Australia and its Constitution, past, present and future

Let’s be realists. In the 1800’s,  when our Constitution was composed, the Islamics were still doing jihad – they have not desisted — and in some Roman Catholic areas they were still doing the Inquisition. They have desisted?  Marx and Engels were advocating total equality, but the intellectual backing for hands-on unremitting and merciless worldwide treachery/piracy against one’s fellow man was then not much more than an embryonic monster in the minds of people such as ‘lenient’ Lenin . The world view for the Constitution founders was simpler than our view. 

“Humbly relying on Almighty God” — preamble to the Constitution, ‘God’, in the context implying what might be termed, ‘christian’ human rights.  Under the same Constitution:–  ‘The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth’, S.116.    Our law experts could benefit from clarification?  ClarificationWhat is the authority for Law?

Law is right reason.

A basic premise of Communism, Heathenism, and other heavily subscribed mindsets, Islam excluded, is that the worlds arrived here by chance and have a prolonged, indeterminate future. The current generalized  opinion of “ Christendom” so-called might not be of a prolonged and meaningless future; nevertheless, are we not caretakers?  Should we not act correctly regarding our planet, and our fellow Man?  Do conscience and forethought prompt us to consider ourselves and our future?  How and why Law?

How best to proceed?  As army officers are advised — if possible, when making decisions, set down the facts in writing, apply logic and wise counsel. Clear the whiteboard of the mind, try to eliminate self-opinionation.   The wise counsel need not exclude the possibility of Higher guidance. The preamble to the Australian Constitution has it: “Humbly relying on Almighty God.” First, that’s humbly. Second, that’s the God who made the worlds, not the god (or prince) of this world. The prince of this world (Satan, who was handed the keys by the original caretaker, Adam) obviously doesn’t always provide good personal and planetary advice. How can assertions such as these be verified?

Logic. Every effect has a cause and every cause has an effect.  It doesn’t?  Then don’t stir up the neurons – it won’t have any effect. When you see your next spook, ghost, spectre, wraith, poltergeist or bogie generally – apply your logic.  If there are effects without causes, beware.   Yowie!  You by your own definition are in Spook Universe.  There are broad minded, gentlemanly atheists out there — may they be blessed and prosper.   Every man by logic has an opinion on cause and effect.  The problem is not so much whether or not we acknowledge a God: the problem arises when we play God. The author of this essay tries to tell himself so, continuously.

Wise Counsel. Backing up the logic: Science as we know it evolved through the input of people who almost to a man either openly espoused biblical principles or at least acknowledged the God of the bible (Einstein was ambiguous.) A very limited sample:  Lord Kelvin: The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I do not see how I can put it in words.   Max Planck: Whence come I and whither go I? That is the great unfathomable question, the same for every one of us.  Albert Einstein: If one day you have to choose between the world and love, remember this: If you choose the world you’ll be left without love, but if you choose love, with it you will conquer the world.  Galileo Galilei: Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.

Johannes Kepler: Science is the process of thinking God’s thoughts after Him. Michael Faraday: The book of nature which we have to read is written by the finger of God. James Joule: After the knowledge of, and obedience to, the will of God, the next aim must be to know something of His attributes of wisdom, power, and goodness as evidenced by His handiwork. James Clerk Maxwell: I have looked into the most philosophical systems and have found none that will work without God. Andre-Marie Ampere: Believe in God, in His providence, in a future life, in the recompense of the good; in the punishment of the wicked; in the sublimity and truth of the doctrines of Christ, in a revelation of this doctrine by a special divine inspiration for the salvation of the human race. Isaac Newton: All my discoveries have been made in answer to prayer.

 

We need to be reasonable within the context of our current circumstances and understanding

There are ‘discoveries’ in Australia made in answer to not consulting a text book.  Not one written by an Einstein or an Isaac Newton, anyway. The ‘discoveries’ weren’t made in answer to consulting great men from before Christ, such as Cicero: “….the author of nature has invested just laws with so much of his divine authority, that we cannot neglect or violate them without injuring and insulting the deity, nor without contradicting our moral conscience, which no good man can fail to consult …. .” ……. Could we make some discoveries? Discoveries, which, like those of Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, or  people such as Socrates or Cicero of long ago, do not originate in Spook Universe?  Or Poltergeist Plaza?

1:   The Carbon Con..  There are two obvious reasons why ‘westerners’ are concerned over usage of fossil fuels. One, future generations will suffer from shortage thereof; two, CO2 is one contributor to a so-called ‘greenhouse effect’ that makes Earth liveable.

Most ice core measurements are of ice younger than a million yrs.  If the results are believable, atmospheric CO2 over that time was invariably lower, often much lower, than in 1950. In that time at least ¼ Earth’s surface suffered partial to total desertification. If we may believe ice cores, low CO2 is a climatic disaster. The Sahara/Arabia isn’t what it once was.  Australia, for that matter, tried to simulate the Sahara?

The restless Earth constantly stores carbon in its depths – coal, oil, gas, oil shale, and as a component of limestones.  Estimates of buried carbon in the Earth and its oceans demand very approximately twelve entire Earth atmospheres of pure CO2 buried beneath our feet and our boats. The only large scale way for the carbon to be re-supplied to the atmosphere is by donations from outer Space, or volcanic emissions.

