Walter Lang (1913 - 2004) - Creationist Warrior

Walter H. J. Lang was born in Omaha, Nebraska on November 3, 1913. [1] In 1937 he graduated from Concordia Seminary in St. Louis. Valeria Ruth Lang and Walter were married in 1940. In 1942 Lang started a mission church among African-Americans in Houston. In 1959 he was serving at a church in Denver that was about half African-American.

In 1963 Walter became the executive director of the Bible-Science Association (BSA). In the following year the organization became officially non-profit. Early issues of the Bible-Science Newsletter (BSN) can be found here. Valeria did most of the editing. The first Bible-Science Newsletter was published in September 1963. BSN was Dedicated to:
BSN included such authors as Nancy Pearcey and D. James Kennedy.

BSA sponsored many creation conventions, the first of which was in Milwaukee in 1972. The theme of the 1978 convention in Wichita was “The Challenge of Design” and the featured speakers included Clifford Wilson, Duane Gish and Henry Morris. The next year’s convention was in Anaheim across from Disneyland and included John Baumgardner and Ethel Nelson as presenters. Other BSA conventions heard Jack Cuozzo, Nancy Pearcey and Walter Remine.

Walter Lang was a tireless promoter of creation. In one year he traveled 66,000 miles by car! He also hiked to the bottom of Grand Canyon 19 times. Lang went to every state in the U.S. and 26 other countries sharing the creation message. When Lang wanted to audit a course in Geology, the College of Idaho refused, claiming he might be disruptive! [2] Some of Lang’s books and mp3 talks can be found here.

Henry Morris spoke of Lang’s “remarkable energy and originality” and described him as “indefatigable” and “living sacrificially.” [3] Although Walter Lang held to some controversial views, he said on balance, “One should know that science is never absolute and there can always be a drastic new model that can explain the data better than our current model. Too many people admit that science cannot be absolute and still they act with science as if they have absolutes.” [4] Consider these wise words from Lang: “God demands a total dedication to Him, and when something in nature is substituted, that something replaces God and is regarded by God as idolatry. When science is claimed to be neutral, at that very point it becomes a pagan religion.” [5]

Lang wrote a number of tracts illustrated by cartoonist Vic Lockman including:
Was God an Astronaut?
Need We Fear Another Ice Age?
Is the Present the Key to the Past?
Here is an example of Vic Lockman’s more recent work:

The popular radio show Creation Moments, hosted by Ian Taylor traces its origins to the Bible-Science Association.

Lang died on July 10, 2004. Here are some thoughts from his son Philip Lang:

It was amazing to watch my Dad talk to total strangers. I remember seeing him off at an airport. While we were waiting he engaged a stranger in conversation about travel. Within five minutes he wove the conversation step by step into a discussion of creation and the Bible. … Dad amazed all those who really knew him that he could persistently be on the go for twenty hours a day. He didn't seem to need sleep. He would arrive at 6 a.m., say hi to the grand kids, sleep a couple of hours, and be off on the road again. … He tried to never spend money for a motel. He usually stayed at some generous person's home. That meant staying up late to share the Bible and Creation story and getting up early to travel on to the next location. … Dad was usually so busy crusading and preaching that family didn't see him much. Still, I wouldn't trade my Dad for any other dad. I have been richly and eternally blessed by his spiritual example and guidance. My closing prayer is that you also have been touched in positive ways by his life.

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Ps. 111:10, Prov. 9:10, cf. Job 28:28, Prov. 1:7).

Notes:
1) Two Decades of Creationism by Walter and Valeria Lang (Bible-Science Assoc., Minn., MN, 1984). Available online.
2) ibid., p. 67.
3) History of Modern Creationism by Henry Morris (Master Book Pub., San Diego, CA, 1984), p. 216.
4) personal correspondence, May 16, 1981.
5) Lang, p. 61.

picture credit: Robert Lang (first two)

Adam’s Blog [stardate 155,123.557] - Location by the Numbers

Before the Curse, I had an innate sense of distance and direction. Now many of my kids have a great propensity for getting Lost. Since Eve is the sunshine of my life, I think I will name the direction of the sunrise “East” in her honor. I will name the direction of the sunset “West” since many of my foolish children do Wicked things at night [cf. 1 Thes. 5:7]. I will call the direction towards the star Polaris “North” and the opposite way “South.”

Ants are very wise creatures. They can travel in a zigzag path searching for food, yet take the straightest path home [1]:

Ants also go around trees and come back to the same place:

When I walked and sailed around the world back when I was 400, always travelling in the same direction, I came back to the same spot on earth. When I made my raft I told Seth to go for wood [gopher wood]. When Eve begged me to stay home I adamantly refused. Eve was upset till evening. Nor-Wiszh traveled the globe from pole to pole, thus proving that the earth is a sphere. Eve and I now live in NEH (No Eden Here). Here is a map of a nearby town:

All the streets run East/West and North/South. I used this same concept to map the entire globe. I think I will call it “latlong.”

Smell the beauty! Teach the wonder! Join me next time for more ruminations from the first human mind.
--- --- ---

“The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course” (Eccl. 1:6, NIV).
“Is not wisdom found among the aged? Does not long life bring understanding?” (Job 12:12, NIV).

** After the Fall, did Adam see stars? **
** Never put Descartes before De Horst **

Note:
1) The Math Instinct by Keith Devlin, (Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2005, New York, NY), pp. 39-42.

A&E - Notes from Edenville

Who crushed the bones
and whence?
Eden’s Mr. Mud
without good sense.
Why talk @ snakes
and hear evil?
Lord willing, I resist
yet surely Eve’ll.
When did the
first pair streak?
The Y6K bug
made all life bleak.
What high prize
was worth bad fruit?
godkin Edenites
He did uproot!

The Oprah Factor – a review of Three Views on Creation and Evolution (Moreland, Reynolds)

Three Views of Creation and Evolution by J. P. Moreland and John Mark Reynolds et al (Zondervan, 1999) is a vast disappointment. The page numbers below refer to this book. The Genesis Debate, edited by Ron Youngblood, is a much better work along the same lines (Thomas Nelson, 1986). Beware of the word “integration” – this usually implies the view that “science” trumps scripture (p. 9). On the positive side, Moreland amazingly admits, “… I cannot shake the idea that the young earth people may be correct” (p. 85). 

A term that is better than Young Earth Creationism (p. 41) is Orthodox Protestants who take Genesis as Historical Narrative (OPGHN, “opgane”). “Orthodox Protestants” was a term proposed by Harold Lindsell who wrote The Battle for the Bible. [1] If Genesis is historical narrative, then creation in six days and a Global Flood follow directly. The RATE team concluded that Genesis 1:1 – 2:3 is historical narrative based on a statistical analysis of preterite verbs. [2] Howard Van Till (theistic evolutionist) denies that Genesis is historical narrative (pp. 209, 210). 

The International Council of Biblical Inerrancy (p. 78) produced the “Chicago Statement.” Article 12 states, “… We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.” R. C. Sproul’s commentary makes it plain that a local flood is consistent with this. [3] Ironically, Sproul is now an OPGHN. Henry Morris is mentioned on just four pages (see index, p. 288). And Ken Ham is only named on one page (p. 43)! The introduction provides various ways to look at this topic (pp. 9-11), but overlooks the primary issue, “what does the Scripture say?” (Rom. 4:3). Moreland disagrees, “The debate about creation and evolution is not primarily one about how to interpret certain passages in Genesis…” (p. 89). There is talk of dialog (p. 14) yet very little of that actually takes place. 

Ken Ham and Jason Lisle debated Walter Kaiser and Hugh Ross in 2006, but this type of interaction is rare. The terms “macroevolution” and “microevolution” should be dropped (pp. 15, 135). Common ancestry, unlimited variation and like phrases, should replace the term “macroevolution.” So called “microevolution” should be described by variation, adaptation, natural selection and speciation. The distinction between origins science and operational science is overlooked (pp. 15, 182, 183). Fixity of essential types of life is of key importance. If frogs only reproduce frogs and velociraptors only make velociraptors, then molecules to man evolution is impossible. Shockingly, “kinds” and “baramin” are not in the index! However, Phillip Johnson does discuss kinds in a footnote (p. 276). Reynolds and Paul Nelson rightly speak of the “… the natural limits of biological variation” (p. 45). Robert Newman claims that the phrase “after their kind” does not imply “… that one kind could never evolve into another” (p. 114). At least three kinds were created on Day Six of Creation Week and there is no hint that creeping things evolved into cattle which further evolved into beasts (Gen. 1:24). Though the RATE team first met in 1997, their project is not mentioned in this book. [4] Old Earthers claim that there are “large gaps in the genealogical records” (p. 21, cf. p. 91), yet there are no gaps in the chronological record which indicates that the earth is about six thousand years old.  We see here that the "begats" are very tight:

When Enosh had lived 90 years, he became the father of Kenan.  After he became the father of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters.  Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, and then he died. When Kenan had lived 70 years, he became the father of Mahalalel ... (Gen. 5:9-12)

At the end of Day Six of Creation Week the universe was declared “very good” (Gen. 1:31). Thus, the geological record, full of death and disease, must be Post-Creation Week. Many of the contributors to this volume ignore this fact. J. P. Moreland and Reynolds claim that “… almost all responsible thinkers agree that certain chemical elements now decay at known rates” (p. 24). The RATE results show this to be false. [5] Francis Schaeffer held that the constancy of radiometric decay was questionable. [6] Edward Blyth, a creationist, published on natural selection decades before Darwin (p. 31). 

There is no mention of the “scriptural geologists” of the early 1800’s highlighted in Terry Mortenson’s book The Great Divide. The Creation Research Society in not “young earth” (p. 33), but rather it holds that the Flood was global in extent and effect. Nelson and Reynolds (young earthers), give away the store: “Recent creationists should humbly agree that their view is , at the moment, implausible on purely scientific grounds” (p. 51). Their advice is “… to leave the issues of biblical chronology and history to a saner period” (p. 100). While emphasizing Intelligent Design, Nelson and Reynolds suggest that we, “Feel free to put off the question of the age of the earth and the Flood for now” (p. 75). They mention Russell Humphreys work on distant starlight (p. 52), but fail to refer to his book Starlight and Time (1994).

Walter Bradley’s (progressive creation) anti-Flood arguments are poor.  Has he read my two books defending a youthful world from History & Science?

 https://totalyouth.us/

Bradley claims that thick deposits pose a problem for the Flood (p. 77). Consider Mt. St. Helens’ eruption of 1980 and its aftermath. There are 600 feet of layered deposits that formed in just a couple of years! [7] Furthermore, some deposits were formed before and after the Flood. Bradley is confused on the meaning of “nephesh” (air-breathing) death when he speaks of bacteria (p. 77). He claims that it is “problematic” that the Adam and Eve might have lived forever (p. 77). The first couple’s descendents may have populated the stars. Bradley denies the global distribution of humanity at the time of the Flood (p. 78). This is quite unreasonable given the long antediluvian life-spans. The Tower of Babel, with its concentration of population, was after the Flood, not prior. Contributor John Jefferson Davis challenges the Global Flood by asking, “… did kangaroos and platypuses that live in Australia come to the Middle East to board Noah’s ark?” (p. 84). The continents may have been together before the Deluge. Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) is one of the leading models of the Flood. The animals would have dispersed from Ararat and floated on debris to get to various islands. In the Ice Age the lower ocean would have revealed some land bridges as well. God’s rainbow promise shows that the Flood must have been worldwide – we have had many local floods since Noah’s death. Vern Poythress (old earth) claims that, “The Bible simply does not say whether the Flood covered the entire globe” (p. 92). Poythress, who teaches at Westminster Seminary (PA), denies creation is six normal days (pp. 92, 93), yet the Westminster Shorter Catechism clearly teaches (Q9), “The work of creation is, God’s making all things of nothing, by the word of his power, in the space of six days, and all very good” [emphasis added]. He is oblivious to the fact that in 1994 six creationist Ph.D.’s defended CPT at the International Conference on Creationism in Pittsburgh not far from where he teaches! (p. 94). Here are some possibilities for defenders of OPGHN that Zondervan should have selected:

• John Morris, author of The Young Earth Russell Humphreys, author of Starlight and Time (1994) John Baumgardner, plate tectonics researcher, pub. in Nature Jonathan Sarfati, author of Refuting Compromise (contra Ross) Terry Mortenson, author of The Great Turning Point Andrew Snelling, author of Earth's Catastrophic Past

In general, the contributors seem to be generally uninformed in the field of creationism. 

 

What is missing from this book is the *Oprah Factor* ... brutal honesty and open confession. “I don’t want to be persecuted or lose my job, so I need to compromise on the clearly stated meaning of Genesis.” It’s hard to say but it is a first step. “Hello, my name is Richard, and I’m Against the Creationists of Tradition (ACT).” There now, doesn’t that feel better? Indeed, it is tough to fight the academic majority. Just say “NO” to the scientific elite and tell your Maker, “Lord I believe, please help my unbelief.” The Creation Research Society would be a great place to start your recovery journey >> 

https://www.creationresearch.org/

 

Notes:  

1) The Bible in the Balance by Harold Lindsell, (Zondervan, 1979, Grand Rapids, MI), p. 321. 2) RATE = Radioisotopes and The Age of the Earth, Thousands … Not Billions ed. by Don DeYoung, (Master Books, 2005, Green Forest, AR), pp. 157-170. 

3) Explaining Inerrancy by R. C. Sproul, (Ligonier Ministries, 1996, Orlando, FL), pp. 36, 38.

4) “Fair and Balanced?” by Steven McConaughy, 

4) DeYoung, p. 17. 

5) DeYoung, especially chs. 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9. 

6) The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer by Francis Schaeffer, (Crossway Books, 1982, Wheaton, IL), p. 134. 

7) Footprints in the Ash by John Morris and Steven Austin, (Master Books, 2003, Green Forest, AR), p. 52, 53.

To Dembski with Love

William Dembski, the well known ID advocate, has written a book promoting the view that the death, destruction and disease seen in the fossil record are the retroactive punishment of the Fall. The book is called The End of Christianity and Terry Mortenson (of Answers in Genesis) has provided an excellent response to Dembski’s thesis. Dembski accepts the standard geochronology where man appeared on the planet many millions of years after the lower animals. Such scripture twisting is not kosher.

The beginning of creation and the advent of man are not separated by millions or billions of years, “But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female’” (Mk. 10:6). God asked Job, "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? … while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4,7). That is the angels were around when the earth was created, but why are the angels around anyway? “Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?” (Heb. 1:14). That is man and angels are contemporaries and not separated by millions of years. So man has been around since the creation of the earth (Day Six of Creation Week).

Satan was a murderer from the beginning (Jn. 8:44). Cain slew Abel and did not resist demonic influences (Ge. 4:6,7). Murder implies man was around – angels don’t die.

Scripture’s first verse tells us that the earth existed at the beginning and not billions of years after the alleged Big Bang. “In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands” (Ps. 102:25).

Prophets have existed since the world began: “As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began” (Lk. 1:70, KJV). Was not Adam speaking prophetically in Genesis 2:23 when he called Eve “bone of my bones.” Did not Adam make a prediction when he indicated that Eve would be the mother of all living (Ge. 3:20)? Enoch was definitely a prophet (Jude 14). So, human prophets and the beginning of the earth are not separated by billions of years, “… which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began (Acts 3:21, KJV). Isaiah concurs:

Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded? He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in (Is. 40:21,22).

Consider the witness of general revelation: “since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” (Rom. 1:19,20). Bert Thompson rightly comments,

Who observed and perceived these things that were made from the beginning of the world? If no man was there for billions of years, because man “is a relatively new comer to the Earth,” who was observing - with rational, human intelligence - these phenomena? An amoeba? A dinosaur? Without question Paul is contending that man has existed since the creation of the world… [1]

“I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?” (Jn. 3:12).

All quotes are from the NIV unless otherwise noted.

Note:
1) Creation Compromises by Bert Thompson, (Apologetics Press, 1995, Montgomery, AL), p. 180, emphasis in original.

- - - +++
Just say “YES” (Young Earth Science)!

QED

MOL = Math Out Loud

Darwin Worship

Some atheists treat Darwin as an infallible god. To adapt (evolve?) a phrase from Chris Mooney, “Today, some evolutionists regard Darwin as little short of deity.” [1] Was Darwin there at the beginning (cf. Job 38:4)? Did he witness the six days of Creation Week? Was Darwin a time traveler like Dr. Who (TARDIS). Time cannot go backwards. We have not yet invented a history viewer (similar to the film “Paycheck”).

Are you willing to bleed for the Evolution Creed? Evo Creed: “Evolution is a fact, but we don’t exactly know how it happened and the evidential links are still missing.” If Darwinists don’t worship Darwin, then who do they idolize? Mathematician David Berlinski (who appeared in the film Expelled, http://expelledthemovie.com/) provides the answer, “… evolutionary dogmatists [Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens] …have conjured up a kind of god. Unlike the God of old, who ruled over everything, this god rules over lapses in argument or evidence. … He may be called the god of the gaps [emphasis added].” [2]

Don’t bow down to the Darwin Idol. Consider again the words of Berlinski:

In talking of the mathematician’s skepticism, I mentioned Von Neumann [a Darwin skeptic and leader in the early development of computers] because his name was widely known. I might have mentioned Gian-Carlo Rota. He despised the enveloping air of worship associated with Darwin; he thought biology primitive and dishonest [emphasis added]. [3]

Here is an enlightening video on Darwin worship: http://www.youtube.com/CreationStation23

NOTES:
1) Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney, (2005, Basic Books, New York), p. 35.
2) “The God of the Gaps” by David Berlinski, Commentary, Vol. 125, No. 4 (April 2008), p. 37.

3) http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/11/darwin_and_the_mathematicians.html

Bible Astronomy for Brainiacs

Jeremiah indicates that the cosmos is expanding: “He has stretched out the heavens” (Jer. 10:12). There are a number of verses that indicate that the universe is expanding. [1]

Psalm 89:37 speaks of the moon as “a faithful witness in heaven.” That is, the moon is a witness to the sun’s light. The moon reflects light; it is not a lightsource itself.

"Just as you can’t number the stars in the sky nor measure the sand on the seashore, neither will you be able to account for the descendants of David my servant and the Levites who serve me" (Jer. 33:22, Message). The total number of stars is about 10^22 to 10^24 stars. This fits in well with the number of sand grains on earth (cf. Ge 22:17). [2]

Job apparently refers to the rotation of the earth: "Hast thou commanded morning since thy days? Causest thou the dawn to know its place? To take hold on the skirts of the earth, and the wicked are shaken out of it. It turneth itself as clay of a seal and they station themselves as clothed" (Job 38:12-14, YLT).

Jude 13 speaks of planets as “wandering stars.”

Job 38:31 asks, “Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades, or loose the belt of Orion?” thus indicating that the Pleiades are gravitationally bound which is scientifically accurate. The Pleiades are also mentioned in Job 9:9 and Amos 5:8.

Ezekiel 1:16 speaks of a “wheel inside a wheel.” This reminds us of a gyroscope which provides stability. So, it makes sense that the planets travel around the sun. If the Milky Way did not rotate, it would collapse due to gravitational attraction of the center.

Psalm 84:11 tells us that the Lord is a sun and shield. The sun gives light and heat and helps plants grow. It makes sense that the sun is the center of the solar system. James 1:17 is also consistent with a relatively fixed sun.

Aristarchus (c. 310-230 BC) proposed the heliocentric view and calculated that the moon was 1/3 the size of the earth (actual = ¼) and that the sun was seven times the size of the earth (actual = 109). Objects fall to the earth due to gravity. So, the sun must have more attractive power since it is bigger. The planets revolving around the sun is a very reasonable theory. [3]

Calvin and Luther both rejected heliocentrism. [4] However, Kepler, a firm Bible believer, accepted the Copernican theory. The middle graphic above by Lucas Cranach illustrates the geocentric model. It appeared in the “Luther Bible” of 1534.

Francis Schaeffer points out that the opposition to the Copernican theory was not based on scripture but on Aristotle’s views:

When the Roman Church attacked Copernicus and Galileo (1564-1642), it was not because their teaching actually contained anything contrary to the Bible. The church authorities thought it did, but that was because Aristotelian elements had become part of church orthodoxy, and Galileo’s notion clearly conflicted with them. In fact, Galileo defended the compatibility of Copernicus and the Bible, and this was one of the factors which brought about his trial. [5]

A good synopsis of the Galileo affair may be found in chapter ten of Dinesh D’Souza’s What’s so Great about Christianity?

Compare these amazing affirmations of the Bible’s accuracy with the following statements from the Qur’an:
“…when he reached the setting–place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring…” (sura 18:86, Pickthal).
“The hour drew nigh and the moon was rent in twain” (sura 54:1).

Is there evidence within the solar system that supports Young Earth Science (YES)? YES, there is. Huge dust rings go around the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. According to Frank Low (Univ. of Arizona), “Particles this small can only survive in stable orbits for a few ten-thousands of year before they are pulled apart by the sun.” [6]

Consider the words of Nobel laureate in physics, Arthur Compton, who said,

For myself, faith begins with the realization that supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have faith, for it is incontrovertible that where there is a plan there is intelligence – and orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of themost majestic statement ever uttered – “In the beginning God.” [7]

You agree, don’t you, that God is in charge? He runs the universe—just look at the stars! (Job 22:12, Message)


Notes:
1) Starlight and Time by Russell Humphreys, 1994, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, p. 66.
2) Astronomy and the Bible by Don DeYoung, 1989, Baker, Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 120, 121.
3) Universe by Design by Danny Faulkner, 2004, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, p. 11.
4) “Some Misconceptions of the Impact of the ‘Enlightenment’ on the Doctrine of Scripture” by John Woodbridge in Hermeneutics, Authority and Canon ed. by D.A. Carson and John Woodbridge, 1986, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 259, 260.
5) Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer by Francis Schaeffer, 1982, Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL, Vol. 5: p. 156.
6) quoted in It’s a Young World After All by Paul Ackerman, 1986, Baker, Grand Rapids, MI, 46.
7) DeYoung, pp. 114, 115.