John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1)

I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry King’s Show. One of two most popular posts I have ever done are posts from John MacArthur. One is on what the Bible has to say about alcohol and then what the Bible says concerning the prophecy of the city of Tyre.

Biblical Inspiration Validated By Science, Part 1 (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

We continue in our look at the Word of God tonight and the subject of the doctrine of inspiration. In 2 Timothy chapter 3 we read, “That all Scripture is inspired by God.” All Scripture is God-breathed. All Scripture proceeds from God. He is the author of Scripture. And therefore, when we study the Word of God, it reflects the divine mind. And since the mind of God is all knowing, everything in the Bible is true. It is a true representation not only of what God said but what God determined is true. Whatever the Bible says on whatever subject it speaks, it is true. Whether it is talking about past history, present reality or future prophecy, it is absolutely accurate and inerrant and without flaw. Whether the Bible is talking about temporal history or heavenly reality, it is true. Whether it is talking about events on the earth or events in heaven, it is true. Whether it is talking about the spiritual realm or the physical realm, it is true. Everything in the Scripture is true because all Scripture is God-breathed. It does not come to us from any human origin, but rather holy men are moved by the Spirit of God to write down that which God has said.

So when we study the Bible, we expect it what it affirms and what it declares and what it says is consistent with reality and with truth. It is God who wrote the Scripture and it is God who created reality, therefore you have the same author of what is and what is said about what is. And there is therefore a perfect consistency in both.
When you think about that with regard to the natural world in which we live, it sort of breaks down to a very simple way to understand it and it would go like this. “Whoever designed and created and sustains the universe also understands it. Whoever made the earth understands the earth. Whoever created the animal life, the plant life and the human life on this earth understands it perfectly as its designer and its creator and its sustainer. He knows the earth and He knows it well because He made it. Whoever made this earth understands that is spherical and not flat. He understands that it rotates on an axis, not that it is stationary with heaven rotating around it. Whoever it was that created this earth knows that it is suspended in space on nothing. Whoever created this earth knows that it sweeps through the universe, being dragged along in a solar system around the sun as the sun moves in an orbit from one end of infinite space to the other. Whoever created this universe knows that there are innumerable stars. Whoever created this world knows that the cycles of air and the cycles of water move in systems that are consistent. Whoever created this world understand the facts of chemistry and understands the facts of biology. And so whoever wrote a book in which any of this is discussed would get it right. So if we find a book that gets it right, we know who wrote it.

If God the Creator writes a book about His creation, we expect it to be a true reflection of the reality of that creation as much as is observable to us, consistent with scientific reality. And to take that argument a little further, whoever is intelligent enough to create the entire universe with all of its complexity is certainly intelligent enough to write a book in which He declares the reality consistently with actual fact. We would expect one who is intelligent enough to create the universe to be up to the task of writing an accurate book that is rational and logically consistent and true to fact.

And we might add another element to our argument. It would be of great assistance to the Creator in convincing us that He actually wrote this book since there are so many other books that have been written that claim to be divine, it would be very helpful to the Creator if He wrote this book wanting us to know that He actually wrote it if He said some things in that book which we can verify as true and yet which no one knew at the time He wrote. It would be, in fact, a monumental thing for God to write in His book things that we know now to be true which no one else at the time of writing knew or could know. That would give us evidence of transcendent divine authorship by the Creator. Whoever created reality knows reality. Whoever can create reality and knows reality can reveal Himself to us accurately about that reality.

So, whey then does Science and Healthand Key to the Scriptures, the authoritative divine book of the Christian Science movement, say “Man is not matter, he is not made up of brain, blood, bones and other material elements and man is incapable of sin, sickness and death?” Well so much for that religion. Whoever made man didn’t write that. Whoever created man and made him brain, blood, bones and material elements didn’t write that book. And whoever wrote that man is incapable of sin, sickness and death did not know the truth, for we are all subject to sin, sickness and death. Why does the Book of Mormonin 2 Nephi chapter 2 say, “Adam fell that men might be and they are that they might have joy?” Why does the Book of Mormonsay that if men had not fallen, they would not be what they are and therefore they would not have joy? Whoever wrote that the result of the Fall was human joy doesn’t know the facts…doesn’t know the facts. By the way, the Book of Mormonalso says in Alma chapter 7 verse 10 that Jesus was born in Jerusalem. Whoever wrote that book doesn’t know the facts.
Why does the Koran describe the earth, the Moslem Koran, describe the earth as flat with the sky suspended over it being held up by Allah so that it doesn’t fall on top of the flat earth? Whoever wrote that didn’t know reality. Why does the Hindu Upanishad say that the sun is the source of all energy in the universe? That’s not true. So far none of these books pass simple tests.

And then there is Taoism, that very vast oriental religion, why does the Taoist holy book say, “There are only thirteen members through which death can come.” We now know that there are far more than that in the human anatomy through which death can come. That is an inaccurate statement, and there are many others. Why does the sacred Buddhist book say that earthquakes are caused by the wind moving the water and the water moving the land? That’s not true either.

All these and many more supposedly holy books written by gods, all these and more are historically inaccurate, scientifically wrong, morally inferior and spiritually muddled. The Bible never is. It doesn’t matter what subject it speaks on, it gets it right. It is accurate because it is written by God. It is a reflection of His Word that men wrote down under the power of the Holy Spirit so that what was written was a true record of God’s Word.

The veracity of the Bible and accuracy of the Bible can be sustained and has been sustained wonderfully under THE most long-lasting and intense examination. And although it is not a text book on science, it is not a text book on technical things, whenever it intersects with science and whenever it intersects with scientific reality, it is completely true and accurate. True science has no argument with Scripture. I’ll say that again. True science has no argument with Scripture. The word science simply means knowledge. That’s why we say when we say God is omniscient, we put the word science with omni, all knowing. True knowledge, true science has no argument with Scripture because the Creator is the author of Scripture and He is the one who determined the way things are and He knows the way things are because He made them the way they are. Never has science, never has science disproven one jot or tittle in the Bible, and, believe me, they have tried those unbelieving scientists. They’re still working at it. The Word of God stands the test of all the poundings that it has taken from so-called science and pseudo-science.

The fact of the matter is that the Bible will not only stand up under the assaults of so-called science, and it will stand fast when compared with true science, but it is also true the Bible, the Word of God, is far ahead of science. It is far ahead of scientific discovery in revealing the reality of the observable matters in this material universe. That is to say the Bible says things that are true long before man ever discovers them to be so. There’s absolutely no contradiction between true science and the Bible, only between pseudo-science and the Bible.

So no matter where we go in the Bible, we’re going to find the Bible scientifically accurate. And, of course, the first thing people are going to say, “Well what about creation? Don’t we know that evolution has been proven?” Answer…of course not. Evolution is a theory, it is not fact. There is no present or never…and there never has been an observable, repeatable scientifically honest illustration of macro-evolution. There’s never been one to observe, it is pure theory and nothing else.
When you read the Genesis account in Genesis 1 through 3, it is absolutely consistent with all true science. There are no conflicts and we’re not surprised by that because God is the author. Biblical inerrancy extends to every word of Scripture and it starts with the first word “in” the beginning. Scripture, not science, is the ultimate test of all truth. In fact, the Bible warns us, 1 Timothy 6:20, against science falsely so called, or false knowledge that opposes the truth of Scripture. And though the biblical account, particularly thinking of the creation account in Genesis 1 through 3, strongly conflicts with nat…natural…naturalistic evolutionary theory, it never conflicts with true scientific fact. All geological, astronomical biological physiological true scientific data fits the Bible. Genesis 1 to 3 tells us exactly the truth about creation. Modern science, going back to Darwin, has developed a very unscientific theory called evolution. It is very unscientific, it is totally irrational because the basic premise of evolution is nobody times nothing equals everything…that’s intellectual idiocy…nobody times nothing equals everything? The Creator in an evolutionary system is chance, but chance is not a force and chance is not a power, it is only a probability. And so they have turned chance into a creator and the theory of evolution, natural selection and natural origination out of nothing, is based on a series of accidents, coincidences, random events and blind luck that has no cause whatsoever. All this comes out of nothing, producing the intricate eco-systems and complex organisms and macrocosm of the universe, out of absolutely nothing by sheer random coincidence. This is total absurdity by any normal scientific evaluation.

There’s a new veil out for the bizarre irrationality of evolution now that’s come along called ID, have you been reading about it…Intelligent Design? This is the new scientific approach to this theory of evolution that says, “Wait a minute, there’s just too much intelligence here, it’s just way too complex to come out of non-intelligence. There has to be some intelligence behind this. It’s just too complicated.” And so they came up with this ID, Intelligent Design. And there are many scientists who are admitting that there is intelligence behind this, there must therefore be some intelligence somewhere in the universe, but they stopped short of saying that that intelligence is the God of the Bible. In fact, they stopped far short of the God of the Bible.
The fact of the matter is, they’re all right with some other god. They’re all right with some cosmic force. Even Einstein said, “Of course there’s a cosmic force out there, but we could never know it.” Even he realized you can’t have all these effects without a cause, you can’t have all this complexity without intelligence. They’re happy to have any god and every god except the true and living one. Marvin Lubinow(??) has written an interesting book called Bones of Contention. And in that book he tells us why, I think, listen to this paragraph. “The real issue in the creation/evolution debate is not the existence of God. The real issue is the nature of God. To think of evolution as basically atheistic is to misunderstand the uniqueness of evolution. Evolution was not designed as a general attack against theism, or against the idea of God, it was designed as a specific attack against the God of the Bible and the God of the Bible is clearly revealed through the doctrine of creation. Obviously…he writes…if a person is an atheist, it would be normal for him to also be an evolutionist. But evolution is as comfortable with theism as it is with atheism. An evolutionist is perfectly free to choose any God he wishes as long as it is not the God of the Bible. The gods allowed by evolution are private, subjective and artificial. They bother no one. They make no absolute ethical demands. However, the God of the Bible is creator, sustainer, Savior and judge. All are responsible to Him. He has an agenda that conflicts with that of sinful humans. For man to be created in the image of God is very awesome. For God to be created in the image of man is very comfortable,” end quote. So they’re comfortable with intelligent design as long as we don’t say it’s the God of the Bible who is not only a creator, but who is a judge, a law giver and a Redeemer.

This is really what is behind the scientific resentment of Scripture. It’s not that the Bible is scientifically inaccurate. It’s not that the creation account is not a right and verifiable and sensible and reasonable and logical explanation of the way things are. It is that if you accept the Creator God of the Bible, then you have the Law-Giver of the Bible and the judge of the Bible. And in order to get rid of Him, you get rid of creation.

Now in the first place, science cannot know anything about creation anyway because it’s not repeatable and it wasn’t observable. Nobody was there. Not until the sixth day did God even create man and woman, and by then He had created everything else. There were no eyewitnesses to creation, with the exception of the angels who were there singing together, as the Scripture tells us, when God was creating, and God Himself. Therefore any view of creation, any view of the origin of the world as we know it is a matter of religion. It’s a matter of faith. It’s a matter of deciding what you want to believe. Science can observe the present. It can observe phenomena in a microscope or a test tube or some kind of telescope. But it can only speculate about prehistoric reality and about origin. There’s only one who knows how it all came to exist, and that’s the one who brought it into existence, and that’s God the Creator.

So what we have in the Bible in Genesis 1 through 3 is the Creator’s account of His creation. And why would He give us a faulty account? If He wanted to reveal Himself, He would tell us the truth about His creation so that when we studied the creation carefully we find that it matches perfectly with the creation account when we measure true science against that account and therefore it verifies to us that this in fact is a book written by the creator. And if we can trust Him for His record of creation, we can trust Him for everything else as well.

Turn to 2 Peter chapter 3 for a moment, because if we’re going to talk about science and the Bible, we’re going to find a good starting point here. And we discussed this a week ago in our Sunday-morning series on the Second Coming, so it will be a little bit familiar to those of you who are here. But in 2 Peter chapter 3 and verse 3, we are told that in the last days, in these days in which we live, the day since the Lord has come and particularly in the days since evolutionary theory was developed over a hundred years ago, “In the last days, mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lust and saying, ‘Where’s the promise of His coming?'” They mocked the idea of a cataclysmic event called the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. They mocked the idea that the Lord is going to come and bring destruction, massive destruction upon the earth and upon the ungodly. And their mockery is basically framed around a theory called uniformity, or uniformitarianism. That is, verse 4, they say, “For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” They say there’s never going to be a cataclysmic event in the future such as described in the Bible as the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, no such cataclysmic event can happen because none ever has. That’s their theory. All things have always continued at the same pace. This is a scientific view that observes current processes, current scientific reality, scientific data. And it extrapolates observing present processes, extrapolates them indefinitely into the past and indefinitely into the future so that as things are changing at the current pace, they must have always changed in the past at that same pace and they will all change in the future at that very same pace.

And so, it’s always been that way. You extrapolate the processes back and you go back millions and you go back billions of years. You’ve extrapolated into the future and you go forward millions and billions of years. There are no great cataclysmic events in the future because there haven’t any…been any such things in the past. It’s always been the same through all history since the fathers way back died, everything continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.

Now if a scientist wants to hold that view, he can. He can determine the age of rocks, the age of the sun, and the age of the human race by projecting present rates of change into the limitless past and into the limitless future. He can develop theories about the evolution of life, assuming that everything continues at the same speed, extrapolating it all the way back billions and billions of years. He can do the same thing with galaxies in space. He can do the same thing with chemical elements in the universe if he wishes. But he cannot know that it is true. He cannot know that it is accurate. He cannot know that it is right because he can’t reproduce those years in the past, he can’t reproduce those realities and those forces. The original events and sequences are not observable so he doesn’t know if it’s always going at the same rate in the past, nor can he know that will always go at the same rate in the future. That he cannot reproduce. Therefore, the viewpoint is not subject to scientific affirmation and verification, it is purely a theory, it is an idea one holds by faith. That is the idea of uniformity. And that’s exactly what this text is saying. Their view in the world is that there’s not going to be a future cataclysm because that’s not how the universe works, it just keeps going along in the same way. The argument then of the heretics goes something like this, the universe is a closed naturalistic system of cause and effect. It moves along in this naturalistic system of cause and effect, closed to any divine intervention at the beginning, in the middle or at the end. There are no catastrophes. They call it uniformity, or uniformitarianism and it denies divine intervention in history.

This became very formalized in the nineteenth century under the influence of a British lawyer and geologist named Charles Lyle. Charles Lyle wrote a book called The Principles of Geology, this was a book that really influenced Darwin. In fact, when Darwin went to the Galapagos Islands, took a copy of Lyle’s book and was studying this idea of uniformitarianism.
The reality, however, is…the reality is, in modern times it is apparent that there is far too much evidence for catastrophism to really, honestly hold to a theory of uniformitarianism. There is just too much evidence for catastrophism, too much evidence such as finding mastodons on the north edge of Siberia buried in the ice pack with their stomachs full of tropical vegetation. How does that happen? Unless there is a catastrophe on the earth that freezes them instantly with their stomach contents in place as a result of some massive innundation and change in the earth so that what now is Arctic Circle ice is a dramatic change from what once was tropical vegetation. That argues for massive catastrophe. And, in fact, the catastrophe, the Bible explains, as the universal Flood which then issues in the changing of the continents of the earth, the repositioning of mountain ranges, the redevelopment of seas leading to massive ice floes moving across the world and changing its face. How do you explain if you go down the road here on Highway 14 and go toward Lancaster and wander in the mountains, you’re finding seashells all over everywhere? How do you get the ocean in a aqua dulce? That’s just a…I have a shell on my desk from Aqua Dulce, an ocean shell that carried an ocean creature. There’s just too much overwhelming evidence for catastrophism to hold on to this.

And so, honest uniformitarians are saying, “Well, there…there have been a few small catastrophes, like the Ice Age.” They love the Ice Age. It doesn’t explain everything by any means. It’s better to view the reality as God created everything the way it is, creation was the first massive catastrophe…that is to say He created a fully mature creation, both in the universe and on the earth, all that exists, He created it all in six twenty-four-hour days by a series of miraculous catastrophic divine evasions. And it’s not billions of years ago, it’s only thousands of years ago that the whole creation is probably somewhere around ten thousand years old.

True science will support that. There are reams of books available for that particular study. The evidence is on the side of biblical creation. That is why…let’s go back, verse 5…”When they maintained this…” I’m not real thrilled with the New American Standard translation of the next phrase, “When they maintained this…” it really says, “They are willfully ignorant…they are purposely ignorant,” thelontos(?), the verb thelo, to will in its participial form. They are willfully ignorant. That is they purposely reject what is true. You can’t have everything from nothing. You can’t have a complex universe that is fully intelligent and personality among humans from non-intelligent non-personality. You can’t have everything from nothing. But they are willfully ignorant of that. They are purposely ignorant of that. They choose to reject that. They refuse to believe that because if they believe that, then they’re stuck with the God of the Bible. So they refuse to believe what is obvious intellectually, what is observable scientifically because they love their sin and they do not want to have to give an account for their sin to a creator who is also a law-giver and a judge. So self-induced blindness leads them to reject the truth that they should understand.

What is so strange to me is Christians that come along and join the evolutionary bandwagon and deny creation. Very popular stuff…theistic evolution, progressive creationism as they’ve called it for years at Wheaton College. The idea that evolution is true, or the writings of Hugh Ross who has written much on this subject and with whom I interact, by the way, in my book The Battle for the Beginning.Why do Christians need to reject Genesis 1, 2 and 3? And I asked the question…okay, you say you’re a Christian and you believe the Bible, what chapter do you come in? When do you start believing? Do you believe in chapter 4? Do you think you can buy in to the Cain and Abel story? How about chapter 5? Can you take that genealogy? How about chapter 6? Can you buy in to the Flood? At what point do you start believing?

And if God didn’t tell us the truth in Genesis 1, 2 and 3, then why would we believe Him anywhere else? And if He didn’t get that part right, then what part did He get right? And what other parts did He get wrong? And we are left with great chaos.
Hugh Ross and others like him wanted to protect God from being wrong, come up with the idea that Genesis 1 through 3 is poetry, not history. It is poetry not history. It is…it is God talking in poetic language, taking poetic license. That, of course, is contrived since there is nothing in the Hebrew text to indicate that this is poetry. And Hebrew poetry is easily recognizable. One of our noble professors at the Master’s College, Dr. Stephen Boyd who is a doctor at…has a doctorate in Old Testament and who is a Hebrew scholar, recently did a very fascinating study which has established an unanswerable argument. And what he did was, he quantified Hebrew poetry so that it could be graphed and put into a computer. He quantified Hebrew historical narrative so then it could be graphed and put into a computer and statistically could then demonstrate whether this Genesis 1 to 3 narrative had the properties of poetry or history. The result of his study is published in a book called Thousands Not Billions, a wonderful book. There’s a whole chapter in there, this study is available…it rocks, believe me…(laughter)…it rocks. It is a…it is a formidable argument and the end result is that it is something like 99.9 percent of what is in Genesis 1 through 3 can only be historical narrative, it has zilch properties of Hebrew poetry when measured in an honest way. That is an illegitimate approach. What you have is historical narrative. And so, I go back to the fact that you can trust Genesis 1 to 3 because every word of God is true and because God knows what is and because the only one who is there at the creation is God, and God can be trusted to tell us what is true. It is so foolish to deny what is true. And there’s no reason to deny it because, as I said, true science compared with the Genesis account matches up perfectly.

And, in fact, we get help in 2 Peter 3. You study creation and then you study the great second cataclysm, the Flood. Verse 5, “When they maintained this, when they willfully are ignorant of this, they forget conveniently that by the Word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water.” They forget the great catastrophic, cataclysmic events that made up the original creation. First God created the earth, and then He created water over the surface of the earth and then He in cataclysmic fashion reshaped the earth and went on to create everything else and populate the earth, creates light first, then attaches that light to heavenly bodies as well. They forget the cataclysm of creation. And verse 6, they forget the cataclysm by which the world in ancient times was destroyed, being flooded with water. And they forget that the Bible promises the present heavens, verse 7, and earth are going to be reserved for a future fire on a day of judgment and destruction of godly men. Uniformity doesn’t work. That is not how it came into a being, that is not how it goes out of being. It comes in in the cataclysm of creation, is reshaped in the second cataclysm of the Flood, Genesis 6, 7 and 8, and it will be destroyed in the cataclysm of fire in the future. And there is nothing scientific that can disprove that. Peter says, “In fact…giving us further detail about the future destruction in verse 10…that the heaven will pass away with a roar, the elements will be destroyed with intense heat and the earth and its work will be burned up.” That is a very simple description of the destruction of the atomic structure of the universe. And verse 12 adds to it, “The heavens then destroyed by burning the elements melt with intense heat.” That is very reasonable as to its description of an atomic implosion of the created material universe.
The Bible then when examined scientifically holds up as to creation account, Flood account, and future destruction. But as one evolutionist says, “I reject the idea of a transcendent God, so what other alternative but evolution do I have?” Well you could come up with a god of your own making that you like better than the God of the Bible. And that’s what the ID men are doing, those scientists who want to come to the recognition of intelligent design but stop short of the God of the Bible. The problem goes back to Romans 1:28, “They did not like to retain God in their knowledge. They did not want to hold on to the God of Scripture.”

Now having said that, let me talk a little bit…I want to talk about a few things in terms of science. We’ll do it tonight and we’ll do it then next Sunday night. Let’s talk, first of all, about the basic principles of science since we’re dealing with foundational things. Science deals with a matrix when we’re talking about natural science. We’re talking about the way things are in a material universe, there is a matrix of things. You have to have matter, you have to have force, you have to have energy, you have to have space and you have to have time. That is…that is Herbert Spencer’s great achievement, he died in 1903, he said, “Everything in the universe can be deposited in one of these categories…time, force, action, space and matter.” Force and action comprising energy. There has to be time, there has to be energy which is force and action, there has to be space, and there has to be matter. And by the way, those five things which he defined in that order are all in Genesis 1, “In the beginning…that’s time…God…that’s force…created…that’s action…the heavens…that’s space…and the earth…that’s matter.” The matrix is in Genesis 1:1, that is a profound scientific statement. The universe in essence is a…is a matrix of space, time, matter, and energy. And all of it has to be existing at the same conflux. It all has to come together or none of it exists. One cannot exist without the other. The entire continuum must have existed simultaneously from the beginning. That is why you find it all in Genesis 1:1, it all had to be there. Science says it has to be there and Scripture says it is there.

Now once the matrix comes into instantaneous simultaneous existence, its processes then are designed to operate in an orderly fashion, going forward. All the different phenomena within the matrix of nature and life are sustained by the forces that exist in that matrix. Time goes on, space goes on, energy goes on, matter goes on. It is all instantaneously and simultaneously coming into existence, it is then not only brought into existence by some external force and source, but it is then kept in prefect balance and function by that same power. It is sustained by the same force that brought it into existence. But everything that God made was made in six days. And it says in Genesis 2:2, “God ended His work which He had made.” God stopped making anything. If you know science, you understand that that is scientifically accurate, nothing is being created, nothing is coming into existence, nothing has since creation, day six, and God’s cessation of His work. The complete cessation of creative activity has been, by the way, in advertently recognized by modern science and they call it the law, the first law of thermodynamics and the first law of thermodynamics is called the conservation of mass and energy…the conservation of mass and energy. This is THE most and universal and certain of all scientific principles. Science has shown and verified that there is nothing being created in the known universe today. Things are doing what they do but not coming into existence newly. There is nothing new in the universe. In fact, the Bible tells us this in the most unaffected, the most simple, the most direct ways without ever defending itself as if its made some statement contrary to fact.
For example, in the words that come to us in the ninth chapter of Nehemiah, “In praise to God, in blessing to God,” we read in Nehemiah 9:6, “Thou alone art the Lord, Thou hast made the heavens, the heaven of heavens with all their hosts, the earth and all that is in them, the seas and all that is in them. Thou dost give life to all of them.” You made it all, everything that exists in the heaven and the earth and the seas, everything that lives, you made it all. That is an affirmation of God’s completed and ended creation. Everything that is You made, and You made it all in those six days of creation.

I think it’s in Isaiah, there are a lot of Scriptures that we could look up but there is another one, I think it’s in Isaiah…yes, chapter 40 verse 26, “Lift up your eyes and see who has created these stars, the one who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name, not one of them is missing.” Nothing comes into existence and nothing goes out of existence. This is the law, the first law of thermodynamics, the law of the conservation of mass and energy. Nothing is being created, nothing is going out of existence. And this is exactly what the Bible says in the most unaffected way and without any scientific pretension. For example, Ecclesiastes 1:9, “That which has been is that which will be and that which has been done is that which will be done and there is nothing new under the sun.” In the third chapter of Ecclesiastes, verse 14, “I know that everything God does will remain forever.” There is nothing to add to it, there is nothing to take from it. It is God so…it is God who has so worked it, that which is has been already, that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by. This is the continuum of the creative reality, spontaneous generation, new creation doesn’t happen. What perpetuates the creation is the conservation of mass and energy. And every organism that is a living organism has the seed of life within itself to reproduce itself.

Now there’s a second law of thermodynamics and science has labeled this law, and the second law of thermodynamics is this…nothing new is being created, nothing is being destroyed, that is in the sense the first law. The second law is, however, all things are tending toward increasing disorder. This is the second law of thermodynamics. Energy is running down. It is losing its capacity to perform its work. There is increasing disorder. That means that slowly but observably the processes that God set in motion are winding down. We’re heading toward the death of this creation. Now they don’t have an explanation for that and it’s a very hard thing to come up with an evolutionary view that everything is getting more complex, more intelligent and better while at the same time they can show scientifically that energy is dissipating and everything is tending toward chaos and disorder. All energy is running down and heading toward being incapable of performing its function.
Now God didn’t make the world that way. God did not make the world that way. In fact, when God finished His creation, Genesis 1:31, He looked at it all and said, “It’s…what?…it’s very good.” How do we explain what’s happened? The Bible is the only place you can go for an explanation. Science has no explanation for the second law of thermodynamics. It has no explanation for the first law. Why is it that everything came into existence in a matrix at one time and continues in that same matrix? Why is it that if this is all a matter of chance, coincidence and randomness that that’s not happening again and again and again and again? Why is it that it has come into existence in such a matrix of complexity and sustained itself in that matrix of complexity? That, in fact, is what drove Einstein crazy, if you would call him crazy, because he couldn’t figure out the power was that held everything together. And how then do you explain this slow death? What is the reason for that? Only the Bible explains the matrix, the power of God is the invisible power that holds it all together and sustains it. And only the Bible explains why it’s all tending toward disorder and death and the explanation comes in Genesis 3, it is the Fall and God curses creation. God curses creation. You read Genesis 3, man is cursed, woman is cursed. Sin enters into the world, the land is cursed, the ground is cursed. You have to till and work by the sweat of your brow to get something out of the land and fight all the cursed elements, the thorns, the weeds. And man has to fight against the weakness of his own body and his weariness and illness and disease because death enters the world and women have pain in childbearing. The ground is cursed. The whole creation is cursed. Read Romans 8:20 to 22. In Romans 8:20 to 22 the whole creation groans under the weight of the curse.

Science has no explanation for the first law of thermodynamics which they are glad to label but cannot explain how the complex matrix can come into existence in a moment, which all of which is required for anything to exist out of nothing. They cannot explain that nor can they explain how it holds itself together because there’s no way to find the power that holds it together scientifically, nor can they explain the principle of disintegration and disorder in the second law of thermodynamics. The Bible explains both perfectly.

The Bible also explains that the second law of thermodynamics without calling it that is working its way down to an end, and the end must come and it will come, only it won’t die a slow death, it will die an immediate death, as I just read you, when the Lord Jesus destroys this cursed universe and establishes a new heaven and a new earth. And in the new heaven and the new earth, there will be a different matrix. There will be a different matrix. There will be no time, there will be no space, there will be the energy of eternal life. It will be a completely different matrix and there will be no second law of thermodynamics. There will be no death, no sickness, no sorrow, no dying, no decay, no unrighteousness, no trouble, to pain, no destruction, and so forth and so forth.

So, you see, when you talk about science at the very basic level, it is only the Bible that gives you any sensible understanding for the way things really are. And we would expect that the one who made things the way they are, knows the way they are, and tells us the truth about the way they are. I stand so firmly before you as somebody who is not a scientist, by any stretch of the imagination, to say to you that I have read as extensively as I can read in science, particularly in those many, many months when I was going through Genesis chapters 1, 2 and 3, trying to understand science, true science, comparison to Scripture, and I have yet to find and I am supported by Christian scientists all over the country and all over the world who study far more in depth and more diligently than I who back up the fact that there has never ben any…any scientific discovery that is in true fact the way it really is that contradicts the biblical record…never…never.

Now, I want to go from the basic principles of science to talk to you about hydrology. That’s sounds like fun, the science of water, astronomy, that is marvelous and thrilling, geology. I want to talk to you about meteorology, I want to be sort of a biblical weatherman and a little bit about physiology and what the Bible says about all those ologies. But that won’t be tonight. We’ll save that for next time. Okay? Let’s pray together.

We are in awe, O God, of Your Word. And we’re so grateful for its purity, its clarity, its integrity, its inerrancy, its inspiration. Truly it has stood the test of close intense hostile angry aggressive scrutiny and its weathered all the storms. We thank You for the great strength of scientists who uphold Your truth. How encouraged we are. So many of them even since the seventeenth century when the truth began to really come out about the way the world really is, how many were Christians, how many had their biblical confidence strengthened and upheld in the discoveries of science that have come to the modern world. We thank You for all of those who work in the field of science today and work so diligently and uphold the Word of God because it can stand every attack. This is Your Word, it’s true whatever it says. We rejoice in that. And our confidence in its spiritual testimony is strengthened when we know it’s testimony about that which we can see and know is absolutely true. Thank You for giving us a true Word. You are the true and living God. Christ is the truth and we trust perfectly and completely in You. We thank You in the name of the Savior. Amen.

Related posts:

I really enjoyed the movie “Savannah Smiles” last night and afterwards I looked up what happened to Bridgette Andersen and where she is today.

IMDB notes:

Bridgette Andersen was born on July 11, 1975 to Frank Glass and Teresa Andersen in Inglewood, California and grew up in Malibu. She always considered it good luck to have her birthday read as 7-11 instead of July 11th. One thing unique about her she would always kiss the first two fingers on her right hand and then touch any digital clock that read 7:11. As a child starlet, she played in many films and touched many hearts in the Utah film Savannah Smiles (1982). As a teenager, she became involved with drugs and especially heroin. She died in May, 1997, after an accidental overdose of alcohol and drugs.

____________________

Trivia

Liked watching LA Kings hockey games

Could remember her lines from any movie

Got her start in show business by modeling.

She had a staggeringly high IQ and had been reading since she was 2 and a half years old. With a wide range of reading interests at the age of six, Hemingway was her favorite writer and “Old Man and the Sea” her favorite book.

For her part as “Young Mae” in the television production of Mae West (1982) (TV), she “picked up” dancing by wearing tap shoes non-stop for a week and watching Gene Kelly in Singin’ in the Rain (1952). At the point she was assigned to a dance instructor, she was already so adept that she learned the routines in a few days.

At the age of two, she said to her father: “I’m an actress, you know!” Within six months, an agent had accepted her as a client and she began a three-year period of fashion modeling, TV commercials and bit parts in a dozen TV shows, including “King’s Crossing” (1982) and Washington Mistress (1982) (TV) with Lucie Arnaz.

Collected stuffed animals as a child, and had over 100 of them

Distantly-related to fairy-tale author Hans Christian Andersen.

Siblings: one sister, and also actress, Angelica Andersen; two brothers, Dean Glass and Mark Ballan.

She learned American sign language for the role of “Jill” in A Summer to Remember (1985) (TV).

Her roommate reported that, at the time of her death, she was struggling to stay clean.

Bridgette tested for the lead in the 1984 movie Firestarter (1984), but ultimately lost the role to Drew Barrymore. Producer Dino De Laurentiis arranged for the test after he saw Bridgette on “The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson” (1962).

Related posts:

Thompson Twins – If You Were Here (Live in Liverpool)

Uploaded on Jul 9, 2006

Live in Liverpool 1983

____________________

Sixteen Candles Final Scene Movie Ending Video

if you were here
i could deceive you
and if you were here
you would believe
but would you suspect
my emotion wandering, yeah
do not want a part of this anymore
The rain water drips
through a crack in the ceiling
and i’ll have to spend
my time on repair
But just like the rain
i’ll be always falling, yeah
only to rise and fall again
(REPEAT CHORUS)

Wikipedia notes:

Thompson Twins

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Thompson Twins
Alannah Currie and Joe Leeway, 1984
Background information
Origin	United Kingdom
Genres	New Wave Synthpop[1] Pop Dance pop
Years active	1977–1993
Labels	Tee Records Arista Records Warner Bros. Records
Associated acts	Debbie Harry Jerry Harrison Babble International Observer Holiwater Bailey-Salgado Project
Past members	See “Members”

For the fictional characters, see Thomson and Thompson.

The Thompson Twins were a British New Wave pop group that formed in April 1977^[2] and disbanded in May 1993. They achieved considerable popularity in the mid-1980s, scoring a string of hits in the United Kingdom, the United States, and around the globe.

The band was named after the two bumbling detectives Thomson and Thompson in Hergé’s comic strip The Adventures of Tintin.^[3] At various stages, the band had up to seven members though their best known incarnation was as a trio between 1982-86. They became a prominent act in the so-called Second British Invasion, and in 1985, the band performed at Live Aid where they were joined onstage by Madonna.^[3]

Contents 1 Career 1.1 Early days 1.2 Membership changes 1.3 Reduction to a trio 1.4 International success 1.5 Final years 2 Criticism 3 After the Twins 4 Members 5 Discography 5.1 Thompson Twins albums 5.1.1 Original studio albums 5.1.2 Compilation albums 5.2 Babble albums 6 Bibliography 7 See also 8 References 9 External links

Career

Early days

In 1977, the original Thompson Twins line-up consisted of Tom Bailey (born 18 January 1954, Halifax, Yorkshire)^[4] on bass and vocals, Pete Dodd on guitar and vocals, John Roog on guitar, and Jon Podgorski (known as “Pod”) on drums.^[1][5] Dodd and Roog first met when they were both 13 years old.

Arriving in London with very little money, they lived as squatters in Lillieshall Road, London. Future Thompson Twins member Alannah Currie (born 20 September 1957, Auckland, New Zealand) lived in another squat in the same street — which is how she met Bailey. It was in this ramshackle and run-down house that they found an illegal way of “borrowing” electricity from the house next door. Bailey described themselves (laughingly) as spongers (meaning that they were on the dole—unemployed) back then, as they were living on very little and scavenging everything they could lay their hands on. He even said that the only instruments they had were bought, or had been stolen or borrowed. Dodd managed to get a council flat not far away. Their roadie at that time was John Hade, who lived in the same house, and who later became their manager.

As Podgorski had decided to stay in the north, the group auditioned for drummers at the Point Studio in Victoria, London. Andrew Edge joined them on drums for less than one year, and went on to join Savage Progress, who later toured with the Thompson Twins as their support act on the 1984 UK tour.^[6]

In 1980, the band (now consisting of Bailey, Dodd, Roog and new drummer Chris Bell) released their first single “Squares and Triangles” on their own DIrty Discs label. A follow-up single, “She’s In Love With Mystery”, was issued later that year.

Membership changes

By 1981, the line-up was Bailey, Dodd, Roog, Bell and two new members: former band roadie Joe Leeway on congas and percussion, and Jane Shorter on saxophone. This line-up recorded the first Thompson Twins album A Product of … (Participation), documented in the film, Listen to London (1981).^[7] Currie, who had been associated with the band for a few years, played and sang on the first album, but was not yet a full member.

After the first album, the band’s line-up shifted yet again. Saxophonist Jane Shorter left, percussionist Currie was made an official member, and bassist Matthew Seligman, a former member of The Soft Boys and The Fallout Club, joined.^[1] Bailey moved to keyboards and guitar in addition to serving as lead vocalist, with Leeway handling vocals on a few tracks.

The band signed to Arista Records and released the album Set.^[1] Thomas Dolby played some keyboards on Set and some live gigs, as Bailey had little experience with synthesizers before then. Set contained the single “In the Name of Love”, sung and largely written by Bailey. It became a No. 1 dance club hit in the US,^[8] and an album entitled In the Name of Love (consisting mainly of tracks from Set, with two others from A Product Of… (Participation)) was released in the US to capitalize on the song’s popularity. It entered the US Billboard 200.^[9]

Reduction to a trio

After the success of “In the Name of Love”, Bailey, Currie and Leeway, wanting to pursue the single’s different sound, toyed with the idea of starting a new band on the side, which they planned to call ‘The Bermuda Triangle’.^[10] When “In The Name Of Love” (and the parent album Set) failed to make a substantial impact in the UK record charts, this plan was abandoned. However, at the same time, manager Hade convinced Bailey, Leeway and Currie to downsize the Thompson Twins to a core of the three in April 1982.^[10] Accordingly, the other four members of the band were notified that they were being let go; they were each paid £500 and were allowed to keep their instruments and equipment.

The Thompson Twins decided to go abroad to free themselves of any UK influence, as well as to combine the songwriting for their first album as a trio with a long holiday. They first went to Egypt and then to the Bahamas where they recorded at the Compass Point Studios in Nassau with the producer, Alex Sadkin.

International success

The band broke into the UK Singles Chart and the US Billboard Hot 100 chart at the beginning of 1983 with “Lies” and “Love On Your Side”, which became the band’s first UK Top 10 single.^[3][8] They then released their third album, Quick Step and Side Kick (called simply Side Kicks in the US),^[9] which peaked at number 2 in the UK and was later certified platinum there. Further singles followed with “We Are Detective” (another Top 10 UK hit) and “Watching”.^[3] All three received songwriting credits, though the band publicly acknowledged Bailey as the songwriter, with Currie contributing lyrics and Leeway focusing on the stage show.^[11] During 1983, the band had the opening spot on The Police concert tour in the US.

A new single, “Hold Me Now“, was released towards the end of 1983. The song was an international chart success, peaking at No. 4 in their native UK where it became the band’s biggest seller earning a gold disc,^[12] and reached No. 3 in the US in the spring of 1984 becoming their biggest American hit.^[8] The band’s new album, Into the Gap, was released in early 1984 and became one of the year’s biggest sellers, selling five million copies worldwide. It topped the UK Albums Chart^[3] and was later certified double platinum there. Further hit singles from the album followed with “Doctor! Doctor!” (UK No. 3) and “You Take Me Up” (UK No. 2, their highest UK singles chart placing^[3] and which earned a silver disc).^[13] Other singles included a new version of the album track “Sister of Mercy” (UK No. 11), and “The Gap” (though this was not released in the UK). The band embarked on a world tour in support of the album, which had also made the US top ten.

A new single, “Lay Your Hands On Me”, was released in the UK in late 1984 and reached No. 13 in the UK charts.^[3] However, while working on the follow-up album to Into The Gap, Bailey suffered a nervous breakdown. The band’s planned next single, “Roll Over”, was then cancelled at the last minute. The band had already parted company with their producer Alex Sadkin, and Nile Rodgers was subsequently called in to help finish the album. Released in September 1985, Here’s To Future Days reached the Top 5 in the UK and the Top 20 in the US,^[9] though failed to come close to the success of Into The Gap. It spawned the single “King For A Day”, which peaked at No. 22 in the UK,^[3] but reached No. 8 on the US chart^[8] Other singles included a new US version of “Lay Your Hands On Me” (US No. 6),^[8] the anti-drug song “Don’t Mess With Doctor Dream” (UK No. 15)^[3] and an unsuccessful cover of The Beatles‘ 1968 hit “Revolution” which became the band’s first single to fail to make the UK Top 40 in three years.

