W W W W World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page Contents Page for Volume What is New
The SAD FAD Group
Imitating Irrelevant Systems, Using Words when Work is Needed
Downfall from Defamation
(the sad fad of the motherless child),
Gratitude for His Glorious Grace 4, (includes 'mother nature')
Spiritual Refreshings ... Ch. 13
Man in Retrospect, in Prospect and in Bold Relief Ch. 2 and Ch. 3
Evidence and Reality ... Ch. 6 cf. Chs. 2-3, and 5,
Grating Grandeur and Aggrandisement of
and the Meekness of the Majestic Messiah Ch. 3.
The Face of God, Illimitable, Unfunded, Definitive, Decisive Chs. 5, 10
Jesus Christ, Defaced, Unfazed: Barrister of Bliss ... Ch. 4,
The Wit and Wisdom of the Word of God ... Ch. 2 (a survey including multiple annotations and presentations, definitions of design and its significance),
Jesus Christ for the People but Not for This World Ch. 6,
Dig Deeper, Higher Soar, DIvine Glory Delights the More Ch. 2, (from myth to divine testimony in logical steps, from the divine to design, from design to designation and information with more on designating a definition for design),
The Majestic Might of the Merciful Messiah: Jesus Ch. 6. (The 'religion' of organic evolution, is not science. It is not even a mish-mash of religion and science. It is religion in contravention of science; whereas creation is religion as attested by logic, and verified IN science, by scientific method WITHOUT exception. As to design, it IS that integrated, correlated, purposively designable, functionally proficient combination of imagination, information, actualisation and continuation which bears an imprint of effort where the means for its autonomous arrival do not appear. We both exhibit and create it.)
Ancient Words, Modern Deeds Chs. 9, 13 (making chance king instead of the name of a non-intrusible* system.
(*This word, intrusible, needs creating, meaning: able to be intruded upon, the negative naturally signifying the state of not suffering intrusion.)
-ologies, olatries and oglings that are
Self-Imposed Manacles for Man
SMR Ch. 4
(The combined equivocations
in sociolotry of its various species, paternalistic psychiatry in its ruses
and transcendental physics in its idle presumptions and ludicrous notions are
a rollicking farce that seeks to occupy the mansions of rationality with
strong minds and weak woes that deny their own assertions and deluge their
efforts with distractions that can never hide the truth, give seizure to the
Lord or evacuate Him from His place as Governor and God, Creator and President
of this universe.
Having seized Him once, only to abet His salvation plan, man in his rebellion continues both the butt and purveyor of nebulous notions that play like scrambling kids, among the facts, and falling rise again, to play more and rougher games, the worse to be bruised and confused till judgment comes).
TMR Ch. 7 including this site (multiple sclerosis of the ideational tissues of logic, coherence and consistency in the arena of physics cf. Ch. 2 above as marked),
Spiritual Refreshings Ch. 9, incl. End-note 1 (esp. programmatic psychology and its ilk),
Marvels of Predestination and the Ways of Will Ch. 7, including *1 (the nature and integrity of love divorced from sensationalism and reductionism alike);
News 80 (evacuating morals is like sending
British kids to Rhodesia in WW II and then letting them fend for themselves)
politics, these two undisciplined but not indisciplinable disciplines, and the
lust for living that does not live),
Repent or Perish Ch. 7 Extension 1 (returning from vacation from rationality to find reality) ;
The True God has Go, Gives Growth and
(avoiding the fantasies of confusion and considering procreation and relationship without the woes of pre-occupation).
See also SMR Index under Freud and Jung;
News 51, 52 (practicalities or morality, love and duty in youth, missions and commerce),
(bogus, blighting and well-based moralities in the powers-that-be
cf. Preliminary Canter *1),
News 166 (cloning, clowning and operative principles),
Lord of Life Ch. 5 (removing confusion: genes and Jesus),
SMR pp. 582ff. (seeing how the Lord works when He is taken at His word, in contrast to dysfunctional fallacies cf. SMR pp. 570ff., 611ff.),
Beauty of Holiness Ch. 2 (human psychiatrists fade but the love of beauty and the beauty of love are fade-free because founded in truth).
'Nature' is an illusion, when conceived of as something with a personality, which strives, which foresees need, opportunity, which invents, wrestles, invents, designates task forces of endeavour and delineates portraits of operational felicity beyond the reach of man.
'Mother nature' is the same, except that here a task force of the female goddess to which Greece and Rome were so prone, is added. Now 'she' is like a motherland, nurturing what she cannot bear, having no womb of mind or heart of invention, and this personification from the realm of myth and illusory, idle religious fervour becomes a suppuration from the spirit of man, projecting as before, but now with this odd and outré irrelevance, some of his own powers. 'She' is not to be found in the skies or the earth, has a spirit of invention but no inventive power, never displays it, never exhibits it, prod it how you will
In TMR Ch. 1, *2, to which we turn shortly, there is this record of one enormously famous case where man decide to manhandle 'nature' (this time with X-ray bombardment) in the hope it would rouse up its glowing creativity and DO something. Naturally it failed and did so with derisively decisive contempt. There is no such thing as a creative entity as 'nature' whether 'mother nature' or any other deemed relative.
It does not exist.
If you meant 'the creativity of the one who has it' or more briefly, the Creator, fine. But this other 'nature', this construction of man's mind, it is not a nature, but many natures, through which appears the essence of the whole, order and law, and creativity, and ranges of being from matter in its relative simplicity to mind in its egregious powers, to spirit in its fascinating liberties (cf. It Bubbles ...Ch. 9, Massifs of Pure Splendour Ch. 7, SMR pp. 348ff.), this culminating at the resultant level with man, where matter, mind and spirit have their organic concourse. In the meantime, man seeks to betray reality by investing 'nature' with the old-time mythical qualities of Greek and Roman gods, or the old-time mentalities of the early Greek philosophers*1 , always in vain seeking for some combination of elements or considerations with which to adorn the 'reason' for the creation, and never agreeing since each effort was like trying to account for the face by the nose, or near or eye, and ludicrous in misconception, stringently mythical misconception and witlessness.
Stringently mythical ? but of course, for what is myth but the ascription of grounds, reason, cause for something without verifiable interface, observable action, adequate causation or sober confirmation, so that imagination does duty for validation. This is precisely what organic evolution is, with a completely correct designation.
Let us however return to man's very practical, very pragmatic, very open endeavour to SHOW something, just for once, from this 'nature' which he has stored, like the early Greek philosophers and Greek and Roman false religionists, in his mind and to prod it into action.
The famous example of the fruitfly Drosophila where the dedicated delusions of evolutionary fantasy and myth were projected into decades of X-ray bombardment to illustrate for just once, the imaginary powers of 'mother nature' to invent new desires of information and advance, à la idolatrous mode, was as frustrating to the worshippers projectionists of dreams, as is normal in any idolatry. While the confusion in man is such that ONLY the Lord knows the heart, yet the objective was sufficiently clear for the overall dynamic of this frustrated project.
As may be seen from the hyperlink above, the result was precisely what due cause and effect, with ascribable interface, X-ray on delicate structure, would suggest. It mangled and tangled, but no progress was found any more than by swinging beer bottles in a small garage in which lies a Jaguar car, except that since it was life that was bombarded, it mangled the tangle somewhat worse!
Like the effort to find extra-terrestrial intelligence on which billions are poured as if a libation to the gods of nature, those fairies and blatherers from books which never quite manage to leave them, while the DNA is the intelligence*1A code already found NOT inventing itself, NOT a long way off, but like the word of the living God for some 3 and one half thousand years, right at your door step and now, right in your fast selling bookshop: this has come to nought. The only noughts are those of the COST of such exercises in delusive futility.
Things do not happen that way, leave no trace of it, show no power for it, exhibit no equipment for it; and the confusion of chance - which equals a system without outside interference, of this with creativity, which is a system with what it takes to SECURE THE CONSTRUCTION of concept-driven, command deploying structures, where symbols have MEANING and where commands USE THAT FACT while receptors OBEY it, in a communication cascade of summary brilliance: this is mere logical slide. More aptly, it is irrational slither.
It is hope where reason should be, irrationality where the empirical should demand, it is fantasy at the helm where the eye should teach, the observations should induce and the fruit of theory is tested and if need be rejected - as organic evolution illicitly has not been rejected by its devotees - when as there, verification fails (cf. SMR pp.140ff.).
Let us then investigate*2 the direct effort to bombard system into becoming inventive, and the imaginary mater into creativity, that extended experimentation that went on for so many frustrated decades, via the graces of a thing so visible but not viable as X-rays, from *2 in TMR Ch. 1 and find the same useless futility as the former efforts of what Greece from its romancers had to endure, and before that, those of Israel in its worst period (as in Jeremiah 2:27-28, 23), where God lambasts their folly in attributing fatherhood to a stone or tree, to 'nature' as these may directly, or in terms of metonymy, imply.
In fact, the image of God in man, arrested by unbelief, and harnessed by irreverential passions, has led to more divagations. It is not the image as such, but what it has enabled which is to the arresting point: that is, the power to imagine, to contradict, to set one's sights to the heavens like Eve (Genesis 3) if one wishes, or to gamble without glory against the God of all creation who instituted in you the very power to think if you feel so motivated, and to try to disestablish the very basis of logic, by ignoring the laws of causation, while using them implicitly in reasoning in the interim.
In fact, it is not even possible to ignore causation and talk rationally, since characteristics inhere in definition that things may be differentiated; and thus it embraces conformity to the established routine of law, by which such things can so much as have any being at all. Qualities relate not only to definitions, in the verbal realm, but to constraints in their own, be it moral, physical or mental; and the constraints relate to that inter-connected dynamics by which the sufficient cause has the resultant to mirror it, not in a morass of muddle, but in a dictionary-embracing constitution of reason and reality. This is of such assured portent and product that meaning itself becomes possible only because of consistent characterisability, and this only because of the constraints of causation. Not fairies but features are operational; and not irrelevance but competence with causal interfaces is acting in definable entities.
What is has its nature, and its place, inclusive of all relevant forces and entities, and in that context, operates as the procedural source or ground of its action; so that from what it is, duly related to what it does with it, in context, there comes the defining source of what is in view. Nature and action relate, in terms of the very order of its being, and that of all else. Its entire assemblage gives it definition; but this because performance comes not from the irrelevant, but the relevant, not from the unrelated, but from the related, not without cause, but with it, not in a fiction of nothingness, but in a function of well-based conception, allowing both depiction and that characterisable continuity which allows words to seize on it and define.
Logic, language, causation and coherence of the same are basic to all non-defective speech*2A; and even when the topic itself is that of irrationality, its reason, nature and inter-relation with all else remains operative for language, denying to this pathology, by the nature of its disease, that feature which conditions all thought. It is therefore exempt from such thought, a pathological exhibit of mis-function. Even this however is definable in word, while it does not work in thought, being the same deprived from the place of its normal or felicitous operation. Without that place, language becomes babble; but it is the former we discuss, and with which ascertain meaning and definition, in the absence of the latter!
Language, rationality, causation are a threesome necessary for the operation of the first of them, depicting the ground and indicative of the basis.
As noted in News 122, there is an indissoluble cohesion.
Even to invent an imaginary world, you need language, the conveyor belt of thought, and its intimate correlate; for what cannot be expressed, is merely latent. In expression, however, it becomes built, assessable, susceptible to communication and implementation. But language ? It is the very stuff of thought. It stirs it, and is stirred by it. We, in God's image, find it so; He indicates that in the beginning (before any thing could be, and hence antedating all creation) was God, and His word was with Him, and was God. It is an indissoluble union, not mere unity. It is indivisible...
Language is impossible without reason, rationality, logic. As soon as you divorce logic, you are left without capacity to categorise, differentiate, detail and divide aspects, to correlate and cause to conspire the components, to indicate the cohesion, inform the matrix with light, disperse the conception with comprehensibility. Language without logic is impossible. It is a contradiction in terms. It is a denial of its matrix. It is far more than logic; it is only impossibly, less.
Remove reason and language collapses.
Similarly, remove causation and logic collapses; for logic CAN have no rational basis without this: as soon as you seek to assign a cause for causation, you use it, and so lose it, the point you wish to make. It is logically insurmountable, a condition of reason, its exclusion in reasoned discourse a contradiction in terms.
Causation IS, and is integral to all thought. That it WORKS, as shown exhaustively in the references in *5 below, is merely the confirmation of all, and the negation of illusion. Logic not only demands a reason for everything, but demands a reason for the validity of logic, which without God it is impossible to do*3, so that with God one may rationally proceed to look, and in His testable word, find the validity confirmed. On the other hand, tamper with causation and you do no less to logic. Invalid logic as a criterion of thought is self-contradictory nonsense. Logic which CANNOT operate in a truth which is EXCLUDED by a model of thought, is no less antithetical, an antilogy of note!
Language without logic is sound merely, or scribble; rationality without causation is a word without operability in its denotation. This not only excludes what it uses, but affronts its integrity by exempting its applicability to all things, and that not merely in scope but in method, so making it merely a construction for use, not a determinant of it. That at once dissolves its capacity to present any viable theory of truth, such as that of language without logic ... or of what in truth has been, being a suicidal omission for thought.
Moreover, you then lack the basis for definition, seeking to smuggle back causation even in presenting such a theory or view, using the very thing you deny. Can you assess with what you deny ? or without it ? Indeed, in such a case you seek then to give the REAL cause of rationality, or its REAL nature, by REASON, and give the cause of the matter for thought, explaining and denoting, indicating grounds of relevance, modes of working, how each part affects every other and why! Do that, and you affirm what you deny, indeed deny it; fail to do it, and you have no case. You babble.
Indeed, 'chaos' if it were to mean a lack of order to the uttermost and of permanence in all things, would not even be definable, since the term itself implies a describable condition, a characterisable situation in which constraints operate so that it does not become something different, and conditions are kept lest the thing transmutes into something else. It has to have that degree of the static to allow a verbal picture to be taken.
If the picture exhibits that NOTHING is ordered, NOTHING is maintained, ALL is in transition, then that is a simple contradiction in terms. If nothing were ordered, there could be no transition, since this itself is a form of sequence that is describable, giving it characaterisability and constraining it. If chaos were king, it could not rule. What therefore is meant, if the very concept is to be rational enough for so much as definition, is this. Order and orders, causes and constraints are imagined so to operate that no hierarchical coherence is to be found, multiple dynamics and bases working in a clash of incoherence which lacks all system. Yet in this there IS precisely system.
There have to BE the operational oddities which have their little ways in order for them to clash. In their clashing, there has to be ordered dynamic, so that it is no mere non-event but a contrariness of things that both are, are inter-relatable (or else they could not clash) and are in ONE system of causal continuation enabling and allowing enough relevance for a clash to have operational capacity. You do not clash a grass-hopper with a cloud ten thousand miles away; for the clash, a continuity of system and operational relationship has to exist, a thing very far from chaos!
In a class, one could use the term 'chaos' to mean that duly appointed authority with duly gained knowledge so lacks the power to control that the potentially useful collation of forces with indeed the people operating them, is throw awry. This simply means that a multiplicity of possibly integrally operational systems is operating in a way contrary to design, or order, or desire, or all three of these. It is a term signifying what lacks a unitary functionality, where one could be envisaged. In 'chaos' there are forces and features, foci and potentials which miss the mark, fail to achieve, to relate, to correlate as they might, and the ordered and the orders mutually writhe in hideous confusion, helpless profusion or miasmic illusion.
Yet this is neither meaningless nor productive to the point. It does not account for anything at the ultimate. It is destructive of what has to be equipped with potential in order to fail to gain it, allowed to interact in order to do so 'wrongly' - that is inanely or vainly. It is what happens when intelligence fails to gain its end, or wisdom to co-operate in its production, when forces alien to the dynamics that relate according to the functional powers provided, have precedence over those that are not so.
Where everything means nothing and nothing operates in any characterisable state, there is nothing to define and nothing in view. It is a self-contradictory concept, and as such, can be defined but not denoted. It is verbal pathology. The assumptions underlying assume creation for the dynamics of relatability and the disjunction of possibility. It is a negative which is most meaningful as an over-statement of a mess from ingredients of which more might have been hoped, or conceived. It is in fact an emotive sort of word evincing or evocative of the dynamics of rebellion in the midst of creation, and it first assumes the latter in order to achieve the latter.
Indeed, it must have a cause, since as our reference to Causes above shows, you cannot even conceive of a cause for causation, since you have to assume it in order to achieve the result even in thought. A means of explaining all, it requires to be before any imagined ground or arising and in particular, before any 'arising' of itself; and since it is a word for the due translation of POWER and ORDER, with GROUND and REASON, it is meaningful only where ALL OF THIS is already present. Power and reason and basis and eternity (since it cannot 'arise' from nothing) being present, we merely come by an indirect route to God; and again, since we are dealing with reality and its realisation, with the procedure goes the process, with the causality the occasion for it, with the reason the referent, with the principle the practice, and so creation.
Indeed, such self-contradictory endeavour as seeking to 'account' for causation, this even shows the sense of muddle that man loves to cite, rather than repent of the obvious coherence enabling clash, and the systematic unity in which it occurs.
So is he arrested even by reason, which demands even for causation no beginning, and with it what is adequate and without limitation as source, for its delimiting operation in time with its agile series and sequential interims; indeed as having capacity so to deploy this and compose with it within the assigned constraints of a time frame, as to institute the matter, mind and spirit that is, and in particular is found in man. Thus is man sent to be seeking in his world and concatenated powers, not only for the source, but for the cause of its significant measure of disruption in the midst of entire magnificence, with this defection to be found in his own bosom, through working contrary to what he both is and is assigned to be (cf. Beyond the Curse).
Not chaos but corruption is the empirical fact: the inestimably lovely, the beautifully admirable, the courageously wonderful and the corruptly envious, vain, obstructive, the desolatory in thought, in life and morals, the viciously and deliberately ignorant achieving their wantonries at colossal loss to what is just and vigorous in vitality. Mental 'chaos' or vast confusion of disrupted fragments of great power, but mesmerised with a malignant defeat, this is the ample testimony of the vast substance of the thoughts of man over the generations, concerning not only his origin, but his duty, responsibility, nature and mission (cf. Romans 1:17ff., 5:1ff.). Ignoring the obvious, he loves to invade the impossible, and having slain many, retire to the next antilogy, the new antinomy, as if life depended on it.
You cannot destroy unless you first create, or defile unless you first make pure. It is corruption which is the consequence that man brings, and disruption the penalty for his shoot-out.
Nor without God is truth so much as an entity with denotation, so that theories could be rationally so much as exposed; for if they were true, and truth is not available, being pre-occupied with empirical proceedings with relativistic encompassment, then nothing beyond event to assess it would even be. All theory of total relativity defies the power to state it to be true, except in antilogy, antinomy and irrationality. Yet to explain by unreason, what you use reason to conceive and verbalise is just further antilogy.
It is therefore necessary to stop speaking and ignoring reality, both logical and personal, or find God.
'Nature' is not a mother but a name for many operational actualities, living and other. The name does not create and affirming existence is not even an explanation, good or bad. You need to find the cause of it all, and as to what NEVER under ANY circumstances shows itself competent to create what it is, in principle, in practice, in equipment, and DOES show its limitations in law, in restraints, in constraints, in its observable and testable nature: this is not in any scientific or even rational sense relevant. You even look beyond the material with the immaterial, that is your mind, thought and spirit, to find something better than the camping ground of matter. You look for the evidences of the deposition of language known as Nature, when in composition with matter and mind.
You find them in commands such as make babies become men in form; and you find no more of them in kind, since creation, just as the Bible clearly narrates, and the realm of nature exhibits, for this is not a current procedure for our universe. It moves as it is, it proceeds as made, it reacts in its dimensions, it acts out its containments, producing FAR from supermen, and NOTHING even in new information! (cf. Jesus Christ, Defaced, Unfazed ... Ch. 4).
Imagine finding an order in a book. There it is, a direct command. How strange! However, lying on the sand with the book, there is a clear complex of orders. You investigate with the wisdom necessary to interpret such things. You find it is but one of a myriad of orders, such as has been compared with the complexity of New York city. You study the thing, in your highly advanced technical facilities, you investigate and after months of high-powered computer assistance you find that this is the order imprint for one object.
What is it ? After tireless effort you find it is a bloc, an object definable. You decide to call it a cell. To your absolute astonishment, after years of research in which you now begin to grow accustomed to the miraculous, you find that there is another cell in this biological boutique. Generations of scientists pursue the matter.
After much labour it is found that this is one of millions of cells, and after more, of billions, and that they in turn form one corpus, one megapolis, and that it all has to do with electrical currents and circuits and data transmission and transference. You decide to call this continent, the brain.
Further generations slave, until they find the liver, heart and blood circulation system, all astounding and remarkable, and the central nervous system, the sympathetic nervous system, the reproductive system, and in each case, things now speeding up because of analogous relationships between organs, you find the digestive system and then in heightened research, it comes to be realised that some commands relate to what you decide to call sensory organs, and their data are transmitted to the brain where it is integrated in various ways, according within set limits, to the purpose it sometimes harbours, a new matter for investigation; and you discover that integral readouts are possible involving this whole series of data inputs, all coded, all decoded in the end into the massif of comprehension. That can then be used by ONE ENTITY!
You are beginning to seek out with enormous imagination that these things are so, and then, suddenly, a very wise man points out that this seems to related to something he has seen before. Ah, says the inspired pedant, I know! I KNOW! It is a copy of what is in MYSELF!*3A
Now while this imaginary reconstruction is a parable, to be sure, it has its point. Not only is this, that the series of calls, commands and conceptualisable and further conceptualised generative equipment is design, for it is arch-design. It is multiplicity of designs integrated in a storm of consistency and an enormity of availability for purpose. It surpasses anything man has made, in complexity (considering each cell resembling a city with power generation plant included), in unity of complexity ... except perhaps what he imagines in the spirit which governs the usage of this little sports car, his own body. This, however, it is not imagination: for it actually goes!
But where does it go ? That depends on the state of what governs the equipment - not absolutely, to be sure, since it can get sick, and has strength limits; but it may govern it wryly or rightly, savagely or sagaciously, kindly or cruelly, without care or with wit. It is not a byproduct of the equipment which enables its purpose and vision, desire and desiderata. On the contrary, it USES the equipment for the achievement of such designs, whether feet or foetus, as in the reproductive system, which assures us that this not merely a creation, but an auto-recreation apparatus.
It makes more as part of what it is made to be... if you follow the systematics involved. Some don't and remain bachelors and spinsters, indeed virgins. That is their decision. The equipment does not tell them about it. It does however have a resistance series of mutually involved systems, to protect itself in ingenious manners, which however stop short of making it anything like autonomous, though such is the nature of the spirit of man who directs the overall action of the whole of the equipment, that he even thinks of being this sometimes. His imagination has little limit.
Indeed, what is not good for the equipment is often done; and it is frequently and massively done to some by others with the same equipment. Murder is one sub-case in this section, and mass-murder, which is what some wars constitute, is not uncommon. The equipment does not require these; but the spirit which moves in the conceptualising consciousness of man (cf. Section 4 below), it may so elect. It may do this on the basis of certain principles, priorities and values which it may cogitate carefully and consider, or take up carelessly: that is another decision. It may change values because of emotions or thought; that is yet another option.
It may even pursue this field rationally and hence come to the God who gave both equipment and resource and spirit and will to use it, and made these things available. It may come to God and then realising in guilty realism or rebellious surrealism what is involved, shut the eyes so quickly that it may convince itself it never realised His existence, and thus become militant with those who stir the guilty depths of truth suppression, perhaps in some cases killing many millions. We have those; they are a type.
It may decide to argue that it is not responsible, using reason as a basis for the argument; and then dismissing God, remove the possibility of truth while declaring it on the basis of meaningless equipment controlled by circumstances with no meaning, and hence announce what its very model precludes; and it may do this with such vigour that it may take over whole universities, only by mockery said to have truth in their sights or on their sites, unless in the students they mentally molest. This becomes a cultural revolt.
Such guilt is not erasible, like the Twin Towers; for it is an invisible matter and as truth (which in God is perfectly available as reasonably required on application from the Maker, on the part of those in harmony with Him), it remains. This is so, however it be mocked, as Christ was (John 14:6). That however did not remove Him, merely inconveniencing His body for a while, as the point of the issue was made apparent, and after the long announced 3 day interval to make the death apparent, the resurrection gripped the nation, disabled criticism, while lies about sleeping guards who nevertheless could attest disciples stealing a body were circulated with an abandon which was in line with the rest of that particular murder.
It remains, specifically at the door both of Israel the nation and Rome in its imperial setting, which while not now available as such, has carried on in various forms for millenia*3B (cf. Section 6 in this volume), as foretold.
It is good that the Creator of such gifts of equipment and spirit, indeed of mind also, has provided a remedy. The other option, removal of the guilt-ridden, rebellion-oriented mass of mess would appear attractive, but love is like that. It pauses in kindness.
One learns by watching the ways and work of God what His love is like. It is keen ever, to restore, and while it reproves, it is even more interested in repair. Where the generative equipment at the spiritual level, which uses and anon abuses the equipment, receives the remedy, this is triumph, co-ordinate with the resurrection. It means a new creation at the spiritual level, a new life and heart is born.
This is of course a costly procedure energically and in terms of sustained skill; but love with mercy undertakes. The cost of Christ's death and resurrection is born, and redemption, the buy-back by absorbing justice vicariously for those who receive Him, proceeds ... for some (II Corinthians 5:17-21). The ransom was costly but it works (Matthew 20:28). For some, their iniquity is laid on Him (Isaiah 53:6), and it is so for ALL whom He has healed (Isaiah 53:1-6).
This takes off some of the pressure from the system, but not so much at the social level, except where these regenerations (Titus 3:3-7) are very common. On some occasions, called revivals at times, this has been so. The book to which reason points, and which verification and validation demand (cf. What is the Chaff to the Wheat Chs. 3 and 4), thus achieves for man the second volume, the Bible: his own DNA and associated information banks being the first book noted (cf. Light Dwells with the Lord's Christ, Reason, Revelation and the Redeemer).
Where then do we come to be ?
Creation has informed what it has to present, and we are. Redemption has given what it has to present, and it is (cf. Section 9 of this volume, and *5 below). Those who receive it participate in the 'new creation' and so are no more at odds with their Creator. Information on coming judgment is already given out! What is given, man, proceeds on his basis as it was informed to be, and commanded to consist; what has been granted in grace to inform HIM of his position, this too covering history in advance and man in his symptoms and needs, proceeds as given: and the world follows it, albeit millions without desire, merely being unable to dismiss its findings any more than their own DNA.
What then do we find ? You consider what it takes, and then what word from such a ground is to be found, and then as in SMR, you find but one, and this majestically beyond all expectation, and never short of it, in the very realm of competence which ONLY HE COULD have! Thus the coherence of concepts, the unity of message, the appointed tests of competence (cf. Isaiah 41, 43, 48), appeals to the operational self-validation of God in the Bible, and the enormous exposure to disproof in thousands of manners and multitudes of fields, these proceed over the millenia, molested by pseudo-autonomy, the pathology of man's spirit, but arrested by none!
When you then find the practical performance of the principles, predictions and powers on the basis given, to this trilogy in unity called 'man', you have the same validation as is always required even of the rational. Then is all complete. On the other hand, the failure EVEN to be rational on the part of those who lacking any place for the truth, yet affirm it, is only the more confirmed AS failure when validity is as much in absentia as rationality, and all practical expectation from such theories ALWAYS in all spheres fails. It is as in SMR Ch. 2, in TMR Ch. 1; and the hollowness of man's wisdom - call it a brand of science if you will (one that starts with theory and ignores fact as in SMR pp. 140ff.), scientism in fact, an example of the scientistic, or by whatever other name you wish to tag the point - this is as apparent as Hiroshima.
As clear as Everest on the other hand is the total empirical, rational, empirical, verificatory and valid uniqueness of the Biblical presentation to those with their DNA and the spirit to use it, who can thus read (Light Dwells with the Lord's Christ).
Now for them does that coherence of mind and spirit in man, of observation and computation, of estimation and confirmation at last resume; and as to that little hiatus, which is sin and devastation coming once more to its abyss in world history, this being exposed can go. If hell is its end, it is equally its beginning; just as God is the end, as well as the beginning, of man the DESIGN, designated in language, in mind, in morals, in manner, in method, in rationality, in competence, in co-operation and in kindness by his Maker.
Many are they who proceed to perdition, that lostness which is not chaos, but the degradation of what was designed by a self-designation contrary to fact and which, for man with mind, is one bearing his own responsibility; and alas, despite the severity of this reality, few are they who find God. It is as with sheep when despite the best sheep-dog, the many insist on going ANYWHERE except to the proper result.
With man, the scope for self-direction is great; and the symptoms of its abuse are mounting as the Bible foretold, and in the precise ways foretold; and with this, history is moving in the precise prophetic assemblage of operations, including Israel now back in its God-appointed land since 1948, and in Jerusalem (1967) as foretold after its long chastening (cf. Section 6 below and Luke 21:24). Indeed, it was even foretold that at one stage it would have just half the city (as occurred in 1948 - Zechariah 14:1).
You do not need unintelligible non-signals from space at a cost of billions, when intelligible signals are present both in you and in the Bible, on earth.
Not only is this so, but the world burdens itself imperiously and impenitently with Israel's affairs as if God had never spoken, with those intractable results which you always get in the end, when truth is defiled and facts ignored. This too is as foretold (cf. Zechariah 12), in the episodes leading up to the repentance of masses of people in Israel, stirred at the crucifixion of Christ then long since over: that, something foretold in Zechariah some 500 years before it was done! On this consult Let God be God, Ch. 4 and SMR Ch. 9.
Man's going astray is proverbial and often exposed in the book of Proverbs; and God's coming for His salvation is epochal and very often exposed in the Bible, as in the words of His servants based on this. Everything proceeds according to plan, to design, which in itself in man's case, has allowed the self-designations of false definitions and bemused muddles of philosophy for thousands of years. Destiny comes into sight like a whirl-wind, but it has been sitting there for an Age, which now closes (Answers to Questions Ch. 5).
What does not close is the accounts; but in the end, even these close. Closed now in Christ are these now for the Christian (II Corinthians 5:17-21), in whom pardon with peace is the procurement of Jesus Christ. Hence what thus comes out of this old creation, it is a new creation; and for what lingers in the old, these biblical books remain applicable, showing the end for what insists on muddle, misuse and misalliance. It also shows the interminable mingled with vitality, eternal life, for those whose termination in impacted guilt is arrested in the death and overcome in the resurrection of Christ.
God never denies the truth, and always acts on it; but in truth, He has shown mercy, a mercy which insists still on truth, even though His truth worked in mercy to redeem, and many ignore or disfigure it mentally. Redemption will never help the soul-stricken slave who prefers the dominion of sin and the domination of irrationality to the simple light of truth, so profound it is light, so straightforward that with it you see and understand (cf. Matthew 13:16-17); but it helps to the uttermost those who come to God by Him who did it (Hebrews 7:25, John 10:9,27-28), that work of His parallel to creation, which covers the cost and restores the lost.
In finding Him, no more is it possible to try to imagine that SOMETHING, big or small, inside what is, is the cause of what is. You do not account for it all by part of it when the point is the origin of any of it! You then cease to indulge in the rampant confusions of seeking such modern-day myths (that is entities imagined and neither rationally based nor causatively connected with any alleged result), as the engendering macro-molecule*3C.
This little notion was a the fruit of a desire to invent SOMETHING or other to engender what is, ignoring as usual what it takes to do what has to be done! It is but one of the myriads of sad, irrelevant but intoxicating fads that man brings up to make phrases substitute for thought, from time to time.
In having Him, you have your rational basis, existential meaning, volitional centre, spiritual place and hence peace, your terminus to the line to untruth, and instead of that, your brilliance of all-explicative beauty*4, *5. Furthermore, you find as you taste and see that the Lord is good, the experience of millions, that HE has a beauty, the beauty of holiness which is the one kind which never lapses (cf. Psalm 27:1-5).
Here is the source of those designs which surpass all meat and meaning for survival, as in any creation. It is creativity which excels, and this is apparent whether in man or in the 'nature', the entire natural realm where the alternation of options and methods abounds with illimitable exuberance, even in creating dinosaurs, which vary like the stars in their modes and wonders. It is not at all that the ultimates of creativity come from the need, for they surpass need and express invention. Their survival is not their origin, but their origin is extravaganza beyond all mere BEING, just as the peacock's tale is beyond all need to impress the non-aesthetic creatures in its zone.
Creation is for creativity, and the Creator is for man what food is to the empty mouth, and meaning to the disenchanted detachee. It is necessary in all things to return to fact and empirical reality, forsaking theories which dictate to facts, and facing facts which demand cause, and being caused to consider, to find what like the sun, shines immoderate in clarity, as if to rebuke the folly of pretence that it is not there.
Moreover, the fad and fancy that man is wonderful in heart, destined for destinies which from the profundity of his kind, he can create, is as fallacious as the fancy that he has no origin but came like a football star from the cripples as their bones grew mouldy in death. It is the false passion side, the self-elevating fallacy just as ludicrous as the self-destroying fallacy, the hope for the future based on nothing being just as ludicrous as the spirit of man based on nothing in the past, whether at once or in stages of nothingness as productive!
Truth endorses neither of these cause-free and contemptible imaginations. The varieties of man's actions in history contain exuberant testimony of the sinfulness of sin, the velocity of vice, the infection of infidelity to God, and to each other, to ideal, principle and truth, to reason, reality and righteousness; just as the domain of nature has its own ironies and actualities, an eloquent divine comment and commentary.
Take one example among many. The dinosaur race is as varied in amazing inventions of offence and defence, as to resemble a comic; but its doom, which struck it, that of all this power and pseudo-glory, of this set of fabulous features which read like the portfolio of an artist or architect, exciting all but incredulity at their variety and ingenuity: it is as marked as its creation. What can escape judgment by power and grandeur of strength in its nature, its own internal being ? Can the dinosaur which intimidates ? Far from it; it WENT! The lesson is obvious. Rely on your own strength if you wish to be demented; but on God if you wish to be delivered, as David was!
How broad the canvas, how vast the depiction, how grand the divine plan and its exhibits in scale; but in spirit and in heart, how incisive, how clear! and what would one expect when the universe is as a book written, man as a criterion of grace, a curse of spoliation, a wryness of will and an aim for exhumation from the spiritual grave-yards. Flowers mix with floral glory - take just the myriads of gazanias adorning the cliff tops at our own Carrickalinga, with their subtle variations of tone, of prongs of colour, discrete or brilliant, making thousands of variations on an original theme, as they mingle with sky and sea and peuse passages of Salvation Jane together in a marine feast and fiesta - along with centipedes (though not apparently there!).
The creation and the curse shout at man, but he is hard of hearing. The call and the pall are both near. It is wise to listen (Proverbs 1).
As the resources of divine love are unlimited, so the plans of God are uninhibited, the scale of His undertakings illimitable; but the results of His word are definitive, like the kinds in the first in Genesis 1. Two kinds remain for man. There are those drawn and delivered in His massive kindness from defilement of their kind (Titus 2-3), a very kindred in spirit for communion with God Himself on His appointed channel, the Cross of the Saviour, in the power exhibited in His resurrection; and then on the other hand, there are those whose contempt becomes contemptible, whose indifference becomes a differential and whose rebellion becomes endemic for spiritual speciation (Isaiah 57:16, Daniel 12)..
So does lesson on lesson, in the realm of the curse on creation of which we read in Genesis 3 and Romans 8:18ff., have its exemplars. Neither multiplicity, as in festooning functionalities of this or that kind, in the whole array of creation, nor potency, neither sting nor bite, neither superficial concern nor passionate care, neither the trickeries that do not allay nor the treacheries that do not pay achieve an ultimate end for all their effort.
Nothing can withstand the all-erosive reality of engineered curse (as in the just judgments of Isaiah 2:10-22, Amos 2:14-16, Revelation 9:18-21). Nothing can equal the power and wonder of the achieved salvation of Jesus Christ, who died the just for the unjust to bring us to God (II Peter 3:18).
As to the curse, sin caused it, and sin incites its continuance. Judgment awaits it, but judgment on Christ precluded harshness, and enabled mercy. The realm of mercy is as singular as that of life. It comes to many in their varying situations, but it comes like DNA, in one language. It is spelt out in one format. As life and non-life, so mercy and non-mercy has its distinctive. The mind of God has used one language in life; it is has one in love. The mind of Christ has its exhibit in one only authorised and tested, validated and enduring place over the millenia: the Bible. It leads to Him as He led to it. It is a double-pronged attestation, each with its own certainty, both jointlly with exuberant declaration and decisive announcement.
Outside that love of God is judgment, futility, vanity, exuberance of power and flimsiness of its possession, irony and outcast occasions of mere mutiny in flesh. It peaked in the Deluge; it will be decisive in the Day of Judgment. Inside that love, as inside a house in a storm, there is the quiet and the peace of profundity, where the ironies of the curse and the lessons against mumbling mutiny become but the aroused voices of the intoxicated rabble, self-made as such in their ruin, fighting in the streets for vantage points from which to aim fire at each other, and make their own special edition of the curse, to be published in new print but old stories, daily.
Pity weeps; love laments; power provides; majesty distils, and mercy thrills as some are evacuated by the power of the risen Christ Jesus, from the realm of rebellion into the realities of the beauty of holiness, the love of truth, where logic is heard like the whispering of wind, because here it has nothing to fear, and reasonableness is like righteousness in the very air that is breathed, for now it is not only a path in the options of man, but a part of his inheritance in the LOGOS, the Lord of creation, the eternal word of God.
The poetry of bliss does not speak the same language as the propaganda of abused power, delusive hope and intricate self-deceit. It can afford to be exuberant, like the creation, because its grounds are sure, its foundations are secure, its language is written, its charter is steadfast and its Creator is King, Commander, Leader, Dispenser of Freedom, Love in Spirit: whose thoughts make the ocean, by comparison seem shallow, and the stars in multitude, seem but few (Isaiah 54-55).
*1 Spiritual Refreshings ... Ch. 13 deals with this topic in its logical setting and an excerpt from it follows below, with further comment. It is moving from a consideration of Einstein's strong desire for a basis for his hope and intellection that it all was not only reasonable as he saw, but based in proper expectation of it (covered in more detail in SMR pp. 299ff. at *12 Ch. 3, Section 4). How could he find the basis for his conviction ? We see here in what sort of way t must be done. There follows a short except, slightly adapted and significantly extended for our present purpose.
THOUGHT THAT IS RATIONALLY WROUGHT;
OR THOUGHT FRAUGHT WITH PERIL ?
Leaving Things in the Air ?
Here was a man of true genius, who could see the necessities of thought, in order to be able with validity to embark on it; could not see how they could be gained, but admitted he worked on such a basis. The answer to this problem, as to all the other flecks of thought on the foam of inadequacy (though Einstein's concepts were far nearer theism than those of many) is easy to find, as so often, when adequate understanding PRECEDES the thought. It is to Einstein's great credit that he SAW the need for such an understanding, a basis for validity of thought, but did not at that time see how to get it.
Nevertheless: Better to know you are a beggar, and beg, than think yourself opulent, and boast! Infinitely better, one might almost hazard! He insisted on finding with that same rationality which had enabled so VERY MUCH, already in his theories, even practical things that in some respects have been eminently helpful, and discovering in this way, what remained.
His problem was not (operationally, but it seems it still was spiritually) the wrong presuppositions in this respect: relative to God. It was rather with respect to the universe. WHY should a universe created by God (but here with his philosophy, there was a fudge factor which spoiled the otherwise promising hopefulness of his approach) BE integrable in terms of SOME ONE FEATURE, FACTOR or INGREDIENT! Does it HAVE to be!
The ancient Greek thinkers are so naive that they could almost without help inhabit many an academic philosophy department of today! EVERYTHING HAD TO BE originated by, or coming from, or the product of...
a) water or perhaps
b) air, or perhaps
c) change or perhaps
d) stability, static to the end, and unyielding
e) atoms (although the spaces between them would still be a problem, their origin and their capacities: but never mind, consistency of thought is the LAST THING in these musings!).
So the turgid mess called early Greek Philosophy went on its Athenian way (with apologies to those not of
, yet as it were, being Athenian before their time!). Athens
It was, as comedy, entrancing; as unsophisticated verve, delightful; but of course, in practice, absurd.
David Hume's Humorous Humian Nature was another such effort (cf. SMR Ch.3, esp. pp. 257ff.), a naturalism for man by which he could good-naturedly tell the truth to truthless nature! It was quite an epic, the destruction of which is exhibited in the reference given. But the point here is this: there is this thrust of lust, like some burning throat in the desert, to imbibe a unified water, encompassing all things, and the throat as well in its format. The mentor must be it; the will; the lifeless seed of atoms; the particles; the particulate, the invisible, the profound, the cause and the consequence, the limpidity of thought and the crass shrieking of matter, the profound wallowings of befuddled will with the incisive logician's skill! It is what then ? It is the unity of the garbage can, the shredder! But not all is shredded, though it WILL most assuredly be reduced to size !(cf. Ezekiel 28:9), when its implicit pretensions of spirit, exemptions of logic and rescensions of unrealism are as silent as they are now irrational.
Why ON EARTH should everything bother to come from air or fire or atoms or any other element or aspect of the whole diversified and multi-partitioned totality! Why should the errors of thought reside (in man, who is so very good at this particular thing) where the directed atoms know no error; and why should will be found, where things went obviously according to a will which they did not possess, irrelevant to their operations, themselves oblivious of their servitude, not being blessed with so much as the capacity to think! and if they had it, where is the evidence! and since there is none, where is the science that postulates such things to explain what is not explicable, or for explication, since it does not enter into the data of what happens (cf. SMR pp. 80ff., 115ff., 131ff., 140ff., 284ff., 307ff., 413ff., A Spiritual Potpourri Chs. 1-3) ?
Just precisely where! Is this to be the end of the world, for science-philosophy (currently by many vitamised with science almost as if it were a fun fair, for serious-minded scientists, weary of the strait-jacket of disciplined thought and taking time off with a few beers!) ?
There IS A UNITY of course. It is not (and as noted, CANNOT BE) a self-sufficient unity. it is NOT the unity of the wholly disparate; for there is no unity in systematic diversity. It MAY of course be UNIFIED into an operational totality (in fact, this has been done and it deserves research - it is called MANKIND). Here the trilogy of will and mind and spirit is wedded, but not welded. It does not systematically interfere, though there can be some interaction. It is like any other invention really: there are provisions for interaction in certain respects, and there is a construction which erects certain sophisticated realms (like the old-fashioned wireless-tubes), which operate according to their own field, but provide as ingredients, what is needed in some allied field.
The human body is full of such discrete and brilliant provision for mass-production, mathematical unity, and energic adequacies at all levels, from cells to organs. The unity is NOT TO BE FOUND*1 however by seeing how an electron is REALLY a brain; or a nerve cell really a muscle; or a mind really a slave system, or a will, merely a delusion. How would you know, since you have one; and how can anyone EVER penetrate to the fact of delusion, if it is endemic! If you could TELL, it COULD not be endemic. If it is NOT endemic, then it is merely a possible condition, and then the nature of it, its causes and cure becomes logically possible. Logic burrows beautifully, and when its end is found, its value is confirmed.
It points to God, as we saw in The Shadow of a Mighty Rock, with unerring certitude; and when He is found (and the point here is that there is more to it than a discovery per se, since He is a person with His own ways), and in God it finds its source, then in fact His statements are found, and from Him, His word has all things in an order so perfect, that it fills with a just awe, and a due delight.
Thus, THIS UNITY IS NOT from some ingredient. It is in the DESIGN. That is the way with all of our cases, and it is way here. It is in the mind of the designer, the creator, the conceptualisation of the constructor, the mental habitat of the maker, the spirit of the producer, the flair of the fashioner, the thought of the conceiver.
To try to ‘unify’ the penchants, principles, preferences, purposes and productions of what matches the definitive expression of design, with some particle is merely one more expression of the naturalistic fallacy. How does this calumny of logic proceed, and what does it say ? This:
- 'Because it is big, it does not need to be logical; since it is vast, it is rationally vacuous. Large scale enterprises are not subject to logic. Build the
, and you do not need to be rational or consider causality.' Sydney Harbour Bridge
- This vacuity of thought is constructed ex vacuo, despite and indeed by MEANS of its mentality ridden interstices, its formed, finished, coherent expression of just one brand of thought, one language of life, one mode of vitality propulsion. It deploys causality in order to ignore it; it is like using an automobile to deny that they exist. Yet, goes the nursery rhyme, it must nevertheless be construed as NOTHING ELSE COULD EVER BE CONSTRUED.
- If it were, thought would suicide and its products die with it. This liberty is mere self-contradiction of the grounds of discourse, as often shown on this site (cf. SMR Ch.3, and causation). As soon as thought starts and uses the rationality of language, the results accrue and lead to God as shown in SMR Ch.1 et al.. IF it does NOT start, then there is no language, and a de-created being, not a logician, stares dumbly into space, auto-disenabled from saying one word.
The habiliments, the paraphernalia of its genius are ignored, and the concept that it makes itself is imported, though the means are as absent as the minds that despise the virtue and brilliance of the creation; and the ‘principles’ of such a happening, as ludicrous as any other myth (strictly so-called, since the cause is inelegantly inadequate for the observable result); while the inexcusability is as vast as in any other case, where profuse examples of what IS the basis, creativity, exist in the VERY MINDS and SPIRITS of those who refuse to believe what logic demands. Here the exact expressions of this sort of thing are in ourselves, constant, if not daily, or with some, virtually hourly events. (Cf. SMR pp. 131, 159, Ch.3; That Magnificent Rock Chs.1, 7, 8; Questions and Answers 3; Ch.1 supra).
There is NOTHING TO IT, when you look at it as an exoteric set of unrelated paraphernalia. Its unity is not then explained, but mocked. This is not scientific theory, but brain-weary dilettantism. The reality which Freud, Darwin and Marx all missed, like the early Greek thinkers, is in its functional sufficiency for multi-phase operation. It lies in the inter-relation between design and performance - as with a car.
Unity as Entity,
and Containment of Cosmoi,
or the Meretricious Mouthing
of the Irrelevant
A car has THIS unity: that it goes, performs a transport function, allows passengers to sit, wheels to turn, rigidity sufficient to prevent great discomfort to passengers and too easy injury on unintended impacts with objects foreign to the purpose of the driver. ALL its systems are to this ONE END. THERE is its unity. Its performance is index to its meaning, and its meaning is an attribute of its design, and its creation is the process of thought and intelligently directed energy, by which this purpose is integrated into a design of multiply different TYPES of object, a mere junk heap except for one thing. And that ? ITS PURPOSE. Its design and its purpose mark it out as rational, its purpose marks out the elements of the ensemble as critically able to be appraised.
It goes ? Could we do better, when it comes to life! Have we done better ? Why, we have done nothing at all, studying and considering and coding, and clipping here, shearing there, and acting altogether like Year 8 students in their first year in the lab..
In the case of man, then, we cannot do at all; though some of the blemishes after a few thousands of years on the 'road' of the vehicle called man, can be repaired.
Let us then create spirit ! Let man be very wonderful and congratulate himself fatuously on his imaginary prowess, though he be but made.
Let us articulate the modes of making God-consciousness, personality understanding, ideational originality, planes of thought, originality so intense and profound that errors are not nonsense at times, but the buffetings of the wings in the airs of grandeur, in the thoughts of many things, planes and dimensions, depths and majesties.
Will man so speak ? or will the denial of logic be assisted now by the addition of megalomania ? Forgetting his created status, will he now try to imitate God by constructing himself! He cannot even construct its material substructure (cf. SMR pp. 316Dff.). He is like a technician, imaging he is a great tenor when he first begins to understand the deposition of sound code onto magnetic tape, forgetting that originality and its material modes of conveyance from one point to another, are as far apart as heaven and earth; as are man in the image of God, with divine access, and man in the dumped desecration of presumption.
How one is reminded of the word of God, here, where Isaiah prophesied from the Lord, concerning those other idolatries men worshipped, those other works of their hands (for really, it lies in the mind and in the spirit, the things people are illogical enough to worship are mere implements, while we ourselves do better, being implement assessors)
"Indeed they are worthless:
Their works are nothing;
Their moulded images are wind and confusion."
Not only moreover, are these ideas barren of logic and empty of ground, but the particular results of the tests of organic evolution are not only negative, they are nebulously hilarious as well. As seen in SMR pp. 140ff., for example, in terms of scientific method it has a negative rating, multiply so, whereas creation is indicated in test situations positively. What logic requires, empirical science thus attests. There is nothing but glorious harmony; and where endless difficulties are found, this is simply where neither the empirical demands of scientific method NOR the empirical facts, being dismissed, respond, even if given some kind of academic mouth to mouth effort at resuscitation.
Organic evolutionism, the present format of the nature myth that has for so long occupied the despoiled minds of the ancients, and mesmerised those of many moderns, is a religion based on hope. It is constantly found hopeless because it starts where it should end, with an odyssey of broken facts, and ends where it should start, with endless search for something that would fit fact. Like a disappointed dream, it moves without ground and is grounded by a farrago of alien fact, a dynamic of intolerant logic and a folly of intestate imagination. Boundless, it never bounds at all.
In it, fact is replaced by fancy, data disappear before desire.
For its premises to proceed, illusion is master.
There are no evidences of its products of elevation. The pit is bare of those myriads; for they are not there. Broken and hopeless in design, as matter tries with the design powers not present, to make the useless billions of misfits, there they are, attesting themselves. Where ? In the mind. Never in the soil.
There is no known means for their arrival. The production procedures and machineries, the concord-creating operatives, they do not appear.
There is no occasion on which it is observed happening. As it is nude of products to show the go in its pitiful misfits and failures, so it is without means to have it go and with out observable action in which it goes. Clothing is denied it, and it stands, sits, fiddles, inane, useless, myths for the mighty, illusion for the race.
What is missing ? There is no footprint of walking, no foot to place it in any case. Nor is there heart to propel the foot it it were there. This is the shocking nudity of the thought in that myth. NOWHERE and in NOTHING does it follow, find due experimental confirmation or find principles productive and testable, for results.
Lacking in particular is that army of half-way up items, quarter way, continually crowded cast-offs; for we are moving in the simple organic evolutionary model where the intelligence is well below that of a moron, and the 'efforts' - though there is nothing to make the move, do not appear. So we look for the means to make the missing imprints in the fossil record, but it is SO conspicuously missing that new theories about epigenetics or virtual creation in a sudden rush augment the old, hopeful monster dream, one which at that would arise complete with wonderful gear of minute application of logical principles, in its suave bits and pieces for development.
However, even that, it is found ONLY in the mind, never on the tarmac of truth, in the production unit that makes FINDS.
The sight of what is never found in evidence, of the work of what never appears in potency, never manages visibility, though ultimately materialist in conception(cf. Repent or Perish Ch. 7), this never appears.
Gould merely exhibits on fossil base what others before insisted, concerning the need for workability in the nascent products (if they do not work, they do not live and so do not contribute), to avoid the dumb products that are not there. He apostrophises heaven because of the madness of accounting on the grand scale indeed, for design LOSS (as he attests) over time, and wonders as he wanders, deprived of the idea of making marvels by indifference, since their vast diversity in his model, come first, what it is all about. Thus stunned, he talks of of punctuation, while failing in entirety to say anything at all to the point of production, between the commas.
Avoiding obfuscatory gradualism: the notion
that missing powers will work if they come slowly,
that design integration will be found if only you give
what is less than the moronic enough time,
that system will produce what it shows absent, and arrive from non-system,
which arrives for its own part, free of cause,
Gould looks to a colossus of miracles, working with an ingenuity and thrust that is appealing to fairy story makers, and myth masters. It is not so popular with others, for like the rest, the power to produce products of distinction and wit is vested in what lacks both, as well as the visible means to orient to either. Gould makes the folly more evident by more attention to some facts.
Godschmidt also disdained gradualism, and challenged men to find an example at the level necessary and to the point; but his own contribution of hopeful monster merely makes the presentation of life from what lacks the means to work in the multiple cosmoi of concepts, co-operation and imagination, orders, assembly lines and editing, the more onerous. Efforts do not lack; but results do. That is the story of organic evoutionism.
No evidence of action upwards is to be found as incoherent virtual designs arise to their inheritance to fulfil the criterion of design by definition. It remains silent as the grave, though not so its proponents. The fourfold pit is it. No power, no means, no evidence and no presentation from the world of the current happenings.
In scientific method, by contrast, you start with what demands explanation, and test it; and abide by the result, casting out failure ruthlessly, in the interest of truth.
Here in organic evolution, you start with hope, evidence being unable to appear, at the outset (Violation I), proceed anyway (Violation II)), get further non-verifications (Violation III and on for each case as it comes and is dismissed invalidly from it negative status). Then you fail to find the basis at length, to provide for the hope, far less to show it at work, either in sight ocular or logical, empirical, testamental or testimonial, in any field. Nothing testifies, in writing, in observable action or results.
With creation, everything attests, in writing (to give the specifications in code, no less, attesting by testament), in testimonial (fully functional living forms, significantly without dunce cap modern style objects d'art visible 'on the way'), in non-action now (a book written does not continue to compose itself, lacking the code source and the intelligence to manipulate it artfully) and in downward draft as in the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the observable testimony normal for anything designed and exposed to vast and various forces.
With creation, ALL corresponds to the model; with organic evolution, NOTHING does.
Cross reference to scientific law is not forthcoming, scientific law itself is not formulated (as Karl Popper points out, cf. SMR pp. 145 -150 ). The thing has no basis, attestation, coherent formulation, verifiable indication, but like a dream wafts in and out of the dissipating designs designated mankind, like a death rattle in ideational format. Indeed, even the procedural format is mere words without signification: survival of the fittest neither provides them, gives ground for them, defines what fitness is, except that it is what survives, when this is taken as the criterion of life. It is not so. Survival and reality are two different things, as any rat could tell you, if it had the ideational cosmos involved, implanted in code relationships to reality, for expression.
Well then, these things being so, it is just the thing for a corrupted culture to INSIST by law and force on teaching the stuff, this impotent panorama of nature myth, to children: not as innocent fairy tale, laced with violence, but as if it had some relationship to reality.
Gross things can capture and chide lovely ones, but this has nought to do with loveliness, except to teach it to look to the Maker for protection and point in life, not to the strength of the grotesque. Thus to make the race the more lurid in lovelessness, what is to be done is to declare that what follows scientific method scrupulously (creation, SMR loc.cit.) is not science, and what multiply violates it, is so.
Thus does culture find itself descending into the squalor of mere lies, fraud, indoctrination of the servile, and baseless religion. Hitler did it all, with flair and folly mixed; now the world, seeing Stalin in the same mould, heedless, loves the lurid and follows its destruction as if hypnotised by vice.
It is. Romans 1 makes it clear that folly delights to think itself wise, and to worship the creation more than the Creator, seeking to wrestle with truth while it parades its pollution. This scenario, right to the end of it, in vile and violent hearts, horrid living modes and sexual effrontery and confusion, is here, as prescribed in Romans 1's analysis and exposure of it all. It is like a medical disease, and the symptoms at its maturity are precise and perfect in their fulfilment of the script, the scripture, the Bible, the word of God.
In this sad and sordid mess, non-evidential gods, spiritual, mental or natural, are fashioned at will as man fulfils the biblical basis of his disease, and embraces his assigned end with a fervour which now Moslem, now Communist, now Unity of Religions, now naturalistic dreams, each or a mixture, or a tincture, or an essentialisation, proceeds to its natural end before the supernatural God of creation (cf. News 121, 122, Of the Earth, Earthy Ch. 13, Ch. 6 infra, *6).
Nor is He inactive, having warned in Romans 1 of the evil progression in principle, as in Matthew 24 in practice; and it all happens like well-oiled machinery; while nonetheless, the machinations of man are far from mechanical, being irresponsive and irresponsible alike, unworthy of his construction. Man moves with a rigour which is like that of rigor mortis as if aware in some sullen, unconscious way, tittilating into focus and vanishing obliquely betimes, of Christ's will.
This, the Christ comes to the rescue, but not of the passionate, the fervent, the ruthless in spirit, whose delight is to void mercy, avoid Christ, devoid of the goodness of heart which makes of man a site for fellowship with God, because of a continual voiding of truth in favour of the void or its correlates. Alas for man, the void is far from what it seems, for judgment settles like tar in the pit. Christ remains for those who not hijacking man through various means, or themselves by devious derangements, repent of their domain and find His demesne, rejoicing to enter HIS kingdom, not as a help for their programs, but as their source, their SPIRITUAL source (Colossians 3:10). This, it is more than the lifeless means of life, DNA; it is the living evocation of life where it is specific to man (I John 1:1-4).
The need for this salvation is the more obvious as man pursues his unspiritual saga, having hijacked science in its interface with logic, truth and Creator, while zealously achieving his future in dismal dynamic; and these particulars indeed, are but one symptom of that need.
It is judgment according to truth that is all that is left, when mercy is despised. Evidentially, not only creation but redemption through Christ is not only the only scientifically evidenced divine design feature at this level, but the one which on all sides is attested in its ramifications and implications at the spiritual level, that of the printed word, that of life ( cf. Light Dwells with the Lord's Christ, The gods of naturalism have no go! Scientific Method, Satantic Method, and the Model of Salvation, Reason, Revelation and the Redeemer).
This ? it without relief for the renegade, or escape for the scientistic or spiritual acrobat, who in combat with truth, assigns folly where wisdom dwells, either directly or indirectly (cf. SMR pp. 176 -190). The escape from the truth is in fact, no escape at all, but a vocation for vacation in the desert, where Summer heat hits its summit.
The world is not quiescent! How could it be, under such circumstances...
*1A If one defines intelligence by what it does, then this cosmos is an example of its exercise. See on this SMR p. 211:
Let us however, not forget the fact of the amount deposited. We have nothing which by observation can match for intelligence, by results can equal for its manifestation, the equipment with which on earth we think, and move and have our being. If the source were not intelligent, contrary as we see and shall see, to all reason, then our greatest works should be denied the attribute of intelligence. However, we experience the intelligence as we proceed in our works; and perceive it is profoundly surpassed in the works which make our working possible: the construction of our bodies, minds and spirits, and of the world which is their visible habitat.
That is of course the definitional dilemma always faced by unbelief: if you are going to be consistent, and define what it is that intelligence is by what it does, then the essential characteristics and criteria are surpassed in what we are, as evidence of its working, relative to anything we do. Yet intelligence is by definition attributed to us in terms of performance. Alas for the atheist, we are monumentally outperformed. See further: Chapter 3, esp. pp. 262-263, 290 infra.
If one wishes to define intelligence despite what it does, then you enter word-play which, although interesting or even somewhat fascinating as a game of entering the ridiculous, is not the stuff of work, or of what works.
See on DNA as language:
Jesus Christ, Defaced, Unfazed ... Ch. 4
2. Dr Jerry Bergman, in his technical article, Mutations and Evolution (1995, Part 2, Creation-Ex Nihilo Technical Journal), cites Biologist L.R. Donaldson, Director of a study involving artificial selection from radiation-treated animals, after 5 years declaring:
"So far as I know we're not getting any good characteristics. You can't add when you are subtracting."
This is found in the summary from the University of Washington study, which also declares from experiment:
"Five years of tests have shown that radiation produces no abnormalities that do not occasionally show up in nature. But irradiated parents produce a much higher percentage of malformed offspring."
· Of breeding work on forest trees given radiation treatment, Giertych is cited: "All we got were deformed freaks, absolutely useless in forestry." There was doubt if a single useful result occurred.
· As to Drosphila, Thomas Morgan who started its study, bred about 900 consecutive generations, which Bergman notes as being the equivalent of some 25,000 years of human reproduction, but "ended with nothing more then deformed fruitflies." There is no clear advance anywhere.
· Dr Jay L. Wile in his "Beneficial Mutations" article (op.cit. Vol.1, 1992) made massive computer simulations of chance mutation, allowing by a refinement for advantage to more sensible changes from an interpretive viewpoint. He found, as theoretically normal for information theory, that so far from advance, there was SYSTEMATIC trend to incomprehensibility as he, by random methods altered space, content, sequence, so that a simple sentence resulted in no product that made sense after 10,000 generations, even specious sense (allowable words) being destroyed syntactically for any useful function.
· This, he noted, was "not surprising to anyone who has studied information theory ... (which) states that any highly-developed system of information will be harmed by the random mutation of any of its components." Of a 30,000 generation approach to his computer simulation result, he noted "the effect of aeons of time (30,000 human generations correspond to approximately 600,000 years ) and natural selection do nothing to damage the conclusions of the theory..."
(Cf. SMR p. 134; and parallel pp, 234-236, 252Aff.)
· To revert: Bergman cites Rust - "Each of the newly emerged minimal functions [from mutations] must be capable of improvement by random mutations - up to the near-perfection usually found in present organisms... Not even a single "positive" or adaptive mutation, in the sense of an improved function previously unavailable, has been documented in any organism." (Italics added.)
· He proceeds: "Takeover of functions from other organisms, by means of episomes, transduction, genetic recombination, allele assortment and the like, cannot be counted as an emergence of a new or improved function in the biosphere, nor can regaining a function lost previously, or the display, under stress, of a temporarily unused function." (Cf. SMR pp. 215,116, 121.)
· Thus the absorption of new material into viruses from existing organisms is irrelevant to organic evolution, as is the defective arrival of genes which limit, for example, the absorption of an antibiotic, by downgrading efficiency in the organism. As Dr Wieland points out, 'superbugs' when given back the competitive situation hospitals tend to reduce by antibiotics, no longer enjoy the advantage of their deformities.
· DNA can certainly be altered by impact, as can many designs, and this may give temporary advantage in such specialised circumstances, posing a threat to human life: but this is no case of superior function not before present, in the world of design, which is what is relevant to our discussion. Advantage in survival within such special situations may occur; arrival however of more advanced, technically more developed designs, this is another matter. It is not found. (See SMR pp. 148, 214-220; also *1 above.)
From SMR pp.252I, we see that language itself is of the order of creation, and man who uses it, the more. Repent or Perish Ch. 7 goes far further still in considering the conceptions implicit in man, before and to enable him to conceive, and talk and use ideation.
Conceiving the conceptualiser, man, and endowing him not merely with mind, but with the spirit to deploy it, for good or evil, logically or irrationally, for this reason or that, and to act as a person capable of self-deception and wilful misuse of others, or sacrifice for them, as occasion arises: this is the arresting work of the Creator who, being not in any system since this would require the Creator of that, but being free and inventor of time with its restraints, gives to man by His own language, not only in DNA that man might exist, but in His word, that man might persist and be pure to his origination and design, what is needed to complete the design.
That ? it is wisdom and understanding and direction and correction; and because of what man has done, it includes redemption, and because God is and there is no other, and it is He who has been offended against, it is one, His own.
It is in the Bible which alone is both valid and verified in this domain as speech of the Almighty, and further commends itself as having no other possible rationally conceivable source. On that see *5 below. It is here alone in this realm, that remedy is from God, of God and a gift to fallen man, so that he is not expected to try to get somewhere with God, as if fidgeting in the unknown, or seek good works to impress, as if 49% might lead to hell, but shown what God accepts in place of the destruction of the individual and the race. So far from this being mere work, religious or other, on the part of mankind, which does nothing to remedy the evils, it is God's own satisfaction that is gained, by His own redeeming action.
The errors of man are such that justice could only remove him; and the mercy of God is such that the interests of justice are met in truth to the full, and that is the work of Jesus Christ, crucified.
#A n E x c u r s i o n
It may be that some will wish an excursion into more detail in this area, and when pp. 316G ff. and 348 ff. have been studied, then what follows may be considered most readily.
In fact, the affair of language is even more ludicrous than this, when it is considered as the recipient of bombardment. Just as the letters of language are no mere objects, but symbols that operate in a world of syntax, unit meaning and formal constraints of their own, so these in turn relate to other worlds of their own. They operate indeed in a universe of meanings which in turn relate to ideas, ideology, ideational syntheses and refinements of inter-relationships, purposes, sectional program, logical developmental structure, inter-active phases and phrases, figures, features, feeling, finesse, aesthetics, formal and operational functions, integrative hierarchy of control, thrust and focus, with cumulative consistency-constraints and sensitivity at all levels to contamination.
This sensitivity item applies at the level of each system and sub-system, and then retro-actively to the ultimate functionality of the whole, which in this way comes to be faced with sectional change of tone, or feeling, or analytical co-ordination or consistency and so on. The destructive efficiency of a medical virus at the control level, is merely one illustration of processive barbarism in the midst of multiply disciplined thought, semantics, signification and significance at all levels.
We have taken the occasion to consider language more generally, but to do so in order the more to conceive the type of situation which it evokes. We do however have before us the result of constructive action - that is, we are operational human beings. We consider simply the function; and with it, the finesse and sensitive webbing of inter-relations behind this. Of this we are avid, astounded learners. Nor should we be so astounded: for as functioning persons, we ourselves are constantly aware of the high wonder of our performance characteristics in thought, feeling, ideas, perspectives, aesthetics, morals, spirituality, mentality and intelligent understanding.
The synthetic, finally unitary, directable, yet prepared concourse of correlated components is like a dream of marvels, that would leave the U.S. national highway system, complete with earth-works and signals, signs and bridges, a silly little joke by comparison. This is provided for one person: but we ? the race... we communicate and may co-operate, each in various groups, so that multiple communication-highway systems have intermittent, intelligible arrangements with each other, formalisable by contract, but equally susceptible to nuance and nicety.
If of all such a relatively simple national highway system, we expose the structure, the form, the features, the functions, the pathways, the signs, their time-tabling and the bridges: all this, to random bombardment - do we still expect it to function after trillions of such uncouth alterations ? Any bureaucrat would be likely wisely to regard a Director who expected success from such operations either as possessed of a rare form of madness, or as an enemy agent - though possibly on drugs, drunk, or seeking stress leave by deceit.
Operationally, this is the principle of the cytological situation. Logic, symbolism, signification, semantics, rules, channels, consistency, direction, control, co-ordination, performance on this basis, integration of performance components, timing and sequence, myriadfold specialties compounded to progressively eminent and functionally exalted conclusions are in place, just as in our example. It is admittedly a poor one. The case surpasses such simplicity as the highway system and all the cars in their goings, to an extreme degree. That however only serves to increase the impact of the facts. (Cf. pp. 332F ff..) The principles in all such cases have been considered therefore; and they apply causatively as has been and is in detail shown (esp. Chs. 3, 5 infra), pervasively.
At the language area, then, the question arises: How is there to be preserved this myriad-formed concourse of symbolic, syntactical, analysable, semantic, synthetic signals and operational performance... in something creatively effective... ? We need not be concerned in this, at the merely physical level. It is a problem which has been solved for us in the wonder of DNA, and its associates, its editorial controls and the symbolic magnificence that performs such wonders in a kind-preserving work... and indeed, language in its various formulations, installations and evocations, is part of the preservation, in genes as in Genesis, of Kinds.
If however we do not beg this delicious question: How can any language (possessed of the facilities and functions the possessor shows) be fostered, or even preserved, by bombardment ? - the answer is simple. It cannot. Cascades of changes successively fail to conform to, but rather attack, through lack of both understanding and intelligence, the massive constraints operative and required. Invasion is like that: it may serve this or that, here or there; but its nature is unakin to the system it assaults, on which it makes its incursions, to which it comes with small or no regard for the requirements of order, efficiency and operability.
It is indeed a case comparable to that of bulls joining football teams, neither knowing focal constraints, nor caring for the rules or for that matter, the performance - grossly or in finesse - of the game. The game could not go on. The program would be ruined.
In general, and of necessity, massive non-conformity is no answer to the logical requirement of continual, sensitive characterisable, synthetic, symbolic and operational conformity. You can of course attribute an opposite as the cause of what it denies, and indeed of what it attacks - but not with reason; and that after all, is currently our field...
If a language and all the operational features it entails (whether in the conscious arena or not) cannot continue with random incursions into all or any of its system, again let us emphasise, how much less could it thus be built!
What then of man ? The individual is equipped with spirit (q.v. esp. pp. 348 ff. infra), and this has a conscious, cognitive language of its own - with personal powers of creative thought. That is one wonder. That we should also have our pre-prepared, readily utilisable material equipment with its operating system and language, beneath our vital, personal activity, allowing ready and inter-active movement with our physical and vital environment; that our inbuilt cell-language is preserved from unsystematic dissolution (for a fascinating time of function), both by the unit or cell and by inter-connected billions of units in synthesis, and this through magnificent defence and management procedures, written into our physical coding at the cell level: this is simply one characteristic, but here brilliant phase of what creation is always all about.
Adequate power beyond the system, produces in the system, what is beyond the certifiable power of the system to produce. It happens in hats, short-stories, buildings and surgery: what is needed is able to be received as necessary input; but the recipient system is not able to produce it. (Cf. pp. 316G ff..)
Whatever the level of such input, that is the attestation of creation. However, since that is the issue here, it cannot be used unless invoked by name: creationism. If not, then one notes that the power even to preserve language is not effective without its first being formed. You cannot preserve a fortune before you make it. Making it is the point. You must create it first. Each symbolic, and in the cells, directive level and feature must be granted the privilege of existence. For each, the causation must be adequate. As to the features and foci, the functions and systems, the scope and significances, their more extended review here merely extends the requirements of and for that adequacy. The machinations of magic may have their moments, but in the end, there is the answer of reality.
The fact that you could not preserve language by bombardment thereon, is simply an added woe to the something-from-nothing irrationality, which as we see continually in this work (see Chs. 3, 5, 10 and Index - nothing, causality, irrationality) is a mere contradiction in terms. Such a proposition first destroys the validity of the thought from which it comes; and what is destroyed is by its very nature, inoperative. That can do nothing which is itself dead; nor attack anything which first itself fails; nor logically deny anything, which first denies itself.
The supervening, consciously conceptualised, purpose-error structure intimate to our spirits with all their involvements, is then simply one more marvel - greater in freedom and significance than the first - where we are permitted personal involvement. This, with its language conception and control, including the power to break and make rules, issues one more requisition for its causative source. Language in its cognitive and non-cognitive forms issues its own eloquent call for the multiply causative systems maker, and for the causative ground of its integrated character.
Creation is as always emphatically and obtrusively attested in a cumulative and comprehensive way. Its verification never varies. Other paths are built on air; or perhaps in this case more aptly, on the bombardment of guns on what isn't there. Little children in toyland may try to "create" in this way, but they have to mature. Imagination is a wonderful thing; but in the end, the job has to be done.
*3 See Barbs ... 7 and 6.
A subjective, relativistic entity not only has no access to the truth of the system, since there is nothing but what internally relates, each part or aspect to the other, but on that model, there IS nothing to which so to relate. Any logic which seeks to be valid, cannot use this model to determine the truth of the system, what it is in truth.
Further, not only in such a case is both truth and access to it, beyond mere operational happenings, unavailable, and non-existent, so not usable in discussion or debate, so requiring immediate failure on the part of any debater or contestant of this character on this topic: but the competence of logic in any sphere is then ALWAYS subject to doubt and scrutiny, to confirm even that part of its operations.
However, to evaluate REQUIRES the objective validity of the method, which, being the point of the exercise, is not available. It is a question begged. It is logically inept, its exponents without either resource or recourse.
Hence validity of logic is impossible without God. Moreover, causation is ONE of the elements of logic, seeking what does and what does not have an adequate basis of explicatory kind, and without its use, logic itself is failed on this model, and this is a third ground of failure in the validity of any such logic.
It is failed thus both in general and in particular, and on a multiple basis, even at the outset. Logic without causation AND its necessary result in God, as shown in SMR, is inoperable on the first count, and invalid on the second.
Just as effective language without logic is impossible, so is logic without causation, and that multiply.
See also The Bright Light and the Uncomprehending Darkness Ch. 7.
Man that medley and composite unity of mind, matter and spirit, has the three in the definable precincts of design to such an extent that if this were not design, none in the materially related realm could exist. The following assemblage from Dig Deeper, Higher Soar, Divine Glory Delights the More Ch. 2 exhibits this from various aspects.
Designations of Design
See first, with respect to definition, SMR pp. 211ff., Repent or Perish Ch. 7, throughout but esp. in two locations and their hinterlands, Ch. 2 above, and indexes.
One adds from the 'two locations', first of all, the following:
1) Indeed, the infamous 'wriggle' that 'survival' created it all is as absurd a proposition as ever passed the lips of man. Does good driving (or 'better') of a Volkswagen create a Rolls Royce, even in stages? Does non-death mean imaginative re-coding? Does creation consists in endurance? Is all language to be a puppet of pretence? Do billions of designs have to be added to billions of visible ones, as 'steps on the way' - always invisible? As if this made things 'easier' for a characterisable end-product called life - far less, one called the universe, the very name of which connotes the summing in sequential array, of some of creative components noted above. Or does their absence, these prodigious outpourings of imagined designs on the way (cf. Professors Thompson, Løvtrup, et al., SMR pp. 199-200, 252Aff.), after diligent delving, make their theoretically useless - indeed, pejorative - addition, please any better, any rational enquiry?
Creation, dear readers, like mathematics, art, is what it is - does what it does, and is characterisable by criteria which it, like other powers, displays. The display is variously, multitudinously, concertedly, co-ordinatively, discretely and synthetically present in a canvas reaching beyond measurement, figures and features beyond assessment, stretched before one of the products, called man, so that he can - if he will - show the sheer prodigality of the imagination used in creating him, by 'assessing' it all - with himself - as betokening, really, no creation at all, just specks of paint spattered on the canvas, that has no basis, from tins with no basis, by a hand that is not there with an art that is.
At odd times, he even imagines that despite the clarity of his logic, he may be deceived by his logic, and reasons with 'validity' that it is itself invalid, just to show the tantrum-esque follies of which he is capable, abusing logic - like an asinine trader, abusing as mutinous, another man's mule for not following him - before falling to the ground in a fit of irrationalism, matching rigor mortis. Next, schizoid but chastened, he returns to USE logic to escape logic, and then confused, he continues to speak as if the mere mouthing of words avoided issues.
AMID ALL THIS TRAFFIC SURGING AROUND MANKIND, LET US BE BOOKED
At the outset in our site, we have first noted and then examined two "books" - and it is very close to LITERALLY two books. They are both exceptionally well-known, the Bible for the mind and the heart of man, and the DNA for his structure. Each is inscribed with efficiency, profound symbolic coherence and cohesion, intimate capacity for correlation with command, system to the finest point, and just that combination of meaning and symbolic method which constitutes design, direction and communication. If this is not communication, nothing could be.
This however is not all. There are two additional books, somewhat more figurative, but not in the least imaginary. The FUNCTIONS to which EACH OF THESE EXTRA 'BOOKS' REFERS is as real as any between two covers in our ambit and purvey of scholars.
The third then, or the first of the two extra books is this: the co-ordination of mental world and physical world, auditory reception and command execution, between the man whose bodily equipment is programmed, and the world which has its physical and botanical, biological equipment programmed. The programs intermesh well; their symbolic sub-structures are unitary in kind, so that the efforts of the one, avail in the other, the impacts of the one are understood in the other, and (cf. Predestination and Freewill, Part 4), there are no alogisms to be found: the logic is unitary.
More, the mind of man, using programmed sub-structures for its ultra-programmatic progressions and pursuits, can understand the products that surround him.
There is therefore, and this is the fourth book, this second unit in our second series: and this is the comprehension-combination that transcends. It goes far beyond the mere structural logical cohesion and synthesis. To emit and receive in terms of a common system is one thing, extremely magnificent though this created product undoubtedly is; but to be so prepared in spirit and mind, so that the raw materials, themselves coherent and cohesive between the two systems, within and without, are able to be grasped, intuited, subjected to imaginative incursions, brought into the scope of thought and will and analysis, yes of understanding for action by the non-material, purpose-proposing, imaginative dimension of the being called man, his spirit, this is the next generation of marvel. (Cf. SMR pp. 348ff..)
Yet it would seem indeed scapegrace in gratitude to God who performed this production with the necessary linguistic, mathematical, comprehensive, analytical skill to manufacture symbols and significances (symbol targets), intimations and executions, thought sub-structures in logic and meaning, and interaction with a subject also formed, if we did not notice a fifth book. This is the power to ruminate concerning the Maker Himself. This naturally is the copestone, to which the imaginary relationship of Pinocchio to his craftsman corresponds in reality. Right through to the inward realisation of the thrust of the logic, the communality of the communication, the direction of the design, the strategy of the construction, man can peer toward the God who made him.
He can do more. It is not necessary in this field to speak of a 5th book, although it would be perfectly meaningful. One prefers not to do so, as at the level we have now reached, the affair is inter-personal to such an extent that the term 'book', so fitting earlier, is somewhat distanced. Rather this is the intimacy-provision for creator and creature when that creature is man. This is what book No. 1 provides for (the Bible), book No.2 is sub-structured to enable (the cells DNA and allied phenomena, atomic parameters and provisions), book No. 3 ascends to substantiate, book No. 4 arises to confirm. We shall however give it a name: there is in this fifth dimension, a correlation that is spiritual in kind, so that it may be termed scope for spiritual communication, and for concord. We are moving from the concept of 'book' to that of 'look', or inter-personal interchange.
This allows testing of promises, assimilation of pronouncements, reaction to orders, comprehension of commands, in a SETTING of illumination of conspectus, like a search-light revealing from the nose of an aeroplane, the configuration of the land far below, and something of the ways of those who live there. This is an ultra-programmatic conspectus, and an inter-personal opening. It is a vista on the divine.
It is complicated by just one vital feature, which is equally a vital failure, such as one may get in a damaged automobile, or TV. There is a perverse streak which surfaces in man, so that the more the promises of God in the Bible are fulfilled, and objectively they all are always found to be of this kind, the less they are wanted; the more the prophecies are brought into history, like obedient little lambs in a fenced paddock, the more is the distaste; the more the disciplines for folly, the more the folly, or the less the concern. While this is not like rectilinear motion, a mere reciprocity, and is complicated by the resilience and capacity granted to the immaterial spirit of man, happily able to divorce itself in imagination and purposes proposed for itself, from almost anything real, at will, it nevertheless is a thrust, an historical trend.
These preliminaries allow our minds to realise the UNDERLYING design, before we consider the externally more obvious examples of it. We can now proceed, this base work done, with what is gained from The Wit and Wisdom of the Word of God, the Bible True to Test Ch. 2.
On design definition, the case is clear. You need what has integrity, or better integrality, oneness in multiplicity, so that many things minister to one result. You need the power to imagine it, since commands do not imagine themselves; the capacity to codify it if you want to use, as in DNA, programmatic devices, the comprehension to make code articulate with command, and command with the raw material for its implementation; you need a series and sequence so that the correct data come with the correct matériel and the correct provision of it at the correct time, and the correct concept with which to edit any errors and rectify any oddments. So is it with the embryo, and indeed in much of the following growth, outside the womb.
This of course is precisely what is found in design, to make it so; and nowhere on earth is that of man surpassed in any visible realm. How is this so ? It is a question of
complexity for the unity, differential divisions of mind, spirit and matter
for the components, inextricably interwoven for normal function,
operational sufficiency and efficiency for the command centre
or operational agent to secure the results which are to be gained
from comprehensive USE of all the equipment and connections
and phases of life involved.
Nothing comes near such versatility, power and combination, synthesis of dynamic diversity in KIND, as this. Fulfilling the specifications for the definition of design, it yet surpasses all other visible examples. To remove this example, this exemplar indeed, man, from design, would have to remove the concept; but the concept is based on billions of examples, systematically found and implemented by the designed unit himself, man. It is just that his observable case surpasses all in the various elements that constitute what is defined to be design.
There follow three citations from earlier works, to illustrate the ludicrous results which come when man tries to ignore the data, and invent by magical moments in thought (cf. A Spiritual Potpourri Chs. 1-9), what no moments in nature contrive to produce; for you may watch forever, for what lacks what it takes, to take what it has not got. Cars do not produce cars; you need the extra features to imagine and purpose, to contrive and to make them arrive. Man-maker has to have all of this, and for such a thing as man, inventor, creator and imaginer, comprehender and amender, you need as it were the machine tools correlative to that; but it is not machinery: it is imagination and all else that the formation and formulation of command exacts.
Correlative with this again is the obvious fact that INFORMATION does not arrive, but in information science as seen below, we find that information tends to dissipate, like other design. What is based on its autonomous arrival, when the law directs that the natural course of information is its dissipation: this is not only UN-scientific; it is ANTI-scientific, and justly put into the realm of magic, where causes inadequate posited, with no evidence, are imagined to go with the results desired.
From DANCERS ... Ch. 5
Secular desperation finally comes to expression, and reality brings at least temporary deliverance from the futile dream of self-creation of what is not into what is, as design is contemplated in its enormous energy and facility.
From Wake Up World! ...Ch. 6, with some extension, we note this:
Indeed, Gould draws attention to
's belief that you cannot logically expect PROGRESS from the changes in view by any inherent propulsion, citing a letter to Apheus Hyatt, Darwin Dec. 4, 1872:
"After long reflection, I cannot avoid the conviction that no innate tendency to progressive development exists."
That of course led to Schützenburger's impasse (SMR pp. 128 ff., 157ff.). We shall soon see in the CREDO of Gould, more saltations of thought, as in Nilsson and Davies.
The Gould reference is in his book, Wonderful Life, p. 257. Gould cannot find any either. Indeed, he declares this: "Instead of a narrow beginning and constantly expanding upward range, multicellular life reaches its maximal scope at the start, while later decimation laves only a few surviving designs" (op.cit. p. 233). Indeed, he not only notes the mockery which facts achieve of the developmental design by gradual propulsion concept of Darwin, but goes far further. On p. 236, he propounds this: "But if we face the Burgess fauna honestly, we must admit that we have no evidence whatsoever - not a shred - that losers in the great decimation were systematically inferior in adaptive design to those which survived," and on p. 239, he adds:
"... we have no evidence that the winners enjoyed adaptive superiority,
or that a contemporary handicapper could have designated the survivors.
All that we have learned from the finest and most detailed anatomical monographs
in twentieth-century paleontology portrays
the Burgess losers as adequately specialized and eminently capable."
The "decimation" is his term signifying the vast lost of biota, of design, from Burgess time till now, that ultimate parody of the developing marvel concept, proliferating its productions: for here the marvel is first, together with its proliferation, and then it dies down, up and out. On p. 236, he warming to his task, announces as if under hypnosis to his 'cause', "the mere pattern of life and death offers no evidence that survivors directly vanquished the losers". Even a postiori, looking back on what was and what is, he is stumped; and that is the ultimate, when you cannot even 'explain' when you see what is the 'result', by the principles which supposedly require it.
So far from their being any inherent power to create design types, we find then that there is an inherent process to remove them, and just as the mechanisms are deemed incredible by Gould, since much is expected and little is gained, in gradualism, in order that the compleat angler should arrive and be capable of function, and we might add, since the evidence of the efforts on the way is so conspicuously lacking in all the myriads that ought to appear, that it is the other side of the impossibility, so that the coin shows both sides at once, which this being all too clownish, is quite fitting. How Alice would have loved it in her wonderland; but in science, of course, it is not a good time to take a course in children's literature, and mix it in!
Small wonder then that Gould is using heaven's name, explicitly, in his apostrophe, like Calvin in Calvin and Hobbes, as we saw in Wake Up World! ... Ch. 6:
HOW, he asks, presuming to do so "in heaven's name" - seemingly in the grip of growing frustration and desperation, like that of Nilsson and Paul Davies in his nothing approach (certainly radical, even if radically irrational)
"HOW ... COULD SUCH DISPARITY ARISE SO QUICKLY"*1A (op.cit. p. 227).
The Burgess time provided what he calls a
"Burgess maximum in organic disparity" (loc.cit.).
The Chinese fossil case cited is reputedly similar (p. 226).
"HOW," he continues,
"IN HEAVEN'S NAME
COULD SUCH DISPARITY ARISE IN THE FIRST PLACE,
WHATEVER THE LATER FORTUNES OF ITS EXEMPLARS?"
(Cf. Questions and Answers 2, End-note 1.)
It is of course far easier to go to heaven in word, than in fact;
just as it is far easier to have continuity in nature through the power of phrases,
than in the power of evident construction.
The intense and literally immense irony is this: that while Gould's words invoke a heaven of whose power no indication in his words appears that he is aware, in the antics or cavortings of his desperation, it is precisely where he invokes this name, that the answer he seeks is not only present: it is blatantly so. However, how many, how often are themselves amazed in due course, at what they did not see, and as we shall see in our Chapter 7 to follow: the sense of irony is not lost on God ! (as in Proverbs 1, 8).
The conundrum, it is most easy to answer. The bewilderment of Gould, it is simple to understand in this matter, just as his own conception of punctuated equilibrium is no more than a nomenclature with which to clad what is not there, and what is lacking on such secular constraints ? It is that lacks in such a theoretical model: a cause for conception, creation, institution, decrease over time rather than increase, beginnings like a splash, and endings like death. Gould here begins to realise in the face of evidence, the ludicrous nature of the omission! At last we find someone so fascinated by the facts, that he actually begins to state them.
From The Majestic Might of the Merciful Messiah: Jesus Ch. 6
we have four excerpts, but it needs to be read entirely.
Forgetting facts is no way to remember reality.
Yes, they present golden ideas of variation with PROGRESSIVE INFORMATION attached, so that NEW KINDS of living things arise (kinds ? you know The Defining Drama ... Ch. 10 ?), even though
it has never been seen,
the means for it have never been positively tested and
the equipment to produce it has never been found.
ALL tests fail, for the relevant criterion of advance in integral functionality into more complexity and capacity; and anti-verifications abound. Information science, for example, brings in yet one more law for this dissident theory to break: a law that information tends to disperse, not concentrate; empirics show NO design increase is made in derivative generations, a fact scarcely surprising since generation of information is generation of adapted data with attached significance; and to signify ?*1
For that, you need what has it in it to do this, and in the DNA case, to give signified orders that will in fact be executed, as well. The arrival of kinds in this arena ? We don't find it; there is no such information producer at work in the creation field, to be seen, found, witnessed or observed; no, in advancing kinds of life, there is no scintilla to be found. Books do not write themselves (unless, of course, the text be already written, and we are talking of a program by intelligence to transmit the writing by intelligence, to intelligence-possessing readers, without which the process would be meaningless, valueless and ludicrous);
engines do not elaborate on their mutual, detailed specifications
and enable their decoding into other engines;
buildings do not raise their levels and instal their wiring;
it is necessary in all things to have what it takes.
If you do not have it, you do not get it. If you want thought, you need a thinker to process and understand it; if you want will, you need someone who can will, to get the job of willing done; if you want imagination, you need a subject to specify the topic and the events: you do not make merry with water, nor does lava flow from ice. You need what it takes to get what you've got, or want to get. Making hey with irrationality while the sun of popular favour shines may be profitable and an anodyne for pride; but it is nothing else.
That is the way it is. To dabble in magic or its equivalent, a theory of irrelevance has been produced.
It cannot stand 'nature' as given from something other than itself,
so it criticises it by showing it came to be what it is by doing what it does not do,
and starting its design productions as it did not start.
We speak here of what is observed, reported and presented by scientists
such as Gould. HE may not have been keen on the implications,
and did produce a theory without power and so void of explanatory power;
but he did note facts in rather important ways!
(I've got some notes for you on that*2.)
Science often does note things like this,
together with what is necessarily implied by them,
in terms of correlative procedures.
How things go when they are there, made, is scarcely correlative, however,
to how they have got here, in order to be able to go on with things,
once they have been made.
Manufacture is not the same as operation. The work of driver or mechanic is not that of car-manufacturer, creative thought to initiate books is not the work of the librarian, nor is the butcher the breeder.
Operation has only one thing to say at this level. It is not organic evolution. It coincides precisely with creation. How ludicrous is that fixation which some appear to have as the father of thought, so that they talk of the untestable! Testable ? Is it testable whether or not new kinds of creatures are being currently manufactured by 'nature' with out intelligent aid ? Is it testable whether this negation is to be expected where certain forces act in a kind of way which is used to account for design ? Is it testable when the Bible indicates with force and simplicity, that creation was FINISHED, as to KIND ? Is it not obvious that the one implication is fulfilled, and the other is not.
The ideas of forgetting about facts were often to be found in the darkness of obscuration in earlier phases of science over history; but there seems currently to be a reversal and renegacy, back to those other phases.
Again in the same chapter we find this:
It was appalling how Gould, in his Wonderful Life, found that there were FAR MORE designs, of vast and spreading natures, of enormous complexity, in some of what he deemed (and many follow the concept) earliest times, and that the fact to be EXPLAINED, is not a growth by advents, but a decrease by departures. It was this because explanations of the opposite are rife, often compelled on students with the sort of passionate zeal that seems to come with the 70,000. Indeed, it is in its relentless and self-absorbed determination, reminiscent of the Inquisition; and we do well to remember that voiding logic in the interests of 'faith' is anti-faith, since faith is not an alternative to reality, but a link to it. No more did Christ break His own body at the Last Supper (and He was a real man - Hebrews 2), not some sort of duplicate monster, than does creation find its origin experimentally, empirically or logically in things that are made.
When the Lord speaks in Hebrews 11, of the things which are made not being made of the things that appear, of the visible a production of the invisible (just as, interestingly, obstinacy is from the invisible resource of human will, and makes much visible in its time!), He states what all attests and reason demands. (A work on this topic is REASON, REVELATION and the REDEEMER.)
Yet to produce an idea of why a growth by slow advents should suddenly bring in what Gould attests as the complexities of creation or prodigies of many kinds, in teeming array and with sub-categories abounding, when a departure by death is the realm of observational fact (and no funeral on earth is the same as creation): this is a feat peculiarly that of Darwin. He gave quite a lead, with leaps of imagination, as if measured reformatting were original creation: as if a printer were the author. In this, he has been sedulously followed, and now that his leap is deep in the storms of complete departure from fact and method in science, we hear of Darwin as though death were not the condition of his theories. He is resurrected by now departed pope, as if his double death - physical and theoretical - were in need of some hope! But there is none...
To explain the opposite of what is before you is a fine explanation indeed, perhaps for the squalls of the impenitent divorce court! It is to science as potassium cyanide to a new-born babe! It is in fact a controversy with reality, more the work of a dissident religion, than related in some obscure way to science. The question is generation of kinds, and no kind of generation of kinds is being found. Not now!
How very remarkable! The idea of this Darwin is that what we CALL designs have ... most slowly come, ah with such miniscule degrees, with vast numbers of non-designs spread like Autumn leaves; and these little things have spread, and grown, and become more and more amazing and complex and so on; whereas the opposite starts off the game, the thing is not found in practice and the means are missing, while laws of science legislate the opposite trend. This is not merely a failure to be verified, but a confrontation with a process totally opposite in kind. Yet instead of immediately dismissing the theory, which never had reason on its side, because empirically it is not merely unable to master the facts, but subjected to mockery by them, they now refer to it as the method of how things came to be, and as testable!
It IS testable, that part is correct; and it has failed - that part needs to be added.
Moreover, this is religion, not science. It is not even a mish-mash of religion and science. It is religion in contravention of science; whereas creation is religion as attested by logic, and verified IN science, by scientific method WITHOUT exception.
Design IS that integrated, correlated, purposively designable, functionally proficient combination of imagination, information, actualisation and continuation which bears an imprint of effort where the means for its autonomous arrival do not appear.
This is precisely what is found in matter to the nth degree, with the mathematical, ordered, specified, systematically inter-related components and modalities, structured in types, interactive in sphere, without any attestation of self-making powers, nor any real relevance to such a thought, since its genius is observably to do, not to make itself. It is, functionally, so disposed as to exhibit what it is in myriads of ways, of exquisite sophistication of style; but not to invent those paths.
This is precisely what is found likewise in life also to the nth degree, with - to start, its correlation with matter, which it moves about with all the friskiness of a fox terrier, organising with the rambunctious thrust of a fighter pilot, deploying it with the imagination of a poet, ruling it with the ruthlessness of a dictator, while allowing by specification, some variation on an original theme. Yet never is it to be found inventing a new progressive type, exhibiting new features of what by definition is design.
That is the way it is, when you become interested in what happens.
The issue, you know, my dear angelic friend, is really this: it is not whether there is design. By definition that is precisely what is there. It is HOW it got there!
It is dead, in terms of scientific method, and its replacements are as dead as it becomes by such abuse of it, for indicated is an entity which has the means, the grounds, the methods, the evidence, providing attestations of origins and grounds for the evidence of progressive uplift.
Suppose, angelic brother, just for a moment, they tried thinking ?
But they would not, for you see, this is the case of selective black-out, where their alienation from the scientific evidence is limited to the position of their own origin and status. It is as if they go beserk at its arising (so very scientific, this 'arising', ex-interface, ex-dynamic, ex-guidance, ex-designable grounds at each level for every level), and claim the opposite, the precise opposite of the truth, as their ground, something not attested in any way, something required but absentee to each test. This they do while they sacrifice scientific method alongside the children and call on statistics of how many of them are doing it, as if this were other than a mathematisation of tragedy, and a statistical emulation of suicide.
What is needed is not the imagination of children in the theories of men, coming from adult minds to batter their upbringing, but the force of logic in the imagination of science. If this world does not offer an explanation of itself in itself and from itself, in any phase, evident in any observable, rational, attestable manner, or by necessary implication not from prejudice but from what is in principle observable, and this despite the most rigorous efforts: then something is clear.
What is clear, O angelic one, it is this: that one must, scientifically, look elsewhere. Lack of prejudice, not of immobility of thought, is what is required in scientific method; but here there is nothing but stasis.
So however intolerant of reason some may have become, we move to something else, call it vertical or lateral thinking, or anything else you like: when you do not find an explanation in one field, but only non-verification accompanied by anti-verification, then you move in enquiry to seek what will not be so devastatingly negative. This is called free thought, in logic, but in propaganda, as in the article's report, a "mishmash of theology and science." This talk does not seem exceptionally scientific.
How could it be ? It is not science, so the methods of non-science, and sometimes of mere nonsense are all that is left. If you have GOT to have this result, despite both logic and evidence, so be it. That is the nature of myth, so myth it is. It is necessary however not to indoctrinate children with private myths, but with realities attested.
Suppose instead the inventors of this form of child indoctrination, were to think, actually to think at this level. Then, they would proceed in terms of scientific method, which does not START by KNOWING the answers and where they are to be found, but instead moves with a spirit of open enquiry, envisaging, testing, comparing for confirmation on all sides, and insisting on logical structure in thought. Thus you do not EXCLUDE something that is not nature because you KNOW, by scientific method, that this cannot be, since this would be a denial of the entire spirit of research, logical thought and would constitute in its entirety, a mere attestation of prejudice.
That is the operative phenomenon in their ludicrous naturalism. It does not work: therefore those who note this fact and show what does, are WRONG. That is the implication however of dogged, dogmatic prejudice and becomes a mere a mish-mash of myth and disinclination.
Mish-mash my friend ?
From the usage I found in the news report, I gather it seems to mean something not very scientific. That is what this is; and it is a mixture, I suppose the mish is this part, and the mash is that part, and they do not like parts - something of this sort perhaps ?
However, how readily we must disagree with them in this, came the voice of the swooping angel, just returning from a quick flit to help a child afflicted by infantile mythology, at some low secondary school.
Unscientific! the angel sent out the word, with artistic grace during a subsequent aerial manoeuvre. What is unscientific about research, open-minded, open-ended and open at the beginning and in the middle, ready for input from anything that explains, is testable, is verifiable and works, and ready to abandon to the junk-heap what does not, such as Darwin's nonsense and dabbling ? Instead, what do we find in this news report ? It is that Darwin is scientific and is to be kept free from what in fact, by contrast, works and is testable. When did myths become scientific, or when did prejudice become a director of thought.
But surely, is it not so, kindred angel, that it is this kind of subjugation which always happens in totalitarian spheres.
It often does, certainly, but this is democratic in that the government is elected. Yet it happens. We know this because it is HAPPENING and has been so these last 17 years in the State of South Australia.
How COULD such a government which endorses and requires such myths, and attacks with irreligious fantasy objective facts about religion, be elected ?
It CAN happen when people do not care too much about myths being taught, so long as their kids get jobs, and all that. At least it should require a goodly number of social service personnel to look after the lives so readily*3 unhinged into disillusion, disspiritedness and dyspepsia of mind, by such irrelevances, and even dignified tenaciously in SCIENCE, since nothing of reason can help them. They often lie slain like birds with Asian influenza.
But surely this is unfair to them, being not merely dictatorial in the government, but insidious and seductive, delusive as if driven by desperation, being a mere misuse of authority to achieve what reason cannot secure ?
Of course! this world is not very nice. It killed Christ and now tries to kill truth, while becoming so deluded that it calls its victim trash.
I am reminded of that aspect of this once so glorious creation, whenever I visit: to call good evil and evil good, just as Isaiah declared in his fifth chapter.
Of course, we must be fair. We must clarify that in detail; for while it is quite true that these things occur, yet they do not actually say they are going to seek to keep education in science free of what works in this sphere: it is just that this is what they are doing.
True, we can clarify that, but you know, you would have hoped that they could note that all the requirements of Genesis creation are met, in the three major laws of conservation of matter and energy, the second of thermodynamics and the third of biogenesis, and that this is the same as saying that we do not find nature producing nature, non-life producing life or what meets the definition of design going naturally up, but rather down.
Darwin and the other failures project the opposite, or allow for it, but they do not find it in logic, where what lacks the capacity of thought is to explain the evidences of it; or in empirical science, where what progresses in cardinal kind is never found nor is any evidence of it in the past ever found, only the 'hope' dressed up as a find, when the fact is absent.
Creationism projects THIS, both in the major scope of domains of reality, and in the minor matter of orders of life. If ever new domains, orders came along, and we found why and how, that would be naturalism with flying colours. Since they don't, and what is sticks, and the means for such upward motion are not found, and logic requires that there be means of getting what we have, adequate for the purpose in kind, then we must look elsewhere.
So you were saying. What is elsewhere to a material creation ?
An immaterial entity.
DANCERS Ch. 6
Where 'nature' says no! science is not the one which says 'yes' -
but science falsely-so-called, it does it, yet only in the fantasy mode, the idol branch of idle imagination! Let us keep to what we find.
Nature does not, in fact make itself or its components,
but they are USED as they are made to be used,
whether with fancy variabilities of sub-type,
glorious situational provision such as crystallisation, or not.
This is what is empirically observed and rationally founded
in causative constraints. If it were otherwise,
the world of experimental observation is open!
Let it be done! Yet it is not done, for it has been done; and these are two facts.
It is set up and it works according to kind, and if it is capable of being 'hurt' as life is, then it is hurt, not re-designed. That is why we NEVER find increments of design, only variations within each kind. That is why information theory, like biota evidence, is that what is relevant to life, DECLINES. It does so in theory, as in practice; and here the attestations of theory are built not least, on practice as they ought to be in scientific method arenas.
Thus the ONLY place where the ACTUAL power is placed is the non-natural, since 'Nature' does not do the thing in view, namely the institution, constitution and coherence creation of biological language, type, kind, material and vital sub-components, thought, spirit, will and so forth.
We can USE a kind to GET its kind; but we do not have them making themselves, for the very simple reason that in this universe that takes work, and in any causal situation you need for that, what its constitutive constraints require, to institute them, both initially at all, and then in the various kinds in view. The alternative is irrationalism which cannot even argue for itself, since it would invalidate reason, a foolish effort, since reason brings us to revelation and this to
affirmation, verification and validation
(cf. It Bubbles ... Ch. 9, SMR, TMR, Reason, Revelation and the Redeemer ).
Not therefore where the data say NO: but
where the logical constraints say YES,
where the type of thing observed in our world, has an adequate resource,
where the spiritual aspects of our lives
(cf. SMR pp. 348ff., Little Things Ch. 5, It Bubbles ... Ch. 9, *1A),
have not only their own ground of creation,
which is not by the absence but by the presence of the qualities shown,
not only to be, but to create because it IS,
where truth can without self-contradiction be KNOWN at all, and
where cessation has its meaning:
this is where what is finds what it does,
where reality is investigated and found active,
not in myth or magic, but in measured discourse and certain reason.
THIS is the testimony of experience,
the demand of logic and the ground of verification;
and it is the resource and the only one for validity,
and the constraint of actuality. There is nothing else.
It is not for Gould to complain in heaven's name when heaven is the answer, or if you will, the God who made it by will in the creation explosion.
It is not for him to lament: for creation being logically required, and in cessation after 'explosion' confirmed as to nature, being the assignation of the components, not from themselves but from what made them also, we move in this realm, of the rush into existence of multitudes of designs, by Gould's account, followed by decimation of the same. It is not with tragic grief written over our faces, before dabbling in more magic, but with the knowledge that there is ONLY ONE PLACE where the validation and verification alike exists; and scientific method being forced to go where the evidence not only in one phase, but in each phase both separately and synthetically, is to be found, it MUST present this.
And that, it is merely what in fact logic independently requires in its other reaches as shown in SMR, TMR and elsewhere so many times.
That all harmonises to perfection makes of mesmerised man's intolerance of truth the more ample a ground for judgment; but this too, it resides in the One whose powers delimit such a function (cf. Romans 1). On that, see Celestial Harmony for the Terrestrial Host.
That God in His mercy, as the Bible indicates, is ready to forgive, has power to pardon as well as to create, has a willingness to do so and delights in mercy (cf. Micah 7:19-21, Romans 3:23ff., Colossians 1:19ff.), while not directly pertinent to the present concern, is of much relevance to those who conceive it. It is considered at length in The Meaning of Liberty and the Message of Remedy.
See also on Rome: SMR pp. 886ff., 946ff., Highway of Holiness Ch. 10,
History, Overview and Review 1; Three Anzas, One Answer Ch. 5, Grand Biblical Perspectives Ch. 8.
On Israel, see Section 6 below.
From SMR Ch. 2, pp. 211ff..
Reference was made to Popper's point that organic evolution is not even a matter of verifiable law. It is worse. It not only breaks observable law, logic re law, but also brings in detailed needs which shock available design-data repeatedly... or more precisely, negatively impact with these and shock experts dealing with them.
Thus Dr. S.E. Aw, in his Chemical Evolution (1982) on p. 192 cites R.E. Dickerson, Sci.Am. 239, 62: The evolution of the genetic machinery is the step for which there are no laboratory models hence we can speculate endlessly, unfettered by inconvenient facts.
The methodology of the speculation causes logical shock. There is no limit; no constraints of having to make it work are allowed: very pleasant it is, like a school excursion! We catch a sense of the pure illusory fantasy involved.
The trifling with teleology is also often met. This is expounded by E.B. Chain (1971- Perspect. Biol. Med. 14, 347) and noted by Aw on p. 168. 'Survival of the fittest' as 'entirely a consequence of chance mutations' or the concept that 'nature... carries out experiments' seems to involve a 'hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. The hypothesis wilfully neglects the principle of teleological purpose which stares the biologist in the face wherever he looks...'
Wilder Smith in his Man's Origin, Man's Destiny (1975) on p. 20 similarly provides scalpel-like words, this time from Dr Erwin Chargaff of Columbia University in The Origin of Life on Earth (Oparin, pp. 288-289).
Dr Chargaff considers: "Our time is probably the first in which mythology has penetrated to the molecular level."
Chargaff for his part, cites a 'distinguished biologist' who desired to avoid God in His creation, and so proposed a 'macromolecule'... but what is this but fixation on a phrase instead of a finding of the cause; and patriarchal molecules lack what patriarchs themselves cannot use to create matter. Commenting, Chargaff notes that for this man, it has come down to this concept of 'macromolecule' and asks what has been gained in that word...
If poetry has suffered, precision has not gained. For we may ask ourselves whether a model that merely provides for one cell constituent continually to make itself, can teach us much about life and its origins. We may also ask whether the postulation of a hierarchy of cellular constituents, in which the nucleic acids are elevated to a patriarchal role in the creation of living matter, is justified.
The 'poetry' that is involved, is that of logic; and the truth is set forth sublimely: but this modern madness is rightly castigated by this genteel enquiry. When words are said, let the things signified be contemplated in all their smuggled pseudo- glory.
Here then we see the magic of 'patriarchal' molecules fraught with engendering potentials, literally out of this world. All these things... patriarchal, striving, providing, a need-meeting 'nature' going about 'her' business, 'finding a way' and the like are a brilliant testimony to the imagination of man, and to his circumvention of the implications of personality and intelligence, rationality and power.
Even if literature is not so studied by so many so well as once it was, at least the aspiring 'scientist' can use it as a cover for illegitimate use of what is not acknowledged, replacing the God who is with the words which 'use' Him, without acknowledgement ... a sort of figure of speech that figures all too well with self-deception.
Why it is too simple: personify matter and then have it work as a Person; and give it imagination, purpose and power, while merely avoiding the use of the word 'God'. These things are merely an illustration of the smuggler's cove approach by which intelligent creativity is presupposed but not acknowledged: planted in caves and coves on the beaches of thought, and activated under the darkness of meeting the dilemma. How else live with the wealth of material that is there, than steal it by night, with dark designs, claiming the while - Who me ? I know nothing of it at all!
Aw (p. 168), in this context interestingly, notes D.H. Kenyon's use of the concept of 'looking aheadness' in Nature (p. 207 of the work: The Origin of Life and Evolutionary Biochemistry -1974).
Thus we often hear of 'Nature's' striving or meeting a need as if this personification, through its terms, conferred its power on the realities - a matter of a verbal 'slip' useful for creating illusion on the one hand, and revelatory of the workings in darkness of the unbelieving mind, on the other. (Cf. p. 845 infra.)
Aw (p. 150) also quotes from Ponnamperuma, Origins of Life, p. 102, where there is provided a beautifully apt under-statement re imaginary construction activities happily working away, though never seen, validated or defined so as to allow prediction, and contrary to all that is known of Nature's laws. Speaking of cell- construction, he says:
the leap from morphology to function is fraught with danger especially when we consider entities of several billion years ago.
The 'leap' to 'several billion years ago' itself is 'fraught with danger' (a point made most clear by Professor E.W. Andrews, as noted in our Dating Extension - see his Chapter 6 et al..)
If only our humour could stretch a little further, we might learn to relish these 'blithe spirit' concessions in constructing an imaginary time for an imaginary activity according to imaginary powers with imaginary processes which actually men cannot really define, duplicate or activate by intelligent effort, no, not with with the most advanced method and time-subduing repetitive equipment, even though this would break the conditions imagined to be in view!
The Bible says the fool has forgotten God: it is time the world learned to 'quit fooling' if it wishes to continue at all. Illusion, whether with drugs, mirages in the desert, or irrational rioting is no sound basis for anything that wishes to endure. Reality can seem quite unkind to chronic fooling, after its season is over... (Cf. Ecclesiastes 11:9-10- and this can occur with a nation as well as with a youth.)
Aw also quotes Bonner (1972, Exobiology, Ponnamperuma C. (ed.), Amsterdam, London, p. 170) on p. 102 of his work, as follows: The origins of optical activity# present problems to the hypothesis of chemical evolution that are at present insoluble. One is reminded of the prodigal son (Luke 15) who somewhat similarly found sharing fodder with pigs to present insoluble problems. How intense may be the affinity of the 'fool' with the words of the Miltonic Satan whose view is held with implacable resolve:
...What though the field be lost ?
All is not lost - the unconquerable will,
And study of revenge, immortal hate,
And courage never to submit or yield...
That glory never shall His wrath or might
Extort from me...
that proud being seeking
Whatever reinforcements we may gain from hope,
If not, what resolution from despair...
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven (Paradise Lost, Book 1)...
yet the irresolvable facts refuse to yield.
They are not yielding the evidences of creative law and creative mind, discreetly operative in the form of mindless, law-obeying fragments. God is no more found in His creation, as a mere part, than am I in this work, as a full stop. Efforts to make it appear that I would, lack... a certain discretion.
Would one then expect it ? A smuggler might, but it is time men stopped smuggling God and calling it matter, equipped with latent systematic powers of upward propulsion into intensive design, subordinating itself the while to the work of originating laws with a freedom its own conformity does not exhibit.
But what of the completed cell, that maxi-marvel of modern sublimity from unbowing antiquity which shows no half-measures, half-masts or preliminary canters:
"How they can continue to operate so reliably in a disorderly environment, to the physicist appears as a deep enigma."
This is from Pattee in Towards a Theoretical Biology, p. 282, quoted by Aw, p. 128. It referred specifically to the genes.
One is reminded of Samson and Delilah. After she had betrayed him many times, he too might have pondered his continued trust in her as a deep enigma! Only passion provided a clear answer: but logically that was irrelevant. There was no ground for trust, and the evidence flatly, repeatedly and systematically denied it.
The result was contrary both to reason and - symbolically here - to Samson's very sight. There is a species of optical activity which is spiritual and can rob the mind of that benign destiny to which it is, when clear, more happily pointed.
