrect translation of aion has created, let's consider a few things. If Christ is the sacrificial payment for the sins of the saved, and if as the old testament teaches, the wicked are their own sacrifice for their sin because they do not have the sacrificial Lamb of God (Christ) as the payment for their sin, then in order for God to pay for the sins of the saved, Jesus Christ would have to be on the cross enduring torment for eternity! It would be absolutely necessary for Christ to perpetually suffer on the cross if sin cannot be completely paid for by sacrifice. If it were necessary for the unsaved to pay eternally for their sin, in order to be consistent with this doctrine of eternal torment, it would likewise be necessary for Christ to suffer eternally on the cross for the sins of the saved! This is of course a preposterous idea, which scripture clearly teaches is not the case. Christ's finished work on the cross paid in full our debt for our sins. So to God will make the unsaved pay in full the debt they owe to Him for their sins.

The Old Testament makes it clear that destruction resulting in death is the judgment upon the wicked:

Job21[30] That the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction? they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath.

Isa13[6] Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

Joel1[15] Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Leviticus 9[24] And there came a fire out from before the LORD, and consumed ('a^kal) upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat: which when all the people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces.

'a^kal (aw-kal'): to eat (literally or figuratively): burn up, consume, devour, dine, eat, feed

. . . they will be consumed because they become their own sacrifice to God since they do not have the lamb of God to take away their sins . . .

Psalms37[20] But the wicked shall perish (ka^la^h), and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.

A primitive root; to end, whether intransitively (to cease, be finished, perish) or transitively (to complete, prepare, consume): - accomplish, cease, consume (away), determine, destroy (utterly), be (when . . . were) done, (be an) end (of), expire, (cause to) fail, faint, finish, fulfil, X fully, X have, leave (off), long, bring to pass, wholly reap, make clean riddance, spend, quite take away, waste.

. . . and consumed, nothing will be left of them. They will exist no more . . .

Malachi[1] For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

. . . because the wages of sin is death, not eternal life in torment . . .

Ezekiel 18 [20] The soul that sinneth, it shall die [mu^th].

mu^th; to die (literally or figuratively); causatively to kill: -  X at all, X crying, (be) dead (body, man, one), (put to, worthy of) death, destroy (-er), (cause to, be like to, must) die, kill, necro [-mancer], X must needs, slay, X surely, X very suddenly, X in [no] wise.

Romans6[23] For the wages of sin is death [thanatos]; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

thanatos; (properly an adjective used as a noun) death (literally or figuratively): - X deadly, (be . . .) death.

. . . because God is a consuming fire says the OT and the NT . . .

Deut4[24] For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.

Heb2 [29] For our God is a consuming fire.

...and that fire wherein their spirit will die, after their bodies have long since died is a lake of fire . .

Job4[8] Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same.[9] By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed.

They will die the death of the soul (Ezekiel 18 [20] The soul that sinneth, it shall die.) because the 1st death is common to all, the death of the flesh:
Rev20[14] And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 21[8] But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Revelation 20[10] And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever (eis aion aion).[14] And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.[15] And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

eis aion aion means: "into age age" which translates literally as "into an age long age" or "a long age". This is a finite measure of time because they will be CONSUMED, DESTROYED, AND (Malaki 1) "it shall leave them neither root nor branch."

Consider the following passage. Where is says "And the smoke of their torment ascended up for ever and ever" literally reads,  "And the smoke of their torment ascended up EIS AION AION. The term "eis aion aion" literally reads "into age age". This means "into an age long age". In other words, into a long, long period of time - a long age. It does not mean eternal (never having a beginning or end) or perpetuity (having a finite beginning but never having an end).

Revelation 14
[11] And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for (eis) ever (aion) and ever (aion): and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Rev 20:10  And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for (eis) ever (aion) and ever (aion).

eis: into

aion:  properly an age; by extension perpetuity

It reads, "into age age" which means "and age that lasts an age" or "a very long time".