Prior to the album’s release, the Thompson Twins made headlines when they performed on the American leg of Live Aid in July 1985 and were joined onstage by Madonna.^[3] The planned 1985 tour of the UK had to be cancelled due to Bailey’s breakdown (fans with tickets received a free live album as compensation), though international dates were re-scheduled and the latter half of 1985 saw sell out tours for the band in the US and Japan.^[14]

Final years

Leeway left the band in 1986, and the remaining duo of Bailey and Currie carried on making music for another seven years.^[1] 1987 saw the release of Close to the Bone and the single “Get That Love”, which climbed to No. 31 in the US^[8] but failed in the UK.^[1] “In the Name of Love” was given a new lease on life in 1988, after a remix by Shep Pettibone made the Top 50 in the UK.^[3] 1989 saw the release of another album, Big Trash, and a new recording contract with Warner Bros. Records.^[1] The single “Sugar Daddy” peaked at No. 28 in the US^[8] and would be their last brush with mainstream chart success.^[1] 1991’s Queer would be the band’s swansong, and was supported by various techno inspired singles under the moniker of Feedback Max (in the UK) to disguise the identity of the band to club DJs. The single “Come Inside” reached No. 7 in the US Dance Chart^[8] and No. 1 in the UK Dance Chart. However, once it was discovered that the Thompson Twins were behind the record, sales dropped and the album never had a UK release^{[citation needed]}.

Prior to this, Bailey and Currie (who were now a couple) had their first child together in 1988,^[1] and in the following years they spent a lot of time writing material for other artists including the hit single “I Want That Man” for Debbie Harry in 1989. In 1990, Bailey and Currie contributed the song “Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?” to the Cole Porter tribute album “Red Hot + Blue“ produced by the Red Hot Organization. In 1991, Bailey and Currie were married in Las Vegas and the following year moved to New Zealand with their two children. In 1992, the Thompson Twins contributed the song “Play With Me” to the soundtrack of the Ralph Bakshi film Cool World; Bailey alone contributed a second track, “Industry and Seduction”. The following year, the duo formally teamed up with engineer Keith Fernley and changed their band name to Babble.^[1]

The Thompson Twins declined to follow the examples of many of their contemporaries and reform to tie-in with a nostalgic rebirth of the 1980s, although Bailey, Currie and Leeway appeared together on the UK Channel 4 show Top Ten Electro Bands in 2001. The Thompson Twins were placed ninth.

Criticism

The British music press regularly criticised the Thompson Twins. The NME called them, “1984’s most instantly kitsch mass program of monosodium glutamation of the brain”. City Limits said they were “candy-floss art capitalists”, whilst The Guardian dubbed them “The three haircuts”.^[11]

After the Twins

Babble released two albums — The Stone (1993)^[1] and Ether (1996) — with songs featured in the films Coneheads and With Honors. Three quarters of a third album was recorded, but it remains unreleased.

In the mid-1990s, Currie gave up the music business to set up her own glass-casting studio in Auckland. After her sister died of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, Currie founded a group in New Zealand called Mothers Against Genetic-Engineering in Food and the Environment (also known as MADGE), which soon had thousands of members.^[11] Currie described this group as a “rapidly growing network of politically non-aligned women who are actively resisting the use of genetically-engineered material in our food and on our land”. An advert for this group featuring a young woman with four breasts hooked up to a milking machine became famous after appearing on billboards across New Zealand.^[11] Bailey and Currie split up in 2003, and are now divorced. They both left New Zealand to live separately in Britain, but are still close friends. In 2011, Currie married Jimmy Cauty (formerly of The KLF) and as of then was a trained upholsterer known professionally as “Miss Pokeno”.^[15]

In 1999, Bailey produced and played keyboards on the album Mix by the New Zealand band Stellar*, and won the Producer of the Year Award at the 2000 New Zealand Music Awards.^[16] He has also arranged soundtracks and has provided instrumental music for several films. He continues to make music under the moniker International Observer and has released the albums Seen (2001), All Played Out (2005), and Felt (2009).^[17] He also performs with the Holiwater group from India. Remarried (to artist Lauren Drescher), he currently resides in London.

After leaving the Thompson Twins in 1986, Leeway briefly dabbled in acting and attempted a solo music career, though neither were successful. As of 2006, he resides in Los Angeles, California, and works in the field of hypnotherapy. He is on the staff at the Hypnosis Motivation Institute (HMI) in Tarzana, California, and is also a certified trainer in neuro-linguistic programming.

The earlier members went on to do other things:

• Dodd and Roog formed a band called Big View (with Edge on drums) and recorded a single called, “August Grass”, which was released on Point Records (owned by Merton, the Thompson Twins publisher) in 1982.^[18] Dodd is now living back in Chesterfield working as a freelance journalist — and has released his own History of Rock album billed as Peter & the Wolves. Dodd still sees Podgorski on a regular basis.
• Roog lives in London and is in a senior position in Tower Hamlets Adult Services.
• Seligman worked for a law firm in London, and has played in The Soft Boys reunions as well as releasing his own albums,^[19] but has moved to Japan with his Japanese wife and their daughter. In 2009, he contributed to the new Thomas Dolby album.
• Bell moved from London to Bath, and played in or for Spear of Destiny, Gene Loves Jezebel and Hugh Cornwell.^[20] He also works as a landscape gardener.
• Booth is, reportedly, living in Shanghai and is the general manager of a music publishing company.
• Podgorski still lives in Chesterfield.
• Edge has a singing career with Drumsing, as well as being an English Conversation teacher in Linz, Austria.

Members

Classic lineup Tom Bailey – vocals, bass, keyboards (1977-1993) Joe Leeway – vocals, percussion, synthesisers (1981-1986) Alannah Currie – vocals, percussion (1981-1993)

Other members Pete Dodd – guitar, vocals (1977-1982) John Roog – guitar (1977-1982) Jon Podgorski – drums (1977-1980) Andrew Edge – drums (1980-1981) Chris Bell – drums (1981-1982) Jane Shorter – saxophone (1981) Matthew Seligman – bass (1981-1982) Mark Heyward-Chaplin – bass Roger O’Donnell – keyboards Carrie Booth – keyboards Boris Williams – drums

Discography

Main article: Thompson Twins discography

Thompson Twins albums

Original studio albums

• A Product of … (Participation) (1981)
• Set (1982)
• Quick Step and Side Kick (1983) (a.k.a. Side Kicks in North America, Japan)
• Into the Gap (1984)
• Here’s to Future Days (1985)
• Close to the Bone (1987)
• Big Trash (1989)
• Queer (1991)

Compilation albums

• In the Name of Love (U.S. only release compiling tracks from the first two albums) (1982)
• The Best of Thompson Twins: Greatest Mixes (1988)
• Hold Me Now (1993)
• Thompson Twins – Greatest Hits (1996)
• Thompson Twins – Singles Collection (1996)
• Love on Your Side – The Best of Thompson Twins (2007)

Babble albums

• The Stone (1994)
• Ether (1996)^[21]

Bibliography

• The Thompson Twins – An Odd Couple (The Official Biography) by Rose Rouse. Virgin Books, 1985.
• Thompson Twin – An ’80’s Memoir by Michael White. Publisher: Little, Brown (4 May 2000).