"For judgment I am come into this world, that those who do not see might see; and that those who see might be made blind... If you were blind, you would not have sin: but now you say, We see - therefore your sin remains." (John 9:39,41.)
Ignoring reason and revelation both is a sad affair:
I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believes on me should not abide in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and does not believe, I do not judge him: for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. He who rejects me, and does not receive my words has one who judges him: the word that I have spoken, the same will judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father who sent me, He gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said to me, so I speak - John 9:46-50. (See Section 6 infra, et al..)
On this, we find perspective from News 122
- But if, on the other hand, you proceed to the field of meta-religion (A Spiritual Potpourri Ch. 12, End-note 1), of what logic requires,
- of God Almighty, just ONE,
- of His word, just ONE,
- of His Spirit, just ONE,
- of the source of cohesion, and the ground of rationality, and the basis of actuality,
- to the power minimal for all these things,
- and the order requisite for all this order,
- and to the capacities needed for all this thought,
- and to the inventiveness needed for spirits that can delude themselves and others, or, otherwise expressed, which can find the truth as an option, provided they are not spoiled (like the car that hit the lamp-post and ceased its transport feature with that event):
- when you follow reason to reality, and find in reality the basis and the ground of knowledge and knowledgeability, actuality and invention, then you leave needles in the sky.
You find the maker of sky, of needle capacities, and of the power to do the needless, to be heedless, which is simply the obverse of the power to do the needful, to have realistic vision, lasting enterprise and to avoid collision, confrontation and collapse in the face of what is. It is Creator or nothing; it is dehumanising dismissal of the language and thought of man (BY the language and thought of man, in a self-contradictory surge of existential lunacy), or the pursuit with the same, of reality to its source. It is procedure from the NON self-sufficient to the SELF-SUFFICIENT; of the derived, to its derivation;
of the derivation to the deity, who, unlike ourselves, is not dismissible with delusion, but the sole sufficient source of what does not, because it cannot, make itself, but yet is made.
WE are not eternal in capacities. We begin. Our temporal is the result of His eternity. NO GOD can be a mere series, for if it were, the true God invents the series. NO GOD can be a derivative, for the derivation is from the true God. In the end, beginnings require basis, and the basis has to be THERE. Eternity is the price you pay for being temporal. It is not yours. It is His.
COMING AND GOING
You need to go where it is, to be real. If you do not, you are the car with the lamp-post, the needless needle in the sky, the aspiration without inspiration. Meta-religion is the religion where it is, where the specifier of specifications, the moulder of materials, the maker of matter, the inventor of human mind in its derivative correlative capacities with the other elements of the system of the universe, and the realities of God back of it, is to be found. It is the religion which is therefore testable, as the Bible is; it is the religion which moves from realities made, to the maker of the made things. It moves from the attestation of His word in our bodies, in our minds, in our spirits, in our one and only attested Book, the Bible. It sees the connection in competence, the undismissible design, the entirety of capacity in one place only.
It then comes to Him according to His word. It gains perspective. It looks at purposes.
It next moves from Him, to the made things and sees them as He made them. His principles are to be found, as well as the modalities of the things He made. HE is to be found, as well as His creation. Perspective does not reside in yourself, or your race. It resides in your Maker. It requires humility to learn (which is not something prodigious or astounding, but a form of admission of the actual case).
PRIDE in a moment can delete a needle in the sky. POWER is found only in God; for only in the Creator is the reality of human life, as well as material and biological life, of spirit as well as flesh, to be discovered. Ignore it and you are merely aspiring in spires; find Him, and you are respiring with reality. This too is testable, for the principles are written, and the results accrue, not only in predictive prophecy fulfilled, not only in principles articulated and then verified in history; but in your own life. The promises of God are personal as well as principial. They have personal results.
Thus, your own cause of being (why you are, and hence what you are, and hence your meaning, and hence you responsibility), this is found; and your own logic is based now in immovable resources, verified and validated. Moreover, your own necessities of thought are sited in their creative capacities, in the Creator not only of the world of things, but of thought, and of spirit and of their inter-relationships, and you then find WHAT THESE ARE.
THE ABSURDITY OF IGNORING
Come to think of it, how absurd to ignore the very things that you are and are using, in thought and logic and imagination and aspiration and inspiration, when seeking to understand. Leaving yourself out , AS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, is not a profound inspiration, but a delusive desperation. The fixity of law and the flightiness of imagination alike need basis and source. They are not at all alike. They proceed on diverse and even divergent principles. They proceed together. Their basis as one intricately inter-related but non-self-sufficient whole, is what is sufficient for one, for all, and for all the inter-connections. Thus is explained their derivative character: they are derived. Thus is seen their inter-relative nature: they have been inter-related from source, by design, and so are distributed in integral features, amid diversities of operation.
The material part ? this is a mere theory of the mind; the mind is a mere adjutant for the spirit. The spirit in its surveying and imagination, its desires and its choices, its rebellions and its conformities, its love and its hate: this is also based in what is adequate.
What IS adequate ? Certainly not something merely made, which wears out, and which does not make itself, but simply and observably operates as made. If it cannot make itself, then what can make it is not itself, not material at all. It is the same in architects: their thoughts precede their far more limited, and actualised, specialised creations.
With perspiration of brow, they go from one building made to the next, their creative powers meanwhile, far transcending any one building; for of necessity, if they did not, then no one building could come. The power to create is of its own nature, and diverse from the actuality of any creation. The platform precedes the construction; the mental platform the conception; the spirit, the capacity to conceive and imagine. The building is simply a product of sufficiency. The sufficiency is first spiritual, then mental, then executive. Such is the nature of that componential whole: architect of spirit and mind, plan informed with both, purpose overseeing the whole, and the material part as the simple means for it all.
Architects, however pleased with their buildings, should not forget themselves. At invoice time, they rarely do. It is wise not to forget who built you, when you are the house. There CAN be a bill, when it is defiled. There IS a bill, since all is defiled. It HAS to be paid. It is a question of resources. When the COST of defilement of life, IS LIFE; then you need the life of another. That is what the architect of man has provided. Of this, more anon.
God's creativity, then, in giving us a derivative and limited creativity, is not limited by any one creation. These are expressions of it; not conditions for it.
If the Creator's own creativity were the dual source of any such limit, and of His involvement in the systematics of such a system, then the ground, the reason for this situation would causatively need to be sought. God Himself is of necessity, unlimited. If He were not, the capacity of creation would be lost, and it would not be able to happen. Why ? It is for this reason: as limited He would not be God, so that the necessity, requisitioned by logic for an always present and sufficient source for the made, would be annulled. Not being, it could not produce. Not producing, it would leave us out. But we are not left out. We are very much left in. Here we are!
What IS LIMITED, has a reason for it. The reason contains it; and it results in this confinement. To induce the confinement, you need the cause of such limitation, and the cause has to be adequate to do this thing. To limit the creator, you need the basis and conditions for his creation and creativity. To secure this, you have to be able to induce his system and put it in its place in the order of things, so that it can operate in this limited way. You ? Well, the power in question, the mind to the point, the operator who imposed the limit. To do that, there is thus the requirement of the causative controller of the creator; and this is merely a two-step dance. It is a way very simply of showing that you come in the end to the one who has no limits, for a series is ITSELF a limit, and requires it own limiting constructor. In the end, there is God. Other limited beings are merely creations. he is not limited. Let us talk about the One who is, who meets the specifications, not about this or that real or imaginary creation.
In the beginning there was God; for without that, there is no cause for Him to arrive. He then does not; and then neither does this world, nor do you. But you did, and so did it. He was there. In the beginning, He was there. When this universe was constructed, He was there. This is one house. He made it. He was there. Time as we know it, a patience-inducing requirement for process, this is created. If it were not, then it would limit Him; but then as before, we proceed again to the One who really IS God.
Hence to save time, we note that time is a creation. HE can have any time dimension or frame He wishes, and can overview all times, without time, if He prefers. Time is a limit. Neither its presence nor its absence impacts upon Him who made it. It is a component of this novel. For events to transpire in the sort of patience and procedure with which we are familiar, time is a mode. For overview of all possible times, there is no need of time for the creator of time, since His patience is not a condition. He does not live with conditions; but He makes them. Novelists, in their imaginary productiveness, their creations, their historical or contemporary or imaginative releases from the press of lively and active understanding, are by nature never controlled by any one time frame, and may invent many.
God who made novelists and architects, is not limited by the time frames of novelists and architects, or the thought limits which enable them to do what they do, and prevent their doing things which only He can do, who is not so specialised and limited. The architect transcends ALL his buildings. HE is their condition. Without him, no buildings. How vain of a building to demand that the architect be like itself; it is mere derivative from his greatness. He can have quite other thoughts tomorrow, and change the whole style, remove functionality and love the baroque; he can in short change the principles (but not ostracise the logic of cohesion) which he seeks, and implement a different vision with different premises, but still logic is shrouding and implementing his thought. His aims differ; His means are the same. Not for nothing is the Hebrew word for word, the one which also conveys cause and reason. It is mutual.
POWER - PERFORMANCE OR SOURCE ?
These are merely illustrations of the difference between performance from a given source of power and cohesion, thought and operational capacity: and the source itself. The source Himself of life and logic, imagination and law, limits and soaring spirits (as well, pathology being in action, of sick ones, who contravene health principles), is adequate for all, limited to none.
As shown in SMR Ch. 3, chaos is not even a thinkable term, unless it has its own required modes of operation, which are merely a jumble of mutually antagonistic laws; for as soon as you lose characterisability, you cannot even frame the concept of chaos; and as long as characterisability is in place, you have logic and language. It is merely an Alice in Wonderland situation, which is the more, and not the less demanding. Where it contradicts in principle the logic required both to think it and to state it, it is merely the car in the lamp post again. It is denying what it uses to exhibit itself and to be thought, and hence is not an operable concept.
So much of the folly of human thought without God is founded on that. It denies what it is to be a thinker, to be a speaker, a formulator; it dehumanises itself in order to construct a vision, parade as a philosopher, and yes in the end, pretends to be or to have invented, a spire in the affronted sky, a god which is the source and basis of all things, ex-power, by sheer fantasy, and then calls it what he will - natural selection, organic evolution, people power, universal thought, nature or whatever other non sublime fatuity which is functionally irrelevant...
When therefore that is not in fact adequate for what is the result, ourselves and the universe, then the construction is an imagination that is not vested with reality. In Biblical terms, it is a god which is not there, an idol which is not God (Deuteronomy 32:17 , Galatians 4:8). It is a nothing. That is the irony. So many start from nothing, nothing sufficient, mere nothings, and call them fancy names. But the ONLY nothing in view, is this: that as far as the position accorded the false god is concerned, it is not there. NOTHING they say, and nothing it is, to the point. It comes to nothing for the very simple and very good reason that there is nothing to it.
It is thus a delusion; and its results are delusion. That is the history of philosophy without God; and when you have God, you see the beginning and the end of all philosophy. As shown in SMR Ch. 5, at once you find the solution and resolution of all chronic philosophical problems; and you can even see WHY they o their own terms, they are irresolvable: it is because they use what they abuse, and assume what they deny, and construct therefore, what if it were a building, would not stand. It falls. It is a needle in the sky. It is built in pride, in order to demonstrate your freedom from reality, or your capacity to invent reality, to communicate unreality, or to make it happen; but it falls in ruin as an exhibition of the fact that if you use what you abuse, you lose what you create. Self-contradiction spells destruction. If you contradict yourself, you need not worry about reality; you yourself are forfeit as a commencement exercise, a write-off, a wreck. So it goes; so it has gone for long enough; and there is little time left in the created words of God, given to man (as in Answers to Questions Ch. 5).
THE DEADLY DE-S
But they are the products of NOT finding your source by the means given, but abusing the means and contradicting them as you flee, a rebel from reality, a resistance movement from your God, a tedious and tiresome renegade from the Creator of the temporary from His eternal resources (cf. Romans 1:20-25).
Want to be a needle in the sky ? Better be a building on a rock, when the rock is reality and the reality is known, and the knowledge does not omit yourself, but moves inexorably to the source, to the spirit which made matter, and for that matter, to the mind which made mind, and to the power which prefaced your construction with words, and requirements and reality. Better prepare to meet your God now than latter. Needles are readily broken. Reality does not move. Temporary reality, in creation, is conformed to code and law, to planes and plateau of being; the eternally real God is unalterable, always what He would be, neither limited in glory nor in plan.
The curse on the lie (announced for our Age in its force, in II Thessalonians 2:11, and expounded further in II Peter 3:4-5), on which we have expatiated above: this is not God. It is a penalty. Just as the cane is not the Headmaster, so the penalty is not the Person.
Indeed, the penalties on profusion of rebellion are not God.
The curse on creation is not God.
The history of folly is not God.
The temporary powers that be, in their temporary philosophies which do not account for reality, these too are not God.
The nations which use them, they are not God.
YOU also, and your body or organisation or group, you are not God.
GOD is Himself the One. He has spoken into the tissue of lies, of the lie, which denies Him, which presupposes that nothing is our source, in frank contradiction of logic; or that what is inadequate for the results is our source. That law came without the means, that freedom came without the source, is mere rebellion of thought, and as to that as we have seen, it is unspeakable.
Assume it, and language is no more available. That is the systematic consequence. You see it formulated in Hinduism, applicable in Buddhism: the 'roaring silence' of concept of Eastern religion is not entirely inept to this sort of denuded or evaded 'divinity'. It MUST speak, for there has to be some religion to satisfy DESIRE. It CANNOT speak, for it is not there. IF this sort of god who is not there, were, though impossible, to try to speak, it could not capture the categories of thought, for it is to be beyond all. Thus it roars, in silence. It is an oxymoron of course; but alas the sharp part is not the dominant one!
In such philosophic predicaments, man uses what he abuses in order even to state it. The laws of life like the law of matter are quite clear and distinct. We need to learn more in those areas of research concerning our world, of which God has not spoken in detail; for this is our work: but we cannot learn less. What it is, must be pursued, and the pursuit cannot without violation of logic, avoid God.
Then, when we look at the speech of the Almighty, by which He distinguishes His way from what in all these things contradicts it, rather than destroying the race for its impudence and its pride, its buildings of thought based on the sand of self-contradiction, in which He vindicates His reality as truth, the source of justice in the inter-relationships of what He has made: then we find verification unlimited, vindication unassailable, validation of His powers, asseveration of His requirements.
They are not harsh; but they are holy, and they involve holiness; and there is no other remedy but that which leads to this. God is holy; and those who love Him are not on a leash like a bad dog. They follow Him.
What ignores Him and His word is not only without validity, speaking without basis on anything as if a measure could be found from the unmeasured, and ignoring what is the very condition of its own discourse; it is without meaning, and even to proclaim the meaningless is without warrant, for where truth is not known, it is useless to announce it, like some cheap political party interested only in votes. Truth has a way of its own. The word of God however confirms in super-abundance as we frequently have seen (e.g. SMR Ch. 5, Repent or Perish Ch. 7, SMR Chs. 8 - 9, A Spiritual Potpourri Chs. 1-9, That Magnificent Rock Chs. 1, 8), what reason requires: that it be indeed His.
Reason sings; truth exults; verification surges; explanation towers, and this is one tower which is never lowered! In this, it is unique. And that ? It is PRECISELY what you MUST expect, from God. This too is verification of the validation. It goes on without ceasing, stretching like distant hills, as far as you wish to go. To the truth of the Eternal God there is no end, no limit.
It is this STYLE of verification which is a separate validation. Coherence, consistency, persistence, insistence, these are the ineffable criteria of truth. When these alone exist in one place, it is the distinctive ensign of its presence.
REASON, REVELATION and the REDEEMER
SCIENTIFIC METHOD, SATANIC METHOD
AND THE MODEL OF SALVATION
LIGHT DWELLS WITH THE LORD'S CHRIST