Mr. Sears, thank you for making the link between American liberty and America’s godly heritage. Your story is both disheartening and hopeful at the same time.

The words of President Washington are representative of early American culture. He was elected President by consensus; the people wanted this man as their leader.

Why can his words no longer be read without offense? Even for those who strongly disagree with his words, can they not be appreciated for their historical significance? Why must they be suppressed? What is the origin of such intolerance?

Tyranny comes in two flavors. Restricting the liberty of those engaged in lawful activity is one and sanctioning what is unlawful is the other. Those offended by traditional religion are quick to restrict the religious liberty of others. They are also the ones who trample under foot the traditional morality.

We are hopeful that the Americans among us will continue to rise up against this tyranny. Beware of those who seek to separate our liberty from our heritage. We agree that they are indivisible; they stand or fall together. Liberty cannot be maintained apart from the heritage that gave it birth.

There is no end to darwinite nonsense. If the religion of naturalism cannot explain the personal nature of man, then no problem, they will just deny that it exists.

The darwinites are being consistent. If their theory is true, then religion as well as law and morality are all nonsense. What they do not understand is that the logical reasoning necessary to make that conclusion and to support the scientific method is also nonsense in their world view.

Would to God that the Christians would hold consistently to their world view. If there is a personal and infinite God who created the universe out of nothing, then darwinism is nonsense. If God created all living things after there kind, then darwinism is nonsense. If there was a Genesis Flood that made the fossil record and destroyed the dinosaurs in the process, then darwinism is nonsense.

If Christ said that the soul of man is of infinite worth being made in the image of God, then those who profess knowledge but deny the soul’s existence declare themselves the chief of fools...

‘For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?’ -Jesus Christ [Matthew 16:26]

All men, whether conservative or liberal and all flavors in between have the same issue of defining their authority for truth.

Liberals make no pretense of rejecting the first principles of the Founders. Their world-view is the best that can be expected from autonomous man.

Conservatives must return to first principles to have a foundation for their beliefs other than that they have been proven to work best.

We identify the false religion of naturalism as our greatest threat. Consistent with Romans 1, the ongoing cultural collapse is the outworking of the wrath of God revealed from heaven against those who suppress the knowledge of God. The wrath of God is not coming. It is already here. Radical sodomites exhibit what it is to be ‘given over to a debased mine.’

The modern church has mixed the Biblical revelation with autonomous reason. As a result it has lost its influence on the culture. ‘You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men.’

Genesis provides the foundation for our knowledge of man, marriage, sin and redemption. Having rejected Genesis the new culture has a perverted view of these things.

The clear meaning of the text is what we mean by ‘the Bible says’. The Reformers called this the perspicuity of the Scriptures. They rejected the extra-Biblical doctrine of papal authority in favor of the New Covenant doctrine of the priesthood of every believer. ‘They all shall know Me from the least of them to the greatest…’ The New Covenant promise is applied to the church in Hebrews 8 and 10.

The world uses a false caricature of Christianity in support of their rejection of Christ. The most common is to project OT laws into the NT church. Bad church experiences turn many against Christianity.

Ignorance of church history is a major contributor to today’s false doctrine in the church. The doctrines that plague the church are not from Reformed Theology as claimed by some churchmen. Rather, it is the new orthodoxy of dispensationalism and semi-plagiarism that are the enemies of the cross.

The deepest wounds have come from professing Christians. We expect the unbelievers to mock and ridicule because we know what it is to be an unbeliever, but the wounds of a brother pierce to the heart.

The following excerpt is from an article at AiG:

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2007/06/27/will-creation-be-banned-in-europe/

The entire article at:

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2211

“…next Tuesday, the Council of Europe (CoE), Europe’s main human-rights body, will vote on a proposal which advocates the fight against creationism, ‘young earth’ and ‘intelligent design’ in its 47 member states.

“According to a report of the CoE’s Parliamentary Assembly, creationists are dangerous ‘religious fundamentalists’ who propagate ‘forms of religious extremism’ and ‘could become a threat to human rights.’ The report adds that the acceptance of the science of evolutionism ‘is crucial to the future of our societies and our democracies.’

“‘Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species through natural selection, was for a long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon,’ the report says.