See also

• List of number-one dance hits (United States)
• List of artists who reached number one on the U.S. Dance chart
• List of Second British Invasion Artists

References

1. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k} “Biography by Stephen Thomas Erlewine”. Allmusic.com. Retrieved 27 October 2009.
2. ^ Roberts, David (1998). Guinness Rockopedia (1st ed.). London: Guinness Publishing Ltd. p. 448. ISBN 0-85112-072-5.
3. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k} Roberts, David (2006). British Hit Singles & Albums (19th ed.). London: Guinness World Records Limited. p. 557. ISBN 1-904994-10-5.
4. ^ Spock.com
5. ^ Thomas, Stephen. “Thompson Twins – Music Biography, Credits and Discography”. AllMusic. Retrieved 2013-05-02.
6. ^ “Diary of Notable Musical Events”. info net calendar. Retrieved 12 April 2008.
7. ^ Listen To London
8. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h} “Allmusic ((( Thompson Twins > Charts & Awards > Billboard Singles )))”.
9. ^ ^{a b c} “Allmusic ((( Thompson Twins > Charts & Awards > Billboard Albums )))”.
10. ^ ^{a b} Now and Then lostidols.com – Retrieved 8 November 2007
11. ^ ^{a b c d} “Hear Me Now by Gilbert Wong”. Melbourne: Theage.com.au. 11 January 2004. Retrieved 27 October 2009.
12. ^ BPI Gold award certification for “Hold Me Now”
13. ^ BPI Silver award certification for “You Take Me Up”
14. ^ Tobler, John (1992). NME Rock ‘N’ Roll Years (1st ed.). London: Reed International Books Ltd. p. 408. CN 5585.
15. ^ “To Die For – She was the crazy-haired singer in 80s synth-pop band the Thompson Twins. Now Alannah Currie is back, in a new incarnation as artist-upholsterer”. London: Guardian.co.uk. 26 April 2008. Retrieved 27 October 2009.
16. ^ Thebubbleburst.co.uk
17. ^ Allmusic.com – accessed October 2009
18. ^ “BigViewAugustGrass”. Discogs. Retrieved 11 November 2008.
19. ^ Bassplayer.com – accessed October 2009
20. ^ “Biography by Dave Thompson”. Allmusic.com. Retrieved 27 October 2009.
21. ^ “Biography by William Ruhlmann”. Allmusic.com. Retrieved 27 October 2009.

External links

Related posts:

MUSIC MONDAY: Keith Green Story (Part 2)

June 3, 2013 – 1:05 am

The Keith Green Story pt 3/7 Keith Green had a major impact on me back in 1978 when I first heard him. Here is his story below: Spiritual Conversion Keith had a Jewish and Christian Science background, but grew up reading the New Testament. He called it “an odd combination” that left him open minded […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

MUSIC MONDAY:Foreigner’s connection to Amy Winehouse (Great song by Lou)

May 20, 2013 – 1:54 am

The Lou Gramm Band – You Saved Me (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm Band (LGB – 2009). ______________________________________ The Lou Gramm Band – I Wanna Testify (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

MUSIC MONDAY: Lou Graham knows what love is

May 13, 2013 – 1:53 am

Double Vision – Foreigner Foreigner- Urgent Foreigner – Cold As Ice _____________________________ The Lou Gramm Band – Redeemer (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm Band (LGB – 2009). ____________________________________ Lou Gramm Knows What Love Is – CBN.com Uploaded by CBNonline on Nov 4, 2009 […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

“Music Monday” Katy Perry

May 6, 2013 – 1:48 am

    Katy Perry Dedicates Song to Tim Tebow at Super Bowl Party Sun, Feb. 05, 2012 Posted: 07:01 PM EDT Flamboyant pop star Katy Perry dedicated suggestive song “Peacock” to evangelical quarterback Tim Tebow at a pre-Super Bowl party Saturday night. Perry, the daughter of Christian ministers, said “This one goes out to Tim […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

“Music Monday” Blondie

April 29, 2013 – 1:47 am

Wikipedia reported: Blondie Chris Stein and Deborah Harry in 2008 Background information Origin New York City, US Genres New Wave punk rock[1][2] dance-rock[3] pop punk[3][4] post-punk power pop Years active 1974–1982 1997–present Labels Chrysalis/EMI Beyond/BMG Epic Sanctuary Private Stock Website http://www.blondie.net Members Debbie Harry Chris Stein Clem Burke Leigh Foxx Matt Katz-Bohen Tommy Kessler Jimmy […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

MUSIC MONDAY:Chynna Phillips is open about her Christian faith

April 22, 2013 – 1:42 am

Chynna Phillips is open about her Christian faith jh31 “Dancing with the Stars” (DWTS) is a  very popular show.  I have only watched it a little, but I am a big fan of Chynna Phillips. I love a lot of her music. Dancing With the Stars: Chynna Phillips Speaks Openly About Her Christian Faith Actress […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged christian believer, chynna phillips, http www youtube, michelle phillips, wilson phillips. | Edit | Comments (0)

“Music Monday” Avril Lavigne’s best songs

April 15, 2013 – 1:39 am

“Keep holding on” is my favorite Avril Lavigne song. Enjoy this clip of it followed by a 2007 interview of Lavigne.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

“Music Monday” All-American Rejects Part 4 (Leadsingers Tyson Ritter and Gene Simmons have something in common)

April 8, 2013 – 7:08 am

In-Studio Interviews – Tyson Ritter ‘The All American Rejects’ Interview: Kids In The Street I enjoyed the concert in Little Rock on 12-13-12, and lead singer Tyson Ritter wrote a song on his latest cd that we should all pay attention to because it covers an issue that both him and many other lead singers […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

 

Ecclesiastes 1

Published on Sep 4, 2012

I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how secular humanist man can not hope to find a lasting meaning to his life in a closed system without bringing God back into the picture. This is the same exact case with Solomon in the Book of Ecclesiastes. Three thousand years ago, Solomon took a look at life “under the sun” in his book of Ecclesiastes. Christian scholar Ravi Zacharias has noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term ‘under the sun.’ What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system, and you are left with only this world of time plus chance plus matter.”

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13)
3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1)
4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).

You can only find a lasting meaning to your life by looking above the sun and bring God back into the picture.

Related posts: