Does God Hate Evolution? (Part 2)

In Part 1 we looked at some of the scientific claims made by evolutionists, versus the actual appearance and evidence that this universe was designed to host life, and that life is also designed. Now we will look at what a belief in evolution will produce in individuals, in society and in the world. We can look at the spiritual origin of evolutionary theory, as everything in this material universe is an analogue of something in the spiritual universe.

In fact Biblical imagery is misunderstood, especially apocalyptic writings, because what we see here in our 4 dimensions of space-time, are seen to be living beings in a spiritual universe, or the actions of those beings in regards to the earth. Another way to think of it is that the spiritual universe is more than here, as Milton (Paradise Lost) depicts in his writings. The spiritual universe contains this universe, you might think of it as having more dimensions. So then a lie in the spirit universe is alive, it is a person, as Christ observed; “Satan was a liar from the beginning, and he is a lie.”

One of the differences between the spiritual “realm,” and this material “realm,” is that you cannot hide what you are in the spirit universe. If you are bad, then you look bad, you smell bad, your voice is an unbearable shriek, and you reek of corruption. Not so here on earth where deception reigns. This is proven in nearly every election cycle in America and elsewhere, and in nearly every revolution in the earth. The people keep expecting saviors; instead they get tyrants, savages, egomaniacs, idiots as their leaders. Many times the people believe in those leaders as if they are hypnotized, they help them to gain prominence by their love of deception.

Revelation 16:12-14 Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared. And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

This first spirit, represented as a frog is seen as a living thing, issuing out of the mouth of the dragon (Satan). It goes into the earth as a 3rd part of a system of deception to bring about the great closing wars of human history, of which we are nearly at an end. It is from the mouth of the dragon, because this is the essence of Satanic thought: Satan’s thinking is that he is the same kind of being as God, he is at war with God, he is in competition with God, he ultimately hates God.

Satan does not think he was created, something in being an angel must demand faith also, since they were created in the eternal realm, before time was created, they have no knowledge of beginning. Satan must have nurtured a grudge while serving God as the Bible depicts he was greatest of the angels, the most beautiful, granted the greatest access and communion with God, the greatest being God had created. Finally his smoldering resentment erupted probably ages ago into full fledged rebellion and war and Satan managed to enlist a third of all the created angels with him. However he lost that war and has been imprisoned here on earth along with the angels that rebelled.

This deception comes into the earth, and it does not come until nearly the end of human history, it functions to help separate men into two camps, those that believe God is the creator, and those that do not believe God is the creator. It is shown as a frog, because frogs are prolific and found in rivers and streams, and pools; this deception would find its way into the flow of human thought and would multiply. This depicts what happened when Darwin published Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859. It turned the scientific world upside down, within a few decades within the elites and sophisticates of Western Culture it became the predominate worldview. Lets look at a few of the comments about this deception:

Clark H. Pinnock from “Set forth Your Case.”

The myth of Evolution is so entwined in the current world view that its absurdities are seldom even noticed. It ought to be apparent to the casual observer of the history of science since Darwin, that the theory he propounded, far from becoming better established, is becoming shakier with every passing year.

If you ignore for a moment the brain washing of magazines with a Time-Life mentality, and listen to the experts in the various fields, you would soon realize that the data on which this grand hypothesis depends are slender indeed, and capable of a dozen different constructions. . . .The reason Evolution is believed and taught as a fact is not due to the evidence for it, but rather due to the need for it

When Sir Julian Huxley published his Evolution in Action, a kind of ex cathedra pronouncement on the subject of natural selection, Sir James Gray reviewed the book in the English journal Nature, noting the fervor with which Huxley "preaches his gospel." Gray put it this way:

Darwinian orthodoxy demands implicit faith in the efficacy of natural selection operating on chance mutations. Subscribe to this, and all doubts and hesitations disappear; question it and be forever lost. The case for orthodoxy can seldom have been stated with greater cogency and enthusiasm than by Dr. Julian Huxley in "Evolution in Action." A few readers, perhaps rather pagan in their outlook, may think it a little strange that, if the case is quite so strong as they are asked to believe, it should still be necessary to argue the merits of natural selection with almost evangelistic vigor.

The following is an excerpt from Evolution: An Irrational Faith by Arthur C. Custance

Natural selection is a meaningless concept unless it leads to the survival of the fittest and to the elimination of the unfit. The fitness of all forms of life (apart from man), by and large, impresses the naturalist everywhere he looks. It impressed Darwin. It could be evidence of the hand of God; or it could be evidence of some natural law which sees to it that all unfit forms are eliminated, constantly, unfailingly, being given no chance to perpetuate their kind. Darwin thought he had discovered this mechanism, the struggle to survive leading to the survival of the fittest. And the very temper of the times in which he lived prepared the public to welcome a concept which seemed to justify the ruthless exploitation of the weak by the strong, a philosophy deeply engrained as a consequence of the Industrial Revolution. In his autobiography, Andrew Carnegie, who made his fortune in steel, described as follows his conversion to evolution on reading Darwin and Spencer:

I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear. Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural but I had found the truth of evolution. "All is well since all grows better," became my motto, my true source of comfort. Man was not created with an instinct for his own degradation, but from the lower he had risen to the higher forms. Nor is there any conceivable end to his march to perfection. His face is turned to the light; he stands in the sun and looks upward.

Ashley Montagu observed in connection with Big Business that John D. Rockefeller (who certainly should have known better) said, "The growth of a large business is merely the survival of the fittest. . . . This is not an evil tendency in business. It is merely the working out of a law of nature and a law of God."