“‘Today creationist theories are tending to find their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few Council of Europe member states. […] [T]his is liable to encourage the development of all manner of fundamentalism and extremism, synonymous with attacks of utmost virulence on human rights. The total rejection of science is definitely one of the most serious threats to human rights and civic rights. […] The war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents most often originates in forms of religious extremism which are closely allied to extreme right-wing political movements. The creationist movements possess real political power. The fact of the matter, and this has been exposed on several occasions, is that the advocates of strict creationism are out to replace democracy by theocracy. […] If we are not careful, the values that are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist fundamentalists.’

According to the CoE report, America and Australia are already on their way towards becoming such undemocratic theocracies where human and civic rights are endangered. Creationism is ‘well-developed in the English-speaking countries, especially the United States and Australia,’ the report states.

“‘While most curricula in Europe today unashamedly teach evolution as a recognised scientific theory, the same does not apply to the United States.’”

This is a reply to ‘aurorawatcher’ regarding the question of NT teaching on the overthrow of the Roman Empire.

I briefly answered ‘onceamarine’ on the blog regarding the America Revolution and its links to the Reformation. Your question is certainly part of the discussion. I can tell you what I think…

You are right that the NT does not advocate the overthrown of the Roman government. May I add that the early church had a right understanding of the book of Daniel and a right understanding of the Kingdom of God. They knew that Messiah’s Kingdom had come in Jesus Christ and that His kingdom was an everlasting Kingdom that would overthrow the last world empire which would be in power when Messiah appeared.

Our weapons are spiritual…bringing every thought captive to Christ. Paul’s teaching is commentary on Christ’s teaching. “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.” My belief is that as Christians are transformed into the new man and begin to live out the gospel in ever aspect of life, then cultures began to be transformed from within. The whole council of God must be preached and applied in order for the gospel to transform our thinking.

There is a common element between the beginnings of the New Testament church in the Roman Empire and its captivity under Roman Catholicism. In both cases the church was opposed by the state and the state religion. When the church acts as salt and light it testifies of the truth as given to us in the Scriptures. The world and its institutions persecute the church. Christ so governs the nations to send warnings and judgments on them for the good of His church according to His will.

In both cases the forces of darkness seemed to prevail over the church, only to be overthrown. How shall we speak of martyrdom? Having entered the Kingdom of God the martyrs loved truth more than their life. They saw by faith the world to come, wherein dwells righteousness.

I have to appeal to our forefathers in the faith. They were used of God to the advance of truth in the world and that advance has resulted in liberty never before seen. For that reason I think the Revolutionary War was a just war against oppression and tyranny, as was the Civil War by the way, but that is another topic.

What do you think?

This is a reply to the good questions posted by ‘onceamarine’.

Your second question is much easier. Let’s take it first. Yes, definitely, we are to do whatever is necessary to defend our life and the life of our neighbor, including taking up arms. Preserving innocent life is the other side of the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’

I take your first question in the broader sense of Christian men justifying insurrection in view of the admonitions given in Romans 13:1-2 and whether another revolution is possible.

The writers of the Declaration of Independence laid out their justification very well. A careful reading of the Declaration defines what they considered to be just cause for rebellion. The conditions we are under today do not, in my opinion, rise to that level as yet.

The Reformation resulted in the rejection of papal authority. The authority of the Reformers was the Scriptures alone. From the Scriptures came the work ‘Law is King’. This book was the death of the doctrine of the divine right of kings. This policy was implemented by the English Puritans under Cromwell removing the head of Charles I. The precedent was set for rebellion against what was considered unlawful authority.

In New England there was the Great Awakening that resulted in Christian men under the authority of God rising up again against unlawful authority.

Before I make the next comments let me remind you that Christ said regarding the relationship between His church and the world that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Men who share the theology of the Reformers have a world view where Christ is the High King of Heaven, having all authority to do as He will. Some of these men like Jonathan Edwards were Post-Mil, meaning that they held to a view that the whole world would progressively be covered with the knowledge of God ushering in the second coming of Christ. Christ had freed them in the spiritual realm; they desired freedom also in the physical realm, and were not willing to remain under tyranny when they knew the liberty of being in Christ.

