In the mid-70’s, Japanese scientists discovered a bacteria that had suddenly acquired the ability to digest nylon waste. Further study revealed that this new ability was the result of a specific mutation in the genetic code.
Evolutionists were quick to point out that this mutation resulted in new information being added to the DNA of the bacteria, substantiating their claim that mutations coupled with natural selection had been the fuel behind the origin of species. The secular scientific crowd filed it away in their box of “infallible evidences” to use whenever a pesky creationist exposed them.
The mutation that had occurred was called a “frameshift” mutation. Under a specific type of stress, the copying system of the DNA had gotten skewed. An entire sequence of DNA moved one whole step over, changing the structure and re-building the protein it was intended to code for.
The rebuilt protein was able to digest nylon waste, an ability that had never been observed before.
So is this really proof of beneficial mutations that add to the genetic code and push an organism up on the Darwinian ladder?
Mutations are generally random. They never happen the same way twice. But scientists studying this particular microbe found that whenever they subjected it to environmental stress, it somehow mutated the same exact way.
Whenever this microbe had a lack of resources that messed up its copying routine, the DNA shifted over, changing the protein type and giving the organism new abilities!
Obviously this is not a random mutation. Under close examination, it becomes apparent that the DNA is “set up” so that it can “reveal” new stretches of DNA under stress. It is as if the “G” encyclopedia, when read backwards, doubled as the “M” encyclopedia.
This is not the time to praise the system that reads the encyclopedia backwards for its “amazing ability” to “change the information”. No, the “M” encyclopedia already existed, written “between the lines” of the “G” encyclopedia.
What the evolutionists thought would help them actually hurts them. They have lost their amazing “random mutation” that increases the information, and now they have to explain how a DNA code evolved that had hidden information in it ready to be released when certain mechanisms kick into action.
“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator. . . .” (Romans 1:24)
What will it take before sinful man will acknowledge the power of God?
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 11:58 pm on 04.09.06 by David S. MacMillan III
| Last night, a terrific brace of thunderstorms swept through our area, bringing with them a few tornados and funnel clouds.
The twig behind this text was taken from a tree that used to crest a huge hill at a park near our home.
Today this magnificient tree was lying flat across the hill, crushed against the ground.
Life is fragile. 150,000 people will die today. Who have you shared your faith with today?
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III |
Postedin Uncategorized at 8:53 pm on 04.08.06 by David S. MacMillan III
On April 6, the New York Times published an article on the latest “Missing Link”: a half-fish/half-reptile that they say “bridges the gap” between ancient fish and early reptiles. The article was very positive about the strength of the study:
“With the discovery of fossils of the Tiktaalik, or ‘large shallow water fish,’ scientists have found a missing connection between fishes and walking land creatures.”
The Cincinnati Enquirer boldly proclaimed on April 7 that “Those who argue against evolution often say there is no fossil record of one kind of creature evolving into another. Tiktaalik bridges just such a gap.”
Many scientists were quick to trumpet the defeat of Biblical creationism, as evidenced by this quote from the Times article:
“Other scientists said that in addition to confirming elements of a major transition in evolution, the fossils were a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists,”
Or so they say.
Times also had a very encouraging image (click to enlarge below) on their website which showed Tiktaalik prominently displayed as “The Missing Link” heaving itself up onto land between an Eusthenopteron fish and a Icthyostega reptile, reinforced by dates from who-knows-where. Below this it showed a diagram of the variegated “limb” bones in the three creatures.
The first obvious fallacy comes out in the artistic license used to depict the soft tissue around the three “limbs”. The first is smooth, but the second, labeled “Transitional footlike structure” is almost serrated at the end    perhaps depicting the assumed “grip” that this creature was “developing”?
At close examination, the “Link” status of this creature totally falls apart. The supposed “footlike” structure is not directly attached to the skeletal system of Tiktaalik    which means that it couldn’t possibly have used these bones on land. The bones were embedded in the muscle, not in joints attached to the backbone. Imagine trying to walk around if your femur was six inches away from your hip.
The scientists at the University of Chicago who discovered this posit that perhaps Tiktaalik “used its fin/feet to paw along the bottoms of shallow streams.” Perhaps. But the Coelacanth, which until recent times was also considered a similar missing link, was found in a fish market in Japan just a few years ago. By observing it in its natural habitat, scientists have discovered that it can’t “paw along the bottoms of shallow streams” because it has no weight-bearing ability.