Carbon dioxide is absolutely essential to all life – plants for obvious reasons, all other life for something to eat.

Therefore the uninterrupted existence of life on Earth is a product of intelligent volcanoes and comets, or … I think you can think.

The five mass extinctions are partly if not entirely attributable to atmospheric carbon starvation.  The worst followed hard on the heels of deposition of stupendous quantities of coal. Australia exports this cause of past extinction in quantity to help stop humans becoming extinct through freezing and the like.

It so happens that the two worst mass extinctions are within the reach of ‘fossilized’ magnetic field measurement.  They are both associated with mysterious dramas in the frequency of our magnetic field reversals. This has been known for 50 years. What had not been certified for 50 years (semi- recent proof) is that heat in huge quantities is transferred within and without the sun by magnetic fields which permeate subatomic plasma fields. Skip the sunlight. Our field in a real physical sense connects to – then disconnects from – the solar field – every 8 minutes.  We are attended in our environs by the Van Allen belts and various subatomic plasma fields.

The reason the Earth for 4 thou. mill. yrs did not turn into Venus and is not going to turn into Venus or any other space junk is for the reason obvious to a juvenile – it has a thermostat. In action, right now. Carbon is going up. Rate of magnetic field drift, northern hemisphere, likewise. Both events in terms of rate of change are unprecedented in human history. Be thankful the carbon is rising, not falling.

2:  Should we altruistically stop using Earth’s mineral resources? Ask the question of piratic, citizen-bashing crews to the north and north-west of us with the fingers on the nuclear buttons and the factories full steam for world mastery. What might they do down the track if they run short?

Of what is the world  likely to run short given the existing situation?  Food.  Agricultural output must gradually drop off unless vast amounts of energy can be produced to manufacture fertilizers and perhaps desalinate sea waters. Australia happens to be a world leading source of energy – uranium. Technology has made this method of energy generation all but failsafe.  Atomic power station waste disposal is manageable and improving. The environmental danger of properly managed modern nuclear power generation is miniscule compared to a looming environmental problem – near  insurmountable if ‘green’ energy is pursued in the long term — solar plate and electric battery disposal.

If a father gave his children an opportunity to go trekking with assurance they would have adequate provision, whilst deliberately misleading them, leading to fatal outcome …. ? The  bible allows Man to extract wealth. “Out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass”. The same person giving this advice will be bringing down the curtain.  He is a person and he can express himself.

3  Why should anyone swear on the Bible?  The bible, foundational to western democracy, a personal message of human value and human rights, has running through it a science thread and more. It begins with the “Big Bang”, cosmologically, geologically, biologically exact, incorporating the real mechanism of evolution (quantum information technology, species as life & information conduits, not ‘common descent’), explains why the genetic information bank of humans is only a fraction of that of other primates (near total extinction before overspreading the globe) ….. gives medical advice such as thorough washing, especially after touching dead bodies, ‘the life is in the blood’ heading off medicinal blood letting, stipulates quarantine for deadly infectious diseases ….. two thousand, even three thousand years ago, with Israel sometimes non-existent or annihilated, it asserts that in the end time, Israel will be renascent in its exact original location ….

The geology aspect I incidentally document concisely @ QuantumPhysics-Evolution dot com .  Incidentally, the first observed proof of heat transfer via magnetic fields permeating subatomic plasma fields was only in 2013 – which clinches the abovementioned thermostat involved in the carbon narrative   —  keeping Earth from becoming Space junk, 4.6 thou. mill. yrs.

What does this have to do with Law, Humanity, and the Constitution?   Everything.

The end of our sojourn in this vale of tears of necessity for each of us will certainly be within 100-odd years of our conception. The end for the planet itself is little more than a by-line.  Sir Walter Scott, concise as ever:

That day of wrath, that dreadful day
When heaven and earth shall pass away:
What power shall be the sinner’s stay?
How shall we meet that dreadful day?

When, shrivelling like a parch-ed scroll,
The flaming heavens together roll,
When louder yet, and yet more dread,
Swells the high trump that wakes the dead.

O! On that day, that wrathful day,
When man to judgement wakes from clay,
Be thou, O Christ, the sinners stay,
Though heaven and earth shall pass away.

As someone advized: Act and think as though you will live forever. You will.

This God whom we are destined to meet – not the current god (or prince) of this world, to whom we (I) handed the keys of this world, but the God who created the world – what is he like?

Being made in his likeness (image) one way to perhaps catch a glimpse? …. consider ourselves? There is something of the divine, or at least the supernatural, in each of us.  “The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly” Proverbs 20:27. God and Man have commonality.

