1. We have entered into a time in human history that demands that will we be able to follow the command of 1 Peter 3:15, and it is my passion to equip Christians to know how we can have faith in our belief in God, and His Son our Savior Jesus Christ.
   1. Fifty Years ago
      1. Abortion was illegal, rightfully considered murder.
      2. Sodomy was illegal and would carry a prison sentence if caught (rarely enforced) as it was, and is against the law of God, same as theft, and murder
   2. Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution have led more people from faith in Christ Jesus than any other person on earth.   He didn’t use threats or war orthe persecution of Christians, no, he used the power of the pen.
      1. Elimination of the need for a creator through evolution
         1. Pride is the greatest evil, and evolution has been taught that it is the thinking person that believes and trusts in evolution
         2. Through this pride people have been taught that only fools believe in this fairy tale called the bible
         3. It cast doubt on the historical reliability of Scripture.
2. The need to study apologetics
   1. Earlier years only needed to share gospel
      1. In America: Most people were already acclimated to the existence of God, and Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and our Savior
      2. Most Americans had at least limited knowledge of scripture, and if we go back to the beginning years of America, all had a very solid understanding of Scripture, because the Bible was the main text book in Education.
   2. Now we not only need to share the gospel, but also be ready to prove its historical reliability
      1. Modern America for many years has been taught evolution to the point most people are acclimated to the formation of earth, and the existence of life as a long process of evolution over a long period of time.
      2. Many Modern Americans have been taught the bible is simply a fairytale to help early (and considered ignorant) man understand (mistakenly) where man came from.
      3. Most American’s including many Christians do not have a working knowledge of scripture because itwas taken out of modern education, and replaced with concepts of evolution
         1. Too busy with modern life to take time to study the word
3. There are many subjects we will be covering in the future to provethe reliability of scripture.
   1. In the last lessons we learned of the reliability of Scripture, in the existence of Christ, and how we could know that Christ is arise from the grave.
   2. Step back and study creation itself, and see that evolution is impossible.
   3. There arenumerous areas of study
      1. Biology
      2. Geology
      3. Astronomy
      4. Physics
      5. Mathematics
      6. Archaeology
      7. Anthropology
      8. Commonly Cited “Proofs” of Evolution
      9. Scientists who believe in Biblical Creationism
      10. Biblical Considerations
4. We will look at two areas
   1. First we will have a little fun with mathematics
   2. Secondly a brief look at population Growth
5. Mathematics
   1. Mathematics is an absolute truth, without the absolute truth of mathematics,
      1. Space travel would be impossible
      2. Even buying clothing or shoes and expect them to fit would be impossible
      3. Math is an exact science,
      4. Is evolution mathematically possible?
   2. Evolution only works if there is a longperiod of time for all of this to come into place,
      1. Time for accidental formations of non-living, and living things
         1. First Example:
            1. Evolutionist way of thinking is that if a monkey was set in front of a typewriter, long enough he would eventually type, by pure chance, a perfect unabridged dictionary. Of course this idea is completely ridiculous, however let’s illustrate this. It is calculated that the probability of a monkey arranging the word evolution by randomly selecting letters from the alphabet is only 1 chance in 26 to the ninth power, in other words, 1 chance in 5,429,503,679,000.The odds of this monkey writing the first verse of the bible by accident is 1 in 1.81,479,392 X 10 to the 62nd power; in plain language 1 chance in 181, 497,392 with 54 zeros past it.
         2. 2^nd example: For a simple object of 200 components toaccidently form Let’s take this science ofprobability a step further. Considerthe chance of accidental development of a very simple system composed of only 200 integrated parts (simple compared with living systems)the probability of forming such an ordered system is 1 in 200 factorial, or 1 chance in 788,657,867,364,790,503,552,363,213,932,185,062,295,138,977,687,263,294,742,533,244,359,449,963,403,342,920,304,284,011,984,623,904,177,212,138,919,638,830,257,642,790,242,637,105,061,926,624,952,829,931,113,462,857,270,763,317,237,396,988,943,922,445,621,451,664,240,254,033,291,864,131,227,428,294,853,277,524,242,407,573,903,240,321,257,405,579,568,660,226,031,904,170,324,062,351,700,858,796,178,922,222,789,623,703,897,374,720,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
            1. This colossal number can be written more simply as 1 chance out of 10 to the 375th power of selecting the proper arrangement for a 200-part integrated system on the first trial.
            2. But what if we keep on trying different combinations over and over again? Won’t we eventuallyachieve the desired result?
               1. If we could try various combinations attempting to get the right number for this 200-part integrated system at 1 billion per second, in other words, every second of the day we could try one billion combinations of the parts it would take scientists longer than the 30 billion years that some scientists say is the age of the earth, If we choose a reasonable time for these attempts can we really expect a billion chances a second?
         3. Third Example: Amino Acids
            1. Modern research by NASA has demonstrated that the most basic type of protein molecule that could be classified living is composed of at least 400 linked amino acids. Each amino acid, in turn, is made up of a specific arrangement of four or five chemical elements, and each chemical element is itself a unique combination of protons, neutrons and electrons. Golay has demonstrated that the chance formation of even the simplest replicating protein molecule is 1 in 10 to the 450th power.
         4. Fourth Example: DNA
            1. Wysong has calculatedthe probability of forming the proteins and DNA for the smallest self-replicating entityto be 1 in 10 to the 167,626 power, even when granting astronomically generous amounts of time and trials per second, who can imagine what the chance formation of a more complex structure or organ such as the cerebral cortex in the human brain would be? Itcontains over 10,000,000,000 (10 billion) cells each of which is carefully arranged according to a specific design, and each of which is fantastically complex in itself!
               1. Schutzenberger of the University of Paris at a conference on “Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution, “ concluded that the probability of evolution by mutation and natural selection is inconceivable
         5. Fifth Example: The Human Body
            1. The human body is made up of 7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (7 octillion) atoms, which make up 37.2 trillion cells in your body, According to an estimate made by engineers at Washington University; there are around 10 to the 14 power atoms in a typical human cell. Another way of looking at it is that this is 100,000,000,000,000 or 100 trillion
            2. Interestingly, the number of cells in the human body is estimated to be about the same as the number of atoms in a human cell.
            3. To count to 100 trillion would take 3,170,900 years (app) that is to just count to that number, now think of the number of years it would take trying to make that right combination at 1 billion attempts a second for a human body to accidently, or through evolution to develop.
   3. Evolution, according to scientist evolve as in building, one thing on top of another, which actually takes longer than a group of the exact right elements to come together all at once, which means mankind has to be literally millions of years old, which is what the fake scientists try to pass off on us
      1. Some numbers I do not understand, but you might, for a 200 part component to come to gather one step at a time is this, again, whatever it means, it is much larger than spontaneous, and it is illustrated as a series of numbers: 2! + 3! +4! …. + 200! I tried to google this, and still don’t understand it, it truly takes a mathematician to understand it.
6. Population Growth
   1. In 1922 the Earth’s populationwas estimated at 1,804,187,000.
      1. It has increased exponentially since this time, and tripled this number in just 90 years. So because the growth rate has changed since then, we are going to use the 1922 figure to work with.
      2. Do you remember me talking in the past about the Chinese rice board, how you can take a penny on the first square and double it for each following square and by the time we hit the 64 square, we would have more money than we could count.
      3. To arrive at a population of 1,804,187,000. The population starting with 2 people would have to double itself between 30 to 31 times, in fact 30.75, in other words, we are at the 30 square on the rice board, and starting to move to the 31^st (actually we did this about 40 years ago)
   2. Let’s use some time numbers at this point and give two reference points as evidence
      1. According to the chronology of Hales, based on the Septuagint text, 5077 years have elapsed since the flood, and 5177 years since the ancestors of mankind numbered only two, Noah and his wife. By dividing 5177 by 30.75, we find it requires an average of 168.3 years for the human race to double its numbers, in order to make the present population. This is a reasonable average length of time.
      2. How can this be verified as an accurate estimate of time and growth
         1. By comparing it to factors than have been observed, and making the comparison. In other words, we can take certain groups of people, check their population growth for the same time period and find the numbers correspond very closely.
         2. Abraham is the father of twopeoples
            1. Jews: the decedents of Israel
            2. Decedents of Ismael
         3. According to Hales, 3850 years have passed since the marriage of Jacob. By the same method of calculation as above, the Jews, who, according to the Jewish yearbook for 1922, number 15,393, 815, must have doubled their numbers 23.8758 times, (this is very close to our Chinese rice board calculations, just a square or two off) or once every 161.251 years. ( an number twice as high as the original number of 168.3 would have been acceptable as a comparison)
         4. The decedents of Ismael: Also, the 25,000,000 descendants of Abraham must have doubled their numbers every 162.275 years, during the 3,988 years since the birth of his son Ishmael.
         5. Mathematics is an exact science, even though we have variations due to diseases wars, and etc., we are looking at averages, and when you have three sources to average, and they come out almost identical, we can trust the validity of their results. And based upon these three results I feel we can trust the age of humanity after the flood as stated by Hales. And, if we can trust this part of scripture, why would we have any reason to not trust all of it.
         6. Evolution according these figures is impossible.
   3. Negative Evidence:
      1. If the human race is 2,000,000 years old, the period of doubling would be 65,040 years, or 402 times that of the Jews, which, of course, is unthinkable.
         1. In other words, to move from one square to the next on our Chinese Rice Board, it would takeapproximately 65,000 years
            1. Using this rate, humanity would have been impossible, the first 2 people would have two children and then wait another 65,000 years in order to have two more, and the first two children having two, and we though Methuselah was old at 900 + years.
         2. Evolutionists claim that the human race is 2,000,000 years old.
            1. But let us generously suppose that these remote ancestors, beginning with one pair, doubled their numbers in 1612.51 years one-tenth as rapidly as the Jews, or 1240 times in 2,000,000 years.
            2. If we raise 2 to the 1240th power, (moving from one square to the next on the Chinese Rice board every 1240 years) the result is 18,932,139,737,991 with 360 figures following. The population of the world, therefore, would have been 18,932,139,737,991 decillion, decillion, decillion. decillion, decillion, decillion, decillion, decillion, decillion, decillion
            3. Or, let us suppose that man, the dominant species, originated from a single pair, only 100,000 years ago, the shortest period suggested by any evolutionist (and much too short for evolution) and that the population doubled in 1612.51 years, one-tenth the Jewish rate of net increase, a most generous estimate. The present population of the globe should be 4,660,210,253,138,204,300 or 2,527,570,733 for every man, woman and child! In these calculations, we have made greater allowances than any self-respecting evolutionist could ask without blushing. And yet withal, it is as clear as the light of day that the ancestors of man could not possibly have lived 2,000,000 or 1,000,000 or 100,000 years ago
            4. If the population had increased at the Jewish rate for 10,000 years, it would be more than two billion times as great as it is. No guess that ever was made, or ever can be made, much in excess of 5177 years, can possibly stand as the age of man. The evolutionist cannot sidestep this argument by a new guess.
7. Now, if there had been no flood to destroy the human race, then the descendants of Adam, in the 7333 years would have been 16,384 times the 1,804,187,000, or 29,559,799,808,000; or computed at the Jewish rate of net increase for 7333 years since Adam, the population would have been still greater, or 35,184,372,088,832. These calculations are imperfect accord with the Scripture story of the special creation of man, and the destruction of the race by a flood. Had it not been for the flood, the earth could not have sustained the descendants of Adam.
8. Is not this a demonstration, decisive and final?