Even if Tiktaalik had real limbs attached to its torso, it still would be unable to breathe above water. The lungs operate on an entirely different principle than gills    which are not as primitive as we are lead to believe. In the Enquirer article, Tiktaalik was called “the” missing link in the line between land and sea. But if evolution was true, we should find an unbroken path between all “transitions”. And we have no transitional form “between land and sea” now, so how can this be “the” missing link? Shouldn’t we find hundreds?
Unfortunately for the evolutionists, all the missing links are still missing.
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 3:15 am on by David S. MacMillan III
In my last post, What It Takes To Put Christ On Ice, I related the story of a study that explained how Jesus “may have” walked on an ice floe rather than on water like God’s Word says. Then, I opened up for comments on what my readers thought about the whole thing. It was not until David Ketter left his two cents
This is where the crux of the issue lies. When I first heard this story, my initial response was purely from a scientific basis: If Galilee isn’t cold enough now, why are they saying it was cold enough then? But I soon realized that this is not the correct approach. Instead of looking to fallible science for the answers, we must look to God’s Word: the only thing that never fails.
David K. did such a good job with this that I am reposting his comment in its entirety:
In order to make the case, let’s refer to the original story, shown in John 6:16-21:
When evening came, his disciples went down to the sea, got into a boat, and started across the sea to Capernaum. It was now dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them. The sea became rough because a strong wind was blowing. When they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat, and they were frightened. But he said to them, “It is I; do not be afraid.”
Then they were glad to take him into the boat, and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going.
In this passage alone, we see the key evidence aqainst the ice-theory: “The sea became rough because a strong wind was blowing.” Also, we can see that this ice is affected, in part, by depth. According to John 6, “they had rowed about three or four miles [out].”
So, really, it’s futile to believe this idea. A more detailed account (of the same event) in Matthew 15, states:
And Peter answered him, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.” He said, “Come.” So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus. But when he saw the wind,[d] he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, “Lord, save me.” Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
Here, again, we have more evidence against it. Peter steps out (in faith) and seeing the wind (again, no calm water), he loses his faith and begins to sink. Jesus, coming to the same spot, pulls him up onto the surface of the water once more and helps him to the boat. The point in this? In order for the ice-theory to work, Jesus would have to be quite a manipulator of ice to move it around like that. But consider the evidence:
1) The water was rough
2) The wind was raging
3) The weather was warm enough for crowds to spend the day by him (read the first portions of Matthew 15 and John 6 and you’ll find Jesus had been teaching the whole day prior).
4) Jesus was walking 3 or 4 miles out on the Sea of Galilee.
5) Peter was sinking.
Biblically speaking (and that’s not taking the science into account because THAT is not my area of expertise), there is no grounding for this ice-theory in the Christian life.
Attaboy, DJ!
Tomorrow (Lord willing) I will be posting on a Missing Link that has captivated the evolutionary crowd     stay tuned.
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 1:59 am on 04.07.06 by David S. MacMillan III
The article started off strong.
“The New Testament story describes Jesus walking on water in the Sea of Galilee but according to a study led by Florida State University Professor of Oceanography Doron Nof, it’s more likely that he walked on an isolated patch of floating ice.”
In an effort to dispel the ancient “myth” of the walking-on-water account, a team of scientists has done research on what is known as “springs ice”.
When a salty spring flows into a freshwater lake, the heavier saltwater sinks to the bottom, creating a temperature imbalance that can lead to ice formation above the saltwater. This only occurs in calm water when the air temperature is at or near freezing.
These scientists have decided that since Jesus “couldn’t” have really been walking on water, he must have been walking on ice that happened to form just at the right time for this to occur. They say that the chances of this happening today in the Sea of Galilee are about “once in 10,000 years” but that the odds “might” have been higher around two thousand years ago during a “prevailing climate” - whatever that means.
I will post my opinion on this startling new piece of “evidence” soon. For now, I am asking my readers to contribute their views via comment. Perhaps we can get some controversy here! To see the original article, go to www.physorg.com.
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 2:02 am on 04.06.06 by David S. MacMillan III
The doctrine of Self Esteem has been an integral part of our schools for a long, long, time. But a study by Scientific American has found that this ideal can actually lower grades and lead to “socially unacceptable behavior”, i.e. bullying, drugs, and promiscuity.
Some of the most famous programs to build self esteem originated in California in the early 1980s. Of course, we know that self esteem comes from psychology, psychology from Freud, and Freud was an atheist. But that is besides the point. After all, they finally found a doctrine they could teach in school and deny that it is religion. Never mind that the Supreme Court has defined atheism as its own religion.