If you were in the presence of another human being who was heaven to be with … you may have begun to catch a glimpse of God. Man can begin to comprehend the eternal by considering the good (and evil) around us?   For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith,[‘sticking with’ someone based on heart belief] hope, [with cheerful assurance regarding the ultimate outcome]  charity [throws itself under a bus to save others from falling under a bus] these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

As for being concise, Rev. J. Edwards falls behind Sir Walter Scott; his Unpublished Essay on the Trinity makes no claims in that regard. It is appended because it shows true religion to be personal, personal, and only genuine if personal. That is why our Constitution can rely on God whilst anathematizing State run religion. The only king/emperor/state power to be worshipped is the Man currently seated in power in the realm of ultimate power.   Every ‘ism’ that ever plagued this world tended to be a denial of personal religion – “the kingdom of Heaven is within you.”  The preamble to our Constitution, ‘humbly relying on Almighty God’, specifically negates everything barring a personal relationship with a personal God.  Australia, with caveats, is empowered to deny false legalities sourced in ‘isms’ – Materialism, Atheism, Marxism, Muhammadenism ….  ad infinitum ….. .  At the last trumpet we go into the presence of the most magnificent person.   The English language struggles .. and fails …..  Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) Unpublished Essay on the Trinity, abbreviated:

‘Tis common when speaking of the Divine happiness to say that God is infinitely happy in the enjoyment of himself, in perfectly beholding and infinitely loving, and rejoicing in, his own essence and perfections, and accordingly it must be supposed that God perpetually and eternally has a most perfect idea of himself, as it were an exact image and representation of himself ever before him and in actual view, and from this arises a most pure and perfect act or energy in the Godhead, which is the Divine love, complacence and joy.

The knowledge or view which God has of himself must necessarily be conceived to be something distinct from his mere direct existence. There must be something that answers to our reflection.  The reflection as we reflect on our own minds carries something of imperfection in it.  However, if God beholds himself so as thence to have delight and joy in himself he must become his own object. There must be a duplicity. There is God and the idea of God, if it be proper to call a conception of that that is purely spiritual an idea.

If a man could have an absolutely perfect idea of all that passed in his mind, all the series of ideas and exercises in every respect perfect as to order, degree, circumstance and for any particular space of time past, suppose the last hour, he would really to all intents and purpose be over again what he was that last hour. And if it were possible for a man by reflection perfectly to contemplate all that is in his own mind in an hour, as it is and at the same time that it is there in its first and direct existence; if a man, that is, had a perfect reflex or contemplative idea of every thought at the same moment or moments that the thought was and of every exercise at and during the same time that that exercise was, and so through a whole hour, a man would really be two during that time, he would be indeed double, he would be twice at once.  The idea he has of himself would be himself again.

Note, by having a reflex or contemplative idea of what passes in our own minds I don’t mean consciousness only. There is a great difference between a man’s having a view of himself, reflex or contemplative idea of himself so as to delight in his own beauty or excellency, and a mere direct consciousness. Or if we mean by consciousness of what is in our minds anything besides the mere simple existence in our minds of what is there, it is nothing but a power by reflection to view or contemplate what passes.

Therefore as God with perfect clearness, fullness and strength, understands himself, views his own essence (in which there is no distinction of substance and act but which is wholly substance and wholly act), that idea which God hath of himself is absolutely himself.  This representation of the Divine nature and essence is the Divine nature and essence again: so that by God’s thinking of the Deity must certainly be generated.  Hereby there is another person begotten, there is another Infinite Eternal Almighty and most holy and the same God, the very same Divine nature.

And this Person is the second person in the Trinity, the Only Begotten and dearly Beloved Son of God; he is the eternal, necessary, perfect, substantial and personal idea which God hath of himself; and that it is so seems to me abundantly confirmed by the Word of God.

Nothing can more agree with the account the Scripture gives us of the Son of God, his being in the form of God and his express and perfect image and representation: (2 Cor. 4:4) “Lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ Who is the image of God should shine unto them.” (Phil. 2:6) “Who being in the form of God.” (Col. 1:15) “Who is the image of the invisible God.” (Heb. 1:3) “Who being the brightness of his glory and express image of his person.”

Christ is called the face of God (Exod. 33:14): the word, presence, in the original signifies face, looks, form or appearance. Now what can be so properly and fitly called so with respect to God as God’s own perfect idea of himself whereby he has every moment a view of his own essence: the idea is that “face of God” which God sees as a man sees his own face in a looking glass.  ‘Tis of such form or appearance whereby God eternally appears to himself.  The root that the original word comes from signifies to look upon or behold: now what is that which God looks upon or beholds in so eminent a manner as he doth on his own idea or that perfect image of himself which he has in view.  This is what is eminently in God’s presence and is therefore called the angel of God’s presence or face (Isa. 65:9).

But that the Son of God is God’s own eternal and perfect idea is a thing we have yet much more expressly revealed in God’s word. First, in that Christ is called “the wisdom of God.”  If we are taught in the Scripture that Christ is the same with God’s wisdom or knowledge, then it teaches us that he is the same with God’s perfect and eternal idea.  They are the same as we have already observed and I suppose none will deny.  But Christ is said to be the wisdom of God (1Cor. 1:24, Luke 11:49, compare with Matt. 23:34); and how much doth Christ speak in Proverbs under the name of Wisdom especially in the 8th chapter.

The Godhead being thus begotten by God’s loving an idea of himself and showing forth in a distinct subsistence or person in that idea, there proceeds a most pure act, and an infinitely holy and sacred energy arises between the Father and Son in mutually loving and delighting in each other, for their love and joy is mutual, (Prov. 8:30) “I was daily his delight rejoicing always before him.”  This is the eternal and most perfect and essential act of the Divine nature, wherein the Godhead acts to an infinite degree and in the most perfect manner possible. The Deity becomes all act, the Divine essence itself flows out and is as it were breathed forth in love and joy.  So that the Godhead therein stands forth in yet another manner of subsistence, and there proceeds the third Person in the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, viz., the Deity in act, for there is no other act but the act of the will.

We may learn by the word of God that the Godhead or the Divine nature and essence does subsist in love. (1 John 4:8) “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.”  In the context of which place I think it is plainly intimated to us that the Holy Spirit is that love, as in the 12th and 13th verses. “If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us; hereby know we that we dwell in him … .. because he hath given us of his Spirit.”  ‘Tis the same argument in both verses.  In the 12th verse the apostle argues that if we have love dwelling in us we have God dwelling in us, and in the 13th verse he clears the force of the argument by this that love is God’s Spirit. Seeing we have God’s Spirit dwelling in us, we have God dwelling in us, supposing it is a thing granted and allowed that God’s Spirit is God.  ‘Tis evident also by this that God’s dwelling in us and his love or the love that he  exercises, being in us, are the same thing.  The same is intimated in the same manner in the last verse of the foregoing chapter.  The apostle was, in the foregoing verses, speaking of love as a sure sign of sincerity and our acceptance with God, beginning with the 18th verse, and he sums up the argument thus in the last verse, and hereby do we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit that he hath given us.

The Scripture seems in many places to speak of love in Christians as if it were the same with the Spirit of God in them, or at least as the prime and most natural breathing and acting of the Spirit in the soul. (Phil. 2:1) “If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, any comfort of love, any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, fulfil ye my joy that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.” (2 Cor. 6:6) “By kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned.” (Rom. 15:30) “Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit.” (Col. 1:8) “Who declared unto us your love in the Spirit.” (Rom. 5:5) “Having the love of God shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given to us.” (Gal. 5:13-16) “Use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.  For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. This I say then, “Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh.”  The apostle argues that christian liberty does not make way for fulfilling the lusts of the flesh in biting and devouring one another and the like, because a principle of love which was the fulfilling of the law would prevent it, and in the 16th verse he asserts the same thing in other words: “This I say then, walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh.”

The third and last office of the Holy Spirit is to comfort and delight the souls of God’s people, and thus one of his names is the Comforter, and thus we have the phrase of “Joy in the Holy Ghost.” (1 Thess. 1:6) “Having received the Word in much affliction with joy of the Holy Ghost.” (Rom. 14:17) “The kingdom of God is …. righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 9:31) “Walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost.”  But how well doth this agree with the Holy Ghost being God’s joy and delight, (Acts 13:52) “And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Ghost” – meaning as I suppose that they were filled with spiritual joy.

This is confirmed by the symbol of the Holy Ghost, viz., a dove, which is the emblem of love or a lover, and is so used in Scripture, especially … in Solomon’s Song (1:5) “Behold thou art fair, my love, behold thou art fair; thou hast doves’ eyes”: i.e., “Eyes of love” ………. .

….. This well agrees with the similitudes and metaphors that are used about the Holy Ghost in Scripture, such as water, fire, breath, wind, oil, wine, a spring, a river, a being poured out and shed forth, and a being breathed forth. Can there any spiritual thing be thought, or anything belonging to any spiritual being to which such kind of metaphors so naturally agree, as to the affection of a Spirit. The affection, love or joy, may be said to flow out as water or to be breathed forth as breath or wind. But it would not sound so well to say that an idea or judgment flows out or is breathed forth.

It is no way different to say of the affection that it is warm, or to compare love to fire, but it would not seem natural to say the same of perception or reason. It seems natural enough to say that the soul is poured out in affection or that love or delight are shed abroad: (Rom. 5:5) “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,” but it suits with nothing else belonging to a spiritual being.

This is that “river of water of life” spoken of in the 22nd chapter of Revelation, which proceeds from the throne of the Father and the Son, for the rivers of living water or water of life are the Holy Ghost, by the same apostle’s own interpretation (John 7:38, 39); and the Holy Ghost being the infinite delight and pleasure of God, the river is called the river of God’s pleasures (Ps. 36: 8) not God’s river of pleasures ………. It is a confirmation that the Holy Ghost is God’s love and delight, because the saint’s communion with God consists in their partaking of the Holy Ghost.  The communion of saints is twofold:  ‘tis their communion with God and their communion with one another, (1 John 1:3) “That ye also may have fellowship with us, and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his son, Jesus Christ.”  Communion is a common partaking of good, either of excellency or happiness, so that when it is said the saints have communion or fellowship with the Father and with the Son, the meaning of it is that they partake with the Father and the Son of their good, which is their excellency and glory.  (2 Peter 1: 4) “Ye are made partakers of the Divine nature.”  (Heb. 12:10) “That we might be partakers of his holiness.” (John 17:22,23) “And the glory which thou hast given me I have given them, that they may be one, even as we are one, I in them and thou in me.” (John 17:13) “That they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.”

But the Holy Ghost being the love and joy of God is his beauty and happiness, and it is in our partaking of the same Holy Spirit that our communion with God consists: (2 Cor. 13:14) “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all, Amen.”  They are not different benefits but the same that the apostle here wisheth, viz., the Holy Ghost: in partaking of the Holy Ghost, we possess and enjoy the love and grace of the Father and the Son, for the Holy Ghost is that love and grace, and therefore I suppose it is that in that forementioned place, (1 John 1:3) we are said to have fellowship with the Son and not with the Holy Ghost, because therein consists our fellowship with the Father and the Son, even in partaking with them of the Holy Ghost.

In this also eminently consists our communion with the Son — that we drink into the same Spirit.  This is the common excellency and joy and happiness in which they are all united; ‘tis the bond of perfectness by which they are one in the Father and the Son as the Father is in the Son.

I can think of no other good account that can be given of the apostle Paul’s wishing grace and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ in the beginning of his epistles, without ever mentioning the Holy Ghost, — as we find it thirteen times in his salutations in the beginnings of his epistles, — except that the Holy Ghost is himself love and grace of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ; and in his blessing at the end of his second epistle to the Corinthians where all three persons are mentioned he wishes grace and love from the Son and the Father ….. the blessing from the Holy Ghost [by inference] is himself – the communication of himself.  Christ promises that he and the Father will love believers (John 14: 21,23), but no mention is made of the Holy Ghost.  The love of Christ and the love of the Father are often distinctly mentioned, but never any mention of the Holy Ghost’s love.

(This I suppose to be the reason why we have never any account of the Holy Ghost’s loving either the Father or the Son, or of the Son’s or the Father’s loving the Holy Ghost, or of the Holy Ghost’s loving the saints, though these things are so often predicated of both the other persons.)

And this I suppose to be that blessed Trinity that we read of in the holy Scriptures. The Father is the Deity subsisting in the prime, unoriginated and most absolute manner, or the Deity in its direct existence. The Son is the Deity generated by God’s understanding, or having an idea of himself and subsisting in that idea. The Holy Ghost is the Deity subsisting in act, or the Divine essence flowing out and breathed forth in God’s infinite love to and delight in himself.  And I believe the whole Divine essence does truly and distinctly subsist both in the Divine idea and Divine love, and that each of them are properly distinct persons. ………..

If a man should tell me that the immutability of God is God, or that the omnipresence of God and authority of God is God, I should not be able to think of any rational meaning of what he said. It hardly sounds to me proper to say that God’s being without change is God, or that God’s being everywhere is God, or that God’s having a right of government over creatures is God.

But if it be meant that the real attributes of God, viz., his understanding and love are God, then what we have said may in some measure explain how it is so, for Deity subsists in them distinctly, so they are distinct Divine persons. …….. All the three are persons for they all have understanding and will.  There is understanding and will in the Father, as the Son and the Holy Ghost are in him and proceed from him.  There is understanding and will in the Son, as he is understanding and as the Holy Ghost is in him and proceeds from him.  There is understanding and will in the Holy Ghost as he is the Divine will and as the Son is in him.  Nor is it to be looked upon as a strange and unreasonable figment that the persons should be said to have an understanding or love by another person’s being in them, for we have Scripture ground to conclude so concerning the Father’s having wisdom and understanding or reason that it is by the Son’s being in him; because we are there informed that he is the wisdom and reason and truth of God, and hereby God is wise by his own wisdom being in him.  Understanding and wisdom is in the Father as the Son is in him and proceeds from him.  Understanding is in the Holy Ghost because the Son is in him, not as proceeding from him but flowing out in him.

But I don’t pretend fully to explain how these things are and I am sensible a hundred … objections may be made and puzzling doubts and questions raised that I cannot solve.  I am far from pretending to explain the Trinity so as to render it no longer a mystery. ………

Here is illustrated the doctrine of the Holy Ghost.  Proceeding from both the Father and Son.  Hereby we see how that it is possible for the Son to be begotten  by the Father and the Holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and Son, and yet that all the persons should be co-eternal.  Hereby we may more clearly understand the equality of the persons among themselves, and that they are every way equal in the society or family of the throne.

‘Tis the honour of the Father and the Son that they are infinitely holy and are the fountain of holiness, but the honour of the Holy Ghost is that holiness itself.  The honour of the Father and the Son is that they are infinitely happy and are the original and fountain of happiness and the honour of the Holy Ghost is equal for he is infinite happiness and joy itself.  …….

Our dependence is equally upon each in his office.  The Father appoints and provides the Redeemer, and himself accepts the price and grants the thing purchased; the Son is the Redeemer by offering himself and is the price; and the Holy Ghost immediately communicates to us the thing purchased by communicating himself, and he is the thing purchased. The sum of all that Christ purchased for men was Holy Ghost: (Gal. 3: 13, 14) “He was made a curse for us …. that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” ……….

Christ purchased for us true spiritual excellency, grace and holiness, the sum of which is love to God, which is nothing but the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the heart. Christ purchased for us spiritual joy and comfort, which is in a participation of God’s joy and happiness, which joy and happiness is the Holy Ghost as we have shown.  The Holy Ghost is the sum of all good things. Good things and the Holy Spirit are synonymous expressions in Scripture: (Matt. 7:11) “How much more shall your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him.” The sum of all spiritual good which the finite have in this world is that spring of living water within them which we read of (John 10: 4), and those rivers of living water flowing out of them which we read of (John 7: 38, 39), which we are there told means the Holy Ghost; and the sum of all happiness in the other world is that river of water of life which proceeds out of the throne of God and the Lamb, which we read of (Rev. 22:1), which is the river of God’s pleasures and is the Holy Ghost and therefore the sum of the gospel invitation to come and take the water of life (verse 17).

The Holy Ghost is the purchased possession and inheritance of the saints, as appears because that little of it which the saints have in this world is said to be the earnest of that purchased inheritance. (Eph. 1:14)  ‘Tis an earnest of that which we are to have a fullness of hereafter. (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5). The Holy Ghost is the great subject of all gospel promises and therefore is called the Spirit of promise. (Eph. 1:13). This is called the promise of the Father (Luke 24: 49), and the like in other places.  If the Holy Ghost be a comprehension of all good things promised in the gospel, we may easily see the force of the apostle’s arguing (Gal. 3:2), “This only would I know, received ye the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith?  So that it is God of whom our good is purchased and it is God that purchases it and it is God also that is the thing purchased.

Thus all our good things are of God and through God and in God, as we read in Romans 11:36: “For of him and through him and to him (or in him as eis is rendered, 1 Cor. 8:6) are all things.”  “To whom be glory forever.” All our good is of God the Father, it is all through God the Son, and all is in the Holy Ghost as he is himself all our good.  God is himself the portion and purchased inheritance of his people.  Thus God is the Alpha and the Omega in this affair of redemption. ………. .

There are two …  eminent and remarkable images of the Trinity among the created things. The one is the spiritual creation, the soul of man. There is the mind, and the understanding or idea, and the spirit of the mind as it is called in Scripture, i.e., the disposition, the will or affection.  The other is in the visible creation, viz., the Sun.  ….. The Sun is as the brightness and glory of the disk of the Sun or that bright and glorious form under which it appears.  The Holy Ghost is the action of the Sun … which, being diffusive, enlightens, warms, enlivens and comforts the world.  [Had Edwards knowledge of that which essentially constitutes the Sun – the stupendous  phenomenon, above human capacity —  stellar nuclear fusion – he may have discerned a three-fold Sun.  Nuclear fusion, the original and essence of the  Sun; The Sun visible to Man; the Sun our companion, warmth and comfort.]

I am sensible what kind of objections many will be ready to make against what has been said …. I offer this only as a farther manifestation of what Divine truth the word of God exhibits to the view of our minds concerning this great mystery.

Reason, Religion, and the search for that elusive Scientific Consensus.

Australia suffers from its own home grown incubators of politically correct warm inner glow , not least of which is ‘politically correct’ aboriginaleze. The Tasmanian Aboriginal, where practicable, was humanely cared for by the British government until they died out more than a hundred and twenty years ago. A medical mystery – as is the disappearance of a hundred people groups, from the earliest inhabitants of Crete to the ancient Romans. This extinction is the undeniable, official record.

Wikipedia, the warm inner glow voluntary home made encycloepedia, on-line, has the current Tasmanian aboriginal population in the thousands. On the scanty available evidence there were probably but a few thousand aboriginals in Tasmania when that island was colonized. The same scanty evidence all but proves this few had lost the ability to make fire — lightning strikes their only ready source — and lost also the ability to make sophisticated tools such as axes. These people were a marooned element of a marooned element. That particular element extinguished. The Australian aboriginal, as a whole, in a fragmented sense, survived. Their lifestyle was not ritzy — usually totally naked – no national unity – gang warfare the order of the day — climate and soil a test for the most durable of people. When did they arrive? Given a mainland population at about ¼ million at colonization, if they had been here for more than a couple of thousand years, the newly arriving colonists would have been stubbing their toes on various artefacts scattered all over the ground. Mainland groups had not lost fire and tool making skills.

Home-made authorities such as Wikipedia will doubtless place their arrival at tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of years past. The simplest mathematics puts the early colonists literally stumbling over stone fragments if ¼ million stone age people had been living on this continent for 40,000 years. Try 2,000 years. Not long before the Maoris reached N.Z.. Despite warm inner feelings, mathematics do not lie. The warm inner glowers are calling for recognition in our Constitution of the seemingly everlasting Originals. We wonder if the Originals were consulted about having houses in which live their new champions, all over the best grounds, and having the country recently stuffed full of people about whose beliefs and attitudes the original inhabitants were never consulted? Scientific consensus? Leaving aside the Original Inhabitants, who, whatever they may have done, probably seldom argued about academic topics:

Every Wikipedia quote below was downloaded 11/10/021. The inserts between the Wikipedia extracts are all mainstream, verifiable – i.e.,“textbook.” We could keep in mind, everything from blood letting to throwing virgins into sacrificial wells to stop the drought has been, quote, ‘the scientific consensus.’ 

 Wikipedia Climate Controversy: “…. some people have attempted to convince the public that ….. climate change is not because of human influence [by implication, by carbon gases released to the atmosphere]– attempting to sow doubt in the scientific consensus.”

ScienceAlert. Ancient Ice has Revealed the CO2 Cycle of Earth going back Nearly 2 Million years, by Carly Cassella, 1/10/2019: “Ancient air bubbles trapped in the Antarctic ice sheet …. dating back roughly 1.5 million years …. contain ‘amazingly low’ CO2 levels, according to paleoclimatologist Yige Zhang from Texas A&M University … who told Science Magazine he found the results “quite interesting”. [The CO2 level as measured is no higher than pre-industrial levels – author.] These are the first direct observations of atmospheric greenhouse gases before the ice ages on Earth began to grow longer, and they suggest something other than a long-term decline in CO2 was at play to shift our planet’s entire ice age cycle.”

Geerts, B. & Linacre, E. 2002, ‘Ice Cores, CO2 Concentration & Climate’. Accessed 23 June 2007 from URL: http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap01/icecore.html. “Carbon dioxide and methane (main greenhouse gases) occur in higher concentrations during warm periods; the two variables, temperature and greenhouse gas concentration, are clearly consistent, yet it is not clear what drives what. The correlation coefficient is 0.81 between CO2 content and apparent temperature, on the whole. During deglaciation the two varied simultaneously, but during times of cooling the CO2 changed after the temperature change, by up to 1000 years. This order of events is not what one would expect from the enhanced greenhouse effect.”

Krauskopf, K.B. 1967, Introduction to Geochemistry, McGraw-Hill/Kogakusha, Tokyo. p.617: “The carbon of sedimentary rocks was nearly all derived from CO2 that once existed in the atmosphere …. the amount of buried carbon exceeds that in the present atmosphere, oceans, and organisms by a factor of about 600 times. …. Beyond any reasonable doubt, the amount of carbon now in the air is only a tiny fraction of the amount that has existed at some time in the geologic past. This result can be interpreted in several ways. One extreme possibility is that the atmosphere at some early period was extremely dense … [consisting] ….. chiefly of CO2, and that the activity of plants plus the deposition of carbonate sediments has gradually reduced the amount to its present low value, 0.0003 atmospheres [increased to 0.0004 since writing]. This is an unlikely hypothesis, for it would mean that we are living at the very end of the history of life on our planet. …. A rough calculation of the carbon balance indicates that CO2 in air will fall to a level too low to support plant life within a few centuries, unless some other source of the gas is available. Since the geologic record gives evidence for the continuous existence of living organisms for … 4 billion years, the CO2 content of air cannot have dropped far below its present figure for a long time. And it is scarcely believable that the present 0.0003 atmospheres has been reached only now after 4 billion years of steady depletion. An obvious additional source of carbon dioxide is volcanic activity. …. .”

Author’s note: A balancing act? With the faeries twiddling the inlet valves day to day to keep plants alive whilst making the weather? We could have been hothouse Venus. That’s of the order of 12 entire atmospheres pure CO2 beneath our feet and in the waters! What stops the Earth becoming Space junk, like all the other Space junk? There is a thermostat, and it is not turned on and off by faeries, power stations, automobiles, nor yet volcanoes. Carbon is here for an essential reason – as is science.

Wikipedia  The Solar System: “… formed .. from .. a large molecular cloud. … The centre, where most of the mass collected, became increasingly hotter … . As the contracting nebula rotated faster, it began to flatten into a … disc with … a protostar at the centre. The planets formed by accretion from this disc.”

NASA’s Genesis Space Retrieval team announced (on-line) March 10, 2008, that analysis of a silicon wafer from Genesis showed that the Sun has a higher proportion of oxygen-16 relative to the Earth, Moon, Mars, and bulk meteorites. This implies that an unknown process depleted oxygen-16 from the Sun’s disk of protoplanetary material prior to the coalescence of dust grains that formed the inner planets and the asteroid belt. …. Target material showed that implanted solar wind nitrogen has a 15N/14N ratio of 2.18×10−3, that is, ≈40% poorer in 15N relative to the terrestrial atmosphere. The 15N/14N ratio of the protosolar nebula was 2.27×10−3, which is the lowest 15N/14N ratio known for Solar System objects. This result demonstrates the extreme nitrogen isotopic heterogeneity of the nascent Solar System and accounts for the 15N-depleted components observed in Solar System reservoirs.

Chemical variability had already been discovered by the Galileo probe.

Britannica – on-line – Composition of Jupiter:

“The elemental abundances in Jupiter’s atmosphere can be compared with the composition of the Sun. If, like the Sun, the planet had formed by simple condensation from the primordial solar nebula that is thought to have given birth to the solar system, their elemental abundances should be the same. A surprising result from the Galileo probe was that all the globally mixed elements that it could measure in the Jovian atmosphere showed the same approximately threefold enrichment of their values in the Sun, relative to hydrogen.”

Taylor, S.R., 1998 Destiny or Chance: Our Solar System and its Place in the Cosmos, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 171. “Curiously enough, the plane in which the planets lie is tilted at 7 degrees to the equator of the sun. This is rarely discussed. Perhaps some late torque twisted the gaseous nebula …… .” P. 211:“Nothing resembling our solar system has been discovered.” P.207: “….. the possibility that a copy might exist of our solar system, or the Earth .. is .. unlikely.”

Brush, S.G., 1996 A History of Modern Planetary Physics, Vol. 3. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p.91. “Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the solar system began about 350 years ago, but have not yet been …. successful….. .”

Author’s note: The authors of certain comedies, make out intelligent design to be a denial of science and truth. They design their theories with neither design nor intelligence – design and intelligence are not science! They will write a sentence which they claim to be intelligently designed, then assert that they themselves with their writing capacities were never intelligently designed! By simply applying facts, we can easily build our home in Space. We may even be able to find our way to the bathroom – if we apply intelligent design. S.G. Brush may yet have his successful explanation of the solar system ….. !!

Wikipedia Our Moon: “The standard … hypothesis suggests that a Mars-sized body .. impacted the .. Earth … then accreted to form the Moon. This collision also resulted in the 23.5° tilted axis of the Earth, thus causing the seasons.”

ScienceAlert. Earth’s Rotation Is Slowing Down …. . by Michelle Starr, 2/08/021: “We know, based on the fossil record, that days were just 18 hours long 1.4 thousand million years ago.. .”

Author’s note: A brief internet search reveals 3 standard, legitimate hypotheses of lunar origin – Fission from the Earth, Co-Formation alongside Earth, and Capture. Almost as soon as the first rocks had been brought back from the moon, world leading mineralogist, A.E. Ringwood, deduced from the evidence a planet-wide sloughing event linked with extreme volcanism as the source of the moon. Because of some clear chemical similarities Earth- Moon, he logically made Earth the donor. (Earth and Planetary Science Letters v. 95.) The peoples in organisations earmarked Lunar Origin suddenly were out of a job, almost before the job began! They headed off unemployment by creating the giant impact hypothesis. This giant impact was supposedly not long after Earth coalesced, giving the moon close on 4 thousand million years in orbit of Earth. The Earth was surfaced by waters almost since its inception, it is constantly slowed in its spin rate through tidal interaction, and a glance at the 18 to 24 hr lengthening of the day over 1.4 thou. mill. yrs suggests it should theoretically have been spinning at a rate of something akin to once every 2 hours at moon formation, 4 thousand million years ago. Planets the size of Earth spinning every 2 hours theoretically fling to pieces. They can not exist. Ringwood was correct in his sloughing-volcanism and the people whose job it was to investigate lunar origin were correct in figuring a way to keep employed in the slough. A survey of the stone planets will show which of the 4 main stoney planets was in fact the most likely donor – provided it also supplied materials to Earth itself, thus giving the chemical similarity; Donor- -Earth – Moon.

Wikipedia Evolution Controversy: “ … species were once widely believed to be fixed products of divine creation, but since the mid-19th century, evolution by natural selection has been established by the scientific community as an empirical scientific fact.”

Rev. John Wesley, 1703-91, preacher, prolific author, concluded, “There is a prodigious number of continued links between the most perfect man and the ape.” He thus foreshadowed the discovery of roughly 90% genetic commonality between human and chimp DNA. He was followed up in this conclusion by Sir Richard Owen, 1804-92, who presented his Law of Progression from the General to the Particular to the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1846, more than a decade before Darwin and Wallace published. He demonstrated vertebrates and possibly other species besides to be transformations of a template or templates, designed to be transformed. This was half a century before people began to clearly understand even the atom, and a full century before DNA. He made the technically correct observation that species were predestined to realize as modifications of an ‘archetype’, through some then unknown but divinely engineered process. This happened at a point in time, without compromising the empirical scientific fact that one species can not give birth to another in the common meaning of birth. Lamarck had already postulated response to environmental circumstance as a factor in species design.

A species can be created as information destined to manifest as a tangible organism once the information is transmitted to or actuated in living cells. Thus a species can be created aeons prior to its apparent manifestation. (The bible states in black and white that species pre-existed, many not being tangible at the time of their creation. Thermodynamics states in black and white that information not only is timeless – it can be neither created nor destroyed by natural processes.) Thus species are indeed fixed products of divine creation, the mechanism being an analogue of tree growth. New growth on a tree manifests as a product of pre-existing information, the branches serving as conduits but not as creators and not as genetic parents. New growth on a tree pre-exists as information, perhaps interactive information, and becomes tangible as an outcome of the relevant processes. The tree of life in the midst of Eden was a real mechanism. It was the mechanism of evolution. Although we can no longer tap it for eternal youth, studying its technicalities as foreshadowed by people such as Wesley and Sir Richard Owen, must be very relevant to human health?

It is an empirical scientific fact that no human baby would survive in the scrub for an hour, with chimps as parents. It is also an empirical fact that perfect information at work in our bodies would equal perfect health, an earthly utopia – and evolution as a technical process relied upon information systems.

For the fuller story, up to date, in detail: See the sister website, CreationTheory dot com; and consult the book, Tree of Life & the Origin of the Species – semi-final draft herewith: