1. Illus: I hold in my hands an ingenious invention that seriously challenges Charles Darwin's theory of the gradual evolution of life on this earth over billions of years.
   1. In fact, there are some tonight who believe that this invention represents incontrovertible proof for the existence of God as Creator!
      1. For the last few evenings we've been carefully unfolding the compelling portrait of God in this Book as a Being questing for friends, a God who longs to enter into a very personal relationship with every one of us.
      2. But I realize that the society we live in has very little tolerance in its secular circles for any such God-talk, as we've been sharing.
      3. And were you to step forward in a conversation and suggest that you have discovered a caring, loving Friend in the God of this Book, I can predict that it would be but a split second till some friend or colleague of yours would immediately protest: "God? Gimme a break! We haven't needed God for decades now!"
      4. "Where are your scientific smarts, man--Charles Darwin a century and a half ago proved that all this fiddle faddle about creation is nothing more than a myth!"
      5. And for many new friends of God--and even for some long-time friends of His--the challenge of evolution has dried up any willingness to publicly discuss His friendship--I mean, come on, in the face of such overwhelming scientific evidence, how could anyone challenge what the entire world has come to believe is the truth about human origins--Darwin's theory of evolution!
   2. Well, for the next few moments, I want to share with you some dynamite evidence wrapped up in this ingenious little invention I hold here in my hands!
      1. Evidence that powerfully proves our friendship with God is no pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking, but a very certain and very present reality!
      2. I share this with you, not as a scientist but as a layman in science.
      3. Now look--we have scientists in this university, and there are scientists in our audiences around the world this evening--all of whom could stand up and lecture for hours on the great debate between evolution and creation.
      4. I repeat: I am not a scientist, though I have spent many hours researching this subject and reading book after book written by brilliant scientists.
      5. Illus: And I will admit that I've added my two cents worth to this great debate by writing a book on the subject myself, and we'd like to make it available to you at the end of this weekend.
   3. Can your friendship with the God of this Book withstand the challenge of Charles Darwin? Join me, as we seek for the answer.
   4. Illus: Before we turn to this ingenious invention, let's read a very sober prediction Darwin made in his celebrated book, The Origin of Species, which I have here in the lecturn with me and which you see on the screen:

      If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." (171, Mentor Books edition, 1962)

      1. I.e., my theory has to do with the gradual evolution of life in successive stages from a tiny spark of chemical reaction over billions of years into the complex life forms we see all over earth today.
      2. If someone would show that in fact some organisms are so complex that they could not "possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications [over time], my theory would absolutely break down."
   5. Has that absolute break down begun?
   6. I'll let a very bright biochemist named Michael Behe answer that.
   7. Illus: But before we turn to him and to the Scriptures, let me tell you about this ingenious devise we have kept around our house ever since that memorable day when Karen was all alone in the kitchen, minding her own business.
      1. Her reverie was broken, however, when she happened to look down to the floor and over in the corner of the cabinet on the floor she spotted a hole in the floorboard we had never spotted before.
      2. The reason she spotted it so easily was because emerging from that previously unknown hole was the small furry grey head of a previously unknown occupant of our house.
      3. Scientific name--Houso mouso or more properly, Mus Musculus from the Muridae family of Old World rats and mice.
      4. Upon seeing the mouse, Karen reacted spontaneously and with great vigor and decibels!
      5. The hapless creature, which obviously was on some sort of exploring expedition, immediately halted its forward motion.
      6. Apparently it too believed in "the survival of the fittest," for it also instantaneously determined that it would be "fittest" for it to exit the premises...which it did post haste.
   8. Illus: Well, ever since that day when Karen spied a mouse in our house, we've kept a supply of this ingenious invention around our garage, from whence that creature must have come--it has not returned--the device works--it is called a MOUSETRAP.
      1. Illus: Turning now to biochemist Michael Behe and his monumental book Darwin's Black Box, I would like to explain this trap to you.
      2. Illus: So that you can better see the mousetrap, note the one on the screen right now.
      3. Please note that a mousetrap consists of five pieces: a wooden platform, a hammer, a spring, a holding bar and a trigger or catch.
      4. Illus: They are very simple devices to set, and deadly--obviously so designed--when they are sprung!.....LIKE THIS......
   9. And WHAT DOES A MOUSETRAP HAVE TO DO WITH DARWINIAN EVOLUTION? Simple, writes Michael Behe.
      1. The mousetrap is an excellent illustration of what he calls irreducible complexity.
      2. Illus: Let me read you his definition of irreducible complexity in his stunning new book Darwin's Black Box (from whence comes the title of tonight's lecture):

         "By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning." (39)

      3. Illus: As in this mousetrap, for example.
         1. Now the function of a mousetrap is to immobilize a mouse, drastically reducing its ability to wander your house anymore.
         2. But if you reached into your drawer, when you heard the pitter patter of mice feet in your room, and you pulled out a mousetrap, that unfortunately was missing a piece due to faulty manufacturing, WHICH PIECE COULD BE MISSING and STILL ALLOW YOU TO CATCH THE MOUSE?
         3. The wooden platform? (No way to mount the trap) the hammer? (mouse would dance on the cheese all night long!) the spring? (hammer would jangle loosely) the holding bar or the catch? (you'd have a broken thumb and no captured mouse!)
         4. The point: the mousetrap is an irreducibly complex system, where all the components function and where all their functioning is required for the system to work, "wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning."
         5. I.e., the system will NOT function with 1, 2, 3 or 4 components --YOU HAVE TO HAVE ALL 5 working together--
         6. And not just together--because these parts have to be of the right material in the correct placement--in order for the mousetrap to successfully function.
      4. There is NO successful gradual evolving of a mousetrap--you have to have all 5 pieces of the right material correctly placed and set.
   10. What does that have to do with Charles Darwin's theory that life evolved gradually billions of years ago through natural selection, through slow natural changes that increase the complexity of the organism over the expanse of time?
       1. Michael Behe answers--IT HAS EVERYTHING to do with Darwin's evolutionary theory.
       2. Illus: Let me reread Darwin's candid confession to you from a moment ago:

          "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."

       3. Ladies and gentlemen--Michael Behe's molecular biochemical research has concluded that in fact on the molecular level Darwin's theory has indeed broken down.
       4. How? This biochemist from Lehigh University in PA pursued his molecular research with the query: Could it be that in the realm of nature there are mousetrap-like systems that are irreducibly complex, SO COMPLEX THAT IT IS SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THOSE SYSTEMS TO HAVE EVOLVED PIECE BY PIECE?
       5. THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD POSSIBLY FUNCTION IS IF THEY WERE DESIGNED AND PLACED INTO OPERATION IN ENTIRETY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY AS an irreducibly complex system, with all the pieces of the right material correctly positioned and set from the very beginning of its function as a system.
       6. Anything short of that, and the system would have been defunct and the organism would have died.
       7. Sound confusing? Not the way Michael Behe describes it for us laypersons who will never master molecular biochemistry.
2. Before we share some of his stunning and mind-boggling exhibits, let's examine the biblical description of divine creation far away from the Genesis account. Turn to Psalm 33 (p 531)--a description, I believe, that is corroborated by this evolutionist biochemist--he is not a creationist, perhaps not even a theist.
   1. Read vv 6-9
      1. "For HE spoke"--the emphatic pronoun is added in the Hebrew, setting God above any other mythological god that might claim creative ability.
      2. "And it came to be"--literally, "it became"--from Heb. root of YHWH--I AM--he spoke and it simply was!
      3. Illus: The old theologians used a Latin word to describe God's method of creation--fiat creation--"let it be done" creation--v. 9 creation!
   2. THINK ON WHAT WE HAVE JUST READ. According to Psalm 33--which is in perfect harmony with the Genesis 1 account--the Creator God created entire systems of life instantaneously and simultaneously--by the command of His fiat word the Triune God created irreducibly complex systems that had to be designed and created and placed in operation all at once or else the systems would not have functioned, in fact would instead have failed.
   3. Which is why I am more than a little intrigued by Michael Behe's biochemical conclusion: That there are some irreducibly complex biological and molecular systems that COULD NOT HAVE possibly EVOLVED piece by piece--THEY HAD to begin ALREADY DESIGNED and IN PLACE in order for the critical life system to have ever functioned at all!
3. Now then, let us turn to his astounding and even astonishing exhibits.
   1. With this parenthetical caveat--there is no way that a layman like me could possibly do justice to his detailed biochemical scientific explanations!
      1. We have plenty of scientists in our midst right now who could easily do it--but not I.
      2. The man Behe has a gift! Not only as a biochemist but also as a very talented writer who is able to take ponderous biochemistry and illumine it with captivating illustrations and very helpful analogies.
      3. I would wish that you could get his book and devour it for yourself.
      4. I repeat: Behe is not a creationist, does not even purport to believe in God, yet as a scientist is challenging Darwinists with major molecular evidence for intelligent design on the most basic levels of life.
      5. And design requires that there be a Designer.
   2. EXHIBIT ONE: THE CILIUM.
      1. Illus: For us to see cilia, we must look through a microscope. Some single-celled animals move via one or more cilia. Ciliated cells line the air passages leading to the lungs, where they beat in a wave-like motion to move foreign particles back up to the throat where they can be swallowed.
      2. In reproduction the male sperm has one long cilium by which means it moves toward the ovum.
      3. Being microscopic, cilia are obviously tiny but that does not mean they are simple.
      4. Behe describes a cilium as follows:

         "The cilium consists of a membrane-coated bundle of fibers. The ciliary membrane (think of it as a sort of plastic cover) is an outgrowth of the cell membrane, so the interior of the cilium is connected to the interior of the cell. When a cilium is sliced crossways and the cut end is examined by electron microscopy, you see nine rod-like structures around the periphery. The rods are called microtubules. When high-quality photographs are closely inspected, each of the nine microtubules is seen to actually consist of two fused rings. Further examination shows that one of the rings is made from thirteen individual strands. The other ring, joined to the first, is made from ten strands....A protein called nexin connects each... double microtubule to the one beside it."

      5. Illus: Visualize yourself holding two flexible fishing poles upright in front of yourself. The two poles represent two of the microtubules within the cilium. They are only inches apart and are connected to each other by fishline at frequent intervals all the way to the top of the poles (representing the nexin fibers). Now if you lift up one of the poles while keeping the other steady, the tops of both poles will bend--toward the right if the left pole is moved up and toward the left if the right pole is lifted. This is a rough illustration of the movement of the cilia.
      6. But in the case of the fishing poles, your arms are the motors that move the poles up or down. Likewise, the cilia require motors to bring about their bending. The tiny molecular motors are called dynein.
      7. A motor requires energy equivalent to electricity or gasoline for many motors with which we are familiar. The "gasoline" used by the molecular dynein motors is ATP (adenosine triphosphate). When ATP activates the dynein, one of the microtubules begins to slide past the other. The nexin fibers prevent it from moving far and cause the vertical motion to be converted to a bending motion.
      8. Of course all nine double microtubules need to act in unison and in harmony for the cilium to move quickly and smoothly.
      9. All of these parts are required to perform one function: ciliary motion. Just as a mousetrap does not work unless all of its constituent parts are present, ciliary motion simply does not exist in the absence of microtubules, connectors, and motors. Therefore we can conclude that the cilium is irreducibly complex--an enormous monkey wrench thrown into its presumed gradual, Darwinian evolution.
      10. Remember, this is being written by a scientist who has changed his mind on the basis of the molecular evidence and has abandoned the theory of gradual change for irreducibly complex systems!
      11. These systems must have been designed and placed into operation complete and functioning by something or someone.
      12. And all this detailed structure is only one small part of a single cell!
      13. This is "Darwin's black box" that he could not penetrate because he simply did not have the technology needed.
      14. Illus: By the way, Behe points out that cilia are of interest to scientists in several disciplines such as biochemistry, biophysics, molecular biology, and even medicine. In the past several decades perhaps as many as 10,000 research papers dealing in some way with cilia have been published but only two of these attempt to discuss the details of the evolution of cilia on the molecular and mechanical levels, and these two papers disagree!
      15. THEY HAD TO HAVE BEEN DESIGNED AND PLACED INTO OPERATION COMPLETE AND FUNCTIONING BY SOMETHING OR SOMEONE.
   3. EXHIBIT TWO: THE EYE.
      1. Exhibit two is another classic irreducibly complex system called THE EYE.
      2. And it, too, was a problem for Darwin.
      3. And so, instead of trying to lay out a sequence of steps that would lead eventually from a very simple eye to the complex human eye, he discussed the eyes of various animals and suggested that natural selection could bring about gradual changes from the single-celled, light sensitive eyes of animals such as jellyfish, to the concave grouping of light sensitive cells in the eyes of the starfish, to the ball of cells with a crude lens in the snails, to the marvellous eyes of birds and humans.
      4. In Darwin's thinking, evolution could not build a complex organ in one step or a few steps; radical innovations such as the eye would require generations of organisms to slowly accumulate beneficial changes in a gradual process.
      5. He realized that if in one generation an organ as complex as the eye suddenly appeared, it would be tantamount to a miracle.
      6. Unfortunately, gradual development of the human eye appeared to be impossible, since its many sophisticated features seemed to be interdependent.
      7. Somehow, for evolution to be believable, Darwin had to convince the public that complex organs could be formed in a step-by-step process.
      8. He succeeded brilliantly....Using reasoning like this, Darwin convinced many of his readers that an evolutionary pathway leads from the simplest light-sensitive spot to the sophisticated camera-eye of man.
      9. But the question of how vision began remained unanswered.
      10. Darwin persuaded much of the world that a modern eye evolved gradually from a simpler structure, but he did not even try to explain where his starting point--the relatively simple light-sensitive spot--came from.
      11. On the contrary, Darwin dismissed the question of the eye's ultimate origin: "How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated."
      12. But now that we can look into the black box that biochemistry has opened, what does it reveal? Here is a simplified version of the details discussed in Behe's book. (And even it is so far over my head I'm going to read it to you!)

