The following is from the new book SEEING THE NON-EXISTENT: EVOLUTION’S MYTHS AND HOAXES, which is available from Way of Life Literature.

The Scopes trial of 1925 is a major evolutionary icon, allegedly proving that evolution has won over the Bible and Christianity, but the way it is typically presented is a myth. In particular, the 1960 Hollywood movie Inherit the Wind staring Spencer Tracy is a cheap propaganda piece.

In History of Modern Creationism, Dr. Henry Morris observed that “the Scopes trial was evolution’s great triumph...” (p. 76).

Dr. Morris said that when he spent six weeks speaking on creationism in New Zealand in 1973, the government-controlled television broadcast Inherit the Wind repeatedly in each city he visited (History of Modern Creationism, p. 77).

The trial was held to determine whether John Scopes was guilty of teaching evolution in a public school classroom contrary to Tennessee state law. (The law forbade any state-funded educational establishment to teach “any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.”)

The trial was arranged as a showcase by the American Civil Liberties Union in their agenda to dethrone the Bible from a position of authority in American society. It was a major milestone in man’s end-times rage against Almighty God and His holy law (Psalm 2:1-3).

At a conference in Bavaria in September 1984, this view was put forth as one of the possible paths of bird evolution. The textbook Understanding Biology through Evolution by Bruce Olsen calls crocodiles and birds “cousins” and claims that both evolved through the archosaur (“ruling lizard”).

Though attempts have been made to describe how a crocodile could become a bird, even the most ardent evolutionists have to admit that they “cannot as yet offer any plausible explanation for the origin of the unique shaft, barbs, and barbules without which modern feathers would have neither aerodynamic nor insulatory function” (Regal, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 1975, p. 35).

That could be the mother of all understatements!

The trilobite is an extinct arthropod, a hard-shelled, segmented creature that “lived in the Earth’s ancient seas.” The name “trilobite” means “three lobed” and refers to the fact that the creature had three longitudinal lobes. They existed in a bewildering number of varieties, with 17,000 known species, ranging in size from one millimeter to over feet in length.

Evolutionists place the trilobite in the earliest stages of life, in the so-called Cambrian layer. The earliest trilobites supposedly lived 570 million years ago and the creature is thought to have gone extinct 240 million years ago. It is considered one of the signature creatures of the Paleozoic Era.

Digital SLR photography is both a hobby and a ministry tool for me, and I enjoy the challenge of photographing butterflies and dragonflies. The monarch butterfly lives up to its name in that it is the king of these amazing creatures and a wonderful icon of divine creation. I own many books on butterflies and have visited prominent butterfly conservatories in several countries, and in my experience evolutionists don’t even try to explain how such a creature could have evolved. They merely presume that it did. They even talk about the “co-evolution” of the butterfly and the flower, as if natural selection and mutation or any other naturalistic concept could possibly explain the origin of such wonderful symbiotic relationships! How could blind evolution create such a thing? If the flower and the pollinating insect did evolve, they had to have evolved at exactly the same time--like in the same day or week--because they are dependent on one another for their very existence.

Metamorphosis

The monarch butterfly’s Latin name, Danaus plexippus, means “sleepy transformation,” referring to its amazing life cycle.

The butterfly goes through a four-stage process called metamorphosis: from egg, to larva, to pupa, to adult.

It begins life as a tiny, brilliantly-designed EGG that the female butterfly attaches to the exact type of vegetation needed by the caterpillar when it hatches. It is attached with a special glue that hardens rapidly and holds the egg securely in all types of weather. The egg stage usually lasts a few days, but eggs laid before winter can enter a resting stage and hatch the following spring.

High Schools, colleges, and universities typically teach only one theory of origins, that being evolution, and the students are not presented with a creationist or even an Intelligent Design viewpoint. In fact, they are often given the idea that no true scientist today is a creationist.

When the National Academy of Sciences in America published an educational tool in 1998 entitled Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, they posed this question, “Don’t many scientists reject evolution?” The answer was, “No; the scientific consensus around evolution is overwhelming.”

Richard Dawkins, a brash atheist and anti-creationist, says in his book The Greatest Show in Earth:

“Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact. ... Evolution is a fact, and [my] book will demonstrate it. No reputable scientist disputes it, and no unbiased reader will close the book doubting it.”

According to Dawkins, if you reject evolution, you are unintelligent and your sanity should be questioned, and he proclaims that no reputable scientist disputes it.

The following is the testimony of Gary Parker, Ed.D. in biology/geology from Ball State University:

“I wasn’t just teaching evolution, I was preaching it. ‘It was millions of years of struggle and death that brought mankind and all the other animals and plants into being,’ I told my college students. I praised Darwin for being the first to understand how evolution worked. ... I let students freely express their religious beliefs, but would not let them use their personal faith to challenge what I considered the rock-hard science of evolution. I thought it was part of my duty as a science teacher to deliver my students from silly old superstitions, like taking the Bible literally and trying to refute evolution with ‘creation science.’

“The change began when Dr. Charles Signorino, a chemistry professor at the college where I was teaching biology, invited my wife and me to his home for Bible study. ... I started studying the Bible, primarily to criticize it more effectively. ...

The creation-evolution debate is too important to accept anything less than confirmed facts.

In 1922, William Jennings Bryan warned,

“It is no light matter to impeach the veracity of the Scriptures in order to accept, not a truth--not even a theory--but a mere hypothesis” (In His Image, 1922, p. 94).

Bryan was right, and nearly a century later, evolution remains “a mere hypothesis.”

The outcome of a murder trial requires evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt,” because so much is at stake, and we should require no less on the issue of creation vs. evolution, which potentially has eternal consequences.

The Bible claims to be the revelation of God to man. It claims to reveal God, man’s beginning and fall, the way of salvation, and the future. If the Bible is true, there is a heaven and a hell, man will live forever in one place or another, and salvation is only through personal faith in Jesus Christ.