Montagu commented: Darwinism was offered as no mere apology. It was more positive than that, it was a validation, a biological justification for competition. This doctrine has become part of the behavioral equipment, the system of overt beliefs, of almost everyone in the western world today. . . . “
This view of life is completely false. Yet it largely motivates the conduct of most persons in the western world. And it has brought man into the sorry state of personal, interpersonal, and international conflict in which he finds himself today.

It seemed so entirely proper, and the arguments which Darwin used to support the concept so very reasonable, and the evidence which he selected to illustrate how it works in Nature so convincing, that very few people paused long enough to ask whether it was really true.

In retrospect, we can see now that many of the catch-phrases with which he bolstered his thesis ought to have been challenged from the very beginning. Is Nature really in a constant state of warfare? Do animals over-populate the territory they occupy so that many of them are constantly on the border of starvation and only the very fit survive? Is it true that animals are entirely "selfish" and that they are neither altruistic nor interdependent?

Do only the fit survive? The fact is that, little by little, a more careful examination of what goes on in Nature has shown that the answer to every one of these questions is negative. It is the object of this Paper to give some of the evidence now available that Nature does not necessarily eliminate or "select out" the unfit, a circumstance which naturalists in their desire to find a mechanism for evolution for a long while tended to overlook.

Nature is not in a state of constant warfare. Animals do not under normal circumstances over-populate the territory they occupy. Cooperation and interdependence in the community life of animals is not a rare thing, but seems rather to be an essential part of the very fabric of it. The whole concept of natural selection, which is still so fundamental to current evolutionary theory, only makes sense if we assume that it eliminates the unfit and that this process of elimination results from struggle of some sort. But what is becoming increasingly apparent is that there is as much co-operation as there is struggle in Nature, and indeed probably more. The unfit often survive, and when they do it is not infrequently because members of their own species actually assist them to do so. (End of Custance excerpt)

Just a few days ago Drudge had the story of a dog that was caught on the traffic cams in Argentina running out into traffic and pulling its injured companion (another dog) from the traffic. There are many stories of animals of different species adopting the young of other species. There are many home videos showing animals that you would think to be enemies, living together, playing together, and it has all the appearance that some of these animals love each other.

Though dedicated evolutionists will deny a link to Eugenics and evolutionary thinking, there are not a few books that draw that link all the way to Hitler:

The War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race by Edwin Black

The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism by Stefan Kuhl.

The Unfit: The History of a Bad Idea by Elof Axel Carlson

G.K. Chesterton was a co-author of the book called, Eugenics and Other Evils: An Argument Against the Scientifically Organized State.

And the book mentioned on the Ben Stein Expelled documentary, From Darwin to Hitler by Richard Weikart.

Now I had said in part I that God has allowed evolutionary theory to take root in the earth to become a great tree under which scientific atheism can flourish, to take men back to the very beginning of our fall, to expose and expunge the Satanic thinking imparted to all humanity when we accepted his lie that we would not die, and we would be like God, and know good and evil. Well we have known good and evil, but we never became like God, and we do die, we die spiritually every day we accept this lie and live in separation from our creator.

To break this cycle we must reject evolutionary thinking, we must identify it in our daily life and resist and reject the competition Satan has introduced. In fact the manifestation of the Sons of God it speaks about in Romans 8 who break the curse of futility on creation will learn to stop competing with each other. You must learn to bless. This is not a do-gooder, new age phony spirituality. This only comes about because you have suffered under the futility of competition. You refuse the outlook of limited resources, for if you channel the blessings of God the resources will be miraculously multiplied.

It is at this time that God is releasing the Law of Harvest upon the earth as an immediate enforceable law. From this time onward you will be blessed or cursed by what comes out of your mouth and spirit. Just as the nations have been destroyed by their actions to one another in the stone cut out of the mountain without hands in Daniel’s vision, now the cycle, the crushing of that stone reaches a personal individual level, as it continues on to grind the remainder of the broken up pieces of that statue to powder.

This is not a slow process coming on the earth; it started the day after Saddam Hussein was captured, in the timing of God the cycle had finished; now it reaches a second stage where men cannot hide behind national, political, racial, ideological or religious excuses for their mistreatment of one another. If you learn (and learning is painful) to bless when all within you would rather curse, would rather send back hatred for hatred, then you will break this spirit of futility on yourself, and will be a part of breaking it on the whole earth.

This is a key to what many Christians have found a mystery in their walk with God. How do you actually acquire His divine nature? He released it to us upon the cross, in great suffering. You acquire that divine nature at the gateway of suffering, we are not good, we do not learn, or discover some hidden goodness in us. We finally suffer so much in our rebellion to our creator that we cry out, “what must we do to be saved?” Only then do you drop the human prerogative to move in hate, in un-forgiveness, in competition.

At first it is a struggle to break a lifetime addiction of moving in your own will, in your own responses and you set yourself to bless, even if evil is being done to you. What will happen? I think you will see your enemies will either sense that blessing, and want more and change from what they are doing, or they will be driven into madness because that blessing is powerful, and filled with the intent of God. Even Paul noted the principle of divine judgment in blessing, he instructs, “love your enemies; as such you will heap burning coals of fire upon their heads.”

This is real, not some gooey human love that is unable to affect or change anyone or anything. This changes you, because you cannot bless with ulterior motives, you cannot smuggle in the idea that, “hey if I bless that jerk, then burning coals will be upon his head.” No you just bless…the coals take care of themselves. What is it to you if the person repents? Much better as he has ceased to be your enemy and may even be your friend. If he does not repent? Now he is not your enemy, you are not positioned as his enemy, now God intervenes directly, before if you were in a psychic shootout, who would God deal with? Who is the most wrong? The one that started it or the one that keeps it going?

