Death is a Curse caused by Sin

It is important to Christian doctrine that death came as a result of sin. If death, disease, and bloodshed existed for billions of years prior to Adam’s sin (as the evolutionary worldview tells us), then these things are included as something that God called very good (Gen 1:31) and the curse of Adam’s sin was not all that distinct from processes that had existed since the beginning. Genesis 3:16-19 reads:

To the woman He said, ‘I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing’…Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.

Adam’s sin brought death and pain into the world, but the evolutionary view tells us that death over billions of years brought mankind into the world. Romans 5:12 “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin.” Romans 6:23 “For the wages of sin is death.” The evolutionary worldview tells us that by the countless deaths of billions of intermediates, human kind was brought about. The two views are mutually exclusive and cannot be reconciled.

Some will say that Adam only brought spiritual death upon himself and his descendants. This argument fails in part because, if it was a spiritual death only, then why did Jesus have to die a horrific physical death to pay the penalty for our sins? If spiritual death was the only punishment for Adam, then why did Jesus not have to die only a spiritual death as payment for sin? But Jesus did die a horrible physical death for our sin (Heb 9). He took every curse of sin upon himself in our place.

Others might say that it was just human death as part of the curse. They contend that animals have been dying for billions of years.  If it was just the physical deaths of only humans that Adam’s sin brought, then why did Jesus sacrifice an animal right there in the garden to cover their sins and nakedness (Gen 3:21)? Why was the picture of covering sins to sacrifice an animal until Jesus came (Ex 24:8)? If evolution were God’s creative mechanism, and the trivial death of animals had been happening for billions of years, would this natural/trivial process be an adequate representation of the excruciating death of the Creator of Life that the Hebrews were told to practice for thousands of years in anticipation of the Messiah (Heb 9:22)? Because the bloodshed of an animal without defect (Ex 12:5, I Pet 1:19) was a picture of the coming bloodshed from the Messiah, it does not align with the theistic evolutionary idea that the curse of sin did not also include animals. People have told me that Adam’s sin brought only human death because animal death is not really bad…it’s part of life. It’s always been part of God’s plan. But this is in direct opposition to 1 Corinthians 15:26 “The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” Death is not some benign counterpart of life. It is a curse of sin. It is an enemy that we all have to face and that Jesus had to face to pay for our sins.

Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son, but Yahweh provided an animal to take his place.

 Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Adam and Eve – The Original Parents

Genesis 2:18-25 God brought all of the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air to Adam. Adam named them and found that none of them were suitable helpers for him. Once God had made Eve from Adam’s rib, in 3:20 “Adam named his wife Eve because she would become the mother of all the living.” This defeats the argument that there were other pre-Adamic races of people. Some old earth believers say that there were other groups of people with whom the line of Adam could inter-breed, but scripture clearly does not accommodate this view because Adam looked through all of the animals and found none of them suitable as companions. They were all animals that Adam named. In addition to this, the other groups of people would not be eligible to come under the redemption that Jesus provided. To the serpent in the garden, God said,

“And I will cause hostility between you and the woman,
    and between your offspring and her offspring.
He will strike your head,
    and you will strike his heel.”


The kinsman redeemer was promised to come from Eve’s descendants and redemption is tied to the blood. Other fictional tribes would not be blood descendants.

Acts 17:26 “From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.”

From that passage, you can see that not only does Luke see Adam as a real person, but he states explicitly that there were not pre-Adamic races of people with whom Adam’s family intermarried.

If we look at the words of Charles Darwin from The Descent of Man, we see the inherent racism of an evolutionary mindset:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

Do we as Christians want to endorse this racist philosophy by incorporating evolution into our teachings?


 Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline


What? How about time-keeping genealogies.

Genesis lays out the genealogies from Adam through Abraham and the actual amount of time between them is easily computed since the genealogies are linked by the father’s ages when each son was born. These genealogies are confirmed in the gospel account of Luke, who actually takes the ancestry from Jesus to Adam. The arguments I have heard from  theistic evolutionists, is that they are incomplete or incorrect, but their arguments are not supported by anything other than eisegesis. Ignoring or disparaging the parts of God’s Word that do not fit a theory is dangerous to the trustworthiness of God’s Word.

The chronologies of the genealogies are calculated to limit the age of the Earth to about 4000 BC. Without the deep time, there could not have been evolution on the grand scale that the theory requires.

UPDATE: Here’s a fantastic video confirming the accuracy of the chronogenealogies. You can skip to minute 22 of the video to see just the specific parts about the genealogies.


 Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Good, very good

Each day is proclaimed by God to be good or very good.

Genesis 1:10 And God saw that it was good.

  • Genesis 1:18 And God saw that it was good.
  • Genesis 1:21 And God saw that it was good.
  • Genesis 1:25 And God saw that it was good.
  • Genesis 1:31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

Since the days are proclaimed as very good and the curse of sin (pain, death, thorns and bloodshed) have yet to be introduced, it is clear that God’s intention for his creation was not to have to experience these sufferings. Throughout scripture this word, good, is used to describe purity, bountiful, prosperous, and excellence. To believe that evolutionary processes (mutations, bloodshed, suffering, and death) have been at work all throughout history prior to Adam’s sin would be to say that God called each of these things very good. Did God proclaim that his creation filled with violence, bloodshed and death is very good? What does this say about the character of God?


 Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Literal days leave no room for metaphor

The six days of Genesis are specifically marked with recognizable the boundaries of evening and morning as well as sequential ordinals (i.e. The first day, the second day…)

  • Genesis 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light…” and there was evening and there was morning – the first day.
  • Genesis 1:6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament between the waters…” and there was evening and there was morning – the second day
  • Genesis 1:9 Then God said, “Let the dry ground appear…” and there was evening and there was morning – the third day
  • Genesis 1:14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the heavens…” and there was evening and there was morning – the fourth day
  • Genesis 1:20 Then God said, “Let the waters teem with living creatures…” and there was evening and there was morning – the fifth day
  • Genesis 1:24 Then God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kind…” and there was evening and there was morning – the sixth day

It would be correct to say that a day can be used as referencing a period of time (i.e. “In my day…” or “In the days of the Romans…”), but this is not properly applied to the days of Genesis 1 because of the boundaries of evening and morning as well as the ordinals. John Walton, in his book The Lost World of Genesis One seems to think that the days can be interpreted more broadly to incorporate long time frames. But this is inconsistent with the majority of Hebrew scholars:

Walton admits that his view is not one which would be supported by many other scholars (p. 44) and, indeed, this is true. James Barr, who was Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford University, wrote:

“ … probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that

  1. creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience

  2. the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story.

Walton seems also to have changed his mind regarding the historicity if the Genesis account after getting a grant from BioLogos in 2013 to tour the country because in 2001, he wrote:

“We cannot be content to ask, ‘Can the word bear the meaning I would like it to have?’ We must instead try to determine what the author and audience would have understood from the usage in the context. With this latter issue before us, it is extremely difficult to conclude that anything other than a twenty-four hour day was intended. It is not the text that causes people to think otherwise, only the demands of trying to harmonize with modern science.” -John H. Walton, Genesis, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 81–82

It seems clear that in order to combine the elements that are required for the evolutionary origins story with the Bible, people are having to invent new ways to interpret scriptures. This process is called eisegesis, which is defined as “an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter’s own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text.” What is truly needed when looking at the scriptures for interpretation is exegesis, which is “critical explanation or interpretation of a text or portion of a text, esp. of the Bible.”

More than anything else, Paul encourages the young believers in the 1st century churches to beware of false teachers who try to bring their false doctrines into the church. In I Corinthians 11:3, Paul warns the Corinthian church to beware of the temptations that the serpent used to deceive Eve. Looking back in Genesis, we see that the serpent began to put doubt into what God had said. What did the serpent say to Eve in the garden to tempt her? “Did God REALLY say…?” We see this same question come up in regards to the Bible today by those who would try to inject the evolutionary origins story into the Bible. To get it to fit, God’s Word has to be questioned or reinterpreted. “Did God REALLY say that he created in six days?” “Did God REALLY say birds and fish were created on the 5th day?” When people questioned the validity of God’s Word in the garden, it brought terrible pain for all of mankind. When people question God’s Word today, they are ignoring Paul’s warning to the Corinthians. Paul’s warning to the Corinthians is poignant even today.

Some have said that the days of Genesis refer to eras of creation, or that perhaps the days that are talked about in Genesis 1 are the same types of days that are talked about in the poetic Psalms 90, “For 1000 years in thy sight are like yesterday when it is past.” If it is the case that each day refers to eras of time rather than 24 hour days, then how did the plants (created on day 3) survive for millions of years without the sun (created on day 4) and billions of years without pollinating insects (created on day 5)? How did the carefully balanced ecosystems survive without their symbiotic partners which would have been created millions or billions of years later?

I have heard it said that since the sun was not created until day 4, how could the first three days have been 24 hour days? That is like saying that time could not exist without watches. The sun was not created to MAKE time, it was created for us to measure time as it says in Genesis 1:14-18 “Then God said, “Let lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. Let them be signs to mark the seasons, days, and years. Let these lights in the sky shine down on the earth.” And that is what happened. God made two great lights—the larger one to govern the day, and the smaller one to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set these bodies in the sky to light the earth, to govern the day and night, and to measure time. And God saw that it was good.” It is clear that God created time including days (morning and evening) prior to the creation of the sun. The sun was created in part to be as a time-keeper for us here on Earth.

 Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Genesis – What was the writer’s intent?

It is fair to ask the question, “How did the writer intend his audience to read the content?” Genesis is written as history, and is not poetic like Psalms. The writer intended his audience to see the contents of his writings as having actually happened. The form of writing is distinctly different from Psalms, in which there are many allegorical and metaphorical components. It has become a recent fad for some scholars to reinterpret the writings of Genesis based on Egyptian cosmology or the perceived framework parallels. But what did the writer of Genesis intend his audience to understand? Hebrew scholars are nearly unanimous in their view that the writer intended his audience to see his writing as a historical account in which God created the universe in six literal days.

Should one erroneously claim “The first 11 chapters of Genesis are mythological“, I would ask them:

  • What contextual clues make you think that the first 11 chapters are mythological and the rest of Genesis is historical?
  • Why do you arbitrarily choose to assign mythological genre to the first 11 chapters when it is written with in same style as the rest of Genesis?
  • Which of the Christian doctrines in the first 11 chapters now have no basis because you choose mythology for Genesis?
    • God is the Creator
    • God created a good creation that was frustrated in corruption by man’s sin
    • Marriage between one man and one woman
    • The curse of sin is death, suffering, and corruption
    • The promise of redemption from the curse
    • Blood lineage of Jesus to Adam/Eve so that Jesus could be a kinsman redeemer of all mankind
    • God’s covenant never to flood the earth again
    • Making of the nations at Babel

Further Research:

Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Creation Manifesto

Tell me if you’ve heard this before, “Could God have used evolution as his creative mechanism?”

I have had several friends tell me that the evolutionary origins story is compatible with the whole biblical narrative and that there is no need to reject the evolutionary story. I would like to take on that claim and analyze it against God’s Word and later against some scientific observations.

The purpose for writing this manifesto is this:

  1. Define evolution and look at its history / intent
  2. Look at scripture to see if (as a whole) it can accommodate evolution. If not, what are the implications of trying to dissolve evolution into the biblical narrative?
  3. Look at the scientific reasons why evolution might not be on as solid ground as we’ve been led to believe.


  1. Disclaimer
  2. Wrong Information
  3. Definitions
  4. History of Deep Time
  5. Did Darwin embrace Christianity?
  6. Evolutionary Mechanism

Not only is the acceptance of evolutionary thought unnecessary for Christians, but it is dangerous. The acceptance of the evolutionary origins story within the Christian church will erase the conviction of the historicity/truth of God’s Word. If the foundations of scripture (established in Genesis) can be marginalized as mythical or poetic, why should we not also be able to reinterpret doctrinal and historical scriptures to match the latest cultural/societal/scientific paradigms? For example, as homosexuality becomes more and more acceptable in today’s culture, it is feasible (seeing how pliable Genesis has been redefined) to expect Christian churches to ordain homosexual ministers. This is already happening in Episcopal, Presbyterian (PCUSA), and Anglican churches. So the battle for the integrity of God’s Word is not just about Genesis, but about the historicity/veracity of the Bible.

The battle of creation/evolution has been waged on many fronts and in many forums. Can my entry into the fray make a difference? My tiny blog may not turn the tide of the many battles, but for those who get a chance to read the following Manifesto, I hope that:

  1. Non-Christians come to faith in Jesus because they see that they can trust God’s Word.
  2. Christians are encouraged to trust God’s Word as cohesive and foundational.
  3. Christians are persuaded not to compromise the clear teachings of scripture simply to accommodate the currently popular paradigm and avoid falling into apostasy.
  4. Everyone is encouraged to study God’s Word for themselves and grow closer to the Creator.


The intended audience of this manifesto is brothers and sisters in Christ who are unsure of the Biblical teachings regarding origins, Christians who purposefully incorporate the evolutionary story into their worldview, and non-Christians who have categorically dismissed the teachings of the Bible because of the belief that the Bible conflicts with the modern academic paradigm. I have sincerely tried to remove wording that would be inflammatory, and my hope is that this presentation will instead be persuasive in order to help bring unity to Christians.

  1. Biblical reasons to exclude evolution in preference of a biblical creation model
    1. Genesis – Writer’s intent
    2. Literal days leave no room for metaphor
    3. God called his creation good
    4. Chrono-genealogies
    5. Adam and Eve were truly the 1st humans
    6. Death came by sin not before
    7. Jesus is not mythical, so neither