This is too grave an issue to be decided on the basis of anything other than solid proof that the Bible is not to be trusted and that evolution is an absolute science.

Though all bird sounds are typically categorized as “songs,” a distinction should be made between true songbirds and other birds that make various noises. For example, most ducks, eagles, and hawks are not songbirds. They quack or screech, but they don’t sing.

I suspect that bird calls are often lumped into the “song” category because of the evolutionary philosophy underlying the field. It is assumed that the purpose for all bird noises, regardless of how pretty and complicated, is for such things as territorial marking and mating which supposedly acted as conditions for “natural selection.” Evolutionists even theorize that the true song birds are more highly evolved (Les Beletsky, Bird Songs from Around the World, 2007, p. 7).

While there is no doubt that bird songs mean something to birds, the Bible believer knows there is more to it than this. Evolutionists are blind to the fact that pretty bird song has a much higher purpose, and that is to glorify the Creator and to please man, the crown of creation (Psalm 8:4-8).

PILTDOWN MAN

Piltdown Man was held forth as a missing link in human evolution for 40 years, but it turned out to be a complete hoax.

In 1912, amateur naturalist Charles Dawson told the Geological Society of London that over the previous four years fragments of a skull, half of a lower jawbone, and a tooth had been found at the Piltdown gravel pit in Sussex. Dawson had been accompanied on some of his excavations by Arthur Smith Woodward, keeper of the geological department at the British Natural History Museum and the world’s leading expert on fossil fish, and by Teilhard de Chardin, Jesuit priest and New Age mystic. It was Teilhard who found another tooth at the Piltdown site in August 1913.

NEBRASKA MAN

In 1922, Henry Osborn, president of the American Natural History Museum in New York City, announced the discovery of a new missing link between apes and man based on “fossils” discovered in Nebraska.

This was based on a tooth discovered five years earlier by Nebraska rancher Harold Cook. Joining Osborn in the conclusion that a new apeman had been discovered were William Gregory (museum curator) and Milo Hellman, who were regarded as two of the world’s leading authorities on the teeth of primates. They concluded, “On the whole, we think its nearest resemblances are with ‘Pithecanthropus’ and with men rather than with apes” Museum novitiates, no. 27).

“There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations” (James Shapiro, molecular biologist, National Review, Sept. 16, 1996).

One of the most frequently-used evidences for evolution is the “just-so” story that purports to explain how evolution happened but which is actually a theoretical explanation lacking evidence. The term “just-so story” was popularized by Rudyard Kipling’s 1902 book by that title which contained fictional stories for children. Kipling says the camel got his hump as a punishment for refusing to work, the leopard’s spots were painted on him by an Ethiopian, and the kangaroo got its powerful hind legs after being chased all day by a dingo.

Kipling’s just-so stories are as scientific as the Darwinian accounts of how the amoeba became a man.

Lacking real scientific evidence for their theory, evolutionists have used the just-so story to great effect. Backed by impressive scientific credentials, the Darwinian just-so story has the aura of respectability.

THE PEPPERED MOTH

One of the most repeated icons for evolution is the peppered moth, Biston betularia.

In the book New Guide to Science, Isaac Asimov devoted a small section to proving Darwinian evolution and his sole evidence was the peppered moth. Stephen Jay Gould also used the peppered moth as one of the supposed indisputable evidences for evolution (Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes, p. 257).

The following statement from Biology: The Dynamics of Life by Merrill Publishing is typical of the way that textbooks use the peppered moth as a major evidence of evolution:

“The evolution of new species is seldom observed because the changes usually require many generations However, scientists have observed many examples of the natural selection of adaptations. One of the best-studied examples involves the peppered moth in England. During the 1800s, there were two kinds of peppered moths--a common light-colored variety and a rarer dark-colored variety. These moths rested during the day on light-colored tree trunks. In 1850, almost all the moths were light in color. Then, during a rapid expansion of industry around that time, the air became full of smoke and soot. This extreme pollution of the air turned the trunks of trees black. By the end of the century, most of the peppered moth population in England was dark colored. The light-colored individuals had become rare. ... In 1950, scientists performed an experiment to determine if natural selection had caused the dark variety of months to become more numerous. They observed light and dark moths in both industrial and rural areas. The experiment showed that birds ate more dark moths in rural areas where the trees were light-colored and more light moths in industrial areas where the trees were dark-colored. Through natural selection, populations of peppered moths had become adapted to living in industrial areas. The experiment showed that organisms whose color provides better camouflage are more likely to survive and reproduce” (Biology: The Dynamics of Life, Merrill Publishing, 1991, p. 209).

It has been said that “a picture is worth a thousand words,” and I have no doubt that more people have been influenced to believe in evolution by artwork than by words. From its inception, Darwinian evolution has been popularized by art.

Lying art.

THE LAETOLI FOOTPRINTS

Serious natural history museums typically feature a model or photo of the Laetoli footprints that purport to prove that apes walked upright over a million years ago on the evolutionary path toward manhood.

In 1978, footprints discovered at a site called Laetoli in Tanzania by Mary Leakey’s team were announced to be “made by a creature that walked upright in a human manner.”

Two sets of prints ran parallel to one another for a length of about 80 feet. One set of prints is man-sized while the other is much smaller.

The footprints are used as an argument for depicting Australopithecus afarenses’s feet (Lucy) as human-like, in spite of the fossil evidence, and Lucy supporters are dogmatic at this point. Typical of these claims is that by Niles Eldredge and Ian Tattersall.

LUCY: THE CUTE LITTLE APE-WOMAN

The premier missing link between apes and men today is Australopithecus afarensis, a little creature that has been popularized by giving one set of fossils the endearing name of “Lucy.”