The rationale behind the push for self-esteem programs is that people are basically good, but that since they do not “believe in themselves”, from thence stems all evil in society. Or that is the way the argument goes. In a 1989 publication called The Social Importance of Self-Esteem, the statement was made that
“. . . many, if not most, of the major problems plaguing society have roots in the low self-esteem of many of the people who make up society.”
But the first scientific problem with this comes from the fact that “beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.” A study was done in 1995 showed that there is no correlation between a person’s “self-esteem” and how attractive or intelligent the person actually is. Artificial attempts to bolster someone’s positive thoughts about themselves leads to dissatisfaction with other people and feelings of superiority. After all, if “social value” is not based on physical or mental characteristics, I can pass judgment on the value of anyone without any rationale.
Another study done by Scientific American found that self-esteem bolsters a person’s opportunity in life only so far as those around them prefer an arrogant person to an insecure person. The lesser of two evils.
Researchers at the University of Kentucky found ‘way back in 1987 that having high “self-esteem” hurts one’s chances to successfully resolve disputes. Because a person with high “self-esteem” feels that he or she is always right, they will be more prone to sever a relationship than admit that they are wrong.
It has been found that teens who have a high level of “self-esteem” as measured by current standards are actually more likely to engage in sexual promiscuity and drugs because they feel they are so “good” that nothing can touch them.
Contrary to what we have been told, bullies in school and violent adults do not generally suffer from insecurity. They usually have high “self-esteem” and as a result have a predisposition to look down on everyone else because they have been told repeatedly how “good” they are.
The message of humanistic self-esteem programs is that we are all basically good, so we just need to accept ourselves and this will help us accept others. But that is not what God’s Word says.
“Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself. Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:3-11)
My favorite Christian comedian, Brad Stine, put it this way:
The first commandment God Almighty told man was: You must put Me first! You must put Me first! Then, when the Creator of matter tells you YOU matter, then you have purpose and then you have self-esteem!
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 1:03 am on 04.05.06 by David S. MacMillan III
Lately I have been speaking with a few people who lean toward the idea that anyone can go to Heaven as long as they are sincere in their beliefs and follow their religion with perseverance. If you are a “good Muslim” or a “good Hindu” or a “good Mormon”, you might make it as long as you accept that Jesus was a Prophet. So, we should never tell people that their belief system is wrong or that they are going to Hell, but at the most we can tell them “Jesus loves you!”
Today I compiled a list of Scriptures that speak directly on this issue and so I decided to post them here. Generally God’s Word can speak for Itself:
Ephesians 4:14-15
“Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.”
Matthew 7:20-21
“Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.”
1 Thessalonians 5:16-22
“Be joyful always; pray continually; give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit’s fire; do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.”
Matthew 7:15
“Do not judge or you too will be judged. . . . Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but an evil tree bears evil fruit.
1 Timothy 4:1,2
The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.
1 John 2:22
“Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.”
Isaiah 9:6
“[Christ’s] name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Revelation 21:8
“But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur.”
Psalm 32:1
“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
Hebrews 9:22
“Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin.”
1 Peter 3:18
“For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.”
Hebrews 9:11-15
“When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
Hebrews 10:19-22
“Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.”
John 3:3,14,15
“Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.’ … As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.”
Which side are you on?
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 1:47 am on 04.04.06 by David S. MacMillan III
Creation vs. Evolution
This is the theme of the second issue of Regenerate Our Culture. Agent Tim, Karen Kovaka, Jason Braun, and myself have joined together to write four articles applying the creation/evolution controversy to our culture and our world today.
This issue also premiers the official podcast of ROC: Square Talk Radio! SquareTalk is a podcast run by Agent Tim Sweetman and several other top bloggers. This is the 12th show, but the first show that is linked together with Regenerate Our Culture. And its subject is also Creation and Evolution! The special guest is: Me!
That’s right, Tim Sweetman, Travis from Blogging Boy Scout, and I spent thirty minutes discussing evolution, creation, and God’s Word. Check it out!.
Back at ROC, I have an article that will enable to you refute any evolutionary “fact”. Tim Sweetman has an excellent article on Social Darwinism and the implications of eugenics today. An essential message.
So head on over to Regenerate Our Culture and take a look!
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Postedin Uncategorized at 9:20 pm on 04.01.06 by David S. MacMillan III
· Next entries »