          "...strikes the retina and reacts with a retinal molecule which immediately changes shape. The change in shape forces the protein rhodopsin, to which this molecule is closely attached, to change shape also. The change in shape of rhodopsin causes it to be attracted to a second protein, transducin. When that happens, the transducin drops off a small molecule and accepts a second slightly different one in its place. Transducin protein now binds to a third protein, phosphodiesterase, which has the ability to 'cut' out a third molecule which reduces the number of positively charged sodium ions. The resulting imbalance of positive and negative sodium ions inside and outside the cell membrane causes an electrical charge that is transmitted down the optic nerve and is interpreted by the brain as vision."

      13. But what happens in the brain to then produce vision is a whole other marvel of complexity with which we cannot deal here!
      14. Now that the black box of vision has been opened, it is no longer enough for an evolutionary explanation of that power to consider only the anatomical structures of whole eyes, as Darwin did in the nineteenth century (and as popularizers of evolution continue to do today).
      15. Each of the anatomical steps and structures that Darwin thought were so simple actually involve staggeringly complicated biochemical processes that cannot be papered over with rhetoric.
      16. As Behe wrote, "Darwin's metaphorical hops from butte to butte are now revealed in many cases to be huge leaps between carefully tailored machines--distances that would require a helicopter to cross in one trip."
   4. EXHIBIT THREE: THE BOMBARDIER BEETLE
      1. Behe places another exhibit on display, this one being a favorite of creationists (even I had heard about it long before reading Behe).
      2. This is an unattractive dark beetle only about half an inch long. However, it has distinguished itself by its unusual means of defence. Through an aperture in its rear end, it is able to blast scalding acid at its enemy.
      3. How is it able to maintain boiling acid in its body without damage to itself?
      4. The answer is that the beetle uses chemistry--the boiling acid is produced at the moment the creature jets its foul fluid.
      5. Simply, the process proceeds as follows: (Again I must read it to you.)

         "Two chemicals, hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone, are produced by special glands within the abdomen. They are stored together in a collecting vesicle. These two chemicals are capable of explosive reaction when mixed together but only under the influence of a special enzyme catalyst. A catalyst is a chemical substance that changes the rates of chemical reactions without itself being used up in the process. Without the catalyst the reaction between hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone is too slow to be of consequence to the animal.

         When danger approaches, the beetle releases into an explosion chamber the mixture that has been stored in the collecting vesicle. At the same time, the catalyst is squirted into the explosion chamber from surrounding glands.

         Now, chemically, things get very interesting. The hydrogen peroxide rapidly decomposes into ordinary water and oxygen, just as a store bought bottle of hydrogen peroxide will decompose over time if left open. The oxygen reacts with the hydroquinone to yield more water, plus a highly irritating chemical called quinone. These reactions release a large quantity of heat. The temperature of the solution rises to the boiling point; in fact, a portion vaporizes into steam. The steam and oxygen gas exert a great deal of pressure on the walls of the explosion chamber. With the sphincter muscle now closed, a channel leading outward from the beetle's body provides the only exit for the boiling mixture. Muscles surrounding the channel allow the steam jet to be directed at the source of danger. The end result is that the beetle's enemy is scalded by a steaming solution of the toxic chemical quinone."

      6. So how did this defensive system develop?
      7. To say the complex defence mechanism of this beetle came about because the necessary substances are used elsewhere in the body--which is how some evolutionists try to describe it--is like saying an automobile can develop in an auto wrecking yard because all the necessary parts can be found elsewhere in the yard.
      8. The fact is this little animal has an interesting irreducibly complex mechanism that cannot function unless several substances and structures are present in the right configurations and at the right time.
   5. EXHIBIT FOUR: BLOOD CLOTTING
      1. One of the most intricate systems in the body of an animal is the process of blood clotting.
      2. Frequently, we pay little attention to a small scratch or cut that stops bleeding shortly (unless we are among the small number of haemophiliacs or bleeders).
      3. We are unaware of the miracle of design that causes the bleeding to stop.
      4. When we stop to think about it, we recognize that certain requirements are necessary for this system to work without damage to the whole body.
         1. A blood clot must form to prevent continuous bleeding and eventual loss of life.
         2. The clot must form in the right place, otherwise it could block passage of blood in critical areas.
         3. It must form at the right time, at the critical moments when it is needed.
         4. Any clot formed must be sufficiently strong and well anchored to withstand the force of a system under pressure.
      5. That's why Behe refers to the blood clotting system as a cascade, like a row of falling dominoes, a series of events leading one after another to the desired end. The complexity involves names like fibrinogen, thrombin, accelerin, proaccelerin, glutamate residues, kallidrein, etc. Quoting him once again:

         "When an animal is cut, a protein called Hageman factor sticks to the surface of cells near the wound. Bound Hageman factor is then cleaved by a protein called HMK to yield activated Hageman factor. Immediately the activated Hageman factor converts another protein, called prekallikrein, to its active form, kallikrein. Kallikrein helps HMK speed up the conversion of more Hageman factor to the active form. Activated Hageman factor and HMK then together transform another protein, called PTA, to its active form. Activated PTA in turn, together with the activated form of another protein...called convertin, switch a protein called Christmas factor to its active form. Finally, activated Christmas factor, together with antihaemophilic factor (which is itself activated by thrombin in a manner similar to that of proaccelerin) changes Stuart factor to its active form."

      6. If you are able to follow and understand the above, you are probably a blood specialist! I include the paragraph to impress you with the complexity of this system.
      7. And this is a description of only part of the system.
      8. After the blood has been stopped, the healing begins. The growth of new cells is also tightly under control. The right kind or kinds of cells must be produced, only the right number of each kind as needed, and the cells must unite to produce tissue of the same shape as required by the location of the cut or wound.
   6. WHAT THEN ARE MICHAEL BEHE'S INESCAPABLE CONCLUSIONS, based on this preponderance of biochemical evidence?
      1. Illus: He says imagine a room in which a body lies crushed, flat as a pancake, a dozen detectives crawling around, examining the floor with magnifying glasses for any clue to the identity of the perpetrator. In the middle of the room, next to the body, stands a large grey elephant.
      2. As he puts it, "There is an elephant in the roomful of scientists who are trying to explain the development of life. The elephant is labelled 'intelligent design.' To a person who does not feel obliged to restrict his search to unintelligent causes, the straightforward conclusion is that many biochemical systems were designed. They were designed not by the laws of nature, not by chance and necessity; rather, they were planned. The designer knew what the systems would look like when they were completed, then took steps to bring the systems about. Life on earth at its most fundamental level, in its most critical components, is the product of intelligent activity....In the face of the enormous complexity that modern biochemistry has uncovered in the cell, the scientific community is paralyzed. No one at Harvard University, no one at the National Institutes of Health, no member of the National Academy of Sciences, no Nobel prize winner--no one at all can give a detailed account of how the cilium, or vision, or blood clotting, or any complex biochemical process might have developed in a Darwinian fashion. But we are here. Plants and animals are here. The complex systems are here. All these things got here somehow: if not in a Darwinian fashion, then how?"
   7. There it is--Behe's strong and convincing case for an intelligent designer--unnamed and unsought by Behe--but nevertheless present for Behe.
      1. In fairness to Behe, he is not positing a creationist position.
      2. He simply suggests that an intelligent designer designed a complete cell--replete with DNA codes--and placed that cell, with all the necessary systems for future life forms within, at the beginning of the journey of life.
      3. The point that Behe convincingly makes is that an intelligent designer had to get the irreducibly complex systems started in the first place.
      4. DESIGN IS NECESSARY...AND WHEN YOU HAVE DESIGN, YOU MUST HAVE A DESIGNER.
4. So how shall we respond to these biochemical conclusions?
   1. I must tell you that I thrill with Michael Behe's brilliant defence of intelligent design in life's most basic and complex systems!
   2. And I accept it as a ringing affirmation, though he did not write his book to do so, of the profound opening salvo to the Holy Scriptures Genesis 1:1 (p 1): "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
   3. How did our earlier psalm put it? [show on screen] "For He spoke and it came to be; He commanded, and it stood fast." (Psalm 33:9)
   4. Irreducible systems of complexity that could never have come into being any other way than by an intelligent designer.
   5. Illus: Would it surprise you to learn that the Bible predicted the likes of Behe 2000 years ago?
      1. Illus: How else shall we explain these words of the brilliant Christian thinker named Paul in Romans 1:20 [show on screen] "For since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead."
      2. Very simply, Paul declares that Behe and you and I have all the evidence that is necessary to conclude intelligent design in creation and to postulate the existence of an intelligent Designer called Creator.
      3. Interestingly enough, were I to review this astounding evidence by Behe and accept its veracity--Paul declares that I would be (and these are his words at the end of this verse) "WITHOUT EXCUSE" if I went on to reject the Creator in spite of the evidence!
   6. I believe that Darwin's Black Box--unintentionally to be sure--corroborates and affirms and vindicates faith in the divine Creator who spoke irreducibly complex systems into existence, as the Bible has always maintained!
   7. My point tonight:
      1. Skeptic, please RECONSIDER THE EVIDENCE FOR YOUR DOUBTS.
      2. Young Christian, DO NOT JETTISON YOUR FAITH.
      3. Long-time believer, DO NOT ABANDON YOUR BIBLE.
      4. Because the cutting edge of this realm of science unintentionally and inadvertently is supporting the great foundational truth of this Book, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
5. And if God could design the infinite intricacies of the molecular system within you, then can He not also design the infinite details of the life forces around you?
   1. I don't know--maybe you feel like your life is irreducibly complex right now.
   2. So complex, so chaotic that you can see no design, no masterplan to the hurt and pain and loneliness and insecurity and failure you sense today.
   3. Maybe you feel your life is falling apart on the eve of the next millennium.
   4. If only there were Someone somewhere who was still in control.
   5. Someone who could speak a word of order and design and hope and life back into your private chaos.
   6. Someone who could take all those random, broken pieces and with a word put your heart back together again.
   7. There is Someone, you know.
      1. Illus: To a paralytic young man consumed by his wretched guilt, Jesus spoke a word: "Son, your sins are forgiven."
      2. Illus: To a broken woman consumed by her diseased hopelessness, Jesus spoke a word: "Daughter, your faith has made you whole."
      3. He spoke a word that embraced the man, He spoke a word that caressed the woman--and He created them both all over again.
      4. "For he spake and it was done, he commanded and it stood fast."
   8. Illus: Remember, the Latin called it fiat creation--by a word.
      1. Illus: But they also had another word for His creation: ex nihilo--from out of nothing.
      2. Because that is what the Creator did in the beginning--out of nothing He made a most beautiful something.
   9. And do you know what? He still can!
   10. Thanks to His cross on Calvary, the same Creator can speak the same creation into your broken chaos right now. From out of nothing, He can make a most beautiful something out of you, out of your life, right now, even today.
   11. Illus: Martin Luther once said, "God created the world out of nothing. As long as you are not yet nothing, God cannot make something out of you."
   12. Maybe it's time we both admitted our nothingness and asked God to make a beautiful something out of the nothing we have left to bring to Him.

Further Study:

We Can Believe In God     (Lecture Study Guide from Discover Bible School)

Topical:   Creation,   God.

Web Site Navigation Here Main Menu Seminar Languages Video, Study & Links Your Feedback Credits Page

© 1998 NAD. HTML by: Alvin Evert.