Artistic reconstructions typically depict Lucy with human hands, walking uprightly in a purely human manner on human feet, and typically with human-proportion arms and legs. This is true for the models and drawings that I have seen personally at the Museum of Natural History in New York City, the American Museum of Natural Sciences in Washington D.C., the Field Museum in Chicago, Yale University’s Peabody Museum, the Seattle Science Center, the Museum of Man in San Diego, and Michigan State University Ann Arbor.

You can also find drawings of Lucy in science textbooks that depict her walking uprightly with human hands and feet. An example is Life: The Science of Biology by Purves, Orians, and Heller, 1992, p. 604.

These reconstructions are not scientific; they are brainwashing tools.

NEANDERTHAL

Ernst Haeckel, inventor of the deceptive embryo chart and Java Man, also helped spread the Neanderthal myth. The first edition of his book History of Creation in 1868 featured a series of drawings depicting man evolving from apes--mandrill, monkey, gibbon, orangutan, chimpanzee, gorilla, Tasmanian, African Negro, Australian Negro, Fuegian, Chinese, Indo-German. Haeckel being German, placed his own “race” as the crown of evolution. In 1907, Haeckel described Neanderthal as a pre-human and placed him between Pithecanthropus (Java man) and Homo Australis, which he called “the lowest race of recent man.” This reflected Haeckel’s racist view that the Australian aborigines represented the lowest stage in full human evolution. Haeckel misrepresented Neanderthal’s brain capacity at 1270 cc, which is less than the average for modern man, when in reality the brain capacity was 1560 cc, which is larger than average.

After the discovery in 1908 of a nearly complete Neanderthal skeleton in La Chapell-aux-Saints in France, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule (1861-1942) of the Laboratory of Paleontology in the Museum of Natural History in Paris, added his authority to the evolutionary myth. Boule believed that Neanderthal was a branch of ape-men who became extinct without giving rise to modern humans. Between December 1908 and June 1909 Boule reported to the Academy of Sciences that Neanderthal was ape-like in many characteristics, including the skull and “a divergent great toe.” He believed that Neanderthal did not walk erect like modern man but walked pigeon-toed like an ape with a bent-knee gait.

In 1909, Frantisek Kupka drew a sketch of Neanderthal as a stooped, hairy ape-man gawking wildly with a club in his hand. It was published in the Illustrated London News. (shown at top)

NEBRASKA MAN

In 1922, Henry Osborn, president of the American Natural History Museum in New York City, announced the discovery of a new missing link between apes and man based on “fossils” discovered in Nebraska.

PILTDOWN MAN

Piltdown Man was held forth as a missing link in human evolution for 40 years, but it turned out to be a complete hoax.

Doctored fragments of a 500-year-old human skull, an orangutan jawbone, and a couple of chimpanzee teeth “discovered” in the Piltdown gravel pit in Sussex in 1912 were accepted by experts at the British Museum and elsewhere as an ancient ape-man. It was given the scientific name of Eoanthropus dawsoni (“Dawson’s dawn-man”) in honor of its discoverer Charles Dawson (who probably perpetrated the hoax).

HAECKEL’S DUMB APEMAN

Ernst Haeckel, inventor of the iconic evolutionary embryo chart, was also the inventor of the dumb cave-dwelling ape-man, and it was based on nothing more scientific than his own fertile imagination. As we saw in “Lying Evolutionary Art - Haeckel’s Embryo Chart,” Haeckel was not one to draw back from inventing facts out of thin air.

Reasoning that the major difference between man and apes is the former’s ability to talk, and assuming that evolution is true and that man evolved from animals, Haeckel concluded that man’s predecessor was a dumb cave-dwelling ape-man. He even invented a scientific name for this mythical creature, Pithecanthropus alalus (“speechless ape-man”).

Haeckel had an artist, Gabriel Max, draw the imagined creature, and Max depicted an entire Pithecanthropus family. The pot-bellied father, ape-headed but having a hairy human body, stands upright and leans on a thick branch, looking as stupid as stupid can be. The poor dim-witted mother sits cross-legged nursing a dumb little ape-man baby. She has long-straggly hair but is less ape-looking than her “husband” except for her ape-like feet.

HAECKEL’S EMBRYO CHART

It was Ernest Haeckel, Charles Darwin’s most enthusiastic disciple in Germany, who devised the iconic embryo chart “proving” that at the embryonic stage man looks almost exactly like various types of animals.

He based this on his “law of recapitulation” (also called the biogenetic law) which stated that the human embryo goes through an evolutionary cycle during which it resembles a single-celled marine organism, then a worm, then a fish with gill slits, then a monkey with a tail, and finally a human. According to recapitulation, each creature repeats or recapitulates the entire alleged evolutionary history. Thus, the human embryo progresses from a single cell to a fish to an amphibian to a reptile to a mammal to an ape to a human.

Haeckel’s embryo chart first appeared in print in 1866 in his book Generalle Morphologie der Organismen and in 1868 in The Natural History of Creation, and since then it has been republished in various forms in countless textbooks, journals, popular reports, and museums. It is still appearing in textbooks in the 21st century. One teacher said, “I have taught Jr. High Science for over 35 years. Every textbook from every major publisher I have ever seen has had Haeckel’s embryos pictured and the text usually claims this as a proof for evolution” (http://creation.com/fraud-rediscovered).

Charles Darwin did not offer any scientifically-proven evidence for his theory. The book On the Origin of Species did not prove that species arise from the process of natural selection. It only proved that species adapt through various processes. A century and a half has passed since Darwin published his thesis, and the scientific proof remains elusive. In fact, remove the evolutionary assumptions, and the “evidence” disappears.

Consider the following testimonies from Ph.D. scientists, most of whom once believed in evolution:

“Despite all the millions of pages of evolutionist publications--from journal articles to textbooks to popular magazine stories--which assume and imply that material processes are entirely adequate to accomplish macroevolutionary miracles, there is in reality no rational basis for such belief” (John Baumgardner, Ph.D. in geophysics and space physics from UCLA, In Six Days, p. 230).