In today’s church with the advent of dispensationalism and arminianism the world view is much different than that of the Reformers and early Americans. These statements may be offensive to some, but it is probably near the truth. We are losing our liberty because we are not willing to stand up for it. The thinking is that Christ does not have all authority now. We must wait for the next age for that to happen. If we don’t appreciate liberty, then we will not fight for it. The thinking is that the second coming is near, let’s just sit back and wait for it. These are radically different beliefs and are not consistent with the fortitude required to throw off the advancing tyranny.

Therefore, apart from another revival of Biblical Christianity that changes enough men that the culture would be influenced there is no hope for restoration and no chance of revolution.

I will expand further if you are interested in continuing the discussion and going deeper. Regards.

‘If you agree with this assessment, then how – short of the revolution I start in my novel – can we save the United States from its rapidly approaching demise? Myself and tens of millions of Americans, anxiously await your answer.’ --Douglas MacKinnon

Mr. MacKinnon, you pose an interesting question. As you say, a question that many are asking. The answer is there for all to see, but seeing we do not see and hearing we do not hear.

Let’s first define conservatism as those principles agreed on and implemented by the Framers into a system of government embodied in the Declaration and the Constitution. The question we should be asking is not so much what are those principles, but what were their origins?

Original source histories reveal that they are not first principles. They originated from a world view derived from a reading of the Bible and determining the plain meaning of the text. A world view that led to a revolution of freedom that the world had not seen since Christ and His apostles walked in the middle-Eastern dust.

The first principles of conservatism did not originate from the Renaissance Man as some falsely claim, but from the Reformation Man. The name of John Calvin has been disparaged by those who hate the Reformed Theology that bears his name. But the Pilgrim and Puritan Fathers revered his name. These children of the Reformation came to the new world, and the gospel and the Spirit came with them.

The Great Awakening of Biblical Christianity in New England was the major, immediate influence on the Founders. The leaders of this revival including the great American theologian Jonathan Edwards shared the same theology as their forefathers in the faith.

Conservatism flourished when the church flourished because cultures are reformed when men live in obedience to Christ. Truth believed on in the heart will result in godliness.

Given the premise that the principles of American Conservatism are based on Biblical Theology, then it follows that the influence of conservatism is related to the health of the church.

So the real question before us is why has the church lost its influence?

Christ gives the answer to His New Testament church in Revelation 2:4…


‘You have left your first love.’

So, Mr. MacKinnon, the way back is given to us by the prophet Jeremiah who prophesied against the apostate Jewish church…

Thus says the LORD: “Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’ [Jeremiah 6:16]

The New Testament church is called the pillar and ground of truth. The ‘called out ones’ that make up the church of the living God, must put off the man made theology and return to the plain meaning of the Scriptures. The truth is what separates the church from the world. The church has lost its influence because it has compromised the truth.

In Jeremiah’s day the church did not repent and was carried off into captivity. The history of our day is not known to us. While there is still opportunity let’s be students of the Scriptures and return to the faith of our forefathers. This is the way that has enjoyed the blessings of God before, and it is the way to restoration by the grace of God. Amen.

Divine revelation is essential for men in the areas of metaphysics, morals and epistemology. When men reject the revelation then naturalism is the expected result. The consequences of rejecting the Bible are that in all three areas reason is given over to the irrational as we see in our culture today.

In metaphysics we are told that man is the result of an impersonal beginning plus time and chance and is nothing more than a biochemical machine. The concepts of personality, language, creativity and history declare the irrationality of an impersonal beginning.

In morals the Law of God as a universal basis of right and wrong is given over to moral relativism and autonomy. Every man does what is right in his own eyes. The irrationality of this position is demonstrated in that man cannot live consistently with his beliefs of no moral absolutes. Since men are image bearers of God, they have a conscience which bears witness to the Law of God. When men condemn other men using moral judgments, then they condemn themselves before God since they are guilty of the same sin.

In epistemology there is no reference to the absolute. Therefore, truth becomes subjective. What is true for me may not be true for you. Anyone who advocates absolute truth applicable to all men is considered arrogant and unenlightened. The Bible rather than a resource of wisdom for all time is seen as a collection of irrelevant stories written by men from another time and culture. The irrationality of this position is obvious and no amount of stating otherwise can change the fact that as creatures and part of the creation we cannot know of origins unless the creator reveals Himself.

