Thursday, February 25, 2016

12 Clues of a Young World

Evidence for a Young World

Here are a dozen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old. The numbers I list below in bold print (often millions of years) are maximum possible ages set by each process, not the actual ages. The numbers in italics are the ages required by evolutionary theory for each item. The point is that the maximum possible ages are always much less than the required evolutionary ages, while the Biblical age(6,000 to 10,000 years) always fits comfortably within the maximum possible ages. Thus the following items are evidence against the evolutionary time scale and for the Biblical time scale.

Much more young-world evidence exists, but I have chosen these items for brevity and simplicity. Some of the items on this list can be reconciled with an old universe only by making a series of improbable and unproven assumptions; others can fit in only with a young universe. The list starts with distant astronomic phenomena and works its way down to Earth, ending with everyday facts.

1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast

The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape.¹

Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this ‘the winding-up dilemma’, which they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same ‘winding-up’ dilemma also applies to other galaxies.

For the last few decades the favored attempt to resolve the dilemma has been a complex theory called ‘density waves’.¹ The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and lately has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescope’s discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the ‘Whirlpool’ galaxy, M51.²

2. Comets disintegrate too quickly

According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about 5 billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of 10,000 years.³

Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical ‘Oort cloud’ well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed.⁴ So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations.

Lately, there has been much talk of the ‘Kuiper Belt’, a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Even if some bodies of ice exist in that location, they would not really solve the evolutionists’ problem, since according to evolutionary theory the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it. [For more information, see the detailed technical article Comets and the Age of the Solar System.]

3. Not enough mud on the sea floor

Each year, water and winds erode about 25 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean⁵ This material accumulates as loose sediment (i.e., mud) on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the mud in the whole ocean, including the continental shelves, is less than 400 meters.⁶

The main way known to remove the mud from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion tons per year.⁶ As far as anyone knows, the other 24 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present amount of sediment in less than 12 million years.

Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged 3 billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with mud dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of mud within a short time about 5000 years ago.

4. Not enough sodium in the sea

Every year, river⁷ and other sources⁹ dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year.^8,9 As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at today’s input and output rates.⁹ This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, 3 billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations which are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years.⁹Calculations¹⁰ for many other sea water elements give much younger ages for the ocean. [See also Salty seas: Evidence for a young Earth.]

5. The Earth’s magnetic field is decaying too fast

The total energy stored in the Earth’s magnetic field has steadily decreased by a factor of 2.7 over the past 1000 years.¹¹ Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the Earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years, are very complex and inadequate.

A much better creationist theory exists. It is straightforward, based on sound physics, and explains many features of the field: its creation, rapid reversals during the Genesis flood, surface intensity decreases and increases until the time of Christ, and a steady decay since then.¹²This theory matches paleomagnetic, historic, and present data.¹³ The main result is that the field’s total energy (not surface intensity) has always decayed at least as fast as now. At that rate the field could not be more than 10,000 years old.¹⁴ [See also The Earth’s magnetic field: Evidence that the Earth is young.]

6. Many strata are too tightly bent

In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition.¹⁵

7. Injected sandstone shortens geologic ‘ages’

Strong geologic evidence¹⁶ exists that the Cambrian Sawatch sandstone—formed an alleged 500 million years ago—of the Ute Pass fault west of Colorado Springs was still unsolidified when it was extruded up to the surface during the uplift of the Rocky Mountains, allegedly 70 million years ago. It is very unlikely that the sandstone would not solidify during the supposed 430 million years it was underground. Instead, it is likely that the two geologic events were less than hundreds of years apart, thus greatly shortening the geologic time scale.

8. Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic ‘ages’ to a few years

Radiohalos are rings of color formed around microscopic bits of radioactive minerals in rock crystals. They are fossil evidence of radioactive decay.¹⁷ ‘Squashed’ Polonium-210 radiohalos indicate that Jurassic, Triassic, and Eocene formations in the Colorado plateau were deposited within months of one another, not hundreds of millions of years apart as required by the conventional time scale.¹⁸ ‘Orphan’ Polonium-218 radiohalos, having no evidence of their mother elements, imply either instant creation or drastic changes in radioactivity decay rates.^19,20

9. Helium in the wrong places

All naturally-occurring families of radioactive elements generate helium as they decay. If such decay took place for billions of years, as alleged by evolutionists, much helium should have found its way into the Earth’s atmosphere. The rate of loss of helium from the atmosphere into space is calculable and small. Taking that loss into account, the atmosphere today has only 0.05% of the amount of helium it would have accumulated in 5 billion years.²¹ This means the atmosphere is much younger than the alleged evolutionary age. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research shows that helium produced by radioactive decay in deep, hot rocks has not had time to escape. Though the rocks are supposed to be over one billion years old, their large helium retention suggests an age of only thousands of years.²² [See also Blowing Old-Earth Belief Away: Helium gives evidence that the Earth is young.]

10. Not enough stone age skeletons

Evolutionary anthropologists say that the stone age lasted for at least 100,000 years, during which time the world population of Neanderthal and Cro-magnon men was roughly constant, between 1 and 10 million. All that time they were burying their dead with artefacts.²³ By this scenario, they would have buried at least 4 billion bodies.²⁴ If the evolutionary time scale is correct, buried bones should be able to last for much longer than 100,000 years, so many of the supposed 4 billion stone age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artefacts). Yet only a few thousand have been found. This implies that the stone age was much shorter than evolutionists think, a few hundred years in many areas.

11. Agriculture is too recent

The usual evolutionary picture has men existing as hunters and gatherers for 100,000 years during the stone age before discovering agriculture less than 10,000 years ago.²³ Yet the archaeological evidence shows that stone age men were as intelligent as we are. It is very improbable that none of the 4 billion people mentioned in item 10 should discover that plants grow from seeds. It is more likely that men were without agriculture less than a few hundred years after the flood, if at all.²⁴

12. History is too short

According to evolutionists, stone age man existed for 100,000 years before beginning to make written records about 4000 to 5000 years ago. Prehistoric man built megalithic monuments, made beautiful cave paintings, and kept records of lunar phases.²⁵ Why would he wait a thousand centuries before using the same skills to record history? The Biblical time scale is much more likely.²⁴

References

Scheffler, H. and H. Elsasser, Physics of the Galaxy and Interstellar Matter, Springer-Verlag (1987) Berlin, pp. 352–353, 401–413. Return to text.
D. Zaritsky et al., Nature, July 22, 1993. Sky & Telescope, December 1993, p. 10. Return to text.
Steidl, P.F., ‘Planets, comets, and asteroids’, Design and Origins in Astronomy, pp. 73–106, G. Mulfinger, ed., Creation Research Society Books (1983) 5093 Williamsport Dr., Norcross, GA 30092. Return to text.
Whipple, F.L., "Background of modern comet theory," Nature 263(2 Sept 1976) 15. Return to text.
Gordeyev, V.V. et al., ‘The average chemical composition of suspensions in the world’s rivers and the supply of sediments to the ocean by streams’, Dockl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR 238(1980) 150. Return to text.
Hay, W.W., et al., ‘Mass/age distribution and composition of sediments on the ocean floor and the global rate of subduction’, Journal of Geophysical Research, 93, No B12 (10 December 1988) 14,933–14,940. Return to text.
Maybeck, M., ‘Concentrations des eaux fluviales en elements majeurs et apports en solution aux oceans’, Rev. de Geol. Dyn. Geogr. Phys. 21(1979) 215. Return to text.
Sayles, F.L. and P.C. Mangelsdorf, ‘Cation-exchange characteristics of Amazon River suspended sediment and its reaction with seawater’, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 41(1979) 767. Return to text.
Austin, S.A. and D.R. Humphreys, ‘The sea’s missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists’, Proc. 2^nd Internat. Conf. on Creationism, Vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1991) in press. Address, ref. 12. Return to text.
Austin, S.A., ‘Evolution: the oceans say no!’ ICR Impact No. 8(Oct. 1973) Institute for Creation Research, address in ref. 21. Return to text.
Merrill, R.T. and M. W. McElhinney, The Earth’s Magnetic Field , Academic Press (1983) London, pp. 101–106. Return to text.
Humphreys, D.R., ‘Reversals of the earth’s magnetic field during the Genesis flood’, Proc. 1^st Internat. Conf. on Creationism (Aug. 1986, Pittsburgh) Creation Science Fellowship (1987) 362 Ashland Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15228, Vol. II, pp. 113–126. Return to text.
Coe, R.S., M. Prévot, and P. Camps, ‘New evidence for extraordinarily rapid change of the geomagnetic field during a reversal’, Nature 374(20 April 1995) pp. 687–92. Return to text.
Humphreys, D.R., ‘Physical mechanism for reversals of the earth’s magnetic field during the flood’, Proc. 2^nd Intern. Conf. on Creationism, Vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1991) (ref. 12). Return to text.
Austin, S.A. and J.D. Morris, ‘Tight folds and clastic dikes as evidence for rapid deposition and deformation of two very thick stratigraphic sequences’, Proc. 1^stInternat. Conf. on Creationism Vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1986) pp.3–15. Address in ref. 12. Return to text.
ibid., pp. 11–12. Return to text.
Gentry, R.V., ‘Radioactive halos’, Annual Review of Nuclear Science 23(1973) 347–362. Return to text.
Gentry, R.V. et al., ‘Radiohalos in coalified wood: new evidence relating to time of uranium introduction and coalification’, Science 194(15 Oct. 1976) 315–318.Return to text.
Gentry, R. V., ‘Radiohalos in a Radiochronological and cosmological perspective’, Science 184(5 Apr. 1974) 62–66. Return to text.
Gentry, R. V., Creation’s Tiny Mystery, Earth Science Associates (1986) P.O. Box 12067, Knoxville, TN 37912-0067, pp. 23–37, 51–59, 61–62. Return to text.
Vardiman, L.The Age of the Earth’s Atmosphere: A Study of the Helium Flux through the Atmosphere, Institute for Creation Research (1990) P.O.Box 2667, El Cajon, CA 92021. Return to text.
Gentry, R. V. et al., ‘Differential helium retention in zircons: implications for nuclear waste management’, Geophys. Res. Lett. 9(Oct. 1982) 1129–1130. See also ref. 20, pp. 169–170. Return to text.
Deevey, E.S., ‘The human population’, Scientific American 203(Sept. 1960) 194–204. Return to text.
Marshak, A., ‘Exploring the mind of Ice Age man’, Nat. Geog. 147(Jan. 1975) 64–89. Return to text.
Dritt, J. O., ‘Man’s earliest beginnings: discrepancies in the evolutionary timetable’, Proc. 2^nd Internat. Conf. on Creat., Vol. I., Creation Science Fellowship (1990) pp. 73–78. Address, ref. 12. Return to text.

Creation Ministries International Dear Augustine: You are welcome to post CMI articles on the mentioned website, as long as you agree not to change any of the content and reference creation.com and the relevant authors, as you have indicated.Kind regards, Annalouise Bekker Administration Creation Ministries International (Australia)

The above post may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, social justice, for the purpose of historical debate, and to advance the understanding of Christian conservative issues. It is believed that this constitutes a ”fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the Copyright Law. In accordance with the title 17 U.S. C. section 107, the material in this post is shown without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Federal law allows citizens to reproduce, distribute and exhibit portions of copyrighted motion pictures, video taped or video discs, without authorization of the copyright holder. This infringement of copyright is called “Fair Use”, and is allowed for purposes of criticism, news, reporting, teaching, and parody. This article is written, and any image and video (includes music used in the video) in this article are used, in compliance with this law: Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. 107.

Sunday, February 14, 2016

What’s the Big Deal About the “Incarnation”?

“Infinite, and an infant. Eternal, and yet born of a woman. Almighty, and yet hanging on a woman’s breast. Supporting a universe, and yet needing to be carried in a mother’s arms. King of angels, and yet the reputed son of Joseph. Heir of all things, and yet the carpenter’s despised son. Oh, the wonder of Christmas.” Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892)

Sometimes around churches we hear people use the term “incarnation” especially around Christmas time.

Exactly what is “the Incarnation”, is it important and what has it got to do with me? I’m not a theologian, I’m just a regular guy.

I guess first we have to define what the Incarnation is and what it is not.

The Incarnation of the Son of God is the terminology used to describe what happened when the second person of the Trinity, the eternal Son of God, “became flesh” as he was miraculously conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary according to the Bible.

In the incarnation, the divine nature of the Son was perfectly united with human nature in one divine Person. This person, Jesus Christ, was both “truly God and truly man.”

http://www.theopedia.com/Incarnation_of_the_Son_of_God

Ok, so Jesus was born part man and part God?

No ! This is where the problem began for the early church. Right off the bat within a few years after the death of the last Apostle John, the deceivers began to crawl out from under their rocks and started propagating their distorted and corrupted versions of what the Incarnation was. These are called heresies.

A heresy is:

1. A fundamental error in religion, or an error of opinion respecting some fundamental doctrine of religion. ………….The Scriptures being the standard of faith, any opinion that is repugnant to its doctrines, is heresy.

2. Heresy, in law, is an offense against christianity, consisting in a denial of some of its essential doctrines, publicly avowed and obstinately maintained.

3. An untenable or unsound opinion or doctrine in politics. Webster’s Dictionary 1828

The word “heresy” comes from the Greek hairesis which means “choosing,” or “faction.” At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. Matt Slick

You see this is the rub. The church rises and falls on the fundamentals. If the fundamentals can be destroyed or weakened then the entire faith crumbles.

My favorite football coach was Vince Lombardi. Lombardi was a fanatic over fundamentals. His Packer teams of the 60′s were champions because they executed every play with perfection. His teams did not have a bunch of complicated fancy plays. They had very few plays in comparison to today’s teams, but every play had been rehearsed hundreds of times till every move, every block, every run and pass was choreographed perfectly. In practice if a block was not executed with exact precision, that player would be forced to repeat it, until under the watchful eye of “Coach”, it met his standard of perfection. ”Do it again, do it again, do it again until you get it right.” Fundamentals are the foundation which define winners and losers.

Satan is determined to destroy what God has established, and as the father of lies, his favorite tactic is to attack the fundamentals of the faith with distortion and untruth. He didn’t waste time.

Genesis 3:1-5 (NKJV) Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’ ” 4 Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

“Hey Eve old girl, are sure you got the message straight”, “Maybe you misinterpreted what God said”, “Maybe God misspoke”, “You’re not really going to die, God just said that because He’s keeping the best fruit for Himself “. “I think if you eat the fruit you will have a better understanding of the situation” “Maybe you didn’t get the memo………..”

Satan always mixes truth with lies. He doesn’t deny the birth of Jesus, there were witnesses, written accounts, and His existence is acknowledged by even the most hardened skeptic, so the next best thing is to attack what the Incarnation is and what it means to us. Maybe just skew the meaning a bit. The problem is, doctrine is not like playing horseshoes. Close doesn’t get it when it comes to the person of Christ. When we stand before God and asked about Jesus, we better have the correct understanding. “I don’t know” is counted as a wrong answer and the identity of Jesus is one of the biggies.

Romans 10:10 (BBE) For with the heart man has faith to get righteousness, and with the mouth he says that Jesus is Lord to get salvation.

“Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself.” Irenaeus Against Heresies 1.2

Satan began his assault on the Incarnation from every conceivable (no pun intended) direction.

Adoptionism – God granted Jesus powers and then adopted him as a Son.

Albigenses – Reincarnation and two gods: one good and other evil.

Apollinarianism – Jesus divine will overshadowed and replaced the human.

Arianism – Jesus was a lesser, created being.

Docetism – Jesus was divine, but only seemed to be human.

Donatism – Validity of sacraments depends on character of the minister

Gnosticism – Dualism of good and bad and special knowledge for salvation.

Kenosis - Jesus gave up some divine attributes while on earth.

Modalism – God is one person in three modes.

Monarchianism – God is one person.

Monophysitism – Jesus had only one nature: divine.

Nestorianism – Jesus was two persons.

Patripassionism – The Father suffered on the cross

Pelagianism – Man is unaffected by the fall and can keep all of God’s laws.

Semi-Pelagianism – Man and God cooperate to achieve man’s salvation.

Socinianism – Denial of the Trinity. Jesus is a deified man.

Subordinationism – The Son is lesser than the Father in essence and or attributes.

Tritheism – the Trinity is really three separate gods. Matt Slick

If it were possible to distort and cloud the Incarnation, Satan and his hired hands tried it. They threw everything they could up against the wall to see what would stick. Thank God Jesus is the truth and he always shines through the darkness to those who open their eyes.

As a result this became a huge fight within the early church which went on for many years until orthodox Christianity developed creeds which clearly defined what the Incarnation means.

You see if people don’t get their fundamentals straight, you end up with people knocking at your door handing you a Watchtower and claiming Jesus was the created angel Michael and if you work real hard you too can be one of the 144,000. Total gnostic nonsense.

Or you get young men from the local Mormon church riding around the neighborhood on bikes telling the “great unwashed masses” how they too can become a god like the billions of other gods out there in the universe who own their own planets. Polytheism another heresy.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic–on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg–or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ~ C. S. Lewis

Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end……………….

Athanasian Creed

Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;

The Westminster Confession of Faith

The Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon Him man’s nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin; being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.

The Lord Jesus, in His human nature thus united to the divine, was sanctified, and anointed with the Holy Spirit, above measure, having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell; to the end that, being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth, He might be thoroughly furnished to execute the office of a Mediator and Surety. Which office He took not unto Himself, but was thereunto called by His Father, who put all power and judgment into His hand, and gave Him commandment to execute the same.

Early church writers on the Incarnation:

The Epistle of Ignatius to the Antiochians by St. Ignatius (35-108) In this very early document, St. Ignatius argues that the Bible teaches that the unity of God and divinity of Christ.

Dialogue with Trypho by St. Justin Martyr (103-165O In this dialogue, St. Justin Martyr argues that the Scripture prophesied Christ’s incarnation; he also demonstrates, using several arguments, why Christ is Lord.

Book III Against Marcion by Tertullian (160-220) Tertullian defends the Christian view of Christ against an early heretic Marcion. In particular, Tertullian argues that Christ really was the incarnate God.

On the Incarnation of the Word by St. Athanasius (297-373) In this classic work, St. Athanasius provides a stimulating account of the Incarnation. A pleasant feature of St. Athanasius’ account is that it does not simply defend the doctrine; it provides a theological backing for it, explaining the theological motivations of the Incarnation.

Nicene Creed (325) The Nicene is the classic statement of orthodox belief, and contains an early formulation of the doctrine of the Incarnation.

A Treatise Against Eutyches and Nestorius by St. Boethius (480-525) In this long treatise, St. Boethius argues for the orthodox view of Christ—two natures, one person. He critiques both the view of Eutyches that Christ was one person with one nature, and the view of Nestorius that Christ was two persons with two natures.

Athanasian Creed Although not actually penned by St. Athanasius, the Athanasian Creed provides a clear statement of the doctrine of the Incarnation, which was important for the Middle Ages.

Cur Deus Homo by St. Anselm (1033-1109) Translated as “Why God Became Man,” St. Anselm’s Cur Deus Homo focuses on the why of Christ’s Incarnation, not the how. St. Anselm argues that Christ became incarnate to atone for human sins, and offers the first “satisfaction” theory of atonement.

Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin (1509-1564) John Calvin argues, first, that Christ had to become incarnate for the salvation of humanity, second, Christ truly had a human nature, and, third, that heresies which deny Christ’s dual-nature misconstrue the nature of the Incarnation. Written and compiled by Tim Perrine, CCEL Staff Writer http://www.ccel.org/node/7393

Athanasius probably more than any other stood on the front lines and battled for the correct understanding of what the Incarnation was and ultimately meant to us. I love this guy. He was like a “a dog with a bone”. No matter what they did to him he managed to come back to “fight the good fight”.

Athanasius got it. He understood how all Christianity stood or fell on the Incarnation.

He describes in On the Incarnation of the Word The Divine Dilemma and its Solution in the Incarnation, the great problem for mankind and the ultimate unthinkable solution.

The Problem:

The law of death, which followed from the Transgression, prevailed upon us, and from it there was no escape. The thing that was happening was in truth both monstrous and unfitting. It would, of course, have been unthinkable that God should go back upon His word and that man, having transgressed, should not die; but it was equally monstrous that beings which once had shared the nature of the Word should perish and turn back again into non-existence through corruption. It was unworthy of the goodness of God that creatures made by Him should be brought to nothing through the deceit wrought upon man by the devil; and it was supremely unfitting that the work of God in mankind should disappear, either through their own negligence or through the deceit of evil spirits. As, then, the creatures whom He had created reasonable, like the Word, were in fact perishing, and such noble works were on the road to ruin, what then was God, being Good, to do? Was He to let corruption and death have their way with them? In that case, what was the use of having made them in the beginning? Surely it would have been better never to have been created at all than, having been created, to be neglected and perish; and, besides that, such indifference to the ruin of His own work before His very eyes would argue not goodness in God but limitation, and that far more than if He had never created men at all. It was impossible, therefore, that God should leave man to be carried off by corruption, because it would be unfitting and unworthy of Himself.

The Unthinkable Solution:

The Word perceived that corruption could not be got rid of otherwise than through death; yet He Himself, as the Word, being immortal and the Father’s Son, was such as could not die. For this reason, therefore, He assumed a body capable of death, in order that it, through belonging to the Word Who is above all, might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all, and, itself remaining incorruptible through His indwelling, might thereafter put an end to corruption for all others as well, by the grace of the resurrection. It was by surrendering to death the body which He had taken, as an offering and sacrifice free from every stain, that He forthwith abolished death for His human brethren by the offering of the equivalent.

Wait a minute! Satan didn’t figure on this. Isn’t this against the rules! You can’t do that…………

A brilliant and revolutionary solution which no human (or angel) could fathom. God taking the initiative to come to earth and do what no human could do. It would put an end to the pride issue because no man could claim he had any part in this “work”. Two birds with one stone. Solve the sin/death thing and eliminate prideful man from claiming he is on his own merits worthy of life.

The Application:

it was necessary for God the Word and none other to become Man: “For it became Him, for Whom are all things and through Whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Author of their salvation perfect through suffering.” He means that the rescue of mankind from corruption was the proper part only of Him Who made them in the beginning. He points out also that the Word assumed a human body, expressly in order that He might offer it in sacrifice for other like bodies: “Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood, He also Himself assumed the same, in order that through death He might bring to nought Him that hath the power of death, that is to say, the Devil, and might rescue those who all their lives were enslaved by the fear of death.” For by the sacrifice of His own body He did two things: He put an end to the law of death which barred our way; and He made a new beginning of life for us, by giving us the hope of resurrection. By man death has gained its power over men; by the Word made Man death has been destroyed and life raised up anew. That is what Paul says, that true servant of Christ: “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. Just as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,” and so forth. Now, therefore, when we die we no longer do so as men condemned to death, but as those who are even now in process of rising we await the general resurrection of all, “which in its own times He shall show,” even God Who wrought it and bestowed it on us.

Luke 2:9-14 (NKJV) And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.” 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying:

14 ”Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!”

Goodwill toward men? Is this one of those Kumbaya, “we are the world things”, “why can’t we all get along” platitudes? I don’t think so. Dr. J. Vernon McGee captures some of what this verse means.

Our Authorized Version gives the wrong impression here. The angels did not say, “on earth peace, good will toward men.” What they actually said was, “peace to men of good will,” or “peace among men with whom He is pleased.” The angels did not make the asinine statement that many men make today which goes, “Let’s have peace, peace, peace.” My friend, “There is no peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked” (Isa. 48:22). We live in a day when we need to beat our plowshares into swords—not the other way around. We live in a wicked world. We live in a Satan–dominated world, and therefore there is no peace. There is, however, peace to men of good will. If you are one of those who has come to Christ and taken him as Savior, you can know this peace of God. Romans 5:1 states: “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” When Christ came the first time, this is the kind of peace He brought. At His second coming He will come as the Prince of Peace; at that time He will put down unrighteousness and rebellion in the world. He will establish peace on the earth. But until He comes again, there will be no peace on this earth.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary: The Gospels (Luke). electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1991 (Thru the Bible Commentary 37), S. 41

I think Hal Lindsey said it best. “Now God ain’t mad at us no more”. God Himself provided the perfect sacrifice for sin, “without spot or blemish” and He poured out all of His wrath upon Him. This leaves God legally and practically free to deal with His children in love. Cool!

1 John 2:2 (NKJV) And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

Propitiation: This means the turning away of wrath by an offering.

The Incarnation provided the offering. If there were no Incarnation, we would still be dead in our sins.

So what does it have to do with me?……………………………..duh !

Federal law allows citizens to reproduce, distribute and exhibit portions of copyrighted motion pictures, video taped or video discs, without authorization of the copyright holder. This infringement of copyright is called “Fair Use”, and is allowed for purposes of criticism, news, reporting, teaching, and parody. This article is written, and any image and video (includes music used in the video) in this article are used, in compliance with this law: Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. 107.

Christian News Service – Worthy News

Net Bible

Answers in Genesis Ministries

CNS News