It does not mean eternal as the context here is a created thing: the angels and Satan, which are creations of God. If the passage referred to God, it would mean "eternity" because God is eternal. The meaning of "aion" is determined by CONTEXT.

Now here is where the contradiction is produced by the incorrect translation of aion, which disappears if we translate the word correctly. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. They burned up and their fires went out and ceased producing smoke. They are not on fire today, nor are they producing smoke:

Genesis 19
[28] And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.[29] And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in the which Lot dwelt.

What happened to those cities is an example of what will happen to the unsaved:

Jude1[7] Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal (aion) fire.

aion:  properly an age; by extension perpetuity

So does "aion" mean "eternal" or "eternity" here too? It cannot. It means "an age" or "long duration". Why? Because of context. Aion here means a finite period of time because Sodom and Gomorrah are creations of God, not God himself or his kingdom, which are eternal.

So - if the idea of perpetual torment were true, that aion always meant "eternity" then Sodom and Gomorrah must still be burning and smoking to this day. But are they?

2Tim2[15] Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Jonah 2:6, the prophet prays for deliverance out of the belly of the great fish. He says:

6 I descended to the roots of the mountains. The earth with its bars was around me forever [olam], But Thou hast brought up my life from the pit, O LORD my God.

The oldest lexicographer, Hesychius, (A. D. 400-600,) defines aion thus: "The life of man, the time of life."

Sophocles: "Endeavor to remain the same in mind as long as you live." Askei toiaute noun di aiónos menein.

Hippocrates. "A human aión is a seven days matter."

Empedocles, An earthly body deprived of happy life, (aiónos.)

Euripides: "Marriage to those mortals who are well situated is a happy aión." "Every aión of mortals is unstable." "A long aión has many things to say," etc.

Theodoret (A. D. 300-4--) "Aion is not any existing thing, but an interval denoting time, sometimes infinite when spoken of God, sometimes proportioned to the duration of the creation, and sometimes to the life of man."

John of Damascus (A. D. 750,) says, "1, The life of every man is called aion. 3, The whole duration or life of this world is called aion. 4, The life after the resurrection is called 'the aion to come."

Thucydides: "othen aidion misthophoran uparchein" referring to his expectaion of perpetual salary. But this could be only a salary during his life time, therefore the word in Thucydides means a period unknown, though it will certainly end.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Life Depends Upon the Immaterial


Atheisms requires materialism and determinism to be true. Why? Because spirit can be said to be an immaterial mind or life force, and if humans have no spirit, then they have no mind (which is immaterial), and if living things have no mind, they are comprised from matter only and there was no mind which begat them. Under these conditions, there is no sentience, no intelligence, no purpose, no purposefulness, no intentionality, no intentions, and no functionality, and no function to anything. If that were so, then all processes are due to material causes.

Unfortunately for atheists, none of that is the case. In fact, modern science has revealed certain facts about living things that could not have been imagined in 1857 when Charles Darwin published his infamous book. So much has been learned about biological systems, especially since the 1970’s, that we have been confidently able for decades to say without reservation that evolution theory is not scientific but is in fact a philosophy, and it that has been thoroughly disproven. One of the proofs that evolution theory is false is the fact that we know today that biological systems, their features and functions, are defined by information, algorithms, and linguistics. What makes this fact an irrefutable proof that life is a product of both Intelligent Design and Special Creation, and in fact cannot have been produced by matter in motion is that information, algorithms, and linguistics are non-physical (immaterial) products of minds.

Information theorist Henry Quastier has stated, “The creation of information is habitually associated with conscious activity."

That’s an understatement. In fact, information can only be produced by minds. There is no potential for material causes to produce information, algorithms, or linguistics. Dr. Gitt Werner is the former President and Professor od the German Federal Institute of Information Technology. He is the world's foremost authority on Information Theory and has advanced Information Theory more than any other information theorist. In his book, In the Beginning Was Information, Dr. Werner states,

“There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.”

In regard to the potential for evolution theory to be true in light of the advancements of Information Theory, he has stated,

“The basic flaw of all evolutionary views is the origin of the information in living beings. It has never been shown that a coding system and semantic information could originate by itself in a material medium, and the information theorems predict that this will never be possible. A purely material origin of life is thus precluded.”

When an atheist hears such statements, they often argue for their unimaginable faith that material causes are nonetheless capable for producing the information in biological systems. Moreover, they have even been known to argue that the information in biological systems is not actually information, but that we simply call it information because the term seems to fit what we are describing. While the atheist thinks he has slipped out of the grip of the argument that information in biological systems is a product of an immaterial mind, but in reality, they are simply making an admission that they are discussing information. Do we call an automobile a car simply because the word “car” seems to describe it accurately, or because it actually is a car? Such is the absurdity of the atheist’s excuse for denying the reality that organic systems actually are based upon real information, which could not exist if atheism were true anyway. However, the faith of the atheist that material causes can produce information is without merit.

One of the facts about information which proves that it is a product of mind and not material causes is the fact that information is non-physical. This has been understood and elucidated for many decades. In his work, “Cybernetics; or, Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine, 2nd edition (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1948), p. 132.”, Norbert Wiener wrote the following:

“Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day.”

If the Big Bang theory were true, then the matter of the early universe was once hot gas, which is one of the most random systems known to science. Random systems cannot produce information, and therefore a materialistic big bang cannot have resulted in the information which exists in biological systems, and cannot be causally related to the information that people continuously create. Many scientists have applied statistical analysis and analytics to the ability of material causes to produce information (as well as proteins), and in all cases the ability has been demonstrated to be none. Dr. Jonathan Sanford, geneticist of Cornell University has stated,

“If there are more than several dozen nucleotides in a functional sequence, we know that realistically they will never just ‘fall into place.’ This has been mathematically demonstrated repeatedly. But as we will soon see, neither can such a sequence arise randomly one nucleotide at a time. A pre-existing ‘concept’ is required as a framework upon which a sentence or a functional sequence must be built. Such a concept can only pre-exist within the mind of the author.”

Scientists Jack T. Trevors and David L. Abel have stated,

“No known hypothetical mechanism has even been suggested for the generation of nucleic acid algorithms.” (“Chance and Necessity Do Not Explain the Origin of Life,” Cell Biology International, Vol. 28, 2004, p. 730.)

While I could provide many more statements from scientists that make my point, I won’t bog you down in them. Instead, I will provide an easily understood explanation of how we know that information proves the evolution theory false, and proves also that life is a product of a mind of unfathomable genius and power.

The root of the word “information” is “inform” for a good reason. It is because information is knowledge conveyed from a sender to a receiver using a language agreed upon by both parties. Without a sender, either as a direct provider of the knowledge or as a original cause, there is no informing and thus no information. When a person conveys knowledge to another, they are a direct informer. When a computer programmer writes a software application designed to provide knowledge to another application on the computer or to another computer, the programmer is an original cause of the information. While in this case the program itself may directly provide the knowledge, the program could do nothing unless the programmer instructed the software on what knowledge to provide. If the informer speaks Portuguese but the receiver speaks only English, there will be no informing and thus no information is formed. Both must speak the same language, whether it is human language, computer language, sign language, or any other in order for knowledge to be conveyed. Here we see that information requires language – another immaterial thing which further demonstrates that an immaterial mind is necessary for information to be formed. Language is based upon symbolic meaning, which cannot exist if materialism were true and immaterial minds did not exist.

Imagine that we have two people watching a concert. One of them notices the drummer is sweating. He has by observation gained knowledge about the drummer. However, at this point no information has been formed since there has been no informing performed. Once this person turns to the other and states, “The drummer is sweating.” there has been information formed because the informer has conveyed his knowledge to the receiver. If the informer spoke Portuguese and the receiver spoke only English, though there was an attempt to convey knowledge, the knowledge would not be conveyed and no information has been formed.

One of the characteristics of information that demonstrates that it is immaterial is that it is not bound to it’s medium. When information is stored on a medium, such as in a book, the material of the book does not disappear as the information is conveyed to the receiver. This is because the medium is not the immaterial information. The Bible can be printed as a book with paper and ink, it can be copied to a memory card, and can be verbally spoken! In all cases the information is exactly the same regardless of the medium, and the medium itself is not transported from the sender to the receiver in order to receive the information. The book, memory card, and the air in these examples are not the information itself. They are only the medium which is used to convey the information. Information does indeed require a physical medium to be either stored or conveyed because we live, move, and think in a physical existence. However, the information is not physical.

The root of the word “information” is “inform” for a good reason. It is because information is knowledge conveyed from a sender to a receiver using a language agreed upon by both parties. Without a sender, either as a direct provider of the knowledge or as a original cause, there is no informing and thus no information. When a person conveys knowledge to another, they are a direct informer. When a computer programmer writes a software application designed to provide knowledge to another application on the computer or another computer, the programmer is an original cause of the information. While in this case the program itself may directly provide the knowledge, the program could do nothing unless the programmer instructed the software on what knowledge to provide. If the informer speaks Portuguese but the receiver speaks only English, there will be no informing and thus no information is formed. Both must speak the same language, whether it is human language, computer language, sign language, or any other in order for knowledge to be conveyed. Here we see that information requires language – another immaterial thing which further demonstrates that an immaterial mind is necessary for information to be formed. Language is based upon symbolic meaning, which cannot exist if materialism were true and immaterial minds did not exist.

To help understand how we know the information is not the medium, consider the following example. A point that is often overlooked when discussing information, is the importance of “how” and “what”. If we arrange the furniture in our living room in a particular way and we were to weight the furniture, it may weigh 500 lbs. Now if we rearrange the furniture in a different way and weigh the furniture again, it still weighs 500 lbs. The only difference between the two arrangements is not “what” is arranged, but “how” it is arranged. While the furniture is the “what” that is arranged, and is physical, the “how” it is arranged is not physical. The same is true of information. We can arrange the text characters of the Bible in an unintelligible way and we will convey no knowledge. However, “how” the letters are arranged is not physical, and is necessary for information to be formed. Likewise, imagine that we have a robot that can walk and weighs exactly 100 lbs. If we delete the computer program in the robot it still weighs exactly 100 lbs. even though we have removed the information which enables it to walk. The information, which is the program, has no mass and is intangible. It is stored in the manner in which the microscopic switches in it’s memory chip are arranged. The memory chip is only the medium which stores the information, but it is not the information itself. Furthermore, we can arrange the text characters of the Bible in an unintelligible way and we will convey no knowledge. But if we arrange the characters in a manner so that they represent knowledge, they can be information. The information is not the characters (what is arranged) but instead it is the manner of their arrangement (how it is arranged) that constitutes the knowledge that becomes information when it is conveyed.

Let’s consider now the absurdity of the materialist’s denial that information is an immaterial entity. Many atheists argue that information is physical simply because they refuse to acknowledge that since information is immaterial it is produced by an immaterial mind, which can be easily likened to the spirit. Since they deny humans have a spirit, they deny the mind is immaterial, and are therefore stuck in claiming that materialism is absolute. Effectively, they deny the very existence of the Non-physical Domain. One glaring problem with the materialist’s false argument is that mental properties cannot be physically measured like physical objects. They have no physical dimensions, no mass, and are not even tangible. All things can be divided into two distinct domains: The Physical Domain and the Non-physical Domain. The Physical Domain includes all things that have mass, are tangible, and of course, physical. The Non-physical Domain includes all that has no mass, is tangible, and of course, non-physical. Some things which are part of the Non-physical Domain are information, algorithms, linguistics, persistence of Self-Identity, personal intentions, philosophical reflection, consideration that results in a change of mind, unconfused lies, the comprehension of the process of time, the recollection of past events, the existence of qualia (private experiences), the truth that people are genuinely moral agents, the ability to understand and appreciate a state of affairs, the aptitude to evaluate and plan for future activities with inbuilt contingencies, the perception and appreciation of beauty, the aim of improving an activity one performs by concentrating, and the continuous volition of intending and attending. Because materialism follows from atheism, atheists must, if they are to be consistent in their beliefs, deny the existence of these and other members of the Non-physical Domain, which reveals the atheist’s belief system to be a delusion whereby so much of that which the world depends upon and operates by simply does not exist. The irony is that the materialist employs these non-physical things all the time, and their life depends upon their existence.

An example of the absurdity of denying that information is a member of the Non-physical Domain would be a university professor giving a lecture to a room of 50 students. If information were material, and if that material were the brain material of the professor because information is material, then in order for that professor to speak to and share information with the students, a stream of brain matter must travel from the professor to the brain of each of the 50 students in the room in order for him to share information with them. This illustrates the sheer absurdity of denying the immateriality of information. Moreover, we cannot even imagine what kind of mechanism would be systematically and efficiently directing the brain matter from the professor’s brain to those of the students. To press the matter, consider how preposterous it would be to believe that someone who has spent countless hours of speaking to groups over an entire career has been sending matter from their brain to their listeners, and their brain has therefore been either grossly reduced in size or completely disseminated simply by speaking to others. I suppose the ultimate example of such absurdity would be one who speaks to millions of listeners at once via television broadcast. If materialism were true, Harry Reasoner or Tom Broakaw must have gone through numerous brains over their careers!

The absurdity of the materialist’s position on the immaterial mind and information has been commented upon many times by experts in related fields. Consider the statements below:

"Materialists have taken note of the growing efforts by non-materialist neuroscientists to point out the deep problems with the inference that the brain is entirely the cause of the mind. Materialist neuroscience, like materialist evolutionary biology, is a vacuous orthodoxy, and its proponents resent threats to their dogma. Darwinian explanations for functional biological complexity are nonsense, but some familiarity with the relevant science is necessary to understand that it is nonsense. Materialist explanations for the mind are transparent nonsense." - Dr. Michael Egnor, award-winning neurosurgeon, scientist of the human brain

"The plain fact is that the materialist picture of the body and brain as the producers, rather than the vehicles, of human consciousness is doomed. In its place a new view of mind and body will emerge, and in fact is emerging already. This view is scientific and spiritual in equal measure and will value what the greatest scientists of history themselves always valued above all: truth." - Dr. Alexander, teaches at the University of Virginia Medical School and has been on the faculty at Harvard Medical School.

The fact that information is a non-physical entity by itself discredits all of the worldview of the atheist. However, one might wonder how it provides substanciation for the Christian’s worldview. If we have an immaterial mind, we can say this mind is likened to the spirit. Jesus Christ Himself explained that the spirit is not a physical entity when speaking to Nicodemus:

John 3

[6] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
[7] Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
[8] The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Scripture mentions that we have both spirit and flesh many times. The atheist finds it difficult to see themselves as having a spirit as well as flesh. Stuck in their materialistic, earthly oriented view of the entire world and themselves, they have difficulty and may be completely incapable of either recognizing, or at the very least, acknowledging that the non-physical domain is verification of the non-physical life force within them – the spirit. For this reason, no atheist can be a truly trustworthy source of knowledge or truth in science, philosophy, or matters of the heart, since they are unwilling to acknowledge the very basis for all things. Scripture directly addresses this prison in which the atheist lives, and why the atheist is locked in their delusion. What has imprisoned them however, is their heart, which is unwilling to humble itself to our majestic Creator:

Romans 8 [5] For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.