Unshackled Apologetics

Unshackled! is a radio drama series produced by Pacific Garden Mission, in Chicago, Illinois, that first aired in 1950.  It is the longest-running radio drama in history (sorry, Johnny Dollar).

Well known evangelist and creation supporter Ray Comfort (and friend of Kirk Cameron) had his conversion story featured on Unshackled! 

WayneSpencer (M.S. Physics), who writes extensively on astronomy topics, had this to say:

The truth of Christianity is … born out in the real life experience of Christians who live by it.  Christian faith has a long track record for over 2000 years now of making positive changes in the personal lives of people.  So the reasons for having faith in the Bible are not merely intellectual, but also revolve around people experiencing God changing their lives and making life more meaningful for them.  It is usually the life of a Christian lived out with integrity that is more persuasive to most people, when it counts, than a logical argument.

C. E. M. Joad (d. 1953) was the head of the Philosophy Dept. at the University of London and was a long time critic of Christianity, but finally said, “I now believe that the balance of reasonable considerations tells heavily in favor of the religious, even of the Christian view of the world.”  Joad had appeared on BBC radio attacking Christianity in the 1940’s, but later wrote The Recovery of Belief in 1952.

Bishop John Subhan came to Jesus from a Muslim background.  When he read the Gospel the second time he came to see that is was the true Injil.  He was convinced that it was God’s Word and divine revelation.  He saw a dramatic difference between reading the New Testament and the effect of reciting the Qur’an. [1]

Have you ever heard a new convert say, “I wonder if Genesis One through Eleven is really true?”  The lost, who do not know Jesus, have not experienced regeneration and don’t have the assurance through the Holy Spirit that the Bible is true.

R. C. Sproul states, “The Scripture objectively gives evidence that it is the Word of God.  The Spirit … gives us the quiet assurance that the evidence is certain.” [2]  The Westminster Confession concludes, “… our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts. (ch. 1, sec. 5).  Sproul, Gerstner and Lindsley proclaim, “… the Spirit of God persuades and assures us of the infallible truth and divine authority of the Word of God.” [3]

For our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance, as you know what kind of men we were among you for your sake.  And you became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit …  For from you the word of the Lord has sounded forth … (1 Thes. 1:5-8).

For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, "Abba, Father."  The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God (Rom. 8:15, 16).

How does God give us assurance of our adoption?  Through the Bible!

These things [the book of 1 John] I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. …  And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life (1 Jn. 5:13, 20).

Glenn Beck and other Mormons claim to have had a dramatic conversion experience.  Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? by Cowdrey, Davis and Vanick, provide strong evidence that the Book of Mormon was based on a work of historical fiction, A Manuscript Found.  The Book of Mormon has been changed many times.  Beck’s evidence for Early American Jewish influence is better explained by Phoenecians traveling to the New World.

Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy - meditate on these things (Phil. 4:8).

How can we think on what’s true if we don’t know the true truth?

Frank Turek, while debating Christopher Hitchens at Virginia Commonwealth University, on the topic of theism said, “I’m giving a probability argument … you can’t prove beyond any doubt that there’s a God.  I’m giving probability …  I’m giving cosmological, teleological, moral, consciousness, reason, mathematics [arguments].” [4]  Turek should have stated that as Christians we know God is there and Jesus is Lord (cf. Jn. 7:17).

Notes:

1)  Evidence that Demands a Verdict (Vol. 1) by Josh McDowell (Here’s Life Pub., San Bernardino, CA, 1979), p. 351.
2)  “The Internal Testimony of the Holy Spirit” by R. C. Sproul in Inerrancy ed. by Norman Geisler (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 1980), p. 342.
3)  Classical Apologetics by R. C. Sproul, John Gerstner and Arthur Lindsley (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 1984), p. 171.
4)  See this debate at 1:14:00.

John Lennon: God, Hell & Evolution

John Lennon (1940-1980) on God:

If I’m going to be a monk with nothing, do it. … People got the image I was anti-Christ or antireligion.  I’m not at all. I’m a most religious fellow. I’m religious in the sense of admitting there is more to it than meets the eye. I’m certainly not an atheist.

Yes Virginia, there is a Hell – just imagine what John Lennon might say (& did):

The idea of being a rock‘n’roll musician sort of suited my talents and mentality, and the freedom was great. But then I found I wasn’t free. I'd got boxed in. … a physical manifestation of being in prison. … Rock ’n’ roll was not fun anymore.  So there were the standard options in my business:  going to Vegas and singing your greatest hits - if you're lucky - or going to hell, which is where Elvis went. [1]

John Lennon had some choice words regarding evolution:

Nor do I think we came from monkeys, by the way.  That’s another piece of garbage. What the [**/% is] it based on? We couldn’t’ve come from anything - fish, maybe, but not monkeys. I don’t believe in the evolution of fish to monkeys to men.  Why aren’t monkeys changing into men now?  It’s absolute garbage.

Lennon was critical of Young Earth Science (YES), but also recognized the limitations of Big Science and the dominance of Sacred Cows inScience:

[Evolution is] absolutely irrational garbage, as mad as the ones who believe the world was made only four thousand years ago [sic, Y6K], the fundamentalists. … I don't buy it [Evolution]. I've got no basis for it and no theory to offer, I just don't buy it. Something other than that. Something simpler. I don't buy anything other than "It always was and ever shall be." [fixity of Kinds?] I can't conceive of anything less or more. The other theories change all the time. They set up these idols and then they knock them down. It keeps all the old professors happy in the university. It gives them something to do. I don't know if there's any harm in it except they ram it down everybody's throat. Everything they told me as a kid has already been disproved by the same type of "experts" who made them up in the first place.

Fred Seaman, who worked with Lennon from 1979 till his death, said that Lennon would vote for Reagan and that Lennon, “did express support for Reagan, which shocked me.”  Raymond Damadian, a YES supporter, was awarded the National Medal of Technology in 1988 by Ronald Reagan and in 1989 was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame for inventing MRI.

John Lennon as prophet:  “The biggest prize is when you die - a really big one for dying in public. OK: Those are the things we are not interested in doing.”  Lennon was assassinated by Mark David Chapman in NYC in 1980. [2]

If you want to see John Lennon “alive” today you need to go see a Beatles tribute band.  The-Fab-4 , Lennon is far right, celebrated the Fourth of July in Big Spring, Texas this year (photo courtesy Francis Hall).

Did Lennon believe the Good News about Jesus Christ before he died?

For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life (Jn. 3:16, AMP).

See my contact info in my profile (“About Me” top right).

Possibly The-Fab-4 could add this song to their repertoire:

Evo Submarine

In Shrewsbury where he was born,

Lived a man who sailed with gust
And he told us of his life,
In the land of Galapagos,

So he sailed on to the sun,

Till we found the finches mean,
And we lived beneath the waves,
In our EVO submarine,

We all live in a Darwin submarine,

EVO submarine, UCA* submarine,

And our fossils are all aboard,

Many more of them live next door,
As we live just as we please
Idols all and live for greed
Sky of blue, and sea green
In our EVO submarine

*UCA = Universal Common Ancestry

Notes:

1) quoted in All We Are Saying: The Last Major Interview with John Lennon and Yoko Ono by David Sheff (St. Martin's Griffin, 2000), p. 6.
2) Ibid.

Search for the Historical Adam

Was Adam real? Can we go to his tomb now? Our prior post dealt with survey results of Christian schools and the truth of Genesis. One pillar of Bible truth under attack is the existence of an historical Adam. Richard Ostling, former religion writer with Time, has written the cover article “The Search for the Historical Adam” for the June 2011 issue of Christianity Today.
Christianity Today has made a neat video on this topic. Thankfully, Wheaton College supports the statement "God directly created Adam and Eve, the historical parents of the entire human race."
In The Language of Science and Faith, Francis Collins (Human Genome Project) and Karl Giberson deny that Adam and Eve were the first couple in a historical sense. Giberson, Physics Professor at Eastern Nazarene College, claims that this is "a secondary or peripheral disagreement that shouldn't cause us to hurl accusations of infidelity at one another." We have responded to some of Collins’ errors here.

Collins claims that humanity came from a group of 10,000 ancestors around 100,000 to 150,000 years ago. That is, mankind came from a group and not Adam and Eve. Elizabeth Mitchell comments, “Search the Christianity Today article much as you will, it never explains how the conclusion that there had to be 10,000 original people was reached. Oddly enough, neither does the BioLogos website.”

According to A. Gibbons, writing in Science, “… researchers have calculated that ‘mitochondrial Eve’ - the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people—lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old.”

Ostling rightly points out what is at stake, “… Christian doctrine on original sin and the Fall, the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke, and, perhaps most significantly, Paul's teaching that links the historical Adam with redemption through Christ (Rom. 5:12-19; 1 Cor. 15:20-23, 42-49; and his speech in Acts 17).” Orthodox Protestants who take Genesis as Historical Narrative (OPGHN, “opgane”) present “one option” according to Ostling. It is not one option, but is actually the Bible option:

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being (Ge 2:7).
All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust (Job 34:15).
The first man [Adam] was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man (1 Cor. 15:47-49).
Genuine humanity was from made from dust, not a prior hominid (Lucy, Lucky or anyone else). Rather than refer to specific scholars who work with Answers In Genesis, many with Ph.D.’s, Ostling uses the nebulous term “writers with Answers in Genesis.”
Ostling tries to put James Montgomery Boice (d. 2000) into the anti-Genesis camp – this is a mistake. Boice, though not holding to all the tenets of Flood Geology, held that much geologic data “must be explained by a flood of worldwide dimensions.” He also said that, “a flood of that duration [377 days] is not a local flood!” Boice wrote a whole chapter on Flood Traditions and concluded that, “Hundreds of flood stories abound throughout the world in various cultures and are therefore evidence not merely of the historicity of the flood but of its universal extent.”

Ostling points out that Genesis doubters assume that starting with two people, “… would have required God's miraculous intervention to increase the genetic diversity to what is observable today.” Maybe Ostling does not know about Marc Kirschner’s and John Gerhart’s book The Plausibility of Life: Resolving Darwin's Dilemma (2005) who proposed the theory of Facilitated Variation. [1] Modular regulatory mechanisms (switches) allow quick changes to occur.

C. John Collins (not related to Francis) has written Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? and takes a more conservative view. He points out that human language poses a serious problem for Darwiniacs. Evolutionary linguist Mark Seidenberg freely admits, “Humans acquire and use natural languages, and lower primates do not.” [2] Fred Field (Ph.D. Linguistics) points out a further problem with assuming that true humanity started many thousands of years ago: “… it is curious how writing could have suddenly emerged after 30 to 100 millennia of speech. And , if writing had been in existence prior to that of the Sumerians, where is the evidence?” [3]
Consider these powerful words from Lita Cosner, who is working on her M.A. (New Testament) at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and who was awarded the Carl F.H. Henry Scholarship (their highest award):

Scripture itself does not allow Adam to be taken non-literally; many passages in Scripture require Adam to be a historical individual. Among them is Romans 5:12 -21, where a historical Adam is contrasted with the historical Jesus. … Paul’s argument [in Rom. 5:12-21] depends completely on a historical individual man called Adam, who committed a real sin bringing real death. Otherwise, why believe in a real historical Jesus who brought justification from sin? No, it is clear from this passage, and many others in both the Old and New Testament, that Scripture itself takes Adam to be a historical person, and the Fall to be a historical event.19 Without these historical facts, the Gospel itself has no foundation (cf. Psalm 11:3).

Tim Keller, who spoke at a BioLogos workshop, provided counterpoint, “[Paul] most definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures. … If Adam doesn't exist, Paul's whole argument … falls apart. … If you don't believe what he believes about Adam, you are denying the core of Paul's teaching."
The Ica Stones, made famous by Peruvian physician Javier Cabrera, provide a strong indication that man and dinos co-existed. The Travel Channel made a great video on this. Surely, the Darwinist timescale is wrong. Adam may have had dino pets. Doubt Darwin! Don’t Deny Divine Revelation!

If Adam was an actual figure from real history, what conversations did he have with the Intelligent Designer and what did he think about the age of the Earth?

Notes:
1) summarized in “Facilitated Variation: A New Paradigm Emerges in Biology” by Alex Williams, Journal of Creation, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2008, pp. 85-92.
2) quoted in “The Language Faculty: Following the Evidence” by Fred Field, Journal of Creation, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2008, p. 75.
3) Ibid., p. 74.

Already Compromised – Review

Ken Ham and Greg Hall, President of Warner University, present the survey results of Britt Beemer (America’s Research Group) in this highly recommended work. They asked questions of school Presidents, Deans, Science Heads and Theology Heads at Christian colleges and universities regarding biblical authority. A total of 312 people were interviewed (2.5% margin of error).

There are six Christian schools where the presidents accept AiG’s statement of faith:

Bob Jones University
Jackson Hole Bible College
Tennessee Temple University
Northland International University
Appalachian Bible College
Warner University

Out of Ham and Hall’s survey of presidents, VP’s and department chairs, 59.6% of these Christian educational leaders accept Creation In Six Days (CISD), that is 24 hour days. Incredibly, 10.9% of these institutions teach that evolution is true. The term “evolution” itself is confusing, but most commonly means Atom-to-Adam transformation or Universal Common Ancestry (UCA). Only 42.3% of these leaders adopt Young Earth Science (YES). [1] Just 74% of these leaders believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. [2]

Considers these answers from the leaders of the Religion (or Theology) Dept. and the Science Dept. on whether they are Old-Earth or Young-Earth [3]:

57% of the Science Dept. chairs support YES - could it be that there is evidence that supports recent creation?
There is a much needed emphasis on a Christian Worldview in the book. [4] Because Christians have a deficient worldview (WV) they hold to a weak view of Ge 1-11 (G111). Francis Schaeffer (d. 1984) helped popularize the importance of worldview. Doug Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy at Denver Seminary, said this about Schaeffer and worldviews:

Schaeffer taught that worldviews need to be compared on the basis of objective criteria. … [a good worldview] must be internally consistent. … a worldview needs to fit the facts of reality; it must be "true to what is," as Schaeffer put it. A worldview needs to match the external facts of history and science.

I spoke with Ken Ham a number of years ago about my research on Schaeffer that his writings, overall, fall into the creationist camp. Schaeffer held to a non-tranquil Universal Flood, the possibility of man-dino coexistence and that nuclear decay rates may not be constant. [5]

According to John Stonestreet,

… one who may have influenced Protestant Evangelicalism more than any other towards worldview thinking is Francis Schaeffer. Schaeffer’s most significant contribution was bringing the concept of Christian worldview out of the academy to popular Christian thought.

Already Compromised provides a welcome emphasis on knowing Jesus Christ personally. Ham and Hall also give a clear presentation of the gospel of grace. They include a helpful chapter of survival tips for college students. Ham and Hall focus on unity based on truth.

There is an excellent appendix refuting the Documentary Hypothesis (JEDP) by Terry Mortenson and Bodie Hodge. This critical theory was refuted in The Fundamentals edited by R. A. Torrey (the successor of Moody) which were first distributed from 1910 to 1916. George Frederick Wright wrote the article “The Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch.” Other articles also relate to the JEDP issue.

Why have so many Christian schools gone astray? They have been unduly influenced by the likes of Mark Noll, who wrote in The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Eerdmans, 1995):

Creation science has damaged Evangelicalism by making it much more difficult to think clearly about human origins, the age of the earth, and mechanisms of geological or biological change. But it has done more profound damage by undermining the ability to look at the world God has made and to understand what we see when we do look. [6]

Christian schools have compromised, but what is the solution? Students and educational leaders should read the following to help restore Evangelical foundations:
Sacred Cows In Science challenges mainstream science with such worldview topics as Darwin, eugenics, animal rights, abortion, climate change, non-material nature of the mind, gay activism, the Global Flood and other hot topics. There are 17 authors, several with Ph.D.’s. Norbert Smith (Ph.D. Zoology) is the editor and has been a creationist leader for many decades. The Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer covers much from theology and philosophy to the arts.

The Fundamentals shows the power of old arguments – the new challenges have not yet refuted these. Contemporary scholars reject conservative theology because of bias and false presuppositions. The Fundamentals was edited by R. A. Torrey who actually “met” H. M. Morris, the father of modern creationism, in 1919! R. A. Torrey held the infant Morris, just a few months old, in his arms and prayed for him and his future ministry. [7] Fundamentalist is not a bad word – read The Fundamentals online.

Joel Heck has written In the Beginning, God: Creation from God's Perspective which is a superb defense of traditional creationism from Scripture and science. It is short and economically priced – ideal for mass distribution (hint: college presidents!!).

A future project for this team might include a national (US, CAN, UK) survey like the following:
The results could be displayed on billboards in various parts of the country (e.g. 84% of Alaskans support Young Earth Science). Amazingly, 29% of Russians, formerly an atheist state, hold that dinos and Man lived together. A survey of 1,600 Russians was conducted in January of this year (3.4% margin of error). The response in Gallup polls for those who agree with the statement “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so” has changed little since 1982.

Now therefore, fear the LORD, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods [Darwin, Big Science, Old Earth Fallacies] which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the LORD! And if it seems evil to you to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD. (Josh. 24:14, 15)

Notes:
1) Already Compromised by Ken Ham and Greg Hall (Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2011), p. 22-24.
2) Ibid., p. 30.
3) Ibid., p. 55.
4) Ibid., pp. 204-212.
5) Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer by Francis Schaeffer (Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 1982), Vol. 2, pp. 94, 95, 132, 134.
6) quoted in Head and Heart: American Christianities by Garry Wills (Penguin, New York, 2007), p. 550.
7) A History of Modern Creationism by Henry Morris (Master Books, San Diego, CA, 1984), p. 58.

***

On a lighter note, maybe some visionary educational leaders will someday start International Creationist University (I-C-U). ;-) G111 = believe Genesis 1-11 (not just what comes after)

Exodus 20:11

Consider the Sabbath commandment:

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it (Ex. 20:8-11).

We work six days (144 hours, twelve dozen) and rest one. These are not imaginary days – they are real. Creation Week occurred in six 24 hour (approximately) days. Creation In Six Days (CISD) is an important teaching of the Bible.

For in six days GOD made Heaven, Earth, and sea, and everything in them; he rested on the seventh day. Therefore GOD blessed the Sabbath day; he set it apart as a holy day (Ex. 20:11, Msg).

Exodus 20:11 is the Haec Credimus (“this we believe”) of the Creation Research Society:
Exodus 31:17 is a parallel passage:

It [the Sabbath] is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.

The Hebrew of Exodus 20:11 may be found here.

John Trapp commented on Ex. 20:11, “God took six days to make the world in, to the end that we might be in a muse when we think of it; and think on his works in that order that he made them.” [1]

Robert McCabe concluded, “… both passages [Ex. 20:11, Ex. 31:17] have been clearly understood as references to man imitating the divine pattern established in the first week of temporal history by working on six consecutive, normal days and resting on a literal seventh day…” [2]
Notes:
1) Online Bible (2004)
2) “A Critique of the Framework Interpretation of the Creation Week” by Robert McCabe in Coming to Grips with Genesis ed. by Terry Mortenson and Thane Ury (Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2008), p. 243.

Creationism 101 with Joel Heck

Joel Heck has written In the Beginning, God: Creation from God's Perspective which is a superb coverage of the basics of creationism (Concordia, 2011). It’s short (80 pages) and is only $3.99 (what a bargain!).

Dr. Heck has a ThM in Old Testament from Trinity Evangelical Divinity and a ThD in Exegetical Theology from Concordia Seminary. He gives a detailed explanation of Genesis chapter one. He lists 17 reasons why yom means a normal day in Ge 1, including #12, the years lived chronicled in Ge 5 & 11 make sense only if day in Ge 1 refers to a regular 24 hour day. That is, if day means millions of years for Creation Week, then how do we understand Methuselah living 969 “years.”
Dr. Heck also argues against scholars who oppose taking Genesis chapter one as historical narrative. He also discusses OT & NT references that bolster a traditional reading of Genesis (a comprehensive compilation of these may be found here). There is an excellent 10 page summary of scientific research supporting fixity of kinds, the Flood and Young Earth Science (YES). If you know anyone who is sitting on the fence on the crevo issue please give them Dr. Heck’s book! Few other works provides so much bang (a BIG one too) for the buck.

It is a rare pleasure to find a theologian courageous enough to take the first chapter of Genesis at face value, disregarding those of his peers who feel they must kowtow to the latest fad in “science.” Dr. Heck explains the passage clearly, showing it is historical narrative supported by true scientific research—not myth, poetry, or vague allegory. -- Russell Humphreys

Michio Kaku - Epic Fail?

              *** UPDATE ***

Be sure to catch our latest video.  We tackle a potpourri of topics:  Thunder & C-14, Tree Rings & Ammonites,  Norman Macbeth (Darwin Retried), OMNI magazine & censorship ... #Rubio #NormanMacbeth #Darwin #AltMed #TreeRings

Hotep = B @ ☮

Physicist Michio Kaku (b. 1947) is the host of the radio show “Science Fantastic.” Kaku is a leading futurist and the co-founder of string field theory. His parents were held in an internment camp during World War II. While in high school, Kaku made his own particle accelerator! He caught the attention of atomic scientist Edward Teller and Mrs. Teller arranged for Kaku to receive a scholarship to Harvard. [1]

Kaku contrasts the God of Miracles and the God of Order (Einstein’s god), yet does not deny that miracles may happen. [2] However, he gives no examples of miracles that he accepts as historical. Empiricist philosopher John Locke (d. 1704) had no trouble with miracles [3]:

The evidence of Our Savior's mission from heaven is so great, in the multitude of miracles he did before all sorts of people, that what he delivered cannot but be received as the oracles of God and unquestionable verity. For the miracles he did were so ordered by the divine providence and wisdom that they never were, nor could be, denied by any of the enemies or opposers of Christianity.

Kaku overlooks the fact that science itself is based on Christian principles [4]:

As Francis Schaeffer pointed out, “Both Alfred North Whitehead [d. 1947] and J. Robert Oppenheimer [d. 1967] have stressed that modern science was born out of the Christian world view.” [5]
Kaku criticizes the traditional “proofs” for God’s existence and even brings up the issue of who made God. [6] One wonders if Kaku has even read the Bible. His denial of the Moral Argument is shocking, “The moral proof is by far the weakest, because morality can be viewed in terms of evolving social customs.” [7] Was the Holocaust an “evolving social custom?” Is abortion an “evolving social custom?” Kaku seems to accept Einstein’s god, that is the impersonal god of Spinoza. Einstein admitted that, “… the doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never be refuted, in any real sense, by science …” [8] Although an evolutionist, Kaku still uses personal language, “… being blessed [by whom, God?] with the intellect to divine the ultimate secrets of nature gives meaning enough to life.” [9]
Kaku is fascinated with the possibility of time travel. [10] If we could make a History Observation Device, then we could settle the issue of Atom-to-Adam evolution and Young Earth Science (YES).

Math describes the universe well. Kaku admits that this is hard to explain, “… the precise reason for the miraculous convergence [between physics and math] seems totally obscure. No one has even a reasonable theory to explain why the two disciplines should share concepts.” [11] Since the Creator is a God of Order, it makes sense that the cosmos displays mathematical patterns – the equations of creation. He refers to Eugene Wigner (Nobel prize in physics) on this topic, who endorsed one of the earliest works on Intelligent Design in 1986. [12] [13] Physicist turned theologian John Polkinghorne said [14],

If the deep-seated congruence of the rationality present in our minds with the rationality present in the world is to find a true explanation, it must surely lie in some more profound reason which is the ground of both. Such a reason would be provided by the Rationality of the Creator.

Kaku praises Bernhard Riemann for his work in higher dimensions and even mentions his work defending the accuracy of Genesis. [15] Kaku claims that “geologic time” trumps Ussher. One wonders if Kaku has considered the facts that favor YES.

Saying to a tree, ‘You are my father,’ And to a stone, ‘You gave birth to me.’ For they have turned their back to Me, and not their face. But in the time of their trouble They will say, ‘Arise and save us.’ (Jer. 2:27)

If materialism fails and ID is the future, who is the Intelligent Designer?

How old is the Earth?  Is Darwinism valid?  How does the Renaissance of Catastrophism relate to the age of the world?  Is your favorite planet thousands or billions of years old?  Discover the shocking evidence in this powerful new book, YES – Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (at Amazon.com). 

Here are some cool Zazzle items on Young Earth Science (YES): 

Notes:
1) Hyperspace by Michio Kaku (Anchor Books, New York, 1994), pp. 6, 7.
2) Ibid., pp. 330, 331.
3) Head and Heart by Gary Wills (Penguin Press, New York, 2007), p. 126.
4) adapted from “How Should a Christian Relate to a Scientific Naturalist?” by J. P. Moreland in The Apologetics Study Bible ed. by Ted Cabal (Holman, Nashville, TN, 2007), pp. 946, 947.
5) How Should We Then Live? by Francis Schaeffer (Fleming H. Revell, Old Tappan, NJ, 1976), p. 132.
6) Kaku, p. 191-195.
7) Ibid., p. 192.
8) Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics by Norman Geisler (Baker Books, Grand Rapids, MI, 1999), p. 214.
9) Kaku, p. 334.
10) Ibid., pp. 232-251.
11) Ibid., p. 327.
12) Ibid., p. 328.
13) Origins and Destiny by Robert Gange (Word, Dallas, TX, 1986).
14) quoted in Creation by Alister McGrath (Fortress Press, Minneapolis, MN, 2005), p. 66.
15) Kaku, p. 30, 31.