The Human Race

I was filling out some paper work the other day and one of the questions was about my race. Some of the options were white-Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Native American, and so on. There was an option for "other". I wondered what they would think if I checked other, and then wrote in "Adam's race".

This made me think of something I read. There really are not separate races of people, there is one race of people. We associate race with the "color" of a person's skin. What exactly is "color"? Just look around you and see all the different skin tones. "Color" is controlled by the amount of melanin in our skin. Everybody has melanin, just some of us have more, and some have less. Therefore it is more accurate to say "What shade of melanin are you"?

So are there actually different races of people? Certainly, and it is a Biblical concept. However, there are only two races. The first are those who have been saved from their sin and are a "descendant" of the last Adam, Christ. The second would be those who have not been saved and are a "descendant" of the first Adam. The prohibition against an unequal yoke is not between people of different shades, but between a believer and an unbeliever.

A valid question now becomes "How come you, as a person of little shading, do not associate with people of more shading"? That is a good point. The Bible states that we are no longer Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female, but that we are all one in Christ Jesus. It shames me to realize how divided my own life is in this regard.

One thing that does divide me from others is culture. However, there are MANY people who have the same shade of skin color as I, but there is a big cultural divide between them and me. That does not give me an excuse for not associating with ALL my brothers in sisters in Christ Jesus. What have any of us done recently to bridge the gaps in our churches and have true fellowship with all believers?

WOW! That sounds like ecumenicalism. I definitely don't believe that all churches are equal, or that we should gloss over doctrine. However, there are many churches who believe in enough of the same doctrine to be in fellowship, but they differ in culture only. We need to get out of our comfort zone and see that there are others out there who may worship slightly different than we do but they are still our brothers!!!!

The bottom line is that we have placed a barrier in our churches based on the shades of our skin. That is an artificial barrier that will be done away with once and for all when we worship at the foot of the throne for all eternity.

The Lie: Evolution

I have been reading a book written by Ken Ham in 1987 called The Lie: Evolution. It is interesting to read the current documentation by Answers in Genesis and see the basis for their current publications in this book. The chapter I want to mention today is called "Evolution is Religion". One of the tenets for the book is that every person who looks at supposed evidence in our world today either for evolution or creation has a worldview that is biasing their interpretation of the evidence. The Christian bases his worldview on the foundation of the Bible being the infallible Word of God. The Evolutionist bases his worldview on the assumption that evolution - in the sense of time, chance and the struggle for survival - rather than the God of the Bible is responsible for life.¹

There is a difference between science of the present and science of the past. Stick with me to see the difference. Any explanation of events in the past that we cannot observe happening today is called historical science. An explanation of events we observe happening in the present is called observational science. True science is an observation about what is happening that can be described by an experiment that is repeatable. (Please note that I am not attempting to approach this subject from a technical aspect, but from a layman's perspective. I am not a scientist.) Therefore, ANY theory about the origin of the world is not provable through a repeatable scientific experiment. There was no human witness to the beginning of the world. (There is however an eyewitness account, the description of creation in Genesis.) All the evidence any scientist has only exists in the present! Evolution is a belief system about the past based on the words of men who were not there, but who are trying to explain how all the evidence of the present ... originated.² Religion can be defined as something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience.³ Certainly this qualifies evolution as a religion, for it is a belief system about the past.

When someone looks at a fossil deposit, what does he see? Can any inferences be drawn from the fossils that are grouped together? Some people would say they lived at the same time, they lived close to each other, or other things about them. However, the only conclusion that can be known for certain is that those fossils were buried together. The point is that you cannot define an ecology based on the fossils that have been deposited in the same place, as some evolutionary artists are want to do.

Finally, Ken Ham says this:

Models of science are subject to change for both creationists and evolutionists. But, the beliefs that these models are built on are not. The problem is that most scientists do not realize that it is the belief (or religion) of evolution that is the basis for the scientific models (the interpretations, or stories) used to attempt an explanation of the present. Evolutionists are not prepared to change their actual belief that all life can be explained by natural processes and that no God is involved (or even needed). Evolution is the religion to which they are committed. Christians need to wake up to this. Evolution is a religion; it is not science!⁴ [Emphasis in original.]

To me, the point of the whole chapter is that we are not dealing with two differing sciences. What we are dealing with is the disagreement of two differing religions. What does that mean? Remember in your dealings with people around you that we all deal with the same evidence, it is just our interpretation of it that is different. When we deal with the underlying assumptions of our worldviews, then it leads to the understanding of man needing a saviour, specifically Jesus Christ.

This article is a summary of chapter 2 in Ken Ham's book The Lie: Evolution. All page references are from the hardcover edition of the nineteenth printing. I recommend you get the book for yourself to read.

Check out the poll below or make a comment about this post so I know how everyone responds.

Endnotes
1. Ken Ham, The Lie: Evolution (Master Books, 1987) pg 31 (back)

2. IBID. pg 33 (back)

3. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion def 6 (back)

4. Ken Ham, The Lie: Evolution (Master Books, 1987) pg 37 (back)

Thank you

Thanks to everyone who has visited and voted in my poll, and offered comments on my first post. Just to let everyone know, I have chosen to moderate comments so the commenting doesn't get out of control. I trust my close friends and family, but since this is a public blog I am going to continue to moderate comments.
I read a family member's blog and was impressed with the facts laid out and sources properly cited. I know I have a tendency to spout off and rant in generalities. Sometimes this is appropriate, but at other times I want to make the utmost effort to cite real facts and sources instead of just giving my (extremely) biased opinion.
My last item of today is to let everyone know that the baby is still on the inside. I keep saying, "Come out baby, come out", but no baby yet.

B

Children

As of this post, I am the only voter on the poll. Statistically speaking, this blog is only read by people with 5 or more children at this time. Seriously, though, my wife has convinced me to start blogging. I am not sure what I will fill this spot with, but I am sure at times I will try to be funny, sometimes I will try to talk about my family, and others I will react to current events.
The most important aspect of my life is my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. All other things I am/do stem from that. My family is of second importance after Him. My job is of third importance to me. That heirarchy shows in my life in that each level is important to me to fulfill any levels above it, meaning that my actions with my family will be a fulfillment of my relationship with God, and my job will be a fulfillment of my obligation to serve my family and my God, on down the line through all my priorities in life. When I became a Christian I gave up all right to self-centeredness. When I became married I gave up all right to selfishness. I have purposely decided to put my priorities on a back shelf in order to provide for the upbringing of my children.
My current hot topic is the subject of the Creation of the world. I have been keeping up with the Answers in Genesis website, they have some REALLY good information. We also subscribe to their Answers Magazine, which has lots of really great articles. I firmly believe the correct interpretation of the book of Genesis in the Bible is for 6 days of creation, making the world around 6000 years old.
On a personal note my wife and I are expecting our 6th child any day now, and I am sure everyone is waiting to hear about that.
That is enough for my first post, hopefully I will follow through with more.