One last final thought, we have tripled in poplation in the last 90 years, from under 2 billion to over 7 billion, and we are in line to double and triple again as these numbers are now increasing expodentially, in other words at a faster and faster rate.

Scientist, claim the earth can only feed about 10 billion people ( I doubt this) then we are running out of time, even if it can feed that many people, just think of how over populated we will be…Are you ready for the return of Christ? Have you attempted, and maybe successfully led anyone else to Christ so they will not suffer eternal damnation?

Apologetics is best seen as either pre-evangelism or as part of the process of evangelism.

It removes barriers to belief and prepares the ground for the seed of the gospel to be sown.

One more time, just to make sure we get this:

It removes barriers to belief and prepares the ground for the seed of the gospel to be sown.

You could compare it to the farmer who is plowing his field preparing it for seed. This is apologtices.

Then you see the same farmer planting the seed, after the field has been prepared. This is evangelism.

What comes next is the harvest: New Christians, looking forward to eternal life without pain, without tears, never growing old. It will be one of those Christians who do not fall away as almost 80 to 85 % do.

This is the ground Christ spoke about in his parable: Matthew 13: 3

Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: “Behold, a sower went out to sow. 4 And as he sowed, some seed fell by the wayside; and the birds came and devoured them. 5 Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. 6 But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. 8 But others fell on good ground and yielded a crop, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. 9 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Will you have a better harvest if you plow the ground before you attempt to plant the seed…..or not?

Designed by God

<a href=”http://www.searchtv.org/printmaterial/resources/BecomingaChristian.pdf” target=”_blank”>Becoming a Christian</a>

