Science vs. the Bible: The truth is that scientific facts prove the truth of the Bible

Believing that the Bible is the Word of God does not require blind faith, it does however require an open mind. For the believer, faith is not blind. Hebrews 11:1 says, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Faith is the proof it is a gift from God. You don't have to prove the Bible true to believers because God's spirit has confirmed His Word by this gift of faith. They don't believe it to be true. They know it is true. However, to one without faith, to the unbeliever, the main evidence of God and His love for us is the Bible. For the unbeliever, the proof that the Bible is God's word to man is the accuracy of the Bible even in the science it presents.

    While it is true that the Bible is not a science book but all the scientific facts it gives are true. These truths where placed in the Bible before scientists discovered them to be true. I suspect God placed them in His word to provide evidence that God inspired this book not man. Consider, a few of the true science facts revealed in the Bible before they were known by scientists.

• Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job describes in chapter forty-one and forty-two describes two different dinosaurs. They were not called dinosaurs since the word did not exist in the language of that day. . I think you will agree that one and a half chapters about dinosaurs is a lot—since most people do not even realize that they are mentioned in the Bible. But, if the Bible describes dinosaurs as living a walking on the Earth a few thousand years ago then evolution is wrong. Some of you are now ready to stop reading. Open you mind and continue reading.
• The Bible tells the number of stars in the heavens. Genesis 22:17 Blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies. Scientists admit that they do not know how many stars there are. They have seen estimates of 10 to the 21 power stars—which is a lot of stars. While the number of grains of sand on the earth’s seashores is estimated to be 10 to the 25 powers grains of sand. Notice how close these two numbers are. I suspect when science gets a more accurate approximation they will be the same, as the Bible says.
• The air has weight. Job 28:25 To establish a weight for the wind,  And apportion the waters by measure. (The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago.)
• The Bible describes the circulation of the atmosphere.  Ecclesiastes 1:6 The wind goes toward the south, And turns around to the north; The wind whirls about continually, And comes again on its circuit. This is exactly the way our atmosphere moves.
• We have cave paintings and other evidence that people inhabited caves. The Bible also describes and explains cave men. Job 30:5,6 They were driven out from among men, They shouted at them as at a thief. They had to live in the clefts of the valleys, In caves of the earth and the rocks. (These were not ape-men, but descendants of those who scattered from Babel.)
• The Bible describes the recirculation of water.  Ecclesiastes 1:7  All the rivers run into the sea, Yet the sea is not full; To the place from which the rivers come, There they return again. This is an accurate description of the water cycle taught in science classes today.
• The Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.  Isaiah 40:22  It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,  And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,  And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
• The Bible stated that the Sea floor has valleys and mountains (Psalm 18:15) 3000 years before man discovered that it did have them. It was believed so until the 1900s when oceanographers found the sea had many deep valleys or canyons. The deepest canyons were called trenches. The Marianas Trench in the Pacific is so deep that if Mt. Everest (29,000 feet high) was dropped into it, the peak would still be a mile below the water’s surface. There are also underwater mountains. The Atlantic Ocean contains an undersea range of mountains 10,000 miles long.
• The pathways in the seas (currents) discovered because of a verse in the Bible. In the 1800s, Matthew Maury, an officer in the United States Navy was reading in Psalm Chapter 8 written by King David under the unction of the Holy Spirit over 3,000 years before. He was amazed that verse 8 spoke of the fish and all creatures that swim in the "paths of the sea." What could it mean? Believing the Bible to be true, he was determined to find them. Maury discovered that the oceans have many paths or currents, which were like rivers flowing through the sea. Maury wrote the first book on oceanography and became known as "the pathfinder of the seas"— "The father of modern navigation."
• Lightning triggers the rain.  Since 68 BC science thought that somehow thunder triggered the rainfall. Now scientists are beginning to realize that as stated in Job 28:26, it is lightning that triggers the rain to fall. Job knew this 3,000 years ago.
• Bible says we are all one race (descendants of Adam & Eve). The Genome Project (mapping human DNA gene) has conclusively proven that all human being are from the same race. That is, we all are ultimately descendants of the same couple. The Bible declares that all descended from Adam and Eve. Science had declared that we are several races (Asian, Negroid, Caucasian, Middle Eastern), but finally scientific knowledge has caught up to the Biblical truth.
• Stars system exist as God describes to Job in his talk with Job. In these three questions (Job 38:31, 32) God is in reality saying:  Job, you think I am not concerned about your suffering. Well, let Me ask you these questions. Can you loose the bands of Orion? No, you cannot. But My Divine power will. Some day Orion will no longer exist. Job, can you bind the 250 stars of the Pleiades together in their symmetry of beauty and not have a single one drift off? Only I have this power and wisdom. Can you prevent the runaways — Arcturus and his sons — from colliding as they go dashing out of the Milky Way? No, only My Divine power and wisdom can. Job, if I am caring for the details of the universe, do you doubt that I not only care for the details of your life, but I have the ability to solve your problems? Trust that there is a good reason I am permitting these tragedies. Remember, Job, I work from the perspective of your eternal welfare. How can one ignore these scientific facts recorded in the book of Job concerning the Pleiades, Orion and Arcturus which anticipated scientific discovery by nearly 3,000 years.
  

What awesome confirmation of the Bible! Scientific facts revealed by God to man thousands of years before natural scientists would discovery these truths. God knew because He created it.
Don't be fooled. Don't be blinded by those who do not want to believe. Don't ignore obvious proof just because you don't like the consequences. In 2 Timothy 4:2-4 Paul exhorts Timothy to Preach the word; be diligent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they draw to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto myths.

Science vs. the Bible: We have been brainwashed?

There is a continual debate between those to accept the Bible as the Word of God and those you believe truth is found only through science. The truth is that observable science and the Bible agree 100% of the time. However, scientists and the Bible do not always agree. Scientists often take the observed facts and use them to support their conjectures about how the world was created. This is were the disagreements originate.

Have you been told that the theory of evolution is an established facts that is accepted by all creditable scientists? Do you believe it? If you do, you have been brainwashed into believing that you have the best paper airplane ever made.

Have you been told that Einstein's Theory of Relativity has stood the test of time and its correctness is beyond the realm of doubt. Now, Google “E=mc2 wrong”. I got over 33,000 hits.

Read some of the links and you will find out that physicists working at CERN believe they may have discovered neutrinos that travel faster than light. You see its a theory, not a fact. It explained our observation correctly until better instrumentation was used, better methodology was followed, or maybe just conducting an experiment in a different manner produces new results that can not be explained by this theory. If Einstein's work is now in doubt, could we possible find reason to doubt the work of Darwin? Did Darwin find reason to doubt his own work?

Have you been told that Charles Darwin found reason to disbelieve his own hypothesis that help form the foundation for the theory of evolution? He said “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I confess, absurd in the highest degree...The difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered subversive of the theory.”¹ Only someone brainwashed (intellectually blind) could have these thoughts and understand the complexity then say it happened by chance.

