Pulling us Down

I must confess that there are a few secular things that I enjoy reading every month. Field and Stream, American Rifleman, and Popular Science. I doubt that the first two come as much of a surprise to many of you, however, you may not have known that I am an avid pop sci guy. I'm definitely not a "techno geek" yet I do enjoy keeping up with what's new. Unfortunately I can't recommend the magazine to anybody. Popular Science continues to teach a false religion month after month.
If you're reading this blog you probably know that I unashamedly share my faith. I pray like the Apostle Paul that the Lord would continue to give me utterance as I talk with those around me. I don't feel like I need to apologize for this because it is not a hidden agenda. If you talk with me for any length of time, you'll hear about my faith. I put my faith in the truth of the Bible.
John 1:1-2, 14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, the same was in the beginning with God...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Popular Science is in the business of sharing their faith as well. The unfortunate thing is that they try to disguise their faith as "science". The October 2010 issue of this religious magazine is no exception.

On Sunday mornings we are trying to build a firm foundation for those who profess to know Christ as their personal Savior. Our strategy has been to go through history, from creation to Christ, in chronological order. In order to do that we needed to start at the beginning.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

How can we believe that statement? I believe it is true because the Bible is a collection of 66 historical books written in 3 different languages on 3 different continents by 40 different authors over a period of 1600 years. It was written by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitness and records supernatural events which took place in fulfillment of specific prophecy and claims to be divine rather than human in origin. See II Peter 1:16-21
To hear Voddie Baucham on this subject...
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=530914253 

Popular Science, October 2010, "Decaying Gravity" on pages 29-31.

"No one has ever quite nailed down gravity. Newton saw that bodies appeared to attract each other even at a great distance, and from this observation was able to construct a mathematical formula that predicted the motion of the planets with astonishing accuracy. Einstein improved on that definition by stating that massive objects attract lesser ones by bending the space around them-like how a bowling ball deforms the surface of a trampoline so that a marble will roll toward it-and based on this insight was able to construct his theory of general relativity, which proved to be even more elegant and predictive.
But not perfect. Einstein's theory posits that the universe is expanding such that each object is moving away from everything else, which Hubble Space Telescope observations have confirmed. Yet for this theory to hold, it requires a far more complicated conclusion: If everything is moving apart as it goes forward in time, then at some moment everything in the universe must have been gathered into a single point."

Do you see the problem yet? Here they assume that if Einstein is right-and things are moving apart- then that means that at some point everything had to have been together at a single point. They will not allow the consideration that things were created and put in motion. They go on...

"The problem, which has challenged theorists for nearly a century, is that Einstein constructed several specific mathematical formulas from his general theory, and they have proved accurate in describing nearly everything-except the proposed origins of the universe itself..." *

There is a lot I can say here but I want to keep it short and simple. If you start with the wrong presupposition, you will end at the wrong conclusion. I am going to leave off some of the "babbling" and pick it up at the declaration of an out and out lie!

"Ferreira and Banados were able to replicate Einsteinian gravity in normal situations, and they were also consistent with the conditions scientists have observed about the origins of the universe." *

WHAT? Scientists observed the origins of the universe? Does throwing the word "about" before "the origins of the universe" make this any less of a lie? Do they think it is okay to give people the impression that they have observed things scientifically regarding the origins of the universe?
Romans 1:19-22
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...

The article continues...

"The recent appearance of so many theories may be a sign of a field on the verge of a breakthrough. Indeed, Erik Verlinde of the University of Amsterdam argues that gravity is not a force at all but rather an "emerging condition". As he told the New York Times in July, "For me, gravity doesn't exist." " *

WOW. That's science?

Apparently it's POPULAR SCIENCE.

*Emphasis added