What everybody ought to know about operational and historical science

Operational vs historical science copyBill Nye debated Ken Ham on the topic, Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era? at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, on February 4, 2014. Ham explained the difference between operational science and historical (forensic) science in some detail. Operational science has to do with investigations into nature in the present (repeated experiments require the present). Historical science investigates the past, trying to understand the origin of life, complexity in nature, humans, et cetera.  Bill Nye denied the distinction. He referred to a TV program where historical investigations and operational science are treated as the same.

For people who are eager to find evidence that will ‘delete’ Genesis 1, that might suffice. But reasonable, logical thinking people should ask themselves the following questions:

  • How many Nobel prizes have been given for evolutionary discoveries?
  • How many laws of nature are based on evolutionary principles?
  • Why is it that only operational science leads to technological applications?
  • Did Darwin really give conclusive evidence in his book, On the Origin of Species, that evolution (common descent) is true?

The answers are mostly negative, because evolution has no practical value.   It is because evolution has a different purpose than science. Science wants to understand how nature works, and how to apply it in technology for the benefit of society. Evolution desperately wants to prove that there is no Creator God, which means there is no life after death and nothing to worry about.


Why is it so important to prove that evolution is true? Why is it so important that even the crucial distinction between operational science and historical investigations is denied? The reason is that once people understand the difference, they understand there is no testable, observable evidence that evolution is true. That will be catastrophic for atheism. They need evolution to be true. It is very important in their atheism campaign.

That is why we so often hear that religion is at war with science. It doesn’t mean operational science. One has to be fairly deluded to think that any person (Bible believers included) can oppose the established laws of gravity, or that proteins consist of amino acids. Laws of nature have been established by repeated experiments.

Evolution is a different scenario. When Bible believers take a closer look at the ‘science’ of evolution, they find its evidence wanting. They question it. So the dreaded creationists and ID people must be silenced. Laws are used to prevent any criticism of evolution in schools.  No one dares to criticise Darwinism (evolutionism).  Evolutionism refers to faith in Darwin without objective proof: you must believe by faith in Darwin alone.  NB! By evolution we logically exclude variations among kinds, like finches with different beaks.

Logic tells us that laws have never been necessary to protect real science from criticism. Testable, observable, repeatable experiments proved the laws of nature (they stand until they are falsified). So why did Bill Nye insist there is no difference between historical (forensic) science and operational science? Because he is not a science guy, but an evolution guy. He defends atheism. Operational science is not the same as historical investigations into events of the past (forensic science).  Reasonable, logical people understand that very well.

Do yourself a favour. Keep your eyes and ears open for the false claim that there is a war between  religion and science.  There isn’t. It is a war between filling heaven and filling hell.

Did Caesar Augustus live?

Caesar Augustus lived from 63 BC – 14 AD. He was the head of the Roman empire (27 BC – 14 AD). C Augustus, credit Bibi Saint-Pol: Wikimedia C 2He was an excellent emperor and his times were known as the Pax Romana (the Roman peace). Yet nobody living today, or anybody since about 100 AD, has seen him. So, how do we know he lived?

 

There are sculptures of him, as well as buildings he erected. Historians like Nicholas of Damascus, Dio Cassius, Plutarch, Tacitus, Cicero and others, wrote about him.Some of his own writings also survived. So we have a fairly accurate history of his life. We are also familiar with Rome, Italy, and the conquests of the Romans in various countries. Thus, even if nobody now living has seen him, there is little doubt that he existed.

 

He even had his share of critics. Some were his contemporaries, but most wrote long after his death, like Jonathan Swift (1667-1745), Thomas Gordon (1658-1741), and Thomas Blackwell (1701-1757). Although they never met him personally, they criticised him based on historical documents.

 

Caesar Augustus is mentioned in the Bible. He issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.2 He was also a patron of Herod the Great and made him king of the Jews. That is why Herod was so disturbed when he heard a king of the Jews had been born. So he decided to kill him.3

 

A few of the other Roman emperors are also mentioned in the Bible: Augustus’ son, Tiberius Caesar (14-37AD),Claudius, the fourth emperor (excluding Julius Caesar),5  Nero (54-68).6  The apostle Paul, charged by the Jews, appealed to the court of Caesar (Nero), expecting a fair trial.7

 

No historian, or anyone else denies the existence of the Caesars. One of the books that discuss the Caesars is is that of I Lissner. 8 However, when it comes to Jesus, people deny that He existed. It is true that there are no busts or statues of Him, but there are many reliable historical documents that testify that He lived. The difference is that Jesus was more than a historical person. He was God, therefore He has to do with life after death. So to acknowledge the possible existence of Jesus is too dangerous for skeptics. They claim to be reasonable people, so they have to ‘delete dangerous history.’

 

For example, well known atheists like P Boghossian,9 Guy P Harrison,10 and Richard Dawkins,11 ignore reliable documents that testify that the Bible is true history. It seems as if they are history deniers.

 

Question: if you accept that Caesar Augustus was a real historical figure and not just a myth, what is the difference between the eyewitness accounts about Augustus and those about Jesus?

 

References

  1. Wikipedia and the Catholic Encyclopaedia
  2. Luke 2:1
  3. Matthew 2:1-8, 13-18
  4. Luke 3:1
  5. Acts 11:28; 18:1
  6. Acts 25:8
  7. Acts 25:11
  8. I Lissner, Power and Folly, the Story of the Caesars, translated by J M Brownjohn, Jonathan Cape 30, Bedford Square, 1958
  9. P Boghossian, A Manual for Creating Atheists, Pitchstone Publishing, 2013
  10. Guy P Harrison, 50 Simple Questions to Ask A Christian, Prometheus Books, 2013. Kindle Edition
  11. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, Bantam Press, 2006

Creation is the basis of the Bible

Do you believe the Bible, but not creation in 6 days? We have not discussed it in detail yet, but creation Creationis the basis of the Bible. If God did not create the heavens and the earth in 6 days, Adam and Eve did not exist. If they were not real, historical people it causes serious problems for the genealogy of Jesus. The Bible says Jesus descended from Adam who was created by God in His image.1 Remember no evolutionist has yet proven how ape-like creatures evolved speech or consciousness. If Adam was not real, Jesus isn’t either. Which means the Bible has no message of redemption and hope for life after death.

There are reasons that the Bible begins with the creation account. It shows up God’s authority. He is the Owner of the universe. Normally if a person creates something, like a business, a painting, a house, or a sculpture, it belongs to that person. That is also true of the universe. It has an Owner, ‘To the Lord your God belongs the heavens, even the highest heavens, the earth and everything in it.’ 2

 

The word ‘God’ in Genesis 1 means the all-powerful, invincible One, the only true God, who needs nobody to assist Him. It is written, These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens.3  Creation shows the difference between the Bible and other religious books. Do they have a logical precise account of how and for what purpose their gods created the universe? The Bible reveals God’s plan for His creation—an eternal new heavens and earth, where He will live with His Family.

 

Another reason creation is important is miracles. If God is not the Creator, how does one explain the miracles in the Bible? Miracles only make sense because God is the Creator (think about the thousands of DNA codes that had to be designed for all the kinds of living things and plants). This is very important, because many people laugh at the miracles in the Bible, claiming they are impossible. Science cannot answer the most basic question—where did life begin? The main obstacle remains the immense complexity of the genetic code (DNA) and the cell (among others).  If God created  life by speaking, miracles are not mysterious.  NB! Please, don’t let evolution fool you into thinking they have solved the problem of first life. They haven’t. That is why they search for possible earth-like planets where life might have begun by some mysterious process.

 

We also read in the Bible that this present universe and the earth will be destroyed by fire, a veritable big bang. It will be replaced with an eternal universe. Only an omnipotent God will be able to accomplish that. The same God who made the first ‘edition’ (in six days), will also make the final ‘edition’ (in a short time). ‘In keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.’ 4  Because God is the Creator of the first heavens and the earth in six days, we have the hope that He can and will create new heavens and a new earth.

 

Question: Do you agree that creation is the basis of the Bible? 


References

  1. Luke 3:23-38
  2. Deuteronomy 10:14
  3. Jeremiah 10:11
  4. 2 Peter 3:13