[credits to Mr. Schaeffer, the layman’s philosopher]

So what are the things that men cannot know apart from the revelation of God?

In He Is There and He Is Not Silent, Schaeffer argues that there are three areas in which modern mankind has an absolute necessity for God: metaphysics, morals, and epistemology; respectively, the problem of existence, the problem of morality, and the problem of knowledge.

In the area of metaphysics, the philosopher has not answered the questions of why there is something rather than nothing and why is the something that exists ordered under natural law rather than in chaos?

In the area of morals, the philosopher has not defined a universal standard to measure whether an action is right or wrong, rather he says what is, is right.

In the area of epistemology the philosopher has no clue how to answer the question how do we know what we know is true?

Philosophy and theology was once recognized as sciences dealing with the same basic questions. The only difference between the two disciplines was that the former appealed largely to reason and natural revelation, while the latter appealed mostly to reason and special revelation. When philosophy took the lead, it soon became apparent that it was not up to the task of answering the big questions. The reality of God known through His revelation, however, does provide the answers for such questions.

The metaphysical need for the existence of God implies that there must be something or someone who is big enough, powerful enough, wise enough, and willing enough to create and maintain the universe we live in. If these requirements are not met, then man is forced to admit that he is here by chance occurrence and has no special destiny.

The moral necessity of God’s existence centers on man as a personal being and a being who distinguishes between right and wrong. There are only two options. Either man was created from an impersonal beginning and his moral system is a product of his culture, or man had a personal beginning and was given laws to follow and an internal sense of right and wrong. The necessity for the Scriptures is the philosophical need to account for why man is both cruel and noble at the same time. This can only be explained in terms of the doctrine of the Fall.

The epistemological necessity of God’s existence addresses our ability to know what is ultimately real. As the scientific revolution developed in the seventeenth century, the criteria for truth became that which could be measured in the laboratory. The result was that belief in God and the miraculous, which is outside the realm of science, came into doubt and were eventually dismissed by many. The final result was skepticism regarding theological truth and the Bible. Christ reveals Himself as the truth. He says that eternal life is to know Him. [John 17]

The only answer to these three dilemmas is an appeal to the God who is there, and to His natural and special revelation. The basis of Christianity is the belief that God is there and that man can communicate with Him. If this is not true, then we are without a foundation.

[credits to Todd Kappelman of Probe Ministries]

Those who think that morality can be defined by men will have as many flavors as there are men. By what standard will we measure truth? Truth is given over to autonomy and relativism. What is happening in Mass. is the inevitable result of a culture that loses its reference to the absolute.

A testimony to the depravity of man is that he hates, distorts and mocks that which God has given for his good. The Bible gives us vital information about ourselves and the world in which we live. Since we are finite creatures this information cannot be known apart from revelation. Those who reject the revelation know that there is something beyond ourselves and that the universe is not all there is. Because we are image bearers, we all seek after that which brings meaning.

The history of philosophy is the history of autonomous man’s failure to discover what the Bible provides for him; that is, a point of reference to the absolute. He has now given up the search and as Mr. Schaeffer says, modern man has escaped from reason into the irrational. His search for significance has ended in despair.

The path back to reason and sanity is to return to the reference point that provides the only true basis for law and morality, because it reflects the moral character of the Creator of the universe.

The world says that the Bible brings tyranny. They will not submit to what God defines as good and abstain from what He says is bad. They will not abide by His morality, but flaunt their sin as if there is no real moral guilt associated with the breaking of His Law. They think that the day of accountability and judgment will not come. They do not want to hear the Scriptures because they testify of a Christ different from the one in their imagination…

‘The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.’ [John 3:35-36]

Grounded in Reformation Theology most citizens understood that men were created in the image of God, but fallen into sin and sinners by nature because of the sin of our father Adam and that the grace of God had appeared in Christ bringing redemption. Grace was understood as that which teaches men to deny the sinful indulgences of the flesh and of the mind in exchange for the pursuits of godliness. [Titus 2:11-15]

We have recently been accused of being arrogant, prideful and clueless because we profess to love the Scriptures and dare associate ourselves with other saints who love the Scriptures, some to the point of a martyrs’ death like Jon Hus and William Tyndale.

And what of Christ’s love for the Scriptures...

Sacrifice and offering You did not desire…burnt offering and sin offering You did not require. Then I said, “Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me. I delight to do Your will, O my God, and Your law is within my heart.” [Psalm 40:6-8]

Those who have gone before us have much to teach us. They came to faith and to a love of the truth the same way every Christian does, because the Scriptures testify of the Lord Jesus Christ and the word was communicated to their heart and mixed with saving faith. They have taken their place in the great congregation before the throne; a congregation that no man can number from every kindred, tribe, nation and tongue.

We have submitted our thinking to the words of Christ as authoritative and the only sure guide and resting place of faith, because of His resurrection from the dead. This would seem to be the only reasonable position for a believer in Christ. If Christ is not risen, then Christianity is nonsense. If He is risen, then His words are truth and demand our attention above all others. If Christ’s words were truth in the first century, then they are truth today. Other than different idols and vain philosophies men are no different today than then. Truth by definition transcends time and culture.

How we treat others reflects the way we think. To think and act contrary to our fallen nature is all of grace. This is the belief of Reformation Christianity.

The fruit of grace is humility, because the one who understands grace knows that it is grace alone that causes him to differ. Out of humility flows mercy. Knowing the mercy of the Lord, we find the power to show mercy to other men. Christ loved us and gave Himself for us while we were lost in sin and in rebellion against His authority. He teaches us to be longsuffering and patient with other men, speaking truth out of love for their souls. If Christ has suffered for them, shall we treat them with unkindness? God forbid!

The Postmodern flavor of Christianity knows nothing of this fruit, because it knows nothing of grace.

"Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is Thine; Thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and Thou art exalted as Head above all" (1 Chron. 29:11).

The Sovereignty of God is an expression that once was generally understood. It was a phrase commonly used in religious literature. It was a theme frequently expounded in the pulpit. It was a truth which brought comfort to many hearts, and gave virility and stability to Christian character. But, today, to make mention of God's Sovereignty is, in many quarters, to speak in an unknown tongue. Were we to announce from the average pulpit that the subject of our discourse would be the Sovereignty of God, it would sound very much as though we had borrowed a phrase from one of the dead languages. Alas! that it should be so. Alas! that the doctrine which is the key to history, the interpreter of Providence, the warp and woof of Scripture, and the foundation of Christian theology should be so sadly neglected and so little understood.

The Sovereignty of God; what do we mean by this expression? We mean the supremacy of God, the kingship of God, the god-hood of God. To say that God is Sovereign is to declare that God is God. To say that God is Sovereign is to declare that He is the Most High, doing according to His will in the army of Heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, so that none can stay His hand or say unto Him what doest Thou? (Dan. 4:35). To say that God is Sovereign is to declare that He is the Almighty, the Possessor of all power in Heaven and earth, so that none can defeat His counsels, thwart His purpose, or resist His will (Psa. 115:3). To say that God is Sovereign is to declare that He is "The Governor among the nations" (Psa. 22:28), setting up kingdoms, overthrowing empires, and determining the course of dynasties as pleaseth Him best. To say that God is Sovereign is to declare that He is the "Only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords" (1 Tim. 6:15). Such is the God of the Bible.

How different is the God of the Bible from the God of modern Christendom! The conception of Deity which prevails most widely today, even among those who profess to give heed to the Scriptures, is a miserable caricature, a blasphemous travesty of the Truth. The God of the twentieth century is a helpless, effeminate being who commands the respect of no really thoughtful man. The God of the popular mind is the creation of maudlin sentimentality. The God of many a present-day pulpit is an object of pity rather than of awe-inspiring reverence. To say that God the Father has purposed the salvation of all mankind, that God the Son died with the express intention of saving the whole human race, and that God the Holy Spirit is now seeking to win the world to Christ; when, as a matter of common observation, it is apparent that the great majority of our fellowmen are dying in sin, and passing into a hopeless eternity; is to say that God the Father is disappointed, that God the Son is dissatisfied, and that God the Holy Spirit is defeated. We have stated the issue baldly, but there is no escaping the conclusion. To argue that God is "trying His best" to save all mankind, but that the majority of men will not let Him save them, is to insist that the will of the Creator is impotent, and that the will of the creature is omnipotent. To throw the blame, as many do, upon the Devil, does not remove the difficulty, for if Satan is defeating the purpose of God, then, Satan is Almighty and God is no longer the Supreme Being.

To declare that the Creator's original plan has been frustrated by sin, is to dethrone God. To suggest that God was taken by surprise in Eden and that He is now attempting to remedy an unforeseen calamity, is to degrade the Most High to the level of a finite, erring mortal. To argue that man is a free moral agent and the determiner of his own destiny, and that therefore he has the power to checkmate his Maker, is to strip God of the attribute of Omnipotence. To say that the creature has burst the bounds assigned by his Creator, and that God is now practically a helpless Spectator before the sin and suffering entailed by Adam's fall, is to repudiate the express declaration of Holy Writ, namely, "Surely the wrath of man shall praise Thee: the remainder of wrath shalt Thou restrain" (Psa. 76:10). In a word, to deny the Sovereignty of God is to enter upon a path which, if followed to its logical terminus, is to arrive at blank atheism.

The Sovereignty of the God of Scripture is absolute, irresistible, infinite. When we say that God is Sovereign we affirm His right to govern the universe which He has made for His own glory, just as He pleases. We affirm that His right is the right of the Potter over the clay, i. e., that He may mold that clay into whatsoever form He chooses, fashioning out of the same lump one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor. We affirm that He is under no rule or law outside of His own will and nature, that God is a law unto Himself, and that He is under no obligation to give an account of His matters to any.

[from The Sovereignty of God by A W Pink]

‘How it is "homophobic" for government employees merely to affirm principles supported by the Bible and thousands of years of civilization, yet not heterophobic and Bible-phobic for government employees to directly trash the Bible and traditional values?’ –David Limbaugh

Good question Mr. Limbaugh! Why wouldn’t all reasonable people agree with you?

Is there not a presumption in the culture that we as a people must move past the moral restrictions previously imposed on us by our forefathers who loved the Scriptures? All men must be accepted as they are. Sin is a thing of the past. Some even say that God made them that way. How could we question that? No need of redemption or Christ.

The world is relentless in its assault on Christ and His people because the Christian ethic stands in opposition to the spirit of lawlessness.

We lament that the culture has rejected the authority of the Scriptures. But why should we find this surprising when the visible church in most part has also rejected its authority. We have forsaken the doctrines of Biblical Christianity and exchanged them for the doctrines of men. The church has lost its influence because it has left its authority.

Does the Bible not teach the doctrines of original sin and the spiritual deadness of all men without hope except in the sovereign grace of God? This is the gospel that transforms men and cultures. The great revivals of Biblical Christianity called the Protestant Reformation and the Great Awakening are the historical examples that the Spirit of Truth will bless the preaching of truth.

Yet, today we are told from the pulpit that men are not so completely dead in sin that he cannot help himself. He has a ticket to heaven in his pocket called faith. God has done everything he can to help us in Christ. But we must exercise our free will and pull out our ticket in order to be born again. This is another gospel and will never transform men so that they transform a culture.

What hope does finite man have to know any truth about the infinite God? His eternal power is revealed in His creation so clearly that the apostle says that men who suppress this knowledge are without excuse [Romans 1]. But God reveals Himself and his attributes to men in the Scriptures and through the person and work of Jesus Christ, ‘He who has seen Me has seen the Father’ [John 14:9].

‘The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law’ [Deuteronomy 29:29]. So what does God reveal about Himself?

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts” [Isaiah 55:8-9].

Why would creatures expect to fathom the infinite Creator? He has told us that we are limited in our knowledge and that our capacity to understand is also limited. Our tendency is to think too highly of ourselves and not nearly high enough about God.

God reveals Himself to Moses as ‘I AM’…

And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you’” [Exodus 3:14].

Moses gives us some insight into the meaning of ‘I AM’…

‘Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God’ [Psalm 90:1-2].

Moses tells us that God is outside the constraints of time and space. ‘In the beginning God created…’ [Genesis 1:1]

Science is about the discovery of the created order; that is, what can be measured and observed. The supernatural creation event is outside the realm of science and can be understood only in the realm of faith through divine revelation…

‘By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible’ [Hebrews 11:3].

God cannot be found out by the autonomous reason of finite men. According to the Scriptures He is known only by faith…

‘Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him’ [Hebrews 11:6].