Have you actually read Charles Darwin's books. Here is a quote to consider. “These difficulties and objections may be classed under the following heads:—First, why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined? Secondly, is it possible that an animal having, for instance, the structure and habits of a bat, could have been formed by the modification of some other animal with widely different habits and structure? Can we believe that natural selection could produce, on the one hand, an organ of trifling importance, such as the tail of a giraffe, which serves as a fly-flapper, and, on the other hand, an organ so wonderful as the eye?

Thirdly, can instincts be acquired and modified through natural selection? What shall we say to the instinct which leads the bee to make cells, and which has practically anticipated the discoveries of profound mathematicians?Fourthly, how can we account for species, when crossed, being sterile and producing sterile offspring, whereas, when varieties are crossed, their fertility is unimpaired?” This is for Darwin's Origin of Species, Chapter 6, page 133.

Are you a logical person? Are you a free-thinker? Intellectually, are you from Missouri, the show me state? All of us wants to answer yes. But, if you accept the theory of evolution when the very people who help form the foundations upon which it stand have serious doubt about it. Have you not been brainwashed?

Why do we humans so quickly accept that which we know can not be proven? Could it be that we believe because we do not wish to believe the alternative.

People who do not wish to believe in God must have some alternate theory as to how this all came about. Since the firmaments declare the glory of God to such an extend that every culture has a god(s) that created everything, they must have an alternative to give to the masses. Since they know that you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time. Then they know they need a story and a procedure to discredit those you don't accept the story. Who is they? Maybe you?

If not, could you just have been intellectually blinded by all the volumes of material produced calling theories facts. What is intellectual blindness? Assuming what others say about a subject is true without investigating the facts behind it. It is evidenced when someone supports a position just because others tell them it is the truth. What is true intellectual blindness? Being closed minded and not open to the truth. Who are blind? Romans 1:28  And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

Have you been blinded to the truth of the Bible? You may be intellectually blinded if you don't know that the Bible revealed many scientific facts before scientists discovered them. You may be intellectually blinded if you don't know that the Bible contains more predictions/prophecies that came to pass just as described than those of all the prophecies/predictions of all the psychics combined.

Don't believe me? Read my article Part Three.

¹ Found on the website www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/12793.Charles_Darwin on April 24, 2012.

Science vs. the Bible: The Limitations of the Natural Sciences

There is a continual debate between those to accept the Bible as the Word of God and those you believe truth is found only through science. The truth is that observable science and the Bible agree 100% of the time. However, scientists and the Bible do not always agree. Scientists often take the observed facts and use them to support their conjectures about how the world was created. This is were the disagreements originate.

They use these observed facts to form beliefs about the age of the Earth and about the creation of the Earth and mankind, and about the destiny of mankind. Once a scientists start forming beliefs about these questions of life they are no longer practicing good science they are forming religious opinions. Then agnostics, atheists and others use them to support their beliefs. They have now gone beyond observable scientific facts into the field of speculation. Let me illustrate the error being made.

Have you ever made a paper airplane? If you have, you probably copied what someone else had previously shown you. You also probably, after a few test flights, changed the design a little, especially if the other guys would fly better. Then you gave it a few more tosses, to find out if the modification made a better model. An analysis of this process of arriving at the best plane points out the limitation of the natural sciences. If you keep this process up, will you ever produce the best paper aircraft design? If you did how would you prove it was the best design? Could you afford the time and money it would cost to test your model against every model ever created? If you could, how about models yet to be created? How would you know that yours would be better than those not yet created? You could not. And that is the limitation of the natural sciences. It can not prove something is absolutely true because it uses the scientific method.

The natural sciences makes its discoveries using the scientific method. It is the heart of the natural sciences. All of its discoveries about our universe have been produced and/or tested using the scientific method. An understanding of this method of investigation will reveal its limitations.

The steps in the scientific method may be phrased slightly differently, but in general they begin with ask a question then proceed to do background research, construct a hypothesis, test you hypothesis by doing an experiment, analyze your data and draw a conclusion, then communicate your results. This is one thing that limits the natural sciences. At its simplest, the process is to ask a question, to purpose an answer, to test by experimenting or observing, then to tell others what you found out. As more and new experiments are conducted using better techniques or instruments, you may get different results. Since accepted truths can change as we learn more by conducting more experiment are making more observations, then no result is conclusively proven to be true. Just as with the paper airplane, one will never know for sure that the next experiment or observation will not disprove our current thinking. A second limitation of natural science is its instrumentation. The accuracy of observations and experiments depends upon the quality of the scientific instruments being used. So, as the instruments get better current beliefs are discarded because they do not explain current observations or new experiments that can now be conducted.

So, the natural sciences by their own acceptance and use of the scientific method, cannot prove anything is absolutely true, because "the next airplane model" might be better than theirs at explaining the observable facts.

To illustrate this limitation, consider the development of the Law of Conservation of Matter/Mass. Antoine Lavoisier's, the father of modern chemistry, research which included what many consider to be the first truly quantitative chemical experiments. He carefully weighed the reactants and products in a chemical reaction. By doing so, he showed that, although matter can change its state in a chemical reaction, the total mass of matter is the same at the end as at the beginning of every chemical change. Thus, for instance, if a piece of wood is burned to ashes, the total mass remains unchanged. His experiments supported the law of conservation of mass, which Lavoisier was the first to state and to prove them in experiments."¹ The Law of Conservation of Mass/Matter took its first form stating that mass(matter) can neither be created nor destroyed. It was true by the scientific method. It explained what people observed. It was supported by thousands of experiments. Then on July 16^th,1945 the United States detonated the first atomic bomb which destroyed matter/mass and turned it into energy. So, the law had to be changed to take into account what this new experiment produced.

As a further illustration, matter was first believed to be made of atoms which were considered to be the smallest possible particle of matter. As advances where made in scientific instruments, they discovered the atom was composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Further discoveries in particle physics and nuclear physics have led to the postulating of quarks, leptons and force carriers existing in atoms also. Firmly held, universally accepted truths, are consistently being discard as advances in instrumentation allow us to observe what was previously unobservable.

So, natural sciences goal is to produce the best possible explanation as to how our universe works. It builds intellectual models that explain how the universe works based on the best available evidence. And, it adapts as new discoveries are made. As new evidence is discovered. This is why the discoveries of natural science are correctly called theories.

A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.

A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true. ²

That is, they have not been proven. They will never be proved. Because they cannot be proved.
Any natural scientist who says that one of their theories has been proven to be true has abandoned his own methodology and moved into the domain of religion. The Macmillan Dictionary Thesaurus list the following as synonyms of theory: thought, idea, belief, commitment, faith, principle, philosophy, ideal, interpretation, ideology, doctrine, dogma.³ It has become his doctrine because he believes it to be true because of the preponderance of the evidence collected thus far. Not all the evidence, only that collected thus far. He has been brainwashed, maybe by his own desire to believe. He now believes that he has created the best paper airplane ever.
Have we also been brainwashed? For the answer see Part Two.
¹ Read the full history on http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~meg3c/classes/tcc313/200Rprojs/lavoisier2/home.html.

² Taken from the website http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm on May 15, 2012.

³ Taken from the website http://www.macmillandictionary.com/thesaurus/british/theory#theory_4 on May 15,2012

Sorry is as Sorry Does When it Comes to an Apology

I feel truly upset. I am sorry for anyone who was hurt by my remarks. I regret that I misspoke. I hate that I was misunderstood. I regret that my actions caused anyone harm. I apologize for my unwise behavior. I apologize if my actions offended anyone. These are examples of the types of apologies often made by politicians, actors and actresses, music entertainers, and sports stars. They often make long conciliatory statements that are suppose to be taken as an apology. Yet, reporters often point out to us the apparent lack of true repentance, the absence of the words “I am sorry.”

I assume, from their apparent lack of skill, that making an apology is something that many people never learned. But, nothing helps a relationship in trouble more than a genuine apology. Its like hot buttered pancakes covered in molasses on a cold day. So, we all need to know how to say “I'm sorry” and really convince someone you mean it. Apparently, a lot of folks' upbringing lacked the proper training in this area.

Well, Pawpaw to the rescue. Pawpaws are good at straightening out someone's attitude or correcting their upbringing. Those out building are not called smokehouses for no reason. I know many a young boy took his first smoke out behind one. But, its main use is to smoke meat? But, its a different meat that gets smoked when a Pawpaw is giving someone's attitude an adjustment.

As a Pawpaw I feel it is imperative that this nation and its people learn to say, “I was wrong. I am sorry. Forgive me. I will do better.” in a way that shows true remorse and that starts the healing of the relationship. A proper apology must include certain things to show your true remorse. So, I've prepared some simple basic southern tips on how to apologize.

• Got your feathers ruffled. You must describe the incident being covered by the apology. You and the person must know what was done wrong. (Men, that's why when you say “I'm sorry.” the next remark made by your spouse is always “For what?”)

• Ain't no such thing as too much pumpkin for a nickel. You must clearly admit the actions you made that were harmful. To do this you must truly acceptance that you have wronged this individual. You must take ownership of the problem.

• You look as happy as a dead pig in the sunshine. I suppose all of us understands that a dead pig ain't happy. You must be truly sorry. Your demeanor and your statement of regret must show your remorse for your actions. You did notice all the yours?

• Mending fences makes good neighbors. You must ask for forgiveness. You are apologizing for your wrongs, so you must ask the person to forgive you for them. You are going through this to mend a relationship with someone. For this to happen, the person must respond. You must assist him by giving him the opportunity to accept the apology, so his healing can begin.

• Gone back on your raisin. You must assure him that it will never happen again. One way to do this is to point out that you knew it was wrong and you will never make that mistake again.

• You can make a silk purse out of a sows ear, if you work hard enough. You must make restitution, if possible. If you have taken something, you must return it whether it is the person's property or the person's character. If you are truly sorry, you will want to make restitution.

Notice it does not say that you are allowed to provide reasons/excuses for your action. It does not say that you are allowed to list any responsibility that the other person has or to share the blame with others.  

The 'God' Particle Reveals a Lot About Science, God and Us

The news about the 'possible' discovery of the Higgs particle, popularly called the 'God' particle, because it is thought to be the particle within particles that gives them mass and shape,¹ has rocketed across the world. It's existence is needed so scientists, based on present knowledge, can have a way to explain how the universe may have formed without God being involved. You did notice the words “possible”, “could”, and “may have”. These are words that imply doubt not certainty. They reveal a lot about God, science, and us when thoughtfully considered.

What does this discovery say about God?

Basically, it says a lot, if you think about it. It does add another layer to the complexity of the universe. In fact, the more we discover how God put the universe together the more evidence there is for God not against God. The more complex the structure the more billion and trillions of years have to be added to the evolution time line to allow for all the miraculous coincidences to accidentally occur. Fictional police detectives are often heard saying, “I don't believe in coincidences.” Well, as a former police officer, I concur. The more intricate the design the more improbable it happened by accident. The more intricate the design the more it demands a designer. You don't need a PhD. to understand this. Anyone with a B.C.E., blue collar education, and some common sense can see the logic in this.

Did Mount Rushmore occur by natural means? Is it a coincidence that the four heads look exactly like four of our former presidents? Would a visitor who knows nothing about them credit their formation to a natural explanation? Would they conclude that the wind and the rain just happened to shape the rock so it resembles the heads of four presidents? A visitor could say that, but no one does because the likeness of the presidents is so perfect that it is obviously the work of a sculptor. You could ask any science teachers. None was support the belief that nature created it. However, many of these teachers will stand up in class the next day and teach their students that not only the single cell, but the very presidents themselves were formed by the blind forces of nature. They teach that the sculpture could not have formed by accident yet they teach that the much more complex human person did. The intricate complexity of all parts of our universe from the single cell to the universe as a whole demands a creator. Nothing else makes sense. To overlook such a simple and sensible solution says volumes about those who do?

What does this discovery say about science?

An impartial and logical analysis of some of the announcements reveals a lot about the made up mind of many scientists and the limitations of the scientific method. Consider the following excerpts from an AP report posted on al.com describing the experiments leading to the evidence of the Higgs particle. Careful reading of the words show that more is still guesses and unknown that fact.

• “Physicists say they have all but proven that the "God particle" exists. They have a footprint and a shadow, and the only thing left is to see for themselves the elusive subatomic particle believed to give all matter in the universe size and shape.” Notice, they have all but proven. They have not proven. Many people have found footprints and have obtained shadowy pictures of 'big foot'. Yet, the number of people who truly believe in an abominable snowman is very small.
• “They don't plan to use the word discovery.” You know why? Because, they know that footprints and shadows do not make up particles.
• “He cited 'strong indications of the production and decay of Higgs-like bosons' in some of their observations....Out of some 500 trillion collisions, just several dozen produced 'events' with significant data, said Joe Incandela of the University of California at Santa Barbara.” Here we have indications not an actual observation of it and that only in a very small percentage of their observations. Yet, I remain unconvinced. Of course, I don't believe in big foot either. I guess this makes me a curmudgeon.
• “Sean M. Carroll, a California Institute of Technology physicist flying, 'only the most curmudgeonly will not believe that they have found it.'” I am not an ill-tempered person full of resentment and stubborn notions. What I am is a logical person who is intellectually from Missouri. As a boy, I learned, that resorting to name calling was usually the sign that the name-caller knew they had no valid point or proof of their statement.

What this means is that science may have learned a bit more, but they are still a long way from “knowing” much less “proving” how the world operators and how it came into existence. "This is just the beginning," says James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN. Scientists will keep probing the new particle until they fully understand how it works. In doing so they hope to understand the 96 percent of the universe that remains hidden from view. This may result in the discovery of new particles and even hitherto unknown forces of nature. Or, it might prove that things are so complex that only the most curmudgeonly can still not believe that God formed it.

Science has improved our lives. This project along has changed our lives with “its creation of the world wide web and it has also boosted the development of distributed, or cloud-computing, which is now making its way into mainstream services. Advances in solar energy capture, medical imaging and proton therapy, used in the fight against cancer, have also resulted from the work of particle physicists at CERN and elsewhere.” While the secondary benefits of scientific investigation into how the world was made have been significant, I am not sure that these same contributions might not have been obtained for less than the $10 billion spent on this project. I believe that they could and that the rest of the money spent on helping humanity in even more ways.

Science spends a lot of money, billions and billions, trying to find a way to argue God out of creation. Is this the most crucial question facing mankind. Would not the money be better spent on solving AIDs, finding water for African nations, curing all forms of Cancer, cloning arms and legs for amputees, feeding the hungry of the world, or using stem cells for so many medical cures?

What does this discovery say about us?

First of all, it says to us that we must remember that what others conclude from their discoveries is influenced by their beliefs about the creation. What has been observed if it can be independently verified is fact. It is truth. But, what one concludes for these facts or what one believes is just that a belief. It is a theory. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis. A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.

The number of theories scientists have formulated is only surpassed by the number discarded along the way. A Google search for 'science theories no longer believed' had a count of 21,900,000. And, they often disagree about the interpretation or meaning of the findings. A Google search for 'science disagree about meaning' had a count of 1,610,000. So, it's Okay to be an unbeliever when it comes to accepting everything scientists believe or conclude from their observations and experiments, since many of them have a hard time also. It's Okay to look a gift horse in the mouth when the gift is someone's interpretation or opinion.

It means that we should apply common sense when presented with the opinions or beliefs of scientists. Consider the current debate over how the universe came into being. Many science facts not beliefs are contradictory to theories of evolution and the big bang. I will look closely at only one - the production of proteins. Consider the following facts about the natural formation of proteins.

• Proteins are so hard to make that in all of nature, they never form except in already living cells. Never! This scientific fact stands in stark contrast to what was taught....Amino acids do not concentrate in the ocean; they disperse and break down. Amino acids will not link together in nature to form proteins; not even when scientists help them by buying all left-handed amino acids from a chemical supply house to make the perfect “organic soup.”
• If proteins could form, they could not get together with DNA because DNA does not form outside of living cells either. Scientists can’t even make DNA in the laboratory.
• When faced with this what did the disbelievers do? They decided to reverse the process. However, most scientists no longer argue that the first proteins assembled spontaneously. Instead, they now propose that the initial macromolecules were composed of RNA, and that RNA later catalyzed the formation of proteins.”{George B. Johnson, Peter H. Raven, Biology, Principles & Explorations, Holt, Rinhehart and Winston, 1996 p. 235}. The problem continues because “… no one has yet succeeded in creating RNA.”{Peter D. Ward, Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth, Why complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe, 2000, p. 65, see also 62-6}.
• "To make proteins, agents known as ribosomes connect amino acids into long strings. These strings loop and fold around each other in a variety of ways. However, only one of these many ways will allow the protein to function properly.… proteins fold into a highly complex, three-dimensional shape that determines their function. Any change in shape dramatically alters the function of a protein, and even the slightest change in the folding process can turn a desirable protein into a disease.”
• “Evidence that life never comes from non-living materials is so abundant that it is a basic principle of science called the Principle of Biogenesis (living things come only from living things).”

Don't abandon your common sense to someone with a Ph.D.! What science knows, believes and teaches has changed and will continue to change, but logic and common sense will always be just that.

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they draw to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto myths.” (2Timonthy 4:3-4 KJV)

Related websites:

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php

http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2010/11/the-top-10-most-spectacularly-wrong-widely-held-scientific-theories/

http://voices.yahoo.com/science-vs-bible-logical-common-sense-perspective-11286032.html?cat=34

Reasons to Believe the Bible is the Word of God

Have you every asked yourself, why should I believe the Bible? Can you think of reasons not to believe, but none why you should believe. Maybe, you don't want to believe, because it will interfere with your life. It will limit your fun. Does it contradicts what you have been taught? All of these thoughts may be true. But, most likely these are things you have been taught to believe. You are so wrong. You have to read it to know it. Cliff notes will not work with this book.

To counter these thoughts, I will give you twelve reasons to believe in the Bible and to know that it is the only written Word of God. None of them are original to me. All can be found in books and all over the Internet. So, why this blog. Because you are reading it. Because you have found your way here not to those other places. Because I care. Because you need to know. Because you future depends upon you knowing that the Bible is the only written Word of God. For these reasons, I present these twelve proofs.

1. You should believe the Bible because it says to.
   As a parent, a former teacher, a former soldier, and a former police officer, I understand that rules can only be enforced by a person who has authority. Authority is not something you gain by the clothes you are wearing. It is not something you inherent just by the job you do. Others recognize it when they see. They also recognize those who don't have it. Read the Bible you will recognize its authority and the authority of its author. You will not find it hard to understand or believe, if you read it. Don't read others comments. Don't read commentaries. Read the Bible. You will come to see that it is a miraculous book.
2. You should believe the Bible because it is full of miracles.
   The miracles of the Bible are there to inspire us, to give us hope, and to seed our faith. Here we learn that the blind, spiritually and physically, can regain sight and that the deaf can hear. There is healing for the sick of soul and body in this book. No matter the depth of the physical or spiritual condition of one, there is deliverance to one and all. And, all credit belongs to God.
3. You should believe the Bible because it tells the truth about its heroes.
   The lives of the people in the Bible are not glossed over. You see their faults with no white washing. Yet, they are not condemned. They are disciplined when needed, but they are also loved, encouraged, and helped to be better.
4. You should believe the Bible because its universality.
   Treat others, friends and enemies, as you desire to be treated is not taught as strongly and unconditionally in any other book. No other religion is all the people are treated the same. All principles apply to all people. Because when its principles are applied by the majority of society, the whole society benefits. Yet, when applied by an individual no matter where the person live, that life is changed and improved.
5. You should believe the Bible because it knows tomorrow.
   The Bible has many prophecies in it. While some pertain to events yet to happen, no event in history has occurred contrary to the way it is predicted in the Bible. It tells of the raise and fall of kings and kingdoms. It tells of these events naming names not with vague references. It predicted the birth, death and resurrection of its central character, Jesus Christ. And, it tells the future of the Earth and its inhabitants. You can count on it.
6. You should believe the Bible because it is scientific accuracy.
   Its writers revealed scientific facts hundreds of years before man discovered them to be true. They revealed that the sun travels in a path, that the wind has weight, that the seas have currents, and that the Earth is round to name a few. The list of scientific truths it reveals is too long to include here, but can be find elsewhere.
7. You should believe the Bible because it is also historically accurate.
   All kings, kingdoms, cities, towns, mountains, people, and events named are done so without error. When archaeological evidence has been found, it always supports and never contradicts what the Bible says.
8. You should believe the Bible because it is here.
   We can check all this out because we have the Bible in its original form with us today. Despite the efforts to destroy it. Despite the number of wars fought. Despite the number of societies destroyed. Despite the number of libraries sacked and burned. Despite the efforts of all the constituted powers of earth fighting to destroy it, it still exists in its original form.
9. You should believe the Bible because it is complete and unified.
   These sixty-six books which were written over thousands of years by various men living in various times who came from various walks of life, yet it puts forth one message. We are all sinners loved by God so much that He, in the person of Jesus Christ, came and died for our sins. Which leads to many questions like when, where, why, how, what and who? Which it answers.
10. You should believe the Bible because it answers your questions.
    Why do I need a Savior? Where did sin come from? When did I become a sinner? How do I overcome sin? What does God require of me? Who is God? There are so many questions. There are an equal number of different answers. But, there is only one place where all the important questions are found along with the correct answer.
11. You should believe the Bible because it is good for all of us.
    In it you find the best standards for human government and personal character. The principles of a democracy society are set forth along with those of a free-enterprise economy with a legal system to accompany them. Most of all, it puts forth a code of personal conduit that without which know of these others are possible.
12. You should believe the Bible because it has no equal.
    Why have I not detailed the historical, scientific, and prophetic accuracy in more detail, so as to convince you of its truth? Because if you take my word or anyone's word about what the Bible is or is not, you are being foolish. The Bible is not a work of literature. Cliff notes will not work. It is a personal document written to each of us. It is an individual message to you from God. Don't analyze it. Don't study it. Don't debate it. Just read it from cover to cover. If it does not convince you of is authorship, you will be the first human being I've heard of to read it and not believe it.

Does not senses yet. Here is some more helpful articles to read.

http://voices.yahoo.com/science-vs-bible-logical-common-sense-perspective-11285998.html?cat=9

http://voices.yahoo.com/science-vs-bible-logical-common-sense-perspective-11286016.html?cat=34

http://voices.yahoo.com/science-vs-bible-logical-common-sense-perspective-11286032.html?cat=34

Yielding a Big Religious Paintbrush Is Just Not Smart

Being Saved vs. Being Religious: 10 Things that distinguish salvation from religion

The harm that has been done to Christianity by the many things done in the name of religion is beyond the content of voices.yahoo.com and probably the whole of the internet. The problem occurs when those who claim to be religious or who claim to be a christian act like the devil. It occurs when so many engage their tongue or hand before they engage their mind. It occurs because people do not wish to see the difference between who people are, as demonstrated by their deeds, and who they claim to be. It occurs because its easier to write or to voice a critical personal opinion than it is to find the truth by doing some research. It occurs because people do not wish to see the difference between being religious and being saved, that is, born again by the Spirit.

Another article on yahoo ( http://voices.yahoo.com/10-things-dont-like-religion-877777.html?cat=9 ) entitled “10 Things I Don't Like About Religion” has inspired me to look at these ten things as a way to compare religion to salvation, Christianity. (Note to the author: go ahead and say hate. It's OK. If you feel it, say it. Is that good advice, good writing or good behavior?) Reader, I ask you to decide that after reading this article.

I must praise the author for his analysis of religion and the listing of some of its many wrongs. However, even though the author says he does not like anything that attempts to control the masses. His article on religion does just that. How? Because most times when religion is discussed a problem automatically occurs. The problem arises because so many of us tend to group things together. It arises because so many fail to or refuse to see the stark difference between being and doing or claiming and living. (For more info the term Christianity and what it really means and who is worthy to wear it see: http://blogs.christianpost.com/just-sayin/i-am-a-back-row-baptist-with-a-smart-mouth-and-a-quick-tongue-christian-9624/#more ) When one talks or writes about religion, everything that the mind of the reader or listener groups into the category of religion gets painted with the same brush. So, when you talk about religion, especially when you attack it, many will agree with you because they have a religion they don't like. The number of religions and religious sects is too big for me to even attempt to count. Certainly, they are too many for one person to know all about them. Too many for one person to be able to talk intelligently about them all. Yielding a big paintbrush requires a very big and very strong arm and should be done only when one's enormous intelligence is controlled by even greater wisdom.

Being religious and being a christian can be, should be and must be very different. Even atheists and agnostics are classified as religions by many. Remember readers, just because one claims it and names it does not mean they live it.

This article lists ten of the differences that exist between religion and Christianity. I will let the Bible speak for itself where possible by providing verses that clearly shows that true Christianity is as different from religion in general as light is from dark.

1. Religion makes us feel bad about ourselves versus lifting us up, but not true Christianity.
   John 14:27: Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.
   Psalm 46:1-3,7: God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore we will not fear, ... The LORD of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our stronghold. Selah.
   Micah 7:19: "...he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea."
   1 John 1:9: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from ALL unrighteousness."
   John 10:10:"...I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly."
2. Religion keeps us from having to take responsibility for our action, but not true Christianity.
   Isaiah 55:6 & 7: Seek ye Jehovah while he may be found; call ye upon him while he is near:
   let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto Jehovah, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
   Matthew 5:19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
3. Religion is used to gain votes by those running for political office, but not true Christianity.
   George Washington (1732-1799) "It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible." (Thinkexist.com) Many of the verses in the Bible establish the rules any civil society needs. "The source most often cited by the Founding Fathers was the Bible, which accounted for 34% of all citations..." from John Eidsmoe, author of Christianity and the Constitution. (The rest were cited from men, writings that cited the Bible, so I've read somewhere.) Some examples of Bible inspirations available to our forefathers:
   Leviticus 19:36 Just balance, just weights, a just ephah (a grain measure) and a just hin shall
   ye have...
   1 Timothy 5:4-8: But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house...
   Leviticus 19:9&10: ...thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field...thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger...
   We need elected officials who know the Bible and whose core values are taken from it. We the electorate must be informed so we can defeat the pretenders and elect true believes, if we want to have a civil, moral, ethical government.
4. Religion is used to convince people they should blow up or kill others, but not true Christianity.
   (Matthew 5:43 - 45): Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy: but I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you; that ye may be sons of your Father who is in heaven:...
   1 Peter 3:8 & 9: Finally, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, affectionate, compassionate, and humble. Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult, but instead bless others because you were called to inherit a blessing.
5. Religion is used to create or maintain war, but not true Christianity.
   1 Peter 3: 10-12: For the one who wants to love life and see good days must keep his tongue from evil and his lips from uttering deceit. And he must turn away from evil and do good; he must seek peace and pursue it. For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous and his ears are open to their prayer. But the Lord’s face is against those who do evil.
   1 Peter 4:7 & 8: For the culmination of all things is near. So be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of prayer. 8 Above all keep your love for one another fervent, because love covers a multitude of sins.
6. Religion makes us feel like we deserve more than others because we are the chosen, but not true Christianity.
   I would recommend another article: http://voices.yahoo.com/10-bible-verses-humility-5801352.html?cat=34 .
7. Religion can be used as our sword and our shield but not as our back bone, but not true Christianity.
   2 Tim 1:7 (AMP) For God did not give us a spirit of timidity (of cowardice, of craven and cringing and fawning fear), but [He has given us a spirit] of power and of love and of calm and well-balanced mind and discipline and self-control.
   Deuteronomy 31:6: Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the LORD your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.
8. Religion is used as an excuse to carry out genocide, but not true Christianity.
   1Timothy 5:1-4: Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father; the younger men as brethren: the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, in all purity. Honor widows that are widows indeed. But if any widow hath children or grandchildren, let them learn first to show piety towards their own family, and to requite their parents: for this is acceptable in the sight of God.
   James 1:13-15: Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempteth no man: but each man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed. Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin:...
   1John 4:16: ... God is love; and he that abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him...
9. Religion is used as a tool to make us feel better about ourselves versus a measure by which we might be called good, ethical, holy, kind or generous, but not true Christianity.
   Colossians 4:5-6: Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.
   Luke 10:27: And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”
10. Religion is used to control the masses, the individual or the soul from an external rather than a personal source, but not true Christianity.
    1 Corinthians 6:19: What? know you not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have of God, and you are not your own?

The author's less than clear understanding of the issues involved were also highlighted by some of the other comments. For instance, the comment “I don't like any system that controls the masses.” So, that would mean our constitutional republic, our form of government. It would mean any moral or ethical standard of conduct that a society has. It seems obvious to me that they are needed for a civil society. Maybe another comment explains his position, “People are meant to live in small numbers.” Tell that to the people of New York, London, Paris, Chicago and the names just keep on coming. One other of his comments illustrates the point of this article, “I believe that Religion should be a guide to God and a guide to life.” Sorry, “Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). Religion is an invention of man. A relationship with my Lord, my Savior and my God is what true Christianity is all about. And, it is the ONLY way to God.

Christianity is not a political position, a religious position, or a social position. Christianity is a relationship. It is a position in Jesus Christ. It is a position in the Kingdom of God. It is not obtained just by claiming it, one must be born again. That is plain for these verses:

John 3:5-7 KJV 2000: Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto you, You must be born again.

1Peter 1:23 KJV 2000: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever.

When it comes to religion why has so many gotten it so wrong?

John 3:16-21 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him. He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should be reproved. But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.

2 Timothy 4:2-4: preach the word; be urgent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside unto fables.

Making the Church Relevant Means Being A Disciple-Making Church

Not every church is alike. Different churches have different talents. Just as our body has different parts that have different functions, so the body of Christ is composed of different churches that have different gifts. But, every church needs to be seen as relevant by the community it ministers to. This is done by making disciples.

Since churches are ministering to different communities, they need to be different. In order to meet the varying needs of the community they serve, they need to have different goals. So, to be relevant each church needs a different mission and a different vision. That sounds great and it rings true. The problem is Matthew 28:18-20

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations(disciple them), baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things (can't just teach what we want to teach) whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

You need to remember that not everyone goes to every church. Granted, in our mobile society, people are likely to change churches more than once in their lifetime. But, if only a few churches are into disciple-making, most church goers will likely never enter one that is a disciple-maker.

You are convinced. The Word of God has convicted you. You want your church to become relevant. You are ready to help turn it into a disciple-making church, but your church just does not have this gift. It's not a strength of your church.

In the quote above Jesus said he has all power in heaven and in earth and he is with us always. That seems to me to nullify that excuse. If not, then combined with the following one it must certainly does.

And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. (2 Corinthians 12:9)

Granted none of us are able to do anything without him. Is it not great that he is with us always? And, our weakness is just what he needs to show his strength to all. So, if it's not your churches strength, then it's exactly your church that God can use to do it.

Well, come to thank of it. Your neighboring church would be best at doing it. Your church just does not have the resources to make disciples. You are confident that your neighboring church is doing a great job. You could be mistaken. According to a 2009 survey by Barna, only 9 percent of the people who call themselves born again believe absolute moral truth exists. So, your neighboring church is not doing it either. If they are trying, they are not succeeding. So, maybe God wants your church to help.

If your church can become a disciple-making church, it will become relevant. If it can stay a disciple-making church, it will stay relevant.

Fixing Public Education: 7 Things That Will Not Work and 1 That Will

American Public Education continues to rank poorly compared with other developed countries. American students ranked 17^th overall among 40 developed countries. In 2009, U.S. mathematics students ranked 25^th out of 34 developed countries. Many approaches and solutions are constantly being discussed and many have been implemented over the past years and decades, yet these studies show that our students are not gaining ground.

As a student then later a mathematics teacher and educator for 30 years, I started with the new math during the race to space and I have stayed through many changes both in course content, methodology, and teacher training. Yet, American students performance has declined. Instead of being able to brag about all the success of these changes we are still talking about how to fix public education.

I have the only solution that will absolutely work. I doubt many will accept it. So, I want to point out the errors in these popular solutions first. Maybe, the discussion will then turn towards the only solution. So, first a look at what will not improve the performance of our students.

Get Rid of Bad Teachers. Bad teachers are not something that have just came along. We've always had them and always will. Getting rid of bad teachers is impossible in our current society. It's not because we don't know who they are. The administrators, teachers, and parents knows who they are. But, there are three reasons bad teachers are still teaching:

1. Is there a good teacher available? An examination of the Department of Educations website where a list of teacher shortages by State is listed will convince anyone that there are always areas where demand exceeds supply. There is, has and always will be a shortage of teachers.
2. Why not train more good teachers? For two reasons that is “easier said than done.” (1) All the current bad teachers had to graduate from some teacher training institution which implies that there are some institutions letting some bad ones graduate. Right? (2) Given a choice any administrator would hire the better teacher. They would never hire their best friend's child or a student they taught years ago over a better teacher. They would never hire a winning football coach when they could get a really good teacher instead.
3. Is there a will to fire the bad teachers? We don't have to worry about lawsuits, political correctness, protects by civil rights groups or a biased judge's orders--Do we? If it would help improve education would you willingly be fired, or support your child or your friend being fired? Or, would you call the teacher organization? Do you know some who would?
4. Is tenure the enemy? If you get rid of teacher tenure, what prevents administrators from firing a great teacher to hire a less capable friend. Tenure was not created to protect bad teachers it was created to protect good teachers from bad administrators.
   Getting rid of bad teachers is harder than it sounds. It seems such a simple solution. But, “the devil is in the details.”

Institute Performance-based Pay. There is no empirical evidence that performance-based pay helps student achievement. Maybe, all the factors that affect student success in a classroom are too hard to define and control to construct a valid study. However, the fact that more pay does not result in better teaching can be proved by looking at the current system. Most systems currently pay teachers who have advanced degrees and teachers who have the most experience the most. One would expect these teachers would be better than the beginner, but that has not proven to be true. I support performance-based pay, but it is not the solution to the poor performance of students.

Properly trained and motivated teachers have been doing a good job for hundreds of years. So, why not institute performance-based teacher pay to motivate the bad teachers into better performance and to reward the good teachers? I support it. I think good teachers are not getting compensated for the work they do. But, as with any solution this one comes with its own set of problems. Most significant is how do we separate the bad teachers from the good ones? Consider the following:

1. If you use student achievement on teacher made tests, what would keep bad teachers from lowering the standards on their tests? Doing this would improve the test scores of their students thus making them eligible for the performance-based pay.
2. If you use student achievement on standardized tests, then how do you account for the many factors besides the teacher than influences achievement scores. Factors like--parental involvement, natural ability of the students, and outside tutoring--must be neutralized to be fair to the teachers. Some have suggested that providing preschool for all would level the field. While studies have shown Head Start Programs have proven successful at raising the achievement of children. They have also shown that these successes are not permanent. These gains disappear once the intervention activities are stopped.
3. If you use evaluations by supervisors, then you have the possibility that personal relationships will influence the evaluations. This would allow bad administrators and bad teachers to do a little “you scratch my back and I'll scratch your back” resulting in both of them getting good evaluations and performance-based pay.
4. If you go with outside evaluators, then you have to come up with even more money to pay the evaluators. If outside evaluators would work, why are they not being used now to eliminate the bad teachers before they gain tenure?

While performance-based teachers pay sounds great, “it is a can of worms” that I doubt our society is prepared to honestly handle or that taxpayers are prepared to fund until they are assured that the money is going to only the good teachers.

Providing the Latest Technology. Giving every child an iPad is great. I support it. But, it will not make students perform better or learn more. I personally assisted in the introduction of the Internet and other marvels of technology into a county school system. I saw them mushroom across the system. Everybody wanted a modern classroom. I could only dream of the revolution in education I was helping to bring to my hometown. However, all this technology did not universally improve the teaching. In some classrooms it did, but the percentage was low. In general, what happened was that the same things were taught using the same pedagogy just with shiny modern equipment.

If we can't replace all the bad teachers with good ones, then will using online learning or distance learning to supplement instruction or to replace them entirely provide a better quality education program? The research does not support this happening. The best results of online learning studies is that kids do no worse than in traditional classes. These results were obtained only in hybrid programs were some of the work is online and some is done with the help of teachers. The research does not offer us any hope that the answer will be found here.

What about using other types of technology to compensate for the lack of teacher skill or effort? Would turning every room into a multi-media room and giving every teacher and student a laptop improve the results in the classroom of a bad teacher? I've seen it done. I've helped do it. You just don't get your money's worth. Consider this: No matter how much high tech or robotics is involved, you would not send a GP doctor in to perform brain surgery. Similarly, putting all the tools of a carpenter in the hands of an English teacher will most likely not get a house build. While these examples are a bit far out, they do accurately point out the problem with implementing technology into the classroom. Teachers need to be trained and motivated to use technology.

The Internet, online learning, distance learning, or any type of technology do offer education some powerful tools. But, putting any of them into the hands of a bad teacher is like putting a power tool in the hands of Tim “the Tool-man” Taylor. In case you are too young, let me say that nothing good ever came from putting a power tool in Tim's hands.

Online Learning or Distance Learning. The best results of online learning studies is that kids do no worse than in traditional classes. These results were obtained only in hybrid programs were some of the work is online and some is done with the help of teachers. I believe, it's because the higher order learning skills need personal teacher-student interaction.

Early Education (Preschool for all). Most of these type programs talk of preschool and daycare programs for kids living below the poverty line. While studies have shown Head Start Programs have proven successful at raising the success of underprivileged children. They have also shown that these successes are not permanent. These gains disappear once the intervention activities are stopped. I believe every child five years of age should have public preschool available, but its not the solution to the poor performance of our students.

The Calendar. I fully support year-round schooling. For decades, all educators have known that a big break in learning means lost learning. Often, the first weeks of a new school year are busy getting students adjusted back to the routine and reviewing what they forgot over the break. So, I believe in year-round schooling, but not as the solution to public education.

Solution: To fix education—fix our priorities. Based upon 30 years in public education, I can say that the solution is not modern equipment, the curriculum, the teachers, their methods, the calendar, or the buildings. If we really want to fix public education, we must get our priorities in order. Education performance will start to improve when:

• Sports and band return to being extracurricular activities in the minds of school leaders.
• Parents are more concerned about their child's perform in the classroom than in athletics.
• Students take more pride in their grades than anything else.
• Teaching is esteemed as a high calling worthy of appropriate compensation.
• We can honestly evaluate a teacher based only on performance.

Making the Church Relevant Again: Relevance is Found In the Wisdom of God

Man's wisdom has made the church often irrelevant. What is needed to make the church relevant again is for it to learn to lean on God's wisdom and not man's. During the Israelites journey from slavery in Egypt to the promised land God attempted to teach them this simple fact. But, with no success. What is hurting the church today is that we think we know what the world needs. To become relevant again the church needs to learn how to be led by God.

Mankind is proud of its achievements. The technology it has bought forth that has benefited the lives of many. The medical advances that have us living longer than mankind has in recent history. Its intellectual pursuits that has created a society whose morals are crumbling, whose ethics are spotty, whose education system is failing the masses and whose society as a whole is built on shifting and sinking sand. Yet, mankind proudly points to its wisdom in rejecting God while extolling its own learning.

Leaning to lean on the wisdom of God is something that took the Israelites decades to learn, if they ever learned it. Learning to lean on God seems to take many a long time to learn. And, even when the lesson is learned we tend to revert back to leaning on our own wisdom. In this article we will see where that got the Israelites. Mankind is proud of its achievements. The technology it has bought forth that has benefited the lives of many. The medical advances that have us living longer than mankind has in recent history. Its intellectual pursuits that has created a society whose morals are crumbling, whose ethics are spotty, whose education system is failing the masses and whose society as a whole is built on shifting and sinking sand. Yet, mankind proudly points to its wisdom in rejecting God while extolling its own learning.

Leaning to lean on the wisdom of God is something that took the Israelites decades to learn, if they ever learned it. Learning to lean on God seems to take many a long time to learn. And, even when the lesson is learned we tend to revert back to leaning on our own wisdom. In this article we will see where that got the Israelites.

Numbers 10:35-36 & Numbers 11:1-6 Whenever the ark set out, Moses said,“Rise up, Lord! May your enemies be scattered; may your foes flee before you.”Whenever it came to rest, he said,“Return, Lord,to the countless thousands of Israel.” Now the people complained about their hardships in the hearing of the Lord, and when he heard them his anger was aroused. Then fire from the Lord burned among them and consumed some of the outskirts of the camp. When the people cried out to Moses, he prayed to the Lord and the fire died down. So that place was called Taberah, because fire from the Lord had burned among them. The rabble with them began to crave other food, and again the Israelites started wailing and said, “If only we had meat to eat! We remember the fish we ate in Egypt at no cost—also the cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic. But now we have lost our appetite; we never see anything but this manna!”

Although the people were where God had led them. Although they where they needed to be to get to what God had for them. Although it was a place were God was going to provide for them. Although it was a place where they had much to learn before they could enter the land of promise. Although they had seen a miracle every day. Despite the cloud by day, the pillar of fire by night, the manna and the water, they still complained. They did not think they are being feed as they deserved or needed. They presumed to tell God what he needed to feed them. They thought their wisdom was wiser than the wisdom of God.

DID YOU NOTICE WHO STIRRED THEM UP? The rabble.

I ASK YOU WHERE WAS THE LEADERSHIP? In Exodus Chapter 18, Moses under the advice of

Jethro is father-in-law had previously selected leaders from among the people to help him govern the people. He selected wise men who were already respected by the community. Last we saw where they failed to lead wisely at the time of the creation of the golden calf. Tonight we see them again failing to step forth and provide wisdom and direction to the people when the rabble stirred them up.

Maybe, that is why God decided to call forth men to be leaders and to anoint them with the spirit that he had placed upon Moses.

Numbers 11:16-20 Jehovah said to Moses, Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people, and the officers over them. And bring them to the tabernacle of the congregation so that they may stand there with you. And I will come down and talk with you there. And I will take of the spirit on you, and will put it on them, and they shall bear the burden of the people with you so that you do not bear it yourself alone.

(Reminds me some of our ordination services.)

And say to the people, Sanctify yourselves for tomorrow, and you shall eat flesh. For you have wept in the ears of the Lord, saying, Who shall give us flesh to eat, for it was well with us in Egypt? Therefore Jehovah will give you flesh, and you shall eat. You shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, nor ten days, nor twenty days. Even a whole month, until it comes out at your nostrils, and it is hateful to you, because you have despised Jehovah among you, and have wept before Him, saying, Why did we come out of Egypt?

God anointed 70 elders with the same spirit that he had imparted to Moses. Then, he taught them and the children of Israel a lesson about telling God what they needed. He tried again to impart to them their need to trust in the love and wisdom of God. And, not to lean on their own understanding.

Moving on. God had something in store for them. All they had to do was get through what they saw as a dry and barren land. Even it was a land of miracles and provision. Maybe not to their liking, but according to God's plan, if they would only open their spiritual eyes and see it. If they could get their eyes off what they wanted and see what God had for them in the future and right now. And, there leadership seemed to be just as bad.

Now, we find the nation of Israel on the edge of the promised land. God has them on the threshold of the blessed land flowing with milk and honey. Yet, God paused them. Maybe their previous attitude led God to see the need for them to verify what he had for them so,...

Numbers 13:1-3 Jehovah spoke to Moses saying, Send men so that they may search the land of Canaan, which I give to the sons of Israel. You shall send a man from every tribe of their fathers, everyone a ruler among them. And Moses by the command of Jehovah sent them from the wilderness of Paran. All those men were heads of the sons of Israel.

Finally, they had arrived at the edge of the promised land. The jumping off point for the abundant life God had waiting for them. Notice they did not send out untested men. These men who had been selected were respected as rulers and leaders. Men who had earthly wisdom. Yet.... We know the story. It does not have a happy ending

Numbers 13:25-33 And they returned from spying out the land after forty days.... And they told him and said, We came to the land where you sent us, and surely it flows with milk and honey. And this is the fruit of it. … JEHOVAH HAS NOT LIED TO US. THE LAND IS AS HE SAID. LET US HURRY AND PACK UP AND TAKE POSSESSION OF THIS LAND. SURELY THE LORD HAS BLESSED UP AND ALL THAT HE HAS TOLD US SHALL COME TO PASS...

(Finally they had learned. I had about given up on them myself. Moses and God both had at times been mad at them. But, it had all worked out.)

However, the people that dwell in the land are strong, and the cities are walled, very great. And also we saw the children of Anak there. … But the men that went up with him said, We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we.

(They had seen God destroy the mighty Egyptian army while they lifted not a figure and they lost not a man. Yet...These people scared them.)

And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched to the sons of Israel, saying, The land through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eats up those who live in it. And all the people whom we saw in it were men of stature. And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, of the giants. And we were in our own sight like grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

The problem here, as often it is, they did not select men with the heart and mind of God or with their spiritual eyes opened. These were men who apparently had wisdom. All twelve returned from the hostile land, so I am sure they selected capable men. They had traveled the land for forty days without getting caught. I am sure they selected trustworthy men. Well regarded men. Men whose words the congregation would receive and believe. That is evident by the fact that the report of the 10 false witnesses was believed. Even through there report stood in stark contrast to the plan and words of God.

Yet, their advice was heeded. And, as a result of their words, …

Numbers 14:2-4 And all the sons of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron. And the whole congregation said to them, Oh that we had died in the land of Egypt! Or, Oh that we had died in the wilderness! And why has Jehovah brought us into this land to fall by the sword, so that our wives and our sons should be a prey? Would it not be better for us to return to Egypt? And they said to one another, Let us make a leader, and let us return to Egypt.

Here they were just days away from the land of promise. Having seen the daily provision of God. Selected rulers had confirmed the words of God about the bountiful land ahead. Yet, almost everyone wanted a new leader and they wanted to return to the land of bondage. They would have preferred to die in the wilderness than to claim what God had for them. It might have required a battle or two. Some may have died. But, many more would die in the wilderness. Because they would fail to listen to the ones who had the mind and heart of God. They chose the majority report. They rejected the words of the two men who had the mind and heart of God.

We blamed the 10 whose spiritual eyes where not working, BUT, where were the other leaders upon whom God has placed his spirit as he had on Moses. None seemed to be led by the wisdom of God. All seemed to be relying on their own wisdom.

Numbers 14:6-10 And Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, of those that searched the land, tore their clothes. And they spoke to all the company of the sons of Israel saying, The land which we passed through to search is an exceedingly good land. If Jehovah delights in us, then He will bring us into this land and give it to us, a land which flows with milk and honey. Only do not rebel against Jehovah, neither fear the people of the land. For they are bread for us. Their protection has moved from them, and Jehovah is with us. Do not fear them. But all the congregation said to stone them.

The two who had the heart and mind of God, were ignored. Instead of seeing the vision these two had confirmed, they wanted to kill them. If God had not intervened these two men of God would have been killed. And, if Moses had not beseeched God on their behalf, all the congregation might have died.

WHY? Because they were smarter than God. Because they knew more than God. Because they wanted what they wanted?

ENDING: The lesson learned by looking at this period in the birth of the Nation of Israel is reinforced in the New Testament.

1Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

Acts 6:3 Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty.

1Corithians 1:19-20 For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart. Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?”

Why is the church deemed by many to not be relevant? God has gifted the church with:

Educated people.

People with business savvy.

Experienced people. (Old people are a gift, if they have learned the lesson God has provided for them.)

Energy in the form of youth. (Young people are a gift, it they are able to utilize the wisdom of the old.)

Financial resources.

Many who have various talents and gifts.

If we can learn to place these resources under the control of God, the church will be relevant again.

All we need is to learn to lean on God for direction at this time. God is relevant. His wisdom created the world and all that are in it. All we need to be relevant is the follow God's will. To listen to the Holy Spirit's direction. Certainly, the church has done it at times in the past and it will do it at times in the future, but to be relevant the church needs to be sure that it is doing it now.