In discussing various topics on my website I draw upon various sources of truth, of spiritual authority. Of course, the Bible is a key source of truth, after all, it is the inspired, inerrant, infallible word of God.But it is not the only source of truth.

Here is where I look to for truth.


The Bible is not a book about science, nor is Christianity a religion about science. But there are many passages in the Bible touching upon scientific topics.

Science cannot contradict the Bible and the Bible cannot contradict science; it's that simple. Both are sources of truth.

That being said, not all scientific proclamations are actually true. Certain claims will surely be changed in the future (as they were changed in the past) and certain claims are not even in the realm of science at all.

Regarding young universe, young earth, Adam & Evethe first humans only 10,000 years ago, the global flood...

  1. The Bible does not teach these when interpreted literally.
  2. Trying to prove these using the geological record is, for me, very unsatisfying. A vapor canopy above the clouds? No way. The Grand Canyon formed from soft mud in one year? Unbelievable. The universe appears old because God created it to look old? Absurd.

I accept the following scientific observations as accurate...

  1. The first true humans 200,000 years ago.
  2. Adam & Eve at the beginning of redemption history, at the dawn of agriculture about 10,000 B.C.
  3. Pain & suffering has existed since the first creatures capable of experiencing these.
  4. Natural selection and evolution.
  5. The earth is very old and the universe is much older still.
  6. There was never a global flood covering the earth. When the earth was young long before there were creatures, the earth very well may have be covered in water; but this is not Noah's flood.

I accept the foundational orthodox Christian teachings...

  1. Adam & Eve were literal people, tempted by Satan who appeared as a serpent. They ate from the tree and original sin began.
  2. Each species was created under the guidance and oversight of God. There were no merely random genetic mutations.
  3. Jesus is deity, the 2nd person of the Trinity, the Son of God, who literally took on human form from the virgin Mary, who literally died and was resurrected.
  4. Original sin which separates us from God and requires faith in Jesus for redemption.
  5. Judgment to eternal hellfor those who reject God's love; eternity in the new heavens and new earthin a resurrected body for the others.

I reject the notion of a pre-Adamic race.

In my view, the Bible is to be interpreted strictly literally.

Regarding miracles: I believe the Bible accounts of miracles are true, and I believe miracles can still happen today.


The domain of Philosophyis almost by definition, unprovable. From the ancient Greeks continuing into our modern day philosophers continue to muse about the nature of reality and of human nature. Having studied some of their views I must conclude that all of them without exception have not framed the question correctly. Philosophy should address the spiritual realm as it relates to God's plans and purposes; it should have as its focus, the soul and the spiritual realm.

Early philosophers try to explain the non-material aspects of reality in the same way scientists explain the physical realm; they invent laws and constructs. For example, for the physical realm we have: space, matter, time, energy, the natural laws — everything can be explained in terms of these. But these can never explain such things as: consciousness, evil, love, emotion, passion, thought, memory, etc., etc.

Philosophers fill the void by creating non-material constructs such as: form and substance, Freud's ego and id, universal ideas, perfect intelligence, the soul as the principle of life and movement, causality, perceptions and impressions and ideas, categorical imperative, Hegel's dialectic, utility, reality as the embodiment of rationality, dialectical materialism, God is dead, the Will to Power, the Superman, determinism.

I should note there are many astute observations and much truth in the statements of Philosophers.

It seems to me what is missing here is the proper distinction between the physical realm and the spiritual realm. The spiritual contains all things living such as souls, ideas, memories, thoughts, symbols, culture, God, spiritual beings, etc., etc. Philosophy is, really, just the study of the spiritual realm, the study of the soul.

The problem with Philosophy is that there are so many systems, each contradicting the others, none leading to the essential conclusion and purpose of life which is God. I propose we abandon all this and frame philosophy in terms of the essential reality, which is...

  1. God is
  2. God created all the material and spiritual realms
  3. God created creatures to have relationship with himself
  4. God created human nature and took on this human nature in the incarnation of Jesus

Therefore, I developed my philosophical system with the above goals in mind. Since the purpose of life is God, the purpose of Philosophy is to study life, to study the soul and its interaction with God. So, in encountering philosophical topics, I merely reframe them in the context of Christianity.


Some biblical prophecies can be validated by history. Such and such an event was predicted to occur and it can be clearly shown to have occurred in all details as predicted.

Some biblical prophecies may have yet-future fulfillment. We can never know for sure because the future is, by definition, unknowable. Even our eternal redemption is manifest only in our faith.

Many biblical prophecies are unclear. Perhaps some made sense to someone in the past but the meanings are now lost to us. Perhaps some are literally fulfilled only in the spiritual realm, a realm having spiritual bodies and spiritual creatures including the souls of humans; both deceased and still living.

My policy is: if I can't demonstrate a given prophecy has such and such a fulfillment, then I drop it. There is no other source of truth to measure these against as there is with scientific factors. Although I do propose theories and explanations for many Biblical topics, I am unwilling to stake a claim on a certain interpretation of a prophetic passage, especially one that may be yet-future. I will not announce that I have discovered the true meaning as many do.