The positive principle of modality

Absolutely nothing cause something (5). Neither can one contingent kind (mode) of being cause another contingent being (6). So, if anything comes to be, it must be caused a Necessary Being.
Therefore, this Necessary Being must be a personal, rational, and moral kind of being, since I am similar to him by the Principle of Analogy (12).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jguXSBk-tAI

The truth about natural selection

Natural Selection: the process by how individuals possessing a set of traits that confer a survival advantage in a given environment tend to leave more offspring on average that survive to reproduce in the next generation.

Natural selection is an observable process that falls into the category of operational science. We have observed mosquitoes, birds, and many microorganisms undergoing change in relatively short periods of time. New varieties have been observed to arise. Biblical creationists agree with evolutionists on most of the ideas associated with natural selection, except the idea that natural selection leads to molecules-to-man evolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWn48CAWt2k

The perfect love

The apostle having shown that the tabernacle, and ordinances of the covenant of Sinai, were only emblems and types of the gospel, concludes that the sacrifices the high priests offered continually, could not make the worshipers perfect, with respect to pardon, and the purifying of their consciences. But when God manifested in the flesh, became the sacrifice, and his death upon the accursed tree the ransom, then the Sufferer being of infinite worth, his free-will sufferings were of infinite value. The atoning sacrifice must be one capable of consenting, and must of his own will place himself in the sinner's stead: Christ did so. The fountain of all that Christ has done for his people, is the sovereign will and grace of God. The righteousness brought in, and the sacrifice once offered by Christ, are of eternal power, and his salvation shall never be done away. They are of power to make all the comers thereunto perfect; they derive from the atoning blood, strength and motives for obedience, and inward comfort.

Hebrews 10:8-10
⁸ First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law. ⁹ Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. ¹⁰ And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvGUvu6yNcw

The principle of contingency (or dependency)

If something cannot be caused by nothing (5), neither can anything be caused by what could be nothing, namely, a contingent being. For what could be nothing does not account for its own existence. And what cannot for even its own existence cannot account for the existence of another.
Since it is contingent or dependent for its own being, it cannot be that on which something else depends for its being. Hence, one contingent being cannot cause another contingent being.
This shows the existence of God. It is shows God is personal, rational and moral kind of being (since he engage in these kinds of activities.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KMd_eS2J7o

Mutations and science

Textbooks present evolution in two different ways-small, observable changes (natural selection, speciation, adaptation) and large, unobservable  changes (molecules-to-man evolution). They show evidence for the former and then conclude that this proves that the latter took place as well.
As our understanding of genetics has improved, it has become clear that mutations + time + chance do not equal evolution. All observed mutations demonstrate a loss of genetic information from the genetic code or they are neutral. Evolution claims that the process has no direction or goal. If you look at the complexity of the "first" organism, it must be accepted that a massive amount of information has been produced to explain the variety of life we see today. Mutations cannot generate new genetic information; so they cannot be used to explain how evolution has produced from a cell with less information than is present in modern cells.
Despite the claims of evolution, the appearance of new species, antibiotic resistance in bacteria, pesticide resistance and sickle-cell anemia are not evidence in favor of evolution. They do, however, demonstrate the principle of natural selection acting or existing traits-a concept that creationists and evolution agree on. The creationist model of how life spread across the globe after the Flood of Genesis uses many of the same principles of natural selection and adaptive radiation that are used in the evolution model. One of the main difference is that the biblical creation model recognizes that one kind can't change into another and that change are a result of variation within kinds- not descent from a single common ancestor. As a result of the Curse, genetic mutations, showing a loss of information, have been accumulating, but these do not cause new kinds to emerge. Accepting the idea of a single common ancestor denies the authority of the Bible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IfV5iRQbIU

He has came

We like to live by our good deeds and we hope that will save us but the law requires perfection.
The law of the Old Testament in the Bible showed Isreal that the Messiah was going to the fulfillment of the law.
The Jews sacrificed animals as a credit card for their sins. They still had a sin debt. We have a sin debt as non-Jews. Everyone needs Jesus to forgive us for our iniquities.
The cure for sin is Jesus and we need accept Jesus. The animal was just medicine, and the Jews needed to take medicine every year.
Jesus is the second person of the Trinity and he came to this world. He lived a perfect life and died on the cross. He arose from the dead so we can be forever clean before the Lord.
Have you received this in your heart and life?

Hebrews 10:1-7

The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. ² Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. ³ But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. ⁴ It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

⁵ Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:

“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
    but a body you prepared for me;
⁶ with burnt offerings and sin offerings
    you were not pleased.
⁷ Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll—
    I have come to do your will, my God.’”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvGUvu6yNcw

The principle of causality, part two

Another way to understand why nonbeing cannot cause being is by noting that everything that "comes to be" must have a cause. If it comes to be it is not a Necessary Being, which by its nature must always be. So what comes to be is, by definition, a contingent being, a being that is capable of existing or not existing. For every contingent thing that comes to be there must be some efficient action that causes it to pass from a state potentiality (potency) to a state of actuality (act).
For, Aquinas noted, no potency for being can actualize itself. To actualize itself it must be in a state of actuality and before it is actualized it must must be in a state of potentiality. But it cannot be both at the same time (a violation of the principle of noncontradiction). Hence, one cannot deny the principle of causality without violating the principle of noncontradiction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrBpSr2JbCo&index=1&list=PLIpO3BUiq2IHKHZVzyzayj5yemo03pxfY

The demise of mitochondrial Eve

Evolutionary scientists believe that all humans on the earth originated from a small group in Africa over 200,000 years ago. This group included "mitochondrial Eve." Researchers of human origins believe that the ancestry of humans can be traced by analyzing mutations of the DNA contained in the mitochondria of every cell. This mitochondrial is assumed to be transferred only from mother to offspring in the egg cell. The mitochondria in the sperm do not enter the egg, so they don't become a part of the offspring's cells.
Assuming that the mtDNA sequence of two females should be more similar the farther back in time you go, researchers calculated how long ago different people groups separated from each other. The African group had more differences from the other groups, so it is assumed that they have had more time to accumulate the mutations. The date was also calibrated by using the assumed divergence of chimps and humans to calculate the rate of mutation.
The mitochondrial Eve idea is only valid if humans receive mtDNA only from the mother and if the rate of mutation is constant and known. Since none of these assumptions are known, the dating method may be invalid. Since recent research indicates that there is mixing of paternal and maternal mtDNA, no conclusion about the rate or origin is reliable- mitochondrial Eve appears to be dead.
The idea that mutation rates are constant and can be used as a "molecular clock" has also been called into question. The dates arrived at by molecular analysis are much older than the dates given when paleontologists interpret the fossil evidence. Many studies have shown that there are different rates of mutation in different sections of the mtDNA. This makes the dating very speculative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGqvNxbSug8

More powerful than any force

It is evident that the sacrifices of Christ are infinitely better than those of the law, which could neither procure pardon for sin, nor impart power against it. Sin would still have been upon us, and have had dominion over us; but Jesus Christ, by one sacrifice, has destroyed the works of the devil, that believers may be made righteous, holy, and happy. As no wisdom, learning, virtue, wealth, or power, can keep one of the human race from death, so nothing can deliver a sinner from being condemned at the day of judgment, except the atoning sacrifice of Christ; nor will one be saved from eternal punishment who despises or neglects this great salvation. The believer knows that his Redeemer lives, and that he shall see him. Here is the faith and patience of the church, of all sincere believers. Hence is their continual prayer as the fruit and expression of their faith, Even so come, Lord Jesus.

Hebrews 9:23-28

²³ It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. ²⁴ For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. ²⁵ Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. ²⁶ Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. ²⁷ Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, ²⁸ so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

The principle of causality, part one

Only being can cause being. Nothing does exists and only what exists can cause existence, since the very concepts of "cause" implies an existing thing that has the power to effect another. From absolutely nothing comes absolutely nothing.
The statement "Nonbeing cannot produce being" is undeniable. The very concept of "produce
 or "cause" implies something exists to cause or produce the being produce. To deny that relationship of cause to effect is to say, "Nothing is something" and "Nonbeing is being," which is nonsense.

Scientific American admits creationists hit a sore spot

The old paradigm of bird evolution is admittedly flawed, according to writers of an article in Scientific American. The authors admit that evolution does not provide a valid mechanism for creating the amazingly strong, yet lightweight, structures found in birds but not in their close dinosaur cousins. Archaeopteryx is discounted as shedding no light on the subject since its feathers look just like modern feathers. There is no fossil evidence of the transition from simple reptilian scales to complex feathers with their many interlock parts. Evolution cannot explain why feathers would have developed from scales for flight and then developed a new developmental pathway to form them. To explain this, the authors suggest that feathers evolved before theropod dinosaurs or birds. There is no fossil evidence to support this claim and the possible reasons for the development of feathers includes camouflage, insulation, protection and other hypotheses that are not supported by the fossil evidence.
Challenging evolution is not an option, so the evidence just gets reevaluated. The new mode of interpretation is called evolutionary development biology for short. According to this, "the complex mechanisms by which an individual organism grows to its full size and form can provide a window into the evolution of a species' anatomy." In other words, by looking at the stages of feather development in a bird today, we can look for "ancient" dinosaur feathers at the early stages of development. The new concept is based on many assumptions that limit its scientific validity, but it has become popular nonetheless. Challenges to the idea of dino-to-bird evolution continue to plague the proposal and leading evolutionary biologists can't even agree on the big picture, let alone the details.

The giver of life to the soul

The solemn transactions between God and man, are sometimes called a covenant, here a testament, which is a willing deed of a person, bestowing legacies on such persons as are described, and it only takes effect upon his death. Thus Christ died, not only to obtain the blessings of salvation for us, but to give power to the disposal of them. All, by sin, were become guilty before God, had forfeited every thing that is good; but God, willing to show the greatness of his mercy, proclaimed a covenant of grace. Nothing could be clean to a sinner, not even his religious duties; except as his guilt was done away by the death of a sacrifice, of value sufficient for that end, and unless he continually depended upon it. May we ascribe all real good works to the same all-procuring cause, and offer our spiritual sacrifices as sprinkled with Christ's blood, and so purified from their defilement.

Hebrews 9:16-22

 

¹⁶ For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

¹⁷ For a testament is of force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

¹⁸ And so not even the first testament was dedicated without blood.

¹⁹ For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people,

²⁰ saying, “This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.”

²¹ Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.

²² And by the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.

The principle of the excluded middle

A objection to the law of non-contradiction comes from science. Niels Bohr's principle of complementarity is used to show the subatomic reality is contradictory. For according to this principle there are contradictory ways to describe the same reality , such as, light is both particles and waves. However, this is a misunderstanding of the principle of complementarity. As Werner Heisenberg noted, these are "two complementary description of the same reality .................... these descriptions can only be partially true: there must be limitations which can be expressed by uncertainly relations, the contradictions disappear."
The objection that Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty or unpredictability is contrary to the principle of causality is unfounded. At best, it does not show that events have no cause, but only that they are unpredictable as presently perceived with available technology.    

The alleged dinosarian ancestry of birds

The idea of dinosaurs evolving into birds has been around since 1968 when it was first proposed by Thomas Huxley. Since Huxley, the hypothesis has been going through major changes.
Even after all these years of new evidence, the interpretation is still not proven.
The presence of two new fossil species, Protarchaeopteryx and Caudipteryx, has shed little light on the topic. Depending on the bias of the interpreter, these two are either flightless birds or feathered theropod dinosaurs. The presence of short, fibrous structures on a Sinosauropteryx fossil is often interpreted as "protofeathers" despite the fact that the existence and structure of these ancestral feathers are completely hypothetical.
In another problematic find, the fossil Protoavis is considered to be more similar to modern birds than Archaeopteryx but is 75 million years older. This causes significant problems for the theropod theory because the common ancestor would need to be much older than the earlier  known dinosaur Eoraptor. The plastic nature of the evolutionary theory makes it certain that something else will be put in the role of bird ancestor if the dinosaurs don't fit.
The development of the bird lung is another major issue because no suitable ancestor exists from which the lungs could have developed. Another major question is whether birds evolved from the ground or down from the trees. Many hypotheses have been suggested, but there seems to be no solid evidence for one side or the other. The evolution of birds is an area where scientists have little to agree on. The special creation of birds and their subsequent variation explain the evident much better.

The place of victory

And for this cause.—Or, And because of this. This verse looks back to the great truth of Hebrews 9:11-12, which the last two verses have served to confirm and place in bolder relief. “Christ through His own blood entered once for all into the Holy Place, having won eternal redemption; and by reason of this He is the Mediator of a covenant, a new covenant, in order that they who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.” For “the new testament” we must certainly read a new covenant: whatever may be thought of the following group of verses, the rendering testament has no place here. The leading thought of Hebrews 8 is the establishment of a new covenant, and the former covenant has been referred to three times in this very chapter (Hebrews 9:1; Hebrews 9:4).

Hebrews 9:15
And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

The principle of the excluded middle, part two

The philosophical objection charges that this argument begs the question, using the law of non-contradiction to prove the law of non-contradiction. It says in effect that it is contradictory to deny the principle of  non-contradiction. But the law of non-contradiction is not used as the basis of the argument.
The direct basis for the law of non-contradiction is its self-evident nature, whereby the predicate is reducible to the subject. 

Archaeoraptor: featured dinosaur from National Geographic doesn't fly

A fossil discovered in 1999 was one of many claimed by a number by a number of scientists and promoted by the media, especially National Geographic, to be a feathered dinosaur. The fossil was from a region in China that has been producing many new fossil from and changing many ideas surrounding the evolutionary history of secular scientists. The fossils was named Archaeoraptor and included a bird's upper body structure with fossilized feather imprints but the tail of a theropod dinosaur. The fossil was promoted as proof positive that birds had evolved from dinosaurs. The National Geographic article that accompanied the release of the fossil had a model of T. Rex covered in feathers. This promoted the curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institute to proclaim:

With the publication of "Feathers for T. Rex?" by Christopher P. Sloan in its November issue. National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated tabloid journalism.

Upon further examination by various experts, it was determined that the fossil was actually a fraud. The apparent difference in the body and trail were actually different- from two different organisms. Despite the fact that this and other "feathered dinosaurs" have been shown to be fakes or misinterpretations, the media and many scientists are still claiming feathers should be shown on fossils that show no evidence of feathers.
    

Christ the King

All good things past, present, and to come, were and are founded upon the priestly office of Christ, and come to us from thence. Our High Priest entered into heaven once for all, and has obtained eternal redemption. The Holy Ghost further signified and showed that the Old Testament sacrifices only freed the outward man from ceremonial uncleanness, and fitted him for some outward privileges. What gave such power to the blood of Christ? It was Christ's offering himself without any sinful stain in his nature or life. This cleanses the most guilty conscience from dead, or deadly, works to serve the living God; from sinful works, such as pollute the soul, as dead bodies did the persons of the Jews who touched them; while the grace that seals pardon, new-creates the polluted soul. Nothing more destroys the faith of the gospel, than by any means to weaken the direct power of the blood of Christ. The depth of the mystery of the sacrifice of Christ, we cannot dive into, the height we cannot comprehend. We cannot search out the greatness of it, or the wisdom, the love, the grace that is in it. But in considering the sacrifice of Christ, faith finds life, food, and refreshment.

Hebrews 9:11-14

 ¹¹ But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. ¹² He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption. ¹³ The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. ¹⁴ How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,so that we may serve the living God!

The principle of the excluded middle, part one

Since being and nonbeing are opposites (i.e., contradictory) and opposites cannot be the same, nothing can hide in the "cracks" between being and non-being. The only choices are being and nonbeing.
Any attempt to deny that all meaningful statements must be noncontradictory, by its very nature very nature a meaningful statement, must be noncontradiction. Likewise, any attempt to deny the law of noncontradictory statement about reality- which is self-defeating. So, like other first principles, the law of noncontradiction is undeniable.

Dinosaurs: phylogenetic chart

The next time you see a phylogenetic tree ("tree of life") in a textbook, take a look at the fine print. Honest diagrams will make a distinction between the actual evidence and the interpreted information by using shading or dashed and solid lines.
Dinosaurs were dinosaurs and did not change into something else or from something else. The links between kinds are simply stories about the evidence. The evidence does not prove evolution, as is often suggested.

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/types/phylogenetic-chart/

Looking towards Christ

The Old Testament was a foreshadow of the coming of Jesus. I will examine this ideas for you and me.
There was a place where priest would sacrifice animals. The priest would not shed their own blood but use the animals as a sort of credit cards for the sins of themselves and the people.
This was an ceremonial that Christ fulfilled.
He came to this world as the Lord that became man. He lived a perfect life and he died on the cross. He conquered death and he returned back to heaven.
If a person repents from their sins and follow Jesus then that person is cleansed from their sins.
Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament.

Hebrews 9:6-10

⁶ When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. ⁷ But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. ⁸ The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. ⁹ This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. ¹⁰ They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

How to read an evolutionary family tree

Charts and diagrams can be wonderful aids giving clarity and visual reinforcement to a point or lesson one is trying to make. However, these explanatory tools also can be confusing and in some cases misleading, when the illustrations and their implications are not fully explained. Such in the case with charts that supposedly show the evolutionary relationship of creatures. A typical illustration will try to convince you of how certain group of creatures has evolved from a common ancestor in the past. However, these charts almost always use dotted lines when the supposed evolutionary path is unknown. In these instances, you should simply ignore the dotted lines. By doing so, you will be left with a diagram showing that the different types of species depicted have remained the same throughout history. Without the dotted lines, these charts simply show the diversity within a kind, revealing that today's creatures haven't changed from so-called "ancient" ancestors. The dotted lines reinforce the fact that there is no evidence to prove the existence of a common ancestor. Go to a library or go on-line for a book and check all the evolutionary trees you can find. You'll find this a revealing and worthwhile exercise.

http://creation.com/is-the-evolutionary-tree-changing-into-a-creationist-orchard

Why are the countless millions of transitional fossils missing? Question #9 for Evolutionist

Darwin noted the problem and is still remains. The evolutionary family trees in text books are based on imagination, not based on fossil evidence. Famous Harvard paleontologists and atheist, Stephen Jay Gould, wrote, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossils record persists as the trade secret of paleontology." Other evolutionists will admit to the same problem.

   creation.com/pattquote

The honor of life

The apostle shows to the Hebrews the typical reference of their ceremonies to Christ. The tabernacle was a movable temple, shadowing forth the unsettled state of the church upon earth, and the human nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. The typical meaning of these things has been shown in former remarks, and the ordinances and articles of the Mosaic covenant point out Christ as our Light, and as the Bread of life to our souls; and remind us of his Divine Person, his holy priesthood, perfect righteousness, and all-prevailing intercession. Thus was the Lord Jesus Christ, all and in all, from the beginning. And as interpreted by the gospel, these things are a glorious representation of the wisdom of God, and confirm faith in Him who was prefigured by them.

Hebrews 9:1-5

Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. ² A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. ³ Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, ⁴ which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. ⁵ Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqiy9JRx-5w 

The principle of non-contradiction

Being cannot be non-being, for they are direct opposites. And opposites cannot be the same. For the one who affirms that "opposites can both be true" does not hold that the opposite of this statement is true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb9CYYdxBQQ

The stopper of science

Evolutionists often claim that the acceptance of creation is a "science stopper" and that the actions of God cut off the possibility for studying scientific concepts. This idea, however, is false. A belief in special creation only removes the option of continuous evolution, not the study of the many other relationships among living things. The study of cichlid fish by Doctor John showed the amazing variety of characteristic within the cichlid species, including coloration and ability to survive in saltwater. What was also apparent was that the cichlid were a distinct kind of fish that showed no evolutionary relationships in the breeding experiments. The fossil record supports the notion of fixed kinds of fish, with very few supposed transitional forms between kinds of fish. Creationists are mot bound to any classification system that rises above the level of kind. Part of the classification schemes may be correct as they appear today, but more research needs to be done to classify the relationships.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGHOkeEaAWA&spfreload=5        

Questions for Evolutionist #7, How did sex originate?

 Asexual reproduction gives up to twice as much reproductive success (‘fitness’) for the same resources as sexual reproduction, so how could the latter ever gain enough advantage to be selected? And how could mere physics and chemistry invent the complementary apparatuses needed at the same time (non-intelligent processes cannot plan for future coordination of male and female organs). 

http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-2-chapter-11-argument-evolution-of-sex

http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?fileID=Cu0IK-EB5F4

The superior thought of the day

The superior excellence of the priesthood of Christ, above that of Aaron, is shown from that covenant of grace, of which Christ was Mediator. The law not only made all subject to it, liable to be condemned for the guilt of sin, but also was unable to remove that guilt, and clear the conscience from the sense and terror of it. Whereas, by the blood of Christ, a full remission of sins was provided, so that God would remember them no more. God once wrote his laws to his people, now he will write his laws in them; he will give them understanding to know and to believe his laws; he will give them memories to retain them; he will give them hearts to love them, courage to profess them, and power to put them in practice. This is the foundation of the covenant; and when this is laid, duty will be done wisely, sincerely, readily, easily, resolutely, constantly, and with comfort. A plentiful outpouring of the Spirit of God will make the ministration of the gospel so effectual, that there shall be a mighty increase and spreading of Christian knowledge in persons of all sorts. Oh that this promise might be fulfilled in our days, that the hand of God may be with his ministers so that great numbers may believe, and be turned to the Lord! The pardon of sin will always be found to accompany the true knowledge of God. Notice the freeness of this pardon; its fulness; its fixedness. This pardoning mercy is connected with all other spiritual mercies: unpardoned sin hinders mercy, and pulls down judgments; but the pardon of sin prevents judgment, and opens a wide door to all spiritual blessings. Let us search whether we are taught by the Holy Spirit to know Christ, so as uprightly to love, fear, trust, and obey him. All worldly vanities, outward privileges, or mere notions of religion, will soon vanish away, and leave those who trust in them miserable for ever.

Hebrews 8:7-13

⁷ For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ⁸ But God found fault with the people and said:

“The days are coming, declares the Lord,
    when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.
⁹ It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
    and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
¹⁰ This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel
    after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
    and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
    and they will be my people.
¹¹ No longer will they teach their neighbor,
    or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
    from the least of them to the greatest.
¹² For I will forgive their wickedness
    and will remember their sins no more.”

¹³ By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

More on the principle of identity

Some people suggest this is a quirk of language. They insists that such statement as "I can't speak a word in English" are only self-defeating because one is speaking English. One could use French and avoid the difficulty. They add that one can make a metastatement in even the same language that avoids this difficulty. That is they posit a class statements about statements (called metastatements about the real world. These metastatements are supposedly exempt from being self-defeating. Thus,one who says, "No statements about God are descriptive," is supposedly not making a descriptive statement about but rather the statements that can be made of God.

It is true that a statement in French saying that one cannot speak English is not self-defeating. However, a statement in French affirming that one cannot speak a word in French is self-defeating.

The statement maneuver does not avoid the trap of self-destruction. For statements about statements that affirm something about reality are indirectly statements about reality.

For example, if one says, "I am not making a statement about reality when I say that statements cannot be made about reality" he is making a statement about reality. It is the most radical kind of statement that can be made about reality, since, it prohibits all other statements about reality. Thus the statement "Something exists" cannot be denied without affirming that something does exist (e.g., the maker of that statement).       

The modern system of classification called Linnaean system

The modern system of classification is known as the Linnaean system and based on the work of creation scientist Carolus Linnaeus. Linnaeus was actually trying to identify the original kinds from the book of Genesis in his research. Linnaeus related the Genesis kind to his category of species and therefore believed in the "fixity of species." Linnaeus recognized that variation happens within the created kinds, not between kinds. Evolutionists often make the false claim that creationists believed and still believe, that species don't change.

Questions for Evolutionists #7, How did multi-cellular life originate?

How did cells adapted to individual survival 'learn' to cooperate and specialize (including undergoing programmed cell death) to create complex plants and animals?
 http://creation.com/multicellularity
http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?page=2

The High Priest of a New Covenant

The substance, or summary, of what had been declared was, that Christians had such a High Priest as they needed. He took upon himself human nature, appeared on earth, and there gave himself as a sacrifice to God for the sins of his people. We must not dare to approach God, or to present any thing to him, but in and through Christ, depending upon his merits and mediation; for we are accepted only in the Beloved. In all obedience and worship, we should keep close to God's word, which is the only and perfect standard. Christ is the substance and end of the law of righteousness. But the covenant here referred to, was that made with Israel as a nation, securing temporal benefits to them. The promises of all spiritual blessings, and of eternal life, revealed in the gospel, and made sure through Christ, are of infinitely greater value. Let us bless God that we have a High Priest that suits our helpless condition.

Hebrews 8:1-6

  Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, ² and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere human being.

³ Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. ⁴ If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already priests who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. ⁵ They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” ⁶ But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

The principle of Identity

I will keep on talking about the First Principles. I will talk about the principle of  identity. A thing must be identical to itself. If it were not, then it would not be itself.
While these and other principles, it is important to note the difference between unsayable and undeniable. I can say or write the words, "I do not exist." However, when I said it I implicitly affirmed that I do exist. The affirmation that I do not exist is actually unaffirmable. I must actually exist in order to grammatically say I do not exist.

Why do many artists draw feathers on dinosaurs when there is no evidence of actual feathers with the fossils?

There is another belief is that birds are actually living dinosaurs. Some prominent scientists refuse to accept the idea, but many still find the mystique of watching a dinosaur eating from a feeder in the backyard intriguing. This idea is prominent in the textbooks and media, even though no theory seems to fit the scenario accurately. Whether or not a mechanism for evolving birds from some small theropod dinosaur can be devised, many scientists are sure that it must have happened. It seems that almost all of the new dinosaur fossils are shown by artists to have feathers. Even though there were no clear evidence to support the feathered interpretation, the feathers are added to convince the public that science has found these things to be true. The next time you hear of one of these feathered fossils, ask to see the feather imprints- like the ones preserved so well in the fossilized bird Archaeopteryx.
Ultimately, all classification schemes and theoretical relationships are based on man's interpretation of the evidence. Starting with the truth found in God's Word will lead us closer to the true interpretation of the evidence than starting with the fallible ideas of men.
  

Question for Evolutionists #6, Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed?

Richard Dawkins wrote, “biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose.” Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the double helix structure of DNA, wrote, “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.” The problem for evolutionists is that living things show too much design. Who objects when an archaeologist says that pottery points to human design? Yet if someone attributes the design in living things to a designer, that is not acceptable. Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?

 http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-9-is-the-design-explanation-legitimate
 http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?fileID=OVm8lSFjaa8

Jesus is in this line

I like Hebrew 7:1-3 because it says, "his Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever."
Many Jews will not believe in Jesus because he wasn't in the line of Levi and so many Jews will reject Jesus.
This position is based on an bad line of thinking. 
 Melchizedek was the first priest in the Old Testament and he was before Moses received the Commandants. 

Melchizedek is mentioned in Genesis 14:18-20 says, "Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High,  and he blessed Abram, saying, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And praise be to God Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand.” Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything."

You will not see Melchizedek mentioned until Psalm 110:4 says, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”

Abraham gave a tenth of his money to Melchizedek before the law was given. 

Hebrews 7:4-10 says, "Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!  Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater.  In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living.  One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham,  because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor."

I will leave you with Hebrews 7:11-28:

" If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?  For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.  And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life.  For it is declared: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”

The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, ²¹ but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him: “The Lord has sworn  and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever.’” Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever."

 

The Principle Of Existence

I will talk about the First Principle idea of the principle of existence.
Something exists. For example, I exist. This is undeniable, for I would have to exist in order to deny my existence. In the very attempt to explicitly deny my existence I implicitly affirm it.

Phylogeny, evolution and other facts

Phylogeny is the study of the evolutionary relationships between all living  organisms. Taxonomists, scientists who classify living things, use different types of diagrams to display the supposed relationships. These diagrams show how organisms are supposed to have descended from a single ancestor. The diagram come in several forms. The fan diagram show the organisms with respect to their common ancestors and the relative size of the groups. Phylogenetic trees and cladograms are very similar in that they show evolutionary relationships based on various characteristics. There is much debate in taxonomy about what traits to include when doing the analyis. Different relationships come to light depending on which characteristics are given the most weight in the system of classification. Evolutionists assume that they can construct the complete "tree of life" by including as many traits as possible. Evidence from DNA, anatomy, development and fossils are commonly used in the construction of these systems.
A major problem with phylogenetic trees and other related models is the lack of evidence that supports the links between organisms and their supposed fossils relatives. The lines that connect an ancestor to the living organism are mostly imaginary. Very little fossils evidence supports the lines on the diagrams that connect the different kinds of organisms over millions of years, but the lines are often presented as fact. Darwin expected the fossils to show a progression of form, from fish to amphibian, for example, but that progression is missing. The term "missing link"  is often used to refer to these gaps and the missing fossils that supposedly fill them. Whenever you see one of these trees, ask, "What direct evidence supports the lines on the tree?" In some cases there are examples of fossils that fit in the sequence, but the vast majority are missing the evidence. The reliability of such a model is called into question when it is based on so many assumptions.
Creationist disagree with the idea of a "tree of life" as evolutionists sees it- all life originating from a single, unknown, common ancestor. If we consider the created kinds from Genesis, the picture of life would look more like an orchard- distinct groups of animals showing variety within a kind.
Imagine an tree orchard. The trees do not overlap one another or cross one another, representing the limits of variety within the DNA of the created kinds.
While new species have been observed to arise, it is always within the limits of the created kinds. The study of this variability and the relationship of animals within the original created kinds is called baraminology.  This does not mean that creationists reject the majority of classifications by evolutionary biologists but that the evolutionary history associated with the classifications is rejected. More research is needed in the field of baraminology to understand the relationship within the created kinds. This field of research can make specific predictions about the relationships of organisms based on breeding experiments and improve the current understanding of God's divine order.    

Questions for evolutionists #5, How did new biochemical pathways, which involve mulitiple enzymes?

How did new biochemical pathways which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?

Every pathway and nano-machine requires multiple protein/enzyme components to work How did lucky accidents create even one of the components, let alone 10 or 20 or 30+ at the same time, often in a necessary programmed sequence? Evolutionary biochemist Franklin Harold wrote, "we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
Here is an link for you if you want more information. creation.com/motor  (includes animation)     

Always faithful

I will talk about Hebrews 6:16-20. This was written to the Jewish believers in Jesus but non-Jewish believers in Jesus can receive hope in these verses.
God made an pact with Abraham and the line went to Issac then Jacob. God gave the Old Testament laws to the Jews. The Old Testament laws were a foreshadow of the New Testament and Jesus was the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
Many non-Messianic Jews says that Jesus came to abolish the Old Testament law but they need to read Matthew 5:17-18. Matthew 5:17-18 says, "  Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
The order of  Melchizedek is an higher order than the tribe of Levi. Psalm 110:4 says, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” This passage is talking about Jesus and he fulfilled this prophecy.
God the Father so loved the world he give his one and only Son to redeem mankind.
John 3:16-17 says, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷ For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

Hebrews 6:16-20

 ¹⁶ People swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument. ¹⁷ Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. ¹⁸ God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged. ¹⁹ We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, ²⁰ where our forerunner, Jesus, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable. They are either self-evident or reducible to the self-evident. And self-evident principles are either true by their nature or undeniable because the predicate is reducible to the subject. That the predicate is reducible to the subject means that one cannot deny the principle without using it. For example, the principle of non-contradiction cannot be denied without using it in the very denial. The statement: "Opposites cannot be true" assumes that the opposite of that statements cannot be true.
Not all skeptics or agnostics are willing to grant that the principle of causality, which is crucial in all cosmological arguments for God, is an undeniable first principle. Indeed, not every skeptic is willing to admit that something exists (the principle of existence). Thus,it is necessary to comment on their undeniability.

Would all scientific thought and advancement end if supernatural creation was accepted?

Many people will say that if a person accepts that there is God then all scientific thought and advancement would end. Does this argument have any merit? Would it be true that people would stop researching because people would be saying, "God wanted to do it that way."This is false and I will explain my thoughts.
The ability to study the world around us us is only reasonable because there is a Lawgiver who established the laws of nature. Modern Science founders believed in the Lawgiver and so believed that nature can be studied because it follows the laws given to it by the Lawgiver.
Johannes Kepler, one of the founders of astronomy said that science was "thinking God's thoughts after Him."
Many founders of scientific disciples, such as Bacon, Newton, Kepler, Galileo, Pascal, Dalton, Linnaeus, Mendel, Maxwell and Kelvin were Bible-believing Christians.
The science think-tanks have hijacked science and have accepted that everything was made only by Materialism that teaches the denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.
We need to look at the possibilities of Materialism that made everything without God.

discovery.org/a/98#

Questions for Evolutionists, #4 Taught as "Evolution", as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?

By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefits creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to the environment. E.g., how do minor back-and-forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? How does natural selection explain goo-to-you evolution? Click on this link. creation.com/defining-terms

The faithful Being

I love the book of Hebrews. The author that wrote this book by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
The book was written to the Jewish believers in Jesus but non-Jews can learn from this book.
Hebrews 6:13-15 talked about the faithfulness of the Lord and his promise to Abraham.
God promised that Abraham that he would have many children and this came true.
The Jews look to Abraham as their father and Jesus was an Jew. Jesus came to redeemed mankind from their sins so he lived a perfect life, died on the cross and arose from the dead.
If an Jew or non-Jew repents from their sins and follow Jesus then they are God's children.
God promise are true. He promised Abraham that he would have many children and it came true.
Abraham had many by nature births and spiritual births.

Hebrews 6:13-15

 ¹³ When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself, ¹⁴ saying, “I will surely bless you and give you many descendants.” ¹⁵ And so after waiting patiently, Abraham received what was promised.

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable. They are either self-evident or reducible to the self-evident. And self-evident principles are either true by their nature or undeniable because the predicate is reducible to the subject. That the predicate is reducible to the subject means that one cannot deny the principle without using it. For example, the principle of non-contradiction cannot be denied without using it in the very denial. The statement: "Opposites cannot be true" assumes that the opposite of that statements cannot be true.
Not all skeptics or agnostics are willing to grant that the principle of causality, which is crucial in all cosmological arguments for God, is an undeniable first principle. Indeed, not every skeptic is willing to admit that something exists (the principle of existence). Thus,it is necessary to comment on their undeniability.

Should there be a distinction between operational science and historical science?

Operational science is the type of science that allows us to understand how DNA codes for proteins in cells. It is the type of science that has allowed us to cure and treat diseases, put a man on the moon, build satellites and telescopes and make products that are useful to humans.
Historical Science interpreting evidence from past events based on a presupposed philosophical point of view. The past is not directly observable, testable, repeatable or falsifiable; so interpretations of past events presents greater challenges than interpretations involving operational science.
Evolutionists often claim that people misuse the word "theory" when discussing science and don't make a distinction between a scientific and the common use of the word "theory." You may say, "I have a theory about why Mr. Jones' hair looks funny" but that theory has never been compared to a broad set of observations. This is not the sense of a theory in science.
In light of this, few would argue that there are different types of theories. So it would be good to refine this term further to avoid any baiting and switching of the word "theory." Just as it was valuable to distinguish between operational and historical, it would be good to do the same with operational and historical theories. A scientific operational thoery is:
Operational Theory: an explanation of a set of facts based on a broad of repeatable and testable observations that is generally accepted within a group of scienists.
That evolution has been elevated to the status of an operational theory (and "fact" in the opinion of some) is not due to the strength of the evidence, but in spite of it. Because evolutionary ideas are interpretations of past events, they are not as well-founded as testable scientific theories like Einstein's Theory of Relativity or Newton's Theory of Gravity. These theories offer predictable models and the ability to conduct experiments to determine their validity in different circumstances. Molecules-to-man evolution does not offer this opportunity because these events happened in the past. Therefore, evolution is not an operational theory. Evolution is considered an historical theory, along with creation models and other origins theories.
Historical Theory: An explanation of past events based on the interpretation of past events based on the interpretation of evidence that is available in the present.
Evolution fits this definition of theory, but it relies on the assumption of naturalism. In the naturalistic scientific community, evolution has become a theory that is assumed to be an established fact and not an explanation. Evolution is the prevailing paradigm, and most scientists have stopped questioning the underlying assumptions that the theory is based upon. Creationists develop theories in the light of biblical truth, but they are not as widely accepted by scientists. All theories of the past are based on assumptions and cannot be equated with facts that are observable in the present. This holds true for creationist or  evolutionist theories.
Good operational science can provide scientific answers by test but it can't answer the questions of where we came from and why we are here.
A person must like at the probability of evolution and the probability of an God and he is the Maker.
Life on earth was either created or it developed in some progressive manner; there are no other alternatives. While there are the ideas of creation and evolution, both cannot be true.

Questions for Evolutionist, #3 How could mutations?

How could mutations- accidental copying mistakes (DNA 'Letters' exchanged, delete or added, Genes  duplicated, chromosome inversions, (Etc.)- create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things?

How could such errors create 3 billion letters of the DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologists? There is information for how to make proteins and also for controlling their use- much like a cookbook contains the ingredients as well as the instructions for how and when to use them. One without the other is useless. See creation.com/meta-information
Mutations are known for their destructive effects, including over 1,000 human diseases such as hemophilia. Rarely are they even helpful. But how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines with many components, to make 'goo-to-you' evolution possible? E.g., How did a 32-componet rotary motor like ATP synthase (which produces the energy currency, ATP, for all life), or robots like kinesin (a 'postman' delivering parcels inside cells) originate?
If you want an answer then click here creation.com/train 

Run to the end

Every believer is in a race and they must keep their focus on Jesus. There are many trials that will occur in their lifetime.
There are many people that train in sports so they can be an professional in their given sports.
There are days when their training are long and tiring but they keep their focus on the prize of the right of playing for money and they will refuse to become lazy.
The believer in Jesus needs to have the some attitude like the person training for their sports. The believer should work hard for their faith and believe that God is the great Giver of life.
This world will throw their ideas towards the believers that sin is worth trying but the believer must remain strong and pure for the Lord Jesus.

Hebrews 6:11-12

 ¹¹ We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. ¹² We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

The Principles of Reality

I will be talking about the First Principles. The principles of reality. Without basic first principles of reality, nothing can be known. Everything we know about reality is known by them. Twelve basic first principles can be set forth.
1) Being Is (B is)= The Principle of Existence
2) Being is Being (B is B)= The Principle of Indentity
3) Being is not non-being (Either is no Non-B= The Principle of Non-contradiction.
4) Either Being or Non-being (Either B or Non-B)= The Principle of the Excluded Middle.
5) Non-being Cannot Cause Being (Non-B>B)= The Principle of Causality.
6) Contingent Being Cannot Cause Contingent Being (Bc>Bc)= The Principle of Contingency or (Dependency).
7) Only Necessary Being Can Cause a Contingent Being (Bn -> Bc) = The Positive Principle of Modality.
8) Necessary Being Cannot Cause a Necessary Being (Bn>Bn)= The Negative Principle of Modality.
9) Every contingent Being is Caused by a Necessary Being (Bn -> Bc)= The Principle of Existential Causality.
10) Necessary Being exists= Principle of Existential Necessity (Bn exists).
11) Contingent being exists= Principle of Existential Contingency (Bc exists).
12) Necessary Being is similar to similar contingent being(s) it causes= Principle of Analogy (Bn- similar -> Bc).

For a realist, being is the basis of knowing. The rationality Rene Descartes said, "I think, therefore, I am." But for a realist such as Thomas Aquinas, " I am, therefore, I think." For one could not think unless he existed. Existence is the foundation to everything. Being is the basis for everything. Everything is being. Hence, there is no distinction between the rational and the real. Thought cannot be separated from things or knowing from being.

Two contenders for the history of life on earth.

There are two contenders for the history of life on earth: some of naturalism (evolution) or supernatural creation. Are there really any alternatives to some form of naturalistic evolution in science if science is restricted to naturalism?
I will examine Operational Science: a systematic approach to knowing facts that uses observable, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable experimentation to understand how nature commonly acts.
Operational science is the type of science that allows us to understand how DNA codes for proteins in cells.
Understanding how those laws operate is the basis for scientific thinking.
Some events defy natural laws. Christians refer to these things as miracles, but naturalistic science must find a way to explain these occurrences naturally. This approach rejects miracles in the Bible because they cannot be explained using natural laws. Such scientists occasionally try to explain the miracles in the Bible as natural phenomena but this ultimately undermines the authority of God and His Word.
If science depends on naturalistic explanation, it must accept that our thoughts are simply the products of chemical reactions that evolved from random chance. How can you ultimately rely on randomness to evolve the correct way of thinking? If there is no God, ultimately, philosophically, how can one talk about reality? How can one even rationally believe that there is such a thing as truth, let alone decide what it is?

Questions for Evolutionist, #2 How is the DNA Code originate?

How id the DNA Code originate?

The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters- just as the information on this page is not a product of chemical properties of ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding systems arise without it being created?
For a good link for information, click on this link. Creation.com/code

Works well with others

There are things that are never separated from salvation; things that show the person to be in a state of salvation, and which will end in eternal salvation. And the things that accompany salvation, are better things than ever any dissembler or apostate enjoyed. The works of love, done for the glory of Christ, or done to his saints for Christ's sake, from time to time, as God gives occasion, are evident marks of a man's salvation; and more sure tokens of saving grace given, than the enlightening and tastings spoken of before. No love is to be reckoned as love, but working love; and no works are right works, which flow not from love to Christ.

Hebrews 6:9-10

 ⁹ Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. ¹⁰ God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them.

The First Principles

I finished up the nature of truth. I will begin a series on the First Principles.
First principles are the foundation of knowledge. Without them nothing could be know. Even coherence-ism uses the first principle of non-contradiction to test the coherence of its system. Realism affirms that first principles apply to the real world. First principles undeniably apply to reality. The very denial that first principles apply to reality uses first principles in the denial.

Do all scientists believe in naturalistic evolution? Why or why not?

I will start with the definition of Naturalism:
A belief denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; specifically, the idea that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.

They are scientists that believe that God created earth and science.
They are some scientists that see complex structure of flagella in bacteria appears so complex that it must have a maker.
They are many scientists that cannot accept that principle because this idea falls outside the realm of naturalism.
People are surprised when they learn that Johannes Kepler, one of the founders of astronomy, said that science was "thinking God's thought after Him."
Many fathers of scientific disciplines, such namely, Bacon, Newton, Kepler, Galileo, Pascal, Boyle, Dalton, Linnaeus, Mendel, Maxwell, and Kelvin were Bible-believing Christians. They are many historians and philosophers of science have recognized that the existence of modern science had its origins in a culture at least nominally committed to a biblical worldview.

Questions for evolutionists, #1 (How did life originate?)

How did life originate?

Evolutionist Professor Paul Davies admitted, "Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell." Andrew Knoll, professor of biology, Harvard said, "we don't really know how life originated on this planet". A minimal cell needs several hundred proteins. Even if every atom in the universe were an experiment with all the correct amino acids present for every possible molecular vibration in the supposed evolutionary age of the universe, not even one average-sized functional protein would form. So how did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design? 
For a good link. Click here. Creation.com/origin

The debate is here, some ways of explaining

I have an hard time understanding Hebrew 6:4-8 so I will talk about what it could mean.
People have debates on what these passages really mean. I will explain that these words could mean.
1) It refers to Christians losing their salvation.
2) It is a hypothetical argument to warn immature Hebrew Christians (Hebrews 5:11-14)  that they must progress to maturity (Hebrews 6:1)  or else experience divine discipline Hebrews (Hebrews 7-8).
3) It refers to professing Christians whose apostasy proves that their faith was not genuine (1 John 2:19).
This view sees chapters 3-4 as a warning based on the rebellion of the Jews in the desert.
As Isreal could not enter the promise land after spying out the land and tasting its fruit so the professing Hebrew Christians would not be able to repent if they adamantly turned against "the light" they had received. According to this view, such expressions as "shared in the Holy Spirit", and "enlightened" indicate that such a persons had come over the influence of God's pact blessings and had professed to turn from darkness to light but were in danger of a public and final rejection of Christ, proving they had never been regenerated (Hebrews 10:26-31).

Hebrews 6:4-8

⁴ It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, ⁵ who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age ⁶ and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. ⁷ Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. ⁸ But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.