"...if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10). (Council of Orange: Canon 6)
We are a community of confessing believers who love the gospel of Jesus Christ, affirm the Biblical and Christ-exalting truths of the Reformation such as the five solas, the doctrines of grace, monergistic regeneration, and the redemptive historical approach to interpreting the Scriptures.
« Fall Theology Conference with Dr. Kim Riddlebarger | Main | King's Firecrackers Performance at the US Naval Academy - Totally Amazing!! »
Mathematician, John Heffner PhD, and Dr. Carl Baugh crunch the numbers...
Comments
very interesting ... would have never thought to take a math equation to the theory of evolution.
thanks for sharing ...
Posted by: David Zook | October 1, 2009 11:56 AM
Please tell me this man does not actually have a Ph.D...Where in the world did he get his supposed degree in mathematics?
Does he have any clue that the growth rate of humans has not been exponential like that for very long (only since the Industrial Revolution has growth neared this rate)?
Posted by: Christian H | October 2, 2009 01:12 AM
Even if you believe in 6 day creation... this argument should hold no water for you... It is clearly based on false premises and is contradicted by historical fact.
When Christians make stupid arguments, they are properly ridiculed by the world. It makes me sad.
http://ncseweb.org/cej/4/4/creationists-population-growth-bunnies-great-pyramid
Posted by: david | October 2, 2009 10:35 AM
I think its a good argument. These men are not stupid and the argument has some weight.
I am sure that the growth rate has not remained precisely constant throughout history, but that's why an average is used and it is certainly interesting to notice just how radically off the math would be if evolution dates are used. It is not even remotely close.
Posted by: Phil D | October 2, 2009 12:00 PM
Math is math and if you do the math you can see if the math is true or not. Using emotional language like "stupid" and "sad" is just, err, stupid and sad, but whatever it is, it is certainly not an argument.
Posted by: jeff B | October 2, 2009 12:48 PM
I'm sorry. I gotta disagree on this one. I am a 6 day creationist and all...but I'm not sure I could seriously take this equation too seriously. The fact that population has skyrocketed in the last 100 years, and even in the last 20, is just fact. With urbanization comes increased population. He gives no consideration to natural disaster (anything from hurricanes to plague), human disaster, and decreased death rate.
Evolution is false, sure, but not because of arguments like this.
Posted by: Jon Norman | October 3, 2009 06:47 PM
Correction:
"Increased death rate."
Posted by: Jon Norman | October 3, 2009 06:50 PM
Jon,
The very low number for the population growth over the centuries surely takes the death rate into account. Even evolutionists who still maintain their position understand this. They don't like the results, but I don't think they can credibly maintain a lower number than John Heffer does.
Posted by: Graham Long | October 3, 2009 07:14 PM
I loved watching. Great program! {[square root of (6,500,000,000 X 3)/3.1416]/5280}2=diameter of a circle the whole world population could fit in: about a 30 mile circle! I love it.
Posted by: Garth Guessman | March 6, 2010 04:46 PM