All of the careful building up of the universe, then the earth, then life, then human culture have led up to this point, to the creation of human spirits in the image of the divine. Ironic that the greatest denial of God as the creator is coming at the very time that His creative power will be most on display in the manifestation of human beings that acquire His divine nature.

Does God Hate Evolution? (Part I)

Evolutionary theory gained prominence in these last 150 years by permission, no actually by direction of God. What you say? Yes that is true, not that evolutionary theory as it is taught is true, as it is actually the greatest lie ever introduced in the earth. It is the original lie of the serpent in the Garden. Where Satan convinces Eve that God was lying and was actually blocking her from being like Him. Satan is what he is because he is in competition with God.

Satan had always harbored a suspicion that God is another being of the same order, of the same kind as himself, but has somehow managed to convince other beings that they are all created, that God himself is the only non-caused existent being, the fount of the eternal. Never having been created, something which cannot be understood, no matter how hard you try, by the human mind. Just as math instructs us there are things the human mind cannot really understand, such as infinity exists between any two numbers, and infinity stretches out in an unending series of numbers. That the constant of PI has a series of non repeating decimal numbers. And many other mathematical concepts that point to the unknown, the uncreated, the eternal.

The process of our creation is to make us know beyond what angels can understand that we are created beings. God will not suffer another rebellion in his creation where so much pain and damage was done by beings that should have accepted by faith that they were created. Most of the angelic beings did accept this fact; or rather truth, but Satan and one third of the “created,” angels did not. There has to be something in the angelic intellect that can be self-deceived that they are not created, I suppose philosophers could contemplate such things. I suspect it has to do with the nature of eternity that angels have no sense of beginning as they were not created as we are in a universe that has the dimension of time.

Thus the need for a created universe with a beginning to be the stage for beings that are created in time, we know we have a beginning, and death informs us we have an end. Yet the promise of God, if we learn our lessons is that we will graduate to the realm of the eternal. Forever marked in our beings as knowing we were created, but we were then redeemed to live in the eternal.

Scientific evidence is nearly overwhelming now that the universe seems to be peculiarly designed for first conscious life to be sustained and more specifically for human life to appear. This is called the anthropic principle and is probably best summed up by the former atheist and Ph.D. in English and American literature Patrick Glenn in his book God: The Evidence "... the Anthropic Principle says that the seemingly arbitrary and unrelated constants in physics have one strange thing in common--these are precisely the values you need if you want to have a universe capable of producing life."

The counter argument to this is that “Well we are here, so of course the universe must have had all these conditions and constants in order for us to be here to write about Anthropic Principle." Peculiarly this is the same sort of argument at the base of evolutionary theory, that repeatedly uses the argument that; “we must have evolved, because we are here and we cannot find any acceptable theory for the variety of species that exist and have existed on the earth." However evolutionists reject out of hand any other explaination, such as special creation, as they protest they cannot know or measure the supernatural. At first glance valid arguments within the narrow confines of the scientific method. However the existence of life is a special case to science, since there are only two recognized methods that human beings can even think of for the existence of life from inorganic material.

Either matter had within itself organizing principles to produce organic compounds, and eventually the assembling together of the incredibly complex chemical machinery within a single living cell, all prodded down the incredible path to life by fortuitous, one in a trillions upon trillions of small chance that all conditions would be met in early seas, just the right amount of radiation as a power source, just the right compounds available in the right concentrations. Yet this is to happen by random (no directing intelligence or supernatural power allowed) and this should in the almost incomprehensible eons of time finally have happened. Once this original task has taken place, the theory of evolution is now used to explain all the plethora of life on this planet, from one celled animals, to whales, to great Sequoias, to dinosaurs, to ants, to you and me.

First, in my opinion this theory shirks its first duty and ought to address the existence of life from the inorganic, since the accepted theory of the existence of this universe shows the progression since the big bang of first only energy, then the congealing of some of that energy into matter, which converts in stars to the multitude of elements of which all things, including life is made. This true evolution of the cosmos is very good science and hardly disputed except by young earth creationists, and perhaps some crackpots here and there. Evidence for the evolution of stars, and galaxies, and finally planetary systems, comes forward in the scientific world day by day, some ideas change here and there, but the grand outline is pretty well known.

Yet when devotees of evolutionary theory try to address how even the first cells arose from the inorganic they look at the math, the possibility that life could have started by chance and they nearly throw up their hands in defeat. Choosing to concoct ridiculous theories that do nothing to answer the problem, it just pushes the creation of life to other planets and spread by alien races, or comets seeding the planets. Still no answer how life arose on the first alien planet, as the probabilities and the math presents the same problem on any planet that is fit for life in all the galaxies in the universe.

This theory called Panspermia was put forth by Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, who are astronomers, trying to help their biologist brethren who are faced with the fact that if all the conditions that life would need to begin as a single cell in primordial seas had existed, then the chances that a single cell would have been assembled and “come to life,” is calculated to be: 1 x 10^1,057,800 That is One with over one million zeros. To put this number in perspective, it would take 11 full pages of magazine type to print this number.

To make this even more clear it is calculated that the number of all the atoms in the universe, in all stars, planets, in all the galaxies is at the high end 1 x 10⁸¹ The number one with eighty one zeros. This is such a huge number for one cell to have come into existence, that even if our universe was thousands of times the size of the one we observe and live in and it was filled with the inorganic elements necessary for a single cell to form it would just never happen. In other words life had to have an outside directing force, intelligence, or it, would never have come into existence.

Hoyle and Wickramasinghe explained it this way by limiting the problem in just creating a protein (Proteins are the building blocks of cells). In this instance they are talking about creating a single enzymes (a form of protein used in cells for manufacturing and construction)

Some 1000-2000 enzymes sustain life, and, surprisingly, the variation of amino acid sequences in these enzymes from one species to another is, overall, rather minor, noted Hoyle and Wickramasinghe. “A number of key positions on these chains are occupied by almost invariable amino acids.” The two astronomers scoffed at the “primeval soup” paradigm proposed by Oparinians and Darwinians, which proposes that twenty biologically important amino acids in equal concentrations floated in the primitive soup until struck by lightening to form life. (11) Hoyle and Wickramasinghe considered ten sites per enzyme as crucial for proper biological functioning. What is the number of trial assemblies needed to produce just one functioning enzyme? The answer is in excess of (20)10 , i.e., 20 times 20 times 20 times 20, etc., 40 times The number of trials needed to assemble one functioning enzyme in the primeval soup exceeds the number of all the atoms in all the stars in the whole visible universe, even before the tenth power is reached! declared Hoyle and Wickramasinghe. (12)


Now I say come to life because life, no matter what it is made of is something totally different than even the highest ordered matter, such as crystals. It has to be seen that unlike inorganic matter, life exhibits will, purpose, self direction, and by minimal definition it must be able to reproduce. This is something all together different than nuclear processes directed by physical laws set into motion within the first fractions of a second in the big bang. This is more like a stage was assembled from and by non-living matter, in our analogy we can even say matter had within itself the properties that it will eventually in a hierarchical manner via physical laws inherent in that matter assemble itself into a stage.

But life is the actors on that stage, from whence came these actors? They are not directed by the same physical constraints of inorganic matter. Put a fan on the stage to simulate wind, and the actors by force of will and by mind directing muscles can walk against that wind to do as they will, they are above these physical laws. They contain within themselves a whole new set of laws, far beyond the electro-chemical processes our evolutionists insist must be an emergent property of matter when arranged in sufficiently complex hierarchies, and this emergent property is life, or rather produces, creates life. Do you see the problem? No matter how you talk about forces that give rise to life you are nearly forced to use the words, "create," produce," "bring forth." All words or phrases that invoke a directing something or someone.

Following is just some of the constants set within matter and energy just to get the stage set via the slow, and I will say careful evolution of the universe. This is true evolution, set in motion by God, with all the laws inherent within matter and energy that produced galaxies, stars, gravity, and atoms. Eventually after stars cooked up heavier elements and some of them blew up in super novas and spread those elements into space for second and third generation stars to form that had planetary systems made of these heavier elements, elements that have to have very certain and specific properties for life to exist. The evolutionist plays a shell game with the novice, and with those that are educated in our secular humanistic schools, they put the laws of the cosmos and the development of stars and planetary systems under the cup where they say life evolves. Not so fast. Let us first understand just some of the exacting precision needed to even have the stage where life can act out its drama. It is far more complex and precise than the uninitiated is told.

Gravity is roughly 1039 times weaker than electromagnetism. If gravity had been 1033 times weaker than electromagnetism, "stars would be a billion times less massive and would burn a million times faster."

The nuclear weak force is 1028 times the strength of gravity. Had the weak force been slightly weaker, all the hydrogen in the universe would have been turned to helium (making water impossible, for example). A stronger nuclear strong force (by as little as 2 percent) would have prevented the formation of protons--yielding a universe without atoms. Decreasing it by 5 percent would have given us a universe without stars.

If the difference in mass between a proton and a neutron were not exactly as it is--roughly twice the mass of an electron--then all neutrons would have become protons or vice versa. Say good-bye to chemistry as we know it--and to life.

The very nature of water--so vital to life--is something of a mystery (a point noticed by one of the forerunners of anthropic reasoning in the nineteenth century, Harvard biologist Lawrence Henderson). Unique amongst the molecules, water is lighter in its solid than liquid form: Ice floats. If it did not, the oceans would freeze from the bottom up and earth would now be covered with solid ice. This property in turn is traceable to the unique properties of the hydrogen atom.

The synthesis of carbon--the vital core of all organic molecules--on a significant scale involves what scientists view as an astonishing coincidence in the ratio of the strong force to electromagnetism. This ratio makes it possible for carbon-12 to reach an excited state of exactly 7.65 MeV at the temperature typical of the centre of stars, which creates a resonance involving helium-4, beryllium-8, and carbon-12--allowing the necessary binding to take place during a tiny window of opportunity 10-17 seconds long


There are even more of these physical constants, what scientist are calling the fine-tuning of the universe, the following are excerpts from The Hidden Face of God: How Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth by physicist Gerald Schroeder:

According to growing numbers of scientists, the laws and constants of nature are so "finely-tuned," and so many "coincidences" have occurred to allow for the possibility of life, the universe must have come into existence through intentional planning and intelligence.

In a BBC science documentary, "The Anthropic Principle," some of the greatest scientific minds of our day describe the recent findings which compel this conclusion.Dr. Dennis Scania, the distinguished head of Cambridge University Observatories: If you change a little bit the laws of nature, or you change a little bit the constants of nature -- like the charge on the electron -- then the way the universe develops is so changed, it is very likely that intelligent life would not have been able to develop.

When Sir Fred Hoyle was researching how carbon came to be, in the "blast-furnaces" of the stars, his calculations indicated that it is very difficult to explain how the stars generated the necessary quantity of carbon upon which life on earth depends. Hoyle found that there were numerous "fortunate" one-time occurrences which seemed to indicate that purposeful "adjustments" had been made in the laws of physics and chemistry in order to produce the necessary carbon.Hoyle sums up his findings as follows: A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintendent has monkeyed with the physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. I do not believe that any physicist who examined the evidence could fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce within stars. Adds Dr. David D. Deutch: If anyone claims not to be surprised by the special features that the universe has, he is hiding his head in the sand. These special features ARE surprising and unlikely.

Universal Acceptance Of Fine Tuning Besides the BBC video, the scientific establishment's most prestigious journals, and its most famous physicists and cosmologists, have all gone on record as recognizing the objective truth of the fine-tuning. The August '97 issue of "Science" (the most prestigious peer-reviewed scientific journal in the United States) featured an article entitled "Science and God: A Warming Trend?" Here is an excerpt: The fact that the universe exhibits many features that foster organic life -- such as precisely those physical constants that result in planets and long-lived stars -- also has led some scientists to speculate that some divine influence may be present.

In his best-selling book, "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking (perhaps the world's most famous cosmologist) refers to the phenomenon as "remarkable." "The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers (i.e. the constants of physics) seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life". "For example," Hawking writes, "if the electric charge of the electron had been only slightly different, stars would have been unable to burn hydrogen and helium, or else they would not have exploded. It seems clear that there are relatively few ranges of values for the numbers (for the constants) that would allow for development of any form of intelligent life. Most sets of values would give rise to universes that, although they might be very beautiful, would contain no one able to wonder at that beauty."

Hawking then goes on to say that he can appreciate taking this as possible evidence of "a divine purpose in Creation and the choice of the laws of science (by God)" (ibid. p. 125).

Dr. Gerald Schroeder, author of "Genesis and the Big Bang" and "The Science of Life" was formerly with the M.I.T. physics department. He adds the following examples:

1) Professor Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in high energy physics (a field of science that deals with the very early universe), writing in the journal "Scientific American", reflects on how surprising it is that the laws of nature and the initial conditions of the universe should allow for the existence of beings who could observe it. Life as we know it would be impossible if any one of several physical quantities had slightly different values.

Although Weinberg is a self-described agnostic, he cannot but be astounded by the extent of the fine-tuning. He goes on to describe how a beryllium isotope having the minuscule half life of 0.0000000000000001 seconds must find and absorb a helium nucleus in that split of time before decaying. This occurs only because of a totally unexpected, exquisitely precise, energy match between the two nuclei. If this did not occur there would be none of the heavier elements. No carbon, no nitrogen, no life. Our universe would be composed of hydrogen and helium. But this is not the end of Professor Weinberg's wonder at our well-tuned universe. He continues: One constant does seem to require an incredible fine-tuning -- The existence of life of any kind seems to require a cancellation between different contributions to the vacuum energy, accurate to about 120 decimal places.

This means that if the energies of the Big Bang were, in arbitrary units, not: 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000,

but instead:

100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000001,

there would be no life of any sort in the entire universe because as Weinberg states: the universe either would go through a complete cycle of expansion and contraction before life could arise, or would expand so rapidly that no galaxies or stars could form.

2) Michael Turner, the widely quoted astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab, describes the fine-tuning of the universe with a simile:The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in diameter on the other side.

3) Roger Penrose, the Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, discovers that the likelihood of the universe having usable energy (low entropy) at the creation is even more astounding,namely, an accuracy of one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123. This is an extraordinary figure. One could not possibly even write the number down in full, in our ordinary denary (power of ten) notation: it would be one followed by ten to the power of 123 successive zeros! (That is a million billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion zeros.)

Penrose continues, Even if we were to write a zero on each separate proton and on each separate neutron in the entire universe -- and we could throw in all the other particles as well for good measure -- we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed. The precision needed to set the universe on its course is to be in no way inferior to all that extraordinary precision that we have already become accustomed to in the superb dynamical equations (Newton's, Maxwell's, Einstein's) which govern the behavior of things from moment to moment.

Cosmologists debate whether the space-time continuum is finite or infinite, bounded or unbounded. In all scenarios, the fine-tuning remains the same.It is appropriate to complete this section on "fine tuning" with the eloquent words of Professor John Wheeler:To my mind, there must be at the bottom of it all, not an utterly simple equation, but an utterly simple IDEA. And to me that idea, when we finally discover it, will be so compelling, and so inevitable, so beautiful, we will all say to each other, "How could it have ever been otherwise?"

We can then add to the above observations by the brightest physicists and cosmologists of our day, who many are agnostic or even atheist and it seems these scientists, even biased against a belief in God, when presented the evidence, unlike their brethren in the life sciences, allow and even exclaim in surprise that it appears someone created this universe.

And now the uniqueness of our earth and the environment on the earth adds to this precise tuning of the overall cosmos. We know that planets that can sustain life must exist around suns much like our sun, for reasons of the life expectancy and radiant output of those suns must exist in a small set in comparison to the rest of the stars in our galaxy. It is also now known that our solar system in order to sustain life must be within a narrow band that circles the galactic center. If in too close to that center radiation and effects of gravity from other stars will not allow stable planetary orbits for the long stretches of time for the preparation of a life sustaining planet.

A life sustaining planet must have considerable surface water; the planet must be in a narrowly defined band around its sun to ensure most of that water stays in a liquid phase. That planet needs to have a very large moon (The earth has the largest moon in comparison to its own size of all the planets in the solar system) in order to produce tidal effects on the oceans that they may not become stagnant. Water must expand when it freezes, one of the few substances that have this property. Water also has many other properties that are unique and go to sustaining life.

A life sustaining planet must have an oxygen atmosphere where the oxygen stays within a narrow range, to high and any fire started will not be put out, too low and life cannot be sustained. The rest of the atmosphere must contain an inert gas as far as oxygen breathing life is concerned. These are just some of the unique conditions that must exist for life to be sustained on a planet. One more mention of the moon. The size and orbit of the moon allowed for humanity to experience total eclipses of the sun, without those phenomena modern science would have had a very tough row to hoe.

I will continue in Part II with the spiritual problems presented by evolution, but it was all intended to come about in the last centuries of our history, for this lie will be exposed and ultimately defeated, in fact it is an assignment given to all mankind to accomplish this task as it is the portal to true worship of God, and a necessary ingredient for the maturing of a human spirit, for as we reject the lie, we receive in ourselves a greater relationship with the spirit of truth, who is the Holy Spirit Himself.

Daniel's Statue Part II

We last left our statue at the destruction of the chest of silver representing the ancient kingdom of Media-Persia). Since I wrote that paper I was watching the movie Charlie Wilson’s War, which depicted the involvement of an American congressman, and ultimately other members of congress to supply weapons to the Mujahedeen to bring down Soviet Helicopters, and destroy Soviet armor. Without knowing some of the details that were revealed in that movie I mentioned that the current great nations of this and the last century by their actions setup for themselves the next level or cycle of divine judgment, our actions come back upon us in unforeseen ways.

The movie has a scene whereby the Maryland congressman Doc Long, who is the Chairman of the United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, which controls the funds the Afghanistan fighters need, this congressman is taken to Afghanistan by Charlie Wilson and he is moved by the suffering of the people from Soviet gunships and mines disguised as toys and candy (many little children with missing limbs). He relates to the oppressed people there and while giving a speech mentions that his son was wounded while fighting the communists in Vietnam who were supplied by the Russians.

You can see in the movie the seeds of what the Soviets planted in their joyous opposition to America in Vietnam, now come to fruition with Americans returning the favor. And at the same time you can see the seeds America is then planting in Afghanistan which will eventually sprout and mature and be harvested on Sept 11, 2001. Amazing! While Congressman Doc Long is speaking the people are shouting Allah Akbar, the same cry the 911 Hijackers shouted as they flew the planes into the World Trade Center towers.

And now this Doc Long is the one with the authority to release the funds that bought the weapons that defeated the Russians in Afghanistan. He is actually the only man in the American political system that could pull this trigger. An astounding fulfillment of the law of harvest that God uses to bring judgment, and more particularly in our case it has been an ongoing force in the depiction of the stone cut out of the mountain without hands that we know was released prophetically, yet its physical working is the accumulated and multiplied mistreatment of mankind to one another, metaphorically displayed by the construct of this statue representing the governments of man.

It is remarkable that the greatest cruelty of man to one another is unleashed and multiplied by governments of man, thinking that if we create something so much larger than ourselves that then gives us permission to divest ourselves of morality on an individual level. This is why utopians are the most deadly and dangerous of all human beings. They will not channel their compassion or morality on an individual level, one upon one. To them they must have a vehicle, the State, that will amplify their goodness (they assume they are good) and enforce it upon others in mass. They are unwilling to receive an individual personal morality which only comes by suffering into their own hearts from God, an act that takes a purposeful humility, but they must impose a morality upon others writ large using the projection screen of the State, as if largeness, loudness, and force will finally convince them that they are truly good, truly compassionate. As if outward grandiose displays confirm they are the possessors of an inwardly worked and Godly righteousness.

This is the reverse of morality and the dead end of self-righteousness, the final result of man rejecting an absolute morality from God. History makes it apparent this is a monumental failure, an ever growing and deadly lie, now culminating in divine judgment upon this idol and construct of man. God’s hatred is certainly against this abomination; the violence of the destruction of this statue is inexorable and will not be delayed.

God will lay low Presidents and Kings and put his vessels, no matter how lowly, into positions of authority to see this purpose accomplished. There must be a Holy indignation and weariness with this vast cruelty over the ages. This destruction of human beings by these invented, yet strangely alive beasts of the governance of man. What tortures have they invented? What oppression and slavery have they sponsored? What madness revealed by the depredations upon human beings by mad Emperors and Czars, by Satanically ambitious men and woman driven to rule over others, the inventions of instruments of torture to terrorize the multitudes, the enslavement of others to increase wealth and luxury for the few, what a miserable history we have with only a glimpse of light here and there through the ages.

The first Gulf War began with Air Assaults on January 17th, 1991. On the same day King Olav V of Norway died. King Olav V was the oldest reigning Monarch in the earth. Certainly his death was a signal that now was the time for the head of gold to be crushed, as the head of gold represents our oldest kingdom in Daniel’s statue.

The ground invasion begins on Feb 23, 1991 and ends on Feb 27, 1991. Bush I announces on Feb 27 that the cease fire will begin Feb 28, 1991. Iraq has accepted all U.N. Resolutions. The ground war lasted 5 days. This war sets many records, certainly one of the fastest wars. It also has the approval of every nation on earth except Jordan and Yemen. In a sense practically all the nations in the earth are in agreement with this attack on Saddam’s Iraq, the head of gold, ancient Babylon in our vision.

Now here is where it gets interesting in that Bush I, listens to his advisors and stops short of invading Baghdad and deposing Saddam Hussein. This was done under the excuse that the U.N. mandate did not give permission to depose Saddam, however this is nonsense, we had already invaded Iraq and destroyed their military power, Saddam was the central cause of all this trouble, we did not complete the mission because of Political Correctness, as many, and most importantly, Colin Powel, was worried about world opinion because of the total destruction of Iraqi troops along what was being called the highway of death from Kuwait to Baghdad.

This refusal to conquer Iraq and depose Saddam created terrible problems for Arabs in the south of Iraq, and the Kurds in the north of Iraq, who had believed, and had been told, that America was committed and we had even encouraged them to rebel against Saddam, which they did. But when America stopped and withdrew, instead these people were slaughtered by the thousands. Saddam even drained the swamps in the south (one of the great ecological disasters in history, and where was the worldwide protests?) to persecute the marsh Arabs. One British reporter recounts how Saddam had the people from one Arab village rounded up and laid down on the road and they asphalted over those people while they were still alive.

He also gassed the Kurds in the north and filled his prisons and filled mass graves with political opponents, or anyone that resisted his rule. This is the time of rape rooms, of the children of his opponents tortured and imprisoned (Our marines freed some of these children in the second Gulf War) this can be laid at the feet of Bush I. Damn Kings and Presidents when they obey man, and political correctness instead of God. No wonder that Bush I went from an unheard of 95% approval rating to being defeated by an unknown governor from Arkansas just one year later.

I will recount a few stories of this time for all those that protest that we should not have gone into Iraq in 2003. Saddam had a room created which had a multitude of pipes running in all directions across the top of the room. A naked prisoner who had incurred the wrath of this maniac would be put into this room and in a random manner sulfuric acid would drip from pinholes in these pipes. The unfortunate victim would never know where the next drip was coming from or when. So huddled in this corner or that the poor individual would be tortured for days, when he finally fell asleep in exhaustion, here would come another drip of acid to awaken him in screaming agony.

Saddam’s two sons delighted in feeding those that displeased them feet first into industrial shredders; they liked to put them in feet first as they enjoyed the screaming until the shredder reached vital organs. Saddam’s two sons would also randomly pick up women from the streets of Baghdad and rape whoever they willed; many were killed after these two monsters were finished. One of the ways Saddam used to destroy his enemies is to take any who had a young daughter and have his goons rape the little girl to death right in front of the parents, before he killed the parents. This is darkness nearly incomprehensible to the Western mind. Yet the spoiled children of a materialist West cared nothing for these atrocities, but were enraged by what amounted to three months of fraternity level hazing, except in a few cases, of prisoners taken in battle and incarcerated in Abu Gharib prison by some out of control and unattended American military prison guards of low intelligence and lower morals. And unlike anything in the Islamic world, once the abuse was discovered, America prosecuted and jailed these miscreants.

According to the French academic Dominique Reynié, between January 3 and April 12, 2003, 36 million people across the globe took part in almost 3,000 protests against the Iraq war. This is amazing that a world that cared nothing for a suffering Iraq for decades is now organized and outraged that America and a few allies are going to war to depose one of the most brutal and murderous tyrants of human history. It is evidence that there must be an organizing principle at work here beyond human intelligence, something that is so violently opposed to this course of events that a breathtaking hypocrisy by humanity is hardly noticed.

And later we find the documents in Iraq that the three nations with the most vociferous opposition from their political leaders against this invasion were all enriching themselves via the Oil for Food U.N. orchestrated scam with Saddam Hussein; that being Russia’s Putin, France’s Chirac, and Germany’s Schroeder. What a monumental disgrace, this was the largest financial scam in human history, aided and abetted by Kojo Annan, the son of the General Secretary of the U.N. Kofi Annan.

Papers such as the New York Times that ran over 37 above the fold stories on page one about Abu Gharib could hardly be bothered about that scandal other than to minimize the actors and the nations that were involved. They were too busy being the choral conductor for what later became Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS). It goes almost beyond belief that the political Left was at this time praising the sophistication of Europe, and the European tradition of appeasement of dictators, while castigating Bush as an unintelligent cowboy.

From these above actions we can see that a great deception is upon mankind and a real fear is shown by the spiritual powers that have ruled the earth. They do not want this completion, the final crushing of the head of Gold of Daniel’s statue. Already one American President’s legacy was destroyed on this rock, and America was led by a venal narcissist for eight years, a scriptural judgment for a nation as the Bible says God places “capricious children” in authority over disobedient nations. You cannot sum up the character of Bill Clinton better. Even if the Left thinks his Presidency was an unprecedented time for America, in God’s view it was part of a judgment. And it is a historical fact that the groundwork for 911 was laid during the Clinton years of treating terrorism as if it is a domestic crime, something to be pursued in the courts.

And it is not a coincidence that another Biblical principle comes into focus with the election of George W. Bush in 2000 in that God brings back the son to finish what was originally commanded to be done by the father. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying George Bush the father heard from God like prophets of old, yet he had a commissioning to end the rule of Saddam Hussein and complete the cycle of the crushing of the Head of Gold. Any sane human being with the power to end such a terrible tyranny as that of Saddam Hussein and then seemingly by divine fiat given the circumstances, the excuse, and the backing of almost the entire world to then not act upon this is a man unwilling to listen to God in his conscious, or so afraid of public opinion he is rendered impotent and ultimately disobedient to divine influence.

But the purpose of God is not thwarted, not ever in all of history, it can be delayed by the disobedience of man, but God will simply up the anti. So all the circumstances were aligned to bring down Saddam Hussein in 1991, and if George Bush I had done what was divinely commanded the recent history of America would have been different. Instead America is put to sleep for a while. Enjoying the “peace dividend,” and unprecedented prosperity, all is well, can’t be better. Except for the lack of morality of our President and the phony dot com economy which begins to collapse during the last years of the Clinton Presidency, all seems well.

Yet we can now look back and see America is being set up for a fall. We do nothing about our dependence on foreign oil (Read Islamic or Russian controlled oil). We ignore the threat of growing world wide Islamic Jihad, heck that is Israel’s problem. We interfere via Bill Clinton in the election process in Israel to secure a government there that is more willing to negotiate away land for peace, and win back for ourselves a most bitter election in 2000, one that sows the seeds of political hatred that is still in the process of maturing for harvest.

Then comes 911, another window opens for America to execute divine judgment, and Bush II goes through that window, but awkwardly, without the overabundance of favorable circumstances that were presented to his father, that time is past, this will now be a hard task to accomplish, not that Bush II or the military planners thought so at the time. And I think Bush II sowed the seeds of some of the resistance to himself in that he did not emphasize the moral imperative to depose Saddam, instead he and his handlers went the cynical route of appealing to American’s self interest and emphasizing the belief of finding Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Bush would have been better served to emphasize the brutal tyranny of Saddam over his people as the primary reason to depose Saddam. Instead it was all a bet on finding WMD in Iraq. If the moral reasons were emphasized, first it is something that I believe God would honor, as that is what is in God’s heart, to deliver the oppressed, unless I have misread the Bible. Secondly there was an abundance of witnesses and evidence of Saddam’s brutality that could have been paraded to the world and media that would have put them on the defensive, in that how do you argue to NOT free people from torture and oppression? Thirdly, if you do not find WMD, it is not as important, because you did not emphasize this as the primary reason for deposing Saddam.

It is my belief that even if WMD were found, Bush would have still been hated, this is not a hatred based on reason, but upon spiritual deception orchestrated by the spiritual powers (fallen angels) that want to continue to rule humanity.

The invasion of Iraq starts on March 20 2003 and American troops are in Baghdad on May 1, 2003. This invasion phase took 43 days, an amazing coincidence, as the entire Gulf War in 1991 took just 43 days. It is a set piece to remind those that are inquiring that the original purpose of God was for this war to take 43 days. But after the invasion the real suffering and work begins, now it will not be an easy task and this war will extend for years not days.

Thousands of Americans will lose their lives and many thousands will be maimed and wounded, not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqis that will lose their lives in bombings and mayhem, Moslems, killing Moslems. For it was during the 12 years and 20 days between the end of the first Gulf war and the beginning of the second Gulf or Iraq war that Saddam’s plans for invasion were laid. The training for resistance, the stockpiling of huge supplies of explosives and guns, all coming back to haunt the invading army that would have not suffered even a fraction of this mayhem if Saddam had been taken down when God had commanded this to be done.

If there is any doubt that this was the purpose we can look at the numbers involved. The number 43 is prominent in both wars. 43 days for the totality of the first Iraq war. 43 days for the invasion of Iraq in the second Iraq war. We can see that the time from the end of the first Iraq war to the beginning of the second Iraq war is 12 years and 20 days. These are all significant Biblical numbers according to E.F. Bullinger’s Number in Scripture

The number 12 in scripture concerns governmental perfection. The number 20 relates to expectancy, or a period of waiting. So the 12 years and twenty days between these two wars is concerned with the perfection of divine government, yet there is delay, there is some expectant waiting. This directly relates to the stone cut out of the mountain without hands (which represents the Government or “Kingdom” of God on this earth).

We can see that finally crushing the head of gold is finishing “mystically,” the reign of the government(s) of man and that the governance is switching at that time to God, or I think what might be more exact, that the influence upon the affairs and governance of man will be from a prophetic level. For a while the image of that statue might remain in the consciousness of humanity, but its power is broken, man will be ruled by the prophetic word in the mouths of those given to God; those that have been tried in the fire of God, those that have been humbled by suffering.
The number 43 is the combination of 40 which represents a period of probation, trial, and chastisement—(not judgment, like the number 9, which stands in connection with the punishment of enemies, but the chastisement of sons, and of a covenant people).

This is fascinating because only two nations on the earth are covenant nations, Israel and America. And even more specifically within these two nations are people that have real walks with God and are being chastised as sons.


The number 3 in Bullinger’s words: Three, therefore, stands for that which is solid, real, substantial, complete, and entire. All things that are especially complete are stamped with this number three. God's attributes are three: omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence. There are three great divisions completing time--past, present, and future. Three persons, in grammar, express and include all the relationships of mankind. Thought, word, and deed, complete the sum of human capability. Three degrees of comparison complete our knowledge of qualities. The simplest proposition requires three things to complete it; viz., the subject, the predicate, and the copula. Three propositions are necessary to complete the simplest form of argument--the major premise, the minor, and the conclusion.

It would seem this number 43 given such significance in the last act of the crushing of Daniel’s image in the combined meaning of 40 and 3 is the completion of the chastisement and preparation of the sons of God to rule on this earth, not just ideologically or mystically, but in a way that will have a full physical impact upon this earth.

No wonder the forces of Satan have raged at the completion of the destruction of the head of Gold in Daniel’s statue. No wonder the blind and nearly universal deception on the earth and the hatred toward one man (George W. Bush) who was simply an imperfect instrument in accomplishing this task. And coupled with that hatred of the man, the hatred of the principle country that was used to accomplish this task, even by those that have lived in this country and been blessed exceedingly. Can anyone point to any of these people who protest so much whose personal lives have been touched even one iota by the policies of Bush or this nation in pursuing this goal?

Hollywood puts out movie after move depicting anything related to the war on terror or the war in Iraq as either crazed troops or depraved intelligence operatives from America torturing and oppressing wonderful Muslim people, when the truth is that 25 million oppressed people were given the opportunity via American blood and treasure to enjoy the vote even at the risk of their lives, something taken as a given in America, and thought by many on the Left as too onerous a task, unless you can register without ID, or at the DMV, or if you could just simply hit a button on your remote to vote for the next entitlement.

All the actors and directors and producers go from rich to richer, yet they howl as if they are being oppressed by Jack-booted thugs, although they have not lost one personal freedom, nor have they again been attacked by Islamic thugs. Yet the greatest attack on American soil has not produced one positive major American movie depicting the bravery and sacrifice of our troops, or any realistic treatment of Islamic fundamentalism.

Indeed they have taken books that depicted Islamic terrorism, and made movies where the villains become neo-Nazis, or albinos. Hollywood and our own media have given us one of the greatest displays of cowardice in human history. Charles Martel must be turning over in his grave.