One of the most widely used icons of evolution is Lucy, the name given to a fossilized ape of the australopithecine class that is supposed to be millions of years old and is alleged to be a missing link between apes and man.

The actual fossils were shown at the Lucy Legacy exhibit in Seattle, which I visited in March 2009. They announced this as “the key piece in evolution’s puzzle.” What they did not say is that the supposed indisputable evidence that this fossil is “proto-human” is non-existent.

Lucy was a tiny creature standing about 43 inches high. The skeleton itself is less than 40% complete and is entirely missing the foot bones, though other bones representing Australopithecus exist.

The bones were found in 1974 in northern Ethiopia by Donald Johanson and his colleagues. The first bone discovered was a knee joint, which Johanson first considered to be that of a monkey, but upon further consideration announced that it was that of a hominid. “He thereupon declared on the spot that he had discovered a three million year old human ancestor” (Gish, Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No, p. 241).

They named the fragmentary skeleton “Lucy” after playing the Beatles song “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” repeatedly at the camp rock & roll party the night of the discovery. John Lennon’s 1971 song “Imagine” would have been more suitable, as Johanson and crew were living out the vain Darwinian dream that there is no God, no heaven or hell, only blind evolution. In the chorus, Lennon sang, “You may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one/ And some day I hope you’ll join us/ And the world will be as one.” Evolutionary scientists are at the forefront of pushing this dream of a world united in a damnable myth, and it is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy (e.g., Psalm 2; 2 Timothy 3:1-5; 2 Peter 2:1-2; 3:2-4).

Yesterday, the New York Times website carried a stunning look at how computer generated animation is depicting the inner workings of the cell. These animations describe cellular operations that are truly ‘jaw-dropping’ as the newspaper said. However, they also show processes that are impossible to explain by chance and time. If nothing else, these animations show intelligence, design, order, complexity, and, most of all, purpose. We felt that this NY Times video was a fitting companion piece to today’s FBIS article, “Staking Eternity on a Wispy Hypothesis.” “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:” Hebrews 1:3

In 1922, William Jennings Bryan warned,

“It is no light matter to impeach the veracity of the Scriptures in order to accept, not a truth--not even a theory--but a mere hypothesis” (In His Image, 1922, p. 94).

Bryan was right, and nearly a century later, evolution remains “a mere hypothesis.”

The outcome of a murder trial requires evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt,” because so much is at stake, and we should require no less on the issue of creation vs. evolution, which potentially has eternal consequences.

The Bible claims to be the revelation of God to man. It claims to reveal God, man’s beginning and fall, the way of salvation, and the future. If the Bible is true, there is a heaven and a hell, man will live forever in one place or another, and salvation is only through personal faith in Jesus Christ.

__________________________

God’s people are obligated to honor God’s Law more than man’s. Though abortion is legal in most countries today, that does not mean that it is right in God’s eyes.

__________________________

The doctrine of Darwinian evolution is taught throughout the world today. It proposes that life originated spontaneously from inanimate matter and that all living things evolved from an original single-celled creature.

The point of this lesson is that a Bible believer must reject evolution because the Bible and evolution are diametrically opposed.

Some professing Christians try to hold to evolution and the Bible at the same time by interpreting the early chapters of Genesis as poetical or allegorical. But this is an impossible position, as we will see in our first point:

1. The early chapters of Genesis are literal history.

a. The first 11 chapters of Genesis are written as literal history, not as poetry. “There are 64 geographical terms, 88 personal names, 48 generic names and at least 21 identifiable cultural items (such as gold, bdellium, onyx, brass, iron, gopher wood, bitumen, mortar brick, stone, harp, pipe, cities, towers) in those opening chapters. The significance of this list may be seen by comparing it, for example, with ‘the paucity of references in the Koran. The single tenth chapter of Genesis has five times more geographical data of importance than the whole of the Koran.’ Every one of these items presents us with the possibility of establishing the reliability of our author. The content runs head on into a description of the real world rather than recounting events belonging to another world or level of reality” (Walter Kaiser, Jr., “The Literary Form of Genesis 1-11,” New Perspectives on the Old Testament, ed. by J. Barton Payne, 1970, p. 59).

______________________

____________________________

A recent research article by Gibson, & Glass et. al.(J. Craig Venter Institute), in Science titled “Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome” was heralded by the media with the sensational claim that “Scientist Creates Life” (see Time.com).

What exactly did this group of researchers do that would warrant such a fantastic claim? What can we learn from their research? What conclusions can we draw from their accomplishments? To answer these questions, I went beyond the media reports and reviewed the original scientific article published by this group of researchers.

Simply put, these researchers transplanted the DNA of one bacteria into another bacteria, and the recipient bacteria took on the characteristics of the donor bacteria and replicated itself.

____________________________

I want to share with you the account of a day that began as the worst day in my life and ended as the best day in my life. I will tell you first how I got to that day, and then I will tell you what happened on that day.

I was born in a small country in South America, although my grandparents were from somewhere in the Indian Subcontinent. I often attended a Lutheran Church with my mother when I was a child. My parents divorced when I was eleven years old, and my mother, two brothers, and I, immigrated to Canada when I was fourteen years old.

I did not go to Church for years after we moved to Canada. By the time I finished High School, I was questioning the existence of God. I went to University, and by the time I finished my four year degree in Science, I was very much a secular humanist/atheist. That’s a person who does not believe that there is a God and believes that humans are the ultimate and best product of evolution.

In fact, he never was a Bible believer, never professed Christ as his Saviour, and was influenced deeply by skepticism from a young age.