https://youtu.be/1Ien2Ah3lEY

I’ve been watching a debate between John Lennox a Northern Irish mathematician specializing in group theory, philosopher of science and Christian apologist. and Richard Dawkins FRS FRSL is an English ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author. He is an emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford, and was the University of Oxford’s Professor for Public Understanding of Science from 1995 until 2008.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0UIbd0eLxw
Two of the brightest men in the world debating God, or I guess I should say the origins of man. Dawkins in reality offers no solid evidence, and in the end you realize his whole argument is based on personal opinion. On the other hand, Lennox, in my worthless opinion falls short of defending the reality of God, he simply doesn’t put forth the facts that are available that support the fact that God does exist, He (or a higher power or higher intelligence if you prefer) created the all. One interesting fact that Mr. Lennox put forth that God created order, so we would/ could recognize the miracle.
In another interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxvrCR28XWY Mr. Dawkins once was asked if he could give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process Which can be seen to increase the information in the genome? In simpler terms a mutation that increases the intelligence, or improves the species, and of course the true answer is no, mutation always “lessens” the species. (Can you imagine the possibility of a highly complex organism such as the eye with it’s many parts, each of which is needed for the eye to see to develop before the design was created or before there was a need)? He goes on to tell us that all things are modern and evolved from something else, but not one modern form from another modern form, however, remember this; there is no evidence… none. Of all the fossils we have now there is not one example of kind changing to another kind.. not one. Even in the Cambrian Explosion we find highly developed animals, not just simple forms of life (they are there as well). (by the way, one organism was found with an eye that was more complex than today’s human eye)
I would think it should be a simple scientific process to “prove God” or at least the impossibility of the earth and cosmos to exist without the existence of a creator.
Scientific method -Method of research with defined steps that include EXPERIMENTS AND CAREFUL OBSERVATION. And, -Tests the hypothesis
Hypothesis -suggested explanation for an event, WHICH CAN BE TESTED.
Scientific Theory= A scientific theory is a generally accepted, THOROUGHLY TESTED AND CONFIRMED explanation for a set of observations or phenomena.
Laws= concise descriptions of parts of the world that are agreeable to formulaic or mathematical description.
The Anthropic principle; everything is so finely tuned in the cosmos that if even one of the fundamental characteristics were even slightly changed life could not exist as we know it.
1st law of Thermal dynamics: The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.
2nd law of Thermal dynamics says, in simple terms, entropy (Entropy is the general trend of the universe toward death and disorder …) always increases. This principle explains, for example, why you can’t unscramble an egg. In other words, it is dying…
Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, HAVE ALWAYS OPERATED in the universe in the past and APPLY EVERYWHERE in the universe.
So in my simple view according to these principles There is a set amount of energy in the universe, nothing can be added, nothing deleted but can be changed. It is being changed due to the fact that it is moving away from order to disorder and is dying. Everything can be measured; space dust, gravity, the weakening of the sun, the moon moving away from the earth, and etc. and all these things are weakening at a uniform rate throughout time. So, it is merely a matter of reversing the projector, and as we go back in time we can easily see that within just 20,000 years life would not be possible, and nor will it be in another 20,000 years (that is; life as we know it).
The fact that billions of years are necessary for evolution to be possible, itself eliminates the possibility of evolution, demanding the requirement of a creator.

Take a Tip from Lieutenant Columbo
Article ID: JAE296 | By: Greg Koukl
This article first appeared in the Effective Evangelism column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 29, number 06 (2006). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org

Being an ambassador for Christ in the twenty‐first century requires more than having the right answers. It is too easy for postmoderns to ignore our facts, deny our claims, or simply yawn and walk away from the line we have drawn in the sand.

Sometimes, however, they do not walk away; instead, they stay and fight. We wade into battle only to face a return barrage that we cannot handle. Caught off balance, we retreat in humiliation, maybe for good.

I would like to suggest another approach. Jesus said when you find yourself a sheep amidst wolves, be innocent, but be shrewd. This calls for a tactical approach.

“Do You Mind If I Ask You a Question?” My favorite approach is what I call the “Columbo” tactic. It is the simplest device imaginable to stop a challenger in his tracks, turn the tables, put you in the driver’s seat, and, more important, get him thinking. This tactic is typified by Lieutenant Columbo, the bumbling and seemingly inept television detective whose remarkable success was based on an innocent query: “Do you mind if I ask you a question?”

Jesus used this method. When facing a hostile crowd He often asked challenging or leading questions meant to challenge His detractors: “Was the baptism of John from Heaven or from men?…Show Me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?” (Luke 20:4, 24 NIV).

The key to this tactic is going on the offense with carefully planned and selected questions that move the discussion along in an interactive way. It is best played out Columbo style—halting, head‐scratching, and apparently harmless.

Simply put, instead of making assertions, ask questions. The Columbo tactic is a lot of fun and it offers tremendous advantages. For one, questions are interactive by nature and invite others to participate. They are neutral, so no “preaching” is involved; you are not arguing, but asking, gathering information. Carefully placed questions also shift the burden of proof (i.e., the responsibility to defend or give evidence for a view) to the other person where it often belongs. The most effective questions either gain information or reverse the burden of proof.

“What Do You Mean by That?” Sometimes you need more information to know how to proceed, so your initial probe will be open‐ended. The most efficient type of question you can ask in most circumstances is a clarification question —some variation of “What do you mean?”—that encourages the person to explain more about what she thinks. It is a natural opening with absolutely no pressure when delivered in a mild and genuinely inquisitive fashion.

For example, when someone declares, “There is no God,” you can ask, “What do you mean by God?” (in other words, “What particular idea of God are you rejecting?”). When someone asserts, “All religions are basically the same,” you can ask, “Really? What do you mean by the same?” (i.e., “In what way?”). When someone objects, “You shouldn’t force your views on me,” you can ask, “Specifically, what am I doing to force my views on you right now?” (then perhaps, “How is that forcing my views?”). When someone states, “The Bible has been changed over the years,” you can ask, “What in the Bible has been changed?” (specifically, “How exactly do you think it has been altered?”).

Questions like these accomplish several important things. First, they immediately engage the other person in friendly conversation. Second, they flatter the other person, because questions show that you are genuinely interested in the person’s view. Third, they compel that person to think more carefully— maybe for the first time—about what exactly she means. Finally, questions uncover valuable information, revealing precisely what the person thinks so that you do not misunderstand or misrepresent her view.

It is important to pay attention to the person’s response. If it is unclear, follow up with more questions. Say, “Let me see if I understand you on this,” then restate the view back to her to make sure you have it right.

Some time ago, while on vacation in Wisconsin, my wife and I were at a one‐hour photo store being helped by a woman who had a large pentagram (a five‐pointed star generally associated with the occult) dangling from her neck.

“Does that have religious significance,” I asked, “or is it just jewelry?”

“It has religious significance,” she answered. “The five points stand for earth, wind, fire, water, and spirit. I’m a pagan.”

My wife, unaware that pagan referred to Wicca (witchcraft) and earth worship, laughed in amazement at what seemed like a remarkably candid confession. “I’ve never heard anyone actually admit outright that they were pagan,” she explained. She knew the term only as a pejorative that her friends use when yelling at their children: “Get in here, you little pagans!”

“It’s an earth religion,” the woman explained, “like the Native Americans’.”

“So you’re Wiccan?” I asked. She nodded. Noticing a piece of jewelry and asking a simple question about it, a variation of “What do you mean by that?” led to a productive conversation.

“How Did You Come to That Conclusion?” The first Columbo question helps you know what another person thinks. To know why he thinks that way takes a second question: “How did you come to that conclusion?” An alternate might be, “Why do you say that?” or “What are your reasons for believing that?”

These questions charitably assume that the person actually has thought through the issue carefully and not just made assertions or expressed his feelings. They accomplish something else vitally important: they force the other person to give an account for his beliefs. The basic rule that governs exchanges like these is: the person making the claim bears the burden of proof.

Here is why this is so important. Christians should not be the only ones who have to defend what they believe. Reject the impulse to counter every assertion someone manufactures. Do not try to refute every tale spun out of thin air. It is not your job to answer his claim; rather, it is his job to defend it.

For example, I once was a guest on a secular talk‐radio show in Los Angeles where I made a case for intelligent design over evolution. When a caller used the Big Bang theory to argue against a Creator, I said that if there was a Big Bang, it worked in my favor. A Big Bang needs a Big “Banger,” it seemed to me.

The caller disagreed. The Big Bang does not need God, he claimed. Then leading off with the phrase, “One could say…,” he spun a lengthy science‐fiction tale for the audience about how everything came from nothing.

“You’re right,” I responded. “‘One could say’ anything he wants, but giving good reasons why we should believe the story you just told is another thing altogether.”

It was not my job to disprove his fairy tale. He bore the burden of proof for his own claim. It was his job to show why anyone should take his something‐from‐nothing fantasy seriously.

The Professor’s Ploy. The Columbo tactic is especially effective in the classroom. Some professors are fond of taking pot‐shots at Christianity with remarks like, “The Bible is just a bunch of fables.” Wellmeaning believers sometimes accept the challenge and attempt a head‐to‐head duel with the professor. This rarely works.

The rule of engagement that governs exchanges like these is: the person with the microphone wins. The professor always has the strategic advantage. It is foolish to get into a power struggle when you are outgunned. There is a better way: use your tactic.

Simply ask your Columbo questions: “Professor, what do you mean by that?” and “How did you come to that conclusion?” Make him shoulder the burden of proof. After all, he is the teacher, and he is the one making the claim. With this approach you are able to stay engaged while deftly sidestepping the power struggle.

The professor may sense your tactical maneuver and respond, “Oh, you must be one of those fundamentalists who thinks the Bible is inspired by God. Okay, I’m a fair man. Why don’t you take a few minutes and prove that to the rest of the class?”

In one quick move he has cleverly shifted the burden of proof back on you, the student. If you find yourself facing the challenge to “prove me wrong,” don’t take the bait! Falling into this trap is fatal; instead, shift the burden back on the professor where it belongs. After all, he made the claim.

Respond this way: “Professor, you don’t know what my own view is because I haven’t mentioned it. More to the point, it’s irrelevant. It doesn’t matter what I believe. I’m just a student. I’m here to learn. You’ve made a controversial claim. I simply want clarification and reasons, that’s all.” If he gives you an answer, thank him for explaining himself and either ask another question or let it go for the time being.

Do not miss this point: the Christian does not have to be the expert on everything. If we keep the burden of proof on the person who is making a claim, we do not have to have all the answers. In fact, we can be effective even when we know very little—if we ask the right questions.

Staying in the Driver’s Seat. Asking simple, leading questions is an effortless way to make capital of a conversation for spiritual ends without seeming abrupt, rude, or pushy. Questions are engaging and interactive, probing yet amicable. Most important, they keep you in the driver’s seat while someone else does all the work.

When someone says to you, “The Bible has been changed so many times” or “No one can know the truth about religion” or “All religions are basically the same,” do not retreat in silence; instead, simply raise your eyebrows and ask, “Oh? What do you mean by that?” and “How did you come to that conclusion?”

Most critics are not well equipped to defend their own claims. They rarely have thought through what they believe and have relied more on generalizations and slogans than on careful reflection. To expose this weakness, take your cue from Lieutenant Columbo: scratch your head, rub your chin, pause for a moment, then say, ”Do you mind if I ask you a question?”

— Gregory Koukl

Christian Research Institute
Our Mission: To provide Christians worldwide with carefully researched information and well-reasoned answers that encourage them in their faith and equip them to intelligently represent it to people influenced by ideas and teachings that assault or undermine orthodox, biblical Christianity.

Do you like what you are seeing? Your partnership is essential. Support CRI …because Truth Matters.™

Subscribe to Christian Research Journal | Visit CRI Book Store | Make a Donation

Evolution News | @DiscoveryCSC
February 6, 2018, 11:14 AM
Matti Leisola isn’t supposed to exist. According to the standard patter from evolutionists, there is no controversy about evolution in the scientific community, nor any need for serious consideration of the theory of intelligent design. That’s because no legitimate scientist doubts modern evolutionary theory; and even if there may be a handful of such doubters in the U.S., there certainly are none to speak of in enlightened Western Europe.

A new book by and about distinguished Finnish bioengineer Matti Leisola authoritiatively brushes aside these Darwinist talking points. The book is Heretic: One Scientist’s Journey from Darwin to Design, co-written with Discovery Institute’s Jonathan Witt, a Senior Fellow with the Center for Science & Culture.

Dr. Leisola is the former dean of Chemistry and Material Sciences at Helsinki University of Technology, and the author of 140 peer-reviewed science publications on enzymes and rare sugars. Among other distinctions, he is a winner of the Latsis Prize of the ETH Zürich.

While arguing, from vast experience, against modern evolutionary theory and for intelligent design, the book is also a memoir. The back cover nicely summarizes the narrative thread:

What happens when an up-and-coming European bioscientist flips from Darwin disciple to Darwin defector? Sparks fly….Heretic is the story of Leisola’s adventures making waves — and many friends and enemies — at major research labs and universities across Europe.

Read the complete article

The Scientist Who Shouldn’t Exist — New Book by Matti Leisola, Jonathan Witt 

Take a Tip from Lieutenant Columbo
Article ID: JAE296 | By: Greg Koukl
This article first appeared in the Effective Evangelism column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 29, number 06 (2006). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org

Being an ambassador for Christ in the twenty‐first century requires more than having the right answers. It is too easy for postmoderns to ignore our facts, deny our claims, or simply yawn and walk away from the line we have drawn in the sand.

Sometimes, however, they do not walk away; instead, they stay and fight. We wade into battle only to face a return barrage that we cannot handle. Caught off balance, we retreat in humiliation, maybe for good.

I would like to suggest another approach. Jesus said when you find yourself a sheep amidst wolves, be innocent, but be shrewd. This calls for a tactical approach.

“Do You Mind If I Ask You a Question?” My favorite approach is what I call the “Columbo” tactic. It is the simplest device imaginable to stop a challenger in his tracks, turn the tables, put you in the driver’s seat, and, more important, get him thinking. This tactic is typified by Lieutenant Columbo, the bumbling and seemingly inept television detective whose remarkable success was based on an innocent query: “Do you mind if I ask you a question?”

Jesus used this method. When facing a hostile crowd He often asked challenging or leading questions meant to challenge His detractors: “Was the baptism of John from Heaven or from men?…Show Me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?” (Luke 20:4, 24 NIV).

The key to this tactic is going on the offense with carefully planned and selected questions that move the discussion along in an interactive way. It is best played out Columbo style—halting, head‐scratching, and apparently harmless.

Simply put, instead of making assertions, ask questions. The Columbo tactic is a lot of fun and it offers tremendous advantages. For one, questions are interactive by nature and invite others to participate. They are neutral, so no “preaching” is involved; you are not arguing, but asking, gathering information. Carefully placed questions also shift the burden of proof (i.e., the responsibility to defend or give evidence for a view) to the other person where it often belongs. The most effective questions either gain information or reverse the burden of proof.

“What Do You Mean by That?” Sometimes you need more information to know how to proceed, so your initial probe will be open‐ended. The most efficient type of question you can ask in most circumstances is a clarification question —some variation of “What do you mean?”—that encourages the person to explain more about what she thinks. It is a natural opening with absolutely no pressure when delivered in a mild and genuinely inquisitive fashion.

For example, when someone declares, “There is no God,” you can ask, “What do you mean by God?” (in other words, “What particular idea of God are you rejecting?”). When someone asserts, “All religions are basically the same,” you can ask, “Really? What do you mean by the same?” (i.e., “In what way?”). When someone objects, “You shouldn’t force your views on me,” you can ask, “Specifically, what am I doing to force my views on you right now?” (then perhaps, “How is that forcing my views?”). When someone states, “The Bible has been changed over the years,” you can ask, “What in the Bible has been changed?” (specifically, “How exactly do you think it has been altered?”).

Questions like these accomplish several important things. First, they immediately engage the other person in friendly conversation. Second, they flatter the other person, because questions show that you are genuinely interested in the person’s view. Third, they compel that person to think more carefully— maybe for the first time—about what exactly she means. Finally, questions uncover valuable information, revealing precisely what the person thinks so that you do not misunderstand or misrepresent her view.

It is important to pay attention to the person’s response. If it is unclear, follow up with more questions. Say, “Let me see if I understand you on this,” then restate the view back to her to make sure you have it right.

Some time ago, while on vacation in Wisconsin, my wife and I were at a one‐hour photo store being helped by a woman who had a large pentagram (a five‐pointed star generally associated with the occult) dangling from her neck.

“Does that have religious significance,” I asked, “or is it just jewelry?”

“It has religious significance,” she answered. “The five points stand for earth, wind, fire, water, and spirit. I’m a pagan.”

My wife, unaware that pagan referred to Wicca (witchcraft) and earth worship, laughed in amazement at what seemed like a remarkably candid confession. “I’ve never heard anyone actually admit outright that they were pagan,” she explained. She knew the term only as a pejorative that her friends use when yelling at their children: “Get in here, you little pagans!”

“It’s an earth religion,” the woman explained, “like the Native Americans’.”

“So you’re Wiccan?” I asked. She nodded. Noticing a piece of jewelry and asking a simple question about it, a variation of “What do you mean by that?” led to a productive conversation.

“How Did You Come to That Conclusion?” The first Columbo question helps you know what another person thinks. To know why he thinks that way takes a second question: “How did you come to that conclusion?” An alternate might be, “Why do you say that?” or “What are your reasons for believing that?”

These questions charitably assume that the person actually has thought through the issue carefully and not just made assertions or expressed his feelings. They accomplish something else vitally important: they force the other person to give an account for his beliefs. The basic rule that governs exchanges like these is: the person making the claim bears the burden of proof.

Here is why this is so important. Christians should not be the only ones who have to defend what they believe. Reject the impulse to counter every assertion someone manufactures. Do not try to refute every tale spun out of thin air. It is not your job to answer his claim; rather, it is his job to defend it.

For example, I once was a guest on a secular talk‐radio show in Los Angeles where I made a case for intelligent design over evolution. When a caller used the Big Bang theory to argue against a Creator, I said that if there was a Big Bang, it worked in my favor. A Big Bang needs a Big “Banger,” it seemed to me.

The caller disagreed. The Big Bang does not need God, he claimed. Then leading off with the phrase, “One could say…,” he spun a lengthy science‐fiction tale for the audience about how everything came from nothing.

“You’re right,” I responded. “‘One could say’ anything he wants, but giving good reasons why we should believe the story you just told is another thing altogether.”

It was not my job to disprove his fairy tale. He bore the burden of proof for his own claim. It was his job to show why anyone should take his something‐from‐nothing fantasy seriously.

The Professor’s Ploy. The Columbo tactic is especially effective in the classroom. Some professors are fond of taking pot‐shots at Christianity with remarks like, “The Bible is just a bunch of fables.” Wellmeaning believers sometimes accept the challenge and attempt a head‐to‐head duel with the professor. This rarely works.

The rule of engagement that governs exchanges like these is: the person with the microphone wins. The professor always has the strategic advantage. It is foolish to get into a power struggle when you are outgunned. There is a better way: use your tactic.

Simply ask your Columbo questions: “Professor, what do you mean by that?” and “How did you come to that conclusion?” Make him shoulder the burden of proof. After all, he is the teacher, and he is the one making the claim. With this approach you are able to stay engaged while deftly sidestepping the power struggle.

The professor may sense your tactical maneuver and respond, “Oh, you must be one of those fundamentalists who thinks the Bible is inspired by God. Okay, I’m a fair man. Why don’t you take a few minutes and prove that to the rest of the class?”

In one quick move he has cleverly shifted the burden of proof back on you, the student. If you find yourself facing the challenge to “prove me wrong,” don’t take the bait! Falling into this trap is fatal; instead, shift the burden back on the professor where it belongs. After all, he made the claim.

Respond this way: “Professor, you don’t know what my own view is because I haven’t mentioned it. More to the point, it’s irrelevant. It doesn’t matter what I believe. I’m just a student. I’m here to learn. You’ve made a controversial claim. I simply want clarification and reasons, that’s all.” If he gives you an answer, thank him for explaining himself and either ask another question or let it go for the time being.

Do not miss this point: the Christian does not have to be the expert on everything. If we keep the burden of proof on the person who is making a claim, we do not have to have all the answers. In fact, we can be effective even when we know very little—if we ask the right questions.

Staying in the Driver’s Seat. Asking simple, leading questions is an effortless way to make capital of a conversation for spiritual ends without seeming abrupt, rude, or pushy. Questions are engaging and interactive, probing yet amicable. Most important, they keep you in the driver’s seat while someone else does all the work.

When someone says to you, “The Bible has been changed so many times” or “No one can know the truth about religion” or “All religions are basically the same,” do not retreat in silence; instead, simply raise your eyebrows and ask, “Oh? What do you mean by that?” and “How did you come to that conclusion?”

Most critics are not well equipped to defend their own claims. They rarely have thought through what they believe and have relied more on generalizations and slogans than on careful reflection. To expose this weakness, take your cue from Lieutenant Columbo: scratch your head, rub your chin, pause for a moment, then say, ”Do you mind if I ask you a question?”

— Gregory Koukl

Christian Research Institute
Our Mission: To provide Christians worldwide with carefully researched information and well-reasoned answers that encourage them in their faith and equip them to intelligently represent it to people influenced by ideas and teachings that assault or undermine orthodox, biblical Christianity.

Do you like what you are seeing? Your partnership is essential. Support CRI …because Truth Matters.™

Subscribe to Christian Research Journal | Visit CRI Book Store | Make a Donation

God has given us gifts to use and enjoy. Some of those gifts are our children, our parents, our girlfriends or wife, if we have one. If not God will bless us in His timing. We need to stop and thank God for all the gifts He has given us. The greatest gift He gave us was the birth of Christ., Who has given us so much hope to live for God. Gad gave us fee will, His agape love, salvation, grace, and a way to come out of the depth of the fiery hell along with death so we can be alive and have the lives God wants us to have. All we have to do is turn from our worldly ways, and live for God. Other gifts God gives us are in the bible (James 1:17 “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.

“ 2 Cor 9:15 “Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift!!”

Proverbs 8:35 For whoever finds me finds life, And obtains favor from the Lord; )

For more reading about Gods gifts

Ephesians 4: 7 – 16[i]; Galatians 5:22-24[ii]; Romans 12:1-11[iii]& 13:1-14[iv]; James 4:6[v],

We houldn’t take these gifts for granted since we can lose them, but God will give them back when He knows we can let Him use them through us no matter what they are. Remember Jeremiah 29: 11-14 [vi]

My 9 year old niece told me what Christmas meant to

[i] Ephesians 4:7-16New King James Version (NKJV)

Spiritual Gifts

7 But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. 8 Therefore He says:

“When He ascended on high,

He led captivity captive,

And gave gifts to men.”[a]

9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first[b] descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

[ii] Galatians 5:22-24New King James Version (NKJV)

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. 24 And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

[iii] Romans 12:1-11New King James Version (NKJV)

Living Sacrifices to God

12 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

Serve God with Spiritual Gifts

3 For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith. 4 For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, 5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; 7 or ministry, let us use it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; 8 he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.

Behave Like a Christian

9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good. 10 Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another; 11 not lagging in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord;

[iv] Romans 13New King James Version (NKJV)

Submit to Government

13 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

Love Your Neighbor

8 Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law. 9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,”[a] “You shall not covet,”[b] and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”[c] 10 Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Put on Christ

11 And do this, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. 12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand. Therefore let us cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light. 13 Let us walk properly, as in the day, not in revelry and drunkenness, not in lewdness and lust, not in strife and envy. 14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts.

[v] James 4:6New King James Version (NKJV)

6 But He gives more grace. Therefore He says:

“God resists the proud,

But gives grace to the humble.”[a]

[vi] Jeremiah 29:11-14New King James Version (NKJV)

11 For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. 12 Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. 13 And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart. 14 I will be found by you, says the Lord, and I will bring you back from your captivity; I will gather you from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you, says the Lord, and I will bring you to the place from which I cause you to be carried away captive.