Charles’ grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was a famous skeptic who worshipped “a distant Deity ... the vast Unknown.” Erasmus’ skepticism was so radical that it even shocked the Unitarian transcendentalist Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who called him “an Atheist.” Josiah Wedgewood, Erasmus’ close friend and the grandfather of Charles’ wife Emma, was a Unitarian who rejected the Deity of Christ and the infallibility of the Bible. Josiah’s famous Wedgwood pottery firm honored the infamous Unitarian Joseph Priestly with a medallion featuring his likeness. The two grandfathers bequeathed “a mixture of freethought and radical Christianity to their grandchildren” (Adrian Desmond, Darwin, p. 5). Erasmus published a very popular two-volume work entitled Zoonomia, which presented nearly the same evolutionary theories later popularized by Charles. Erasmus added an evolutionary symbol to the Darwin family’ coat of arms, consisting of three scallop shells and the motto E Conchis Omnia (“all things out of shells”). The meaning was that all things had evolved out of the sea.

The trilobite, which is found in the so-called Cambrian layer, at the earliest stages of life according to evolutionary thinking, is an amazing creature.

Evolutionary writings are filled with accounts of the trilobite, of how they “evolved,” “modified,” “developed eyes,” but there is no evidence for this. The trilobite no doubt adapted somewhat to its changing environment, as animals tend to do, but the evidence that it evolved from some other creature or that it its complex eyes and other organs evolved is non-existent. This proposition is based upon evolutionary assumptions and wishful thinking and not on the actual evidence.

The earliest trilobites supposedly lived 570 million years ago and the creature is thought to have gone extinct 240 million years ago. It is considered one of the signature creatures of the Paleozoic Era.

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphos apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”

The field of creation science has grown by leaps since the publication of The Genesis Flood in 1962 by Henry Morris and John Whitcomb. There are many organizations and publishers that promote the creationist viewpoint, including The Institute for Creation Research (1970) and Answers in Genesis (founded in Australia in the 1970s as the Creation Science Foundation).

High Schools, colleges, and universities typically teach only one theory of origins, that being evolution, and the students are not presented with a creationist viewpoint. In fact, they are often given the idea that no true scientist today is a creationist. When the National Academy of Sciences in America published an educational tool in 1998 entitled Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, they posed this question, “Don’t many scientists reject evolution?” The answer was, “No; the scientific consensus around evolution is overwhelming.”

Richard Dawkins, (shown right) a brash atheist and anti-creationist, says in his recent book The Greatest Show in Earth,

“Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact. ... Evolution is a fact, and [my] book will demonstrate it. No reputable scientist disputes it, and no unbiased reader will close the book doubting it.”

According to Dawkins, if you reject evolution, you are unintelligent and your sanity should be questioned, and he proclaims that no reputable scientist disputes it.

January 27, 2010 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

November 19, 2009 (Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

The following is excerpted from “The World’s Greatest Creation Scientists” by David Coppedge, which is available from Master Plan Association, http://www.creationsafaris.com/products.htm --

Enlarged September 5, 2009 (first published August 8, 2009) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

High Schools, colleges, and universities typically teach only one theory of origins, that being evolution, and the students are not presented with a creationist viewpoint. In fact, they are often given the idea that no true scientist today is a creationist. When the National Academy of Sciences in America published an educational tool in 1998 entitled Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, they posed this question, “Don’t many scientists reject evolution?” The answer was, “No; the scientific consensus around evolution is overwhelming.”

Richard Dawkins, a brash atheist and anti-creationist, says in his recent book The Greatest Show in Earth, “Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact. ... Evolution is a fact, and [my] book will demonstrate it. No reputable scientist disputes it, and no unbiased reader will close the book doubting it.”

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS: THE DEVIL’S WINNING TOOL

April 23, 2008 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

Hegelian dialectics is being used around the world as a tool to break down traditional beliefs with the objective of replacing them with something new.

Georg Wilhelm Hegel (1770-1831) was a liberal German philosopher who led the German Idealist movement, turning his back on orthodox Christianity and holding to a type of pantheism. He denied that there is such a thing as absolute truth. He said it is “narrow” and “dogmatic” to assume that of two opposite assertions, one must be true and the other false. He rejected the Bible and proposed that man is on an evolutionary journey and that human history is the record of a process of conflict and synthesis that he referred to as the dialectical process of Spirit, believing that man would eventually reach his highest state, ultimately arriving at “the Absolute Idea” which would be so perfect it could not be challenged or synthesized.

The Hegelian system is described as follows:

“It was Hegel’s view that all things unfold in a continuing evolutionary process whereby each idea or quality (the THESIS) inevitably brings forth its opposite (the ANTITHESIS). From that interaction, a third state emerges in which the opposites are integrated, overcome, and fulfilled in a richer and higher SYNTHESIS. This synthesis then becomes the basis for another dialectical process of opposition and synthesis. Hegel believed that the creative stress of opposing positions was essential for developing higher states of consciousness. In the moment of synthesis, the opposites are both preserved and transcended, negated and fulfilled” (Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Spiritual Politics, 1994, p. 88).

Hegel believed that this process has a life of its own, in an evolutionary sense, but since the days of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels it has been used as a guided process toward a desired end.

The objective of Hegelian dialectics in this sense is to replace something old with something new (e.g., capitalism with communism, traditional Bible doctrine with theological modernism, a traditional educational system based on moral absolutes with a new one based on relativism, an old age with a new).

Used like this, Hegelian dialectics cannot produce the new thing, but it can destroy the old. Other processes and techniques come into play in actually producing the new thing that is desired.

Hegelian dialectics is used today to create a “paradigm shift” by replacing an old “paradigm” (prevailing belief system) with a new one. It is a technique of “social evolution” and “political transcendence.”

It is not an innocent process. It is used by “change agents” and “facilitators of transformation.” Hegelian dialectics is “the framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to a predetermined solution” (Niki Raapana and Nordica Friedrich, “What Is the Hegelian Dialectic?” October 2005, http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm).

Speaking religiously and spiritually, it is an ever-evolving system that never arrives at absolute truth. All is relative and negotiable and the end justifies the means.

It employs a wide range of tactics: dialogue, compromise, consensus forming, conflict resolution, divide and conquer, deceit, redefinition of words, giving new names to objectionable things, crisis creation, obfuscation (concealment of meaning by making something confusing and hard to interpret or by otherwise hiding its true meaning).

It requires non-judgmentalism, tolerance, acceptance, relativism, group mentality.

It is the opposite of and the avowed enemy of dogmatism, absolutism, exclusivism, and separatism.

It is very elitist and complex.

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY COMMUNISTS to tear down law-based capitalistic, democratic societies that grant the right to private ownership of property and replace them with communist ones. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels’ take on the Hegelian philosophy is called “dialectical materialism,” because it focuses on the evolution of economics (materialism) rather than the spirit, as in Hegel’s system. In older communist terms the thesis was CAPITALISM and the antithesis was the PROLETARIAT (workers exploited at the hands of owners and the capitalistic system in general who rise up in resistance). The process of conflict and resolution is supposed to continue until it produces the ultimate synthesis which is allegedly pure communism but in reality is a New World Order of severe communitarianism (collectivism, the politics of community, the individual cared for by the state while his individuality is subservient to the will of society).

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS HAS BEEN EMPLOYED BY EDUCATORS in America since the 1920s to move the educational system from the old concept of moral absolutism and submission to a higher authority to the new philosophy of relativism and constant change. “The collective moulding begins early in life, sustained and refined throughout one’s formal education; a universal curriculum of manipulation can transform and achieve a complete paradigm shift for a whole generation” (Terry Melanson). The influence of the New Age public school system is incalculable.

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY THE EMERGING CHURCH to break down the old church “paradigm” so that it can be replaced with the emerging one.

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY ECUMENISTS to break down the walls of separation between denominations, between liberals and evangelicals, between Protestants and Catholics, to create Christian unity, and it is used BY INTERFAITH DIALOGUERS to tear down absolute truth and replace it with broadminded religious tolerance.

Dr. Robert Klenck describes how Hegelian dialectics works within the ecumenical setting, and he reminds us that the ecumenical dialectics is not a mere process of chance; it is “facilitated” toward a desired end. Otherwise, the group process could result in faith in dogmatic truth and an absolute Bible, but that is not going to be allowed to happen!

“Briefly, the Hegelian dialectic process works like this: a diverse group of people (in the CGM [Church Growth Movement], this is a mixture of believers and unbelievers), gather in a facilitated meeting (with a trained facilitator/‘teacher’), using group dynamics (peer pressure), to discuss a social issue (or dialogue the Word of God), and reach a pre-determined outcome (consensus or compromise). When the Word of God is dialogued between believers and unbelievers, and consensus is reached--agreement that all are comfortable with--then the message of the Word of God has been watered down, and the participants have been conditioned to accept (and even celebrate) their compromise. This becomes the starting point for the next meeting. The fear of alienation from the group is the pressure that prevents an individual from standing firm for the truth of the Word of God.

“A traditional thinker, when proven wrong with factual information (i.e., Biblical moral absolutes) yields to the facts, and admits that he/she is wrong, and then aligns him/herself to those facts. Because Biblical moral absolutes do not change, traditional thinkers who align themselves to those unchanging absolutes are labeled as ‘resistant to change.’

“On the other hand, transformational thinkers, when proven wrong with factual information, have been conditioned to process that information differently. They automatically question it and dialogue it within themselves; their (deceitful) hearts rebel against it, and then they begin to justify (to themselves and others) why it is that they no longer have to attend to the facts. The natural result of the dialectic process is the searing of the conscience (1 Timothy 4:1-2). These people are then able to justify to themselves why they are no longer bound to Biblical moral absolutes. ...

“... through the process of continual incremental change (using the Hegelian dialectic over and over with the last synthesis becoming the new thesis--the ‘new fact base,’ or ‘new reality’), the Word of God is gradually/incrementally changed from its original intent, and eventually it is interpreted to mean something contrary to its original intent. ...

“The rebellion is subtle at first--simply moving away from the traditional way of ‘doing’ church; later, the ordaining of female ‘pastors’; and eventually it gets to the point of ordaining lesbian ‘pastors.’ Barriers to change must be broken down, and eventually, for the sake of peace and unity, interdenominational barriers and interreligious barriers will be broken down, paving the way for a worldwide ecumenical movement--a one-world church. ...

“A recent example of this paradigm shift in processing factual information was when the ‘Rev.’ Richard Mouw, the President of the Fuller Seminary in Pasadena, California (a strong promoter of the church growth movement), was quoted in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on January 22, 2000: ‘Mouw said he supports rights and benefits for committed same-sex domestic partners, but believes the sacrament of marriage should be confined to heterosexual couples in the Judeo-Christian tradition.’ When leaders of this movement are making statements like this, then we can be sure that the movement is not from God, and is headed in the opposite direction of God’s will. Mr. Mouw already is thinking in the transformational mode. He is able to justify (to himself) a teaching that is contrary to the Word of God” (“What’s Wrong with the 21st Century Church,” August 8, 2000, http://www.crossroad.to/News/Church/Klenck1.html).

Observe, again, that deception is inherent in the dialectic process. Those who initiate and oversee the process have an objective, and they know that it will be resisted, so they resort to deception, especially at the beginning, to break down resistance to the goal. In the case of theological modernists, they present the new theology as a minor issue at first, hiding their real agenda. In the case of Marxists, they describe their desired political system in deceptive terms. They make promises that they have no intention of keeping; they hide the fact that liberties will be curtailed.

Those who use this methodology know that once the process of dialectics has been carried out, the resistance will have been broken down and an atmosphere created for the implementation of the original goal. They adopt the Jesuit philosophy that “the end justifies the means.”

Consider how that Robert Schuller’s January 2008 Rethink Conference employed Hegelian dialectics to further his New Age objectives of syncretizing religion and creating a new type of Christianity and ultimately a new world through the power of human potential.

The conference was “A CONVERGENCE of some of the most influential Christian and global thinkers” (Rethink Conference announcement, Oct. 15, 2007). These great thinkers were also described as “respected icons in media, politics, faith, science, business and technology.” The important fact is that they represented contradictory ideas, and their contradictory ideas were to be the stepping stones to something new. They included evangelicals such as Lee Strobel and Rick Warren’s wife, Kay, Emerging Church leaders Erwin McManus and Dan Kimball, Evangelicals and Catholics Together proponent Charles Colson, media mogul and pornography purveyor Rupert Murdoch, and agnostic Larry King.

The Rethink Conference was clearly described in terms of the Hegelian methodology, though of course the term itself was not used. The idea of the conference was “bring all the different thoughts and ideas and create something cohesive and meaningful” (“Interview with Erwin McManus, Christian Post, January 22, 2008). The process first involved hearing what each speaker said in a 20-minute lecture. The participants were then instructed to “wrestle with it, dialogue about it, agree or disagree with it--then take it a step further and make it your own” (Rethink Conference announcement, Oct. 15, 2007).

Schuller also described his Hegelian methodology in the book Don’t Throw Away Tomorrow: Living God’s Dream for Your Life:

“We need to learn the healing quality of wise compromise. ... Perhaps the only way to deal with contradictions is to combine them creatively and produce something new. That’s ingenious compromise.” (New Age leader Gerald Jampolsky’s endorsement is on the back cover of this book.)

To seek to combine contradictions into something new is Hegelian dialectics. It is a key principle of the emerging church.

If some believe that Jesus is God and others believe he was merely a great teacher, and if some believe that man is a fallen sinner separated from God and others believe he is essentially good and one with God, and if some believe that God is the Almighty who created all things but is not a part of the creation and others believe that God is the sum total of all things -- those are the old contradictions and we must move beyond such things. This is what they are saying.

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY THEOLOGICAL MODERNISTS to replace old doctrine with new.

A Lutheran pastor describes how the Hegelian dialectic works in the field of theological training:

“I had fully accepted this ‘New Theology or Thinking,’ having first gone through a traumatic time in which the Christian faith with which I had arrived there [at seminary] was ‘challenged.’ The reason presented for this ‘challenging’ was to bring us to really ‘think through’ our theology, to ‘stretch’ our faith, to ‘move us to a deeper understanding of the faith.’ This was the rational which was presented when more conservative members of the constituency in the synod would question about what was going on when they would hear from outspoken students and vicars what was being taught.

“THIS REALLY WAS DECEITFUL BECAUSE THE AIM AND INTENTION, AS I CAME TO KNOW LATER AS A MORE SOPHISTICATED INITIATE, WAS NOT TO ‘STRETCH OUR FAITH’ BUT TO MOVE US FROM THE HISTORICAL FAITH INTO THE ‘NEW THINKING.’ We all knew this was a great shift; that’s why it was so traumatic; but we presented it as representing only minor doctrinal differences. It actually involves an entirely different way of thinking. I have said many times to my conservative friends: You don’t understand; they think in an entirely different way. You think in terms of one thing which is true and the opposite which is false. They have adopted a dialectical way of thinking in which there is no true and false, only thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. They have effectively adopted Hegel’s dialectical way of thinking. There truly are no absolute truths within their system. They will discuss things with conservatives in a way that gets their opponent to think that they are discussing which of two positions is right. All the while the real issue for them is that there is no certain answer” (The Christian News, April 29, 1985, pp. 1, 3, 4).

We see, again, that the dialectic process is a guided process and that it employs deception to reach its objectives.

Dean Gotcher describes how Hegelian dialectics works in a general setting as well as in the type of egalitarian, non-authoritative Bible classes that are popular in many churches today:

“There is thesis, which is simple; that’s you and your position and facts based on what you believe. Antithesis is somebody who’s different than you. The moment the two of you who are different are in the same room, there’s a potential relationship there. However, the only way you can get to it is synthesis. You and the other person have to put aside your differences for the sake of a relationship and try to find facts or elements of your belief systems that are in harmony. ...

“In seminary I took the equivalent of a total quality management course where I learned how to survey the congregation and find out ‘what do you think and how do you feel?’ ... The moment you go into the dialogue [the dialectic process]--which now is in Sunday School materials as well--about what do you think and how do you feel over what is being taught, you are now allowing the [student] to be a scientist on God, to question the authority of God’s Word, instead of looking at it as it is, and saying, ‘Okay, I don’t understand it; Lord, reveal it to me.’ This has to be what we do instead of gauging how we think and feel. ...

“[The dialectic process] makes faith into a tool to be changed to our human understanding, to change it to meet our felt needs for the sake of a relationship. The agenda that the Berean church revealed to Paul, was that they weren’t hung up on Paul. They weren’t hung up on a relationship. They were hung up on truth. So when the Apostle Paul shared the Gospel, they went to the Word of God and checked him out. Try that with ministers today and they’ll get bent out of shape because you’re not supposed to question their ‘I think and I feel.’ ...

“Theology students drive me nuts because they say, ‘Jesus is a team builder.’ I say, ‘Wait a minute. No, He wasn’t a team builder. Each one of those disciples could stand on their own. They didn’t need the group to make a decision. They died alone as martyrs. They realized there wasn’t a group grade on the day of judgment. They didn’t say, ‘I think and I feel.’ You don’t find that in their ministry. They saw the truth and proclaimed it. They encouraged us through their work to continue to proclaim the truth.’ Jesus’ ministry was not built on ‘I think and I feel.’ It was built on ‘I know’” (Interview with Dean Gotcher, Women’s International Group Newsletter, Sept.-Oct. 1999).

HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY ONE WORLDERS AND NEW AGERS to prepare the way for world harmony. It is employed to break down national sovereignty and create a globalist mindset, to tear down the old contradictory religious and political systems and replace them with a new syncretized one. Speaking at the UN Conference on Human Rights in 1993 in Vienna, UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali spoke of the “challenging dialectical conflict” that required people to “transcend ourselves” and “to find our common essence beyond our apparent divisions, our temporary differences, our ideological and cultural barriers” (Interview with Dean Gotcher, Women’s International Group Newsletter, Sept.-Oct. 1999).

The late New Ager M. Scott Peck, whose books have sold by the millions, believed that man could become God through a process of spiritual evolution. He promoted the religion of scientific “skepticism,” of rejecting the religious faith of one’s parents, regardless of what that faith is, and building one’s own personal religion, of questioning everything.

In his books The Different Drum (1987) and A World Awaiting to Be Born (1993), Peck applied this evolutionary process to world peace. He taught the concept that a new age has arrived in man’s evolutionary process and a spiritually evolved generation can create unity, solve the world’s problems, and bring in an age of peace. The front cover of The Different Drum describes the book’s objective as “the creation of true community, the first step to world peace.” The back cover says, “Dr. M. Scott Peck believes that if we are to prevent civilization destroying itself, we must urgently rebuild community on all levels, local, national and international, and that is the first step to spiritual survival.” The Different Drum has the following dedication: “To the people of all nations in the hope that within a century there will no longer be a Veteran’s Day Parade...” This refers, of course, to the hope of world peace.

Peck described the process whereby the world can allegedly experience peace, and it is the Hegalian dialectic at work. It requires creating New Age communities all over the world in which differences can be resolved and the world transformed. In these communities there is no leader but all are leaders, decisions are reached by consensus, there are no “sides” and everyone is respected and heard (The Different Drum, pp. 71, 72). In these communities the individual is allowed to express any belief or doubt and to act out in his own individual way, to live as he pleases. The New Age community must be a “safe place.” He says the “healing” will only happen when “its members have learned to stop trying to heal and convert” (p. 68). He says true community means that “everyone is welcome” and there is “no pressure to conform” and that “all human differences are included” and “appreciated” and even “celebrated” (pp. 61, 62). True community must incorporate “the dark and the light, the sacred and the profane” (p. 65). Those who believe in homosexual marriage and abortion and evolution and human divinity are to live in harmonious community with those who don’t. He calls this process the politics of “transcendence” (p. 63).

In the New Age community, the only real sin is the sin of exclusiveness and theological dogmatism.

Peck says, “It is not only such ideological and theological rigidities that we need to discard, it is any idea that assumes the status of ‘the one and only right way’” (p. 96).

He says that the greatest hindrance to world peace is “exclusivity” (The Different Drum, p. 61). He warns about “groups that exclude others” because they are “doubters” or “sinners” and that are “defensive bastions against community.” He says that even the refusal to join a group because you don’t agree with it is “destructive to community” (p. 62).

Peck personally conducted scores of community-building workshops to further his objective, and he is only one of many who are involved in this process.

It is easy to see how unacceptable the practice of dogmatic Bible preaching and exclusive evangelism is in such a context! It simply cannot be allowed, because it will disrupt the sense of world community!

For a Bible-believing Christian to say that salvation is through regenerating faith in Jesus Christ alone and to separate his children from the public school system and to disagree with evolution and to refuse to “celebrate” homosexuality is considered a great evil by New Agers, because they think it is hindering the evolutionary progress of the entire world. Dogmatic biblical thinking is the chief obstacle to the establishment of the New Age.

What Saith the Scripture?

From a biblical perspective Hegelian dialectics is gross disobedience to God.

Hegelian dialectics is contrary to the Bible’s teaching that we have been given absolute truth from God and we are not to allow any contradiction. The Bible claims to be the sole divine revelation that God has given mankind and we are to believe it and judge everything by it (2 Timothy 3:16-17). We are to allow “no other doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3). We are to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3), which means we are forbidden to give contradictory doctrines any credence.

For the Bible believer, the Bible is THE infallible thesis, and every antithesis is to be rejected and no synthesis allowed!

Hegelian dialectics is contrary to the Bible’s teaching that God’s people are to separate from darkness.

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Romans 16:17).

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you” (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away” (2 Timothy 3:5).

“And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness. And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen” (1 John 5:19-21).

The Bible asks rhetorically, “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3). The Ecumenical, New Age, Emerging Church crowd brazenly replies, “Sure, we can make that work.”

But it won’t work. It never has and it never will.

Well does the Bible describe the great departure of the faith as those who are “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7).

[Distributed by Way of Life Literature's Fundamental Baptist Information Service, an e-mail listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. OUR GOAL IN THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF OUR MINISTRY IS NOT DEVOTIONAL BUT IS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR. This material is sent only to those who personally subscribe to the list. If somehow you have subscribed unintentionally, following are the instructions for removal. The Fundamental Baptist Information Service mailing list is automated. To SUBSCRIBE or to UNSUBSCRIBE or to CHANGE ADDRESSES or to RE-SUBSCRIBE UNDER A NEW ADDRESS, go to http://www.wayoflife.org/fbis/subscribe.html. If you have any trouble with this, please let us know. And please be patient with us. We do not ignore any unsubscribe request, but we cannot always get to your request immediately as each person involved with maintaining the Way of Life web site does this only on a very part time basis and is busy with many other major activities, such as pastoring and missionary work. We take up a quarterly offering to fund this ministry, and those who use the materials are expected to participate (Galatians 6:6) if they can. Some of the articles are from O Timothy magazine, which is in its 25th year of publication. Way of Life publishes many helpful books. The catalog is located at the web site: http://wayoflife.org/catalog/catalog.htm Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061. 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org. We do not solicit funds from those who do not agree with our preaching and who are not helped by these publications, but from those who are. OFFERINGS can be made at http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/offering.html. PAYPAL offerings can be made to https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=dcloud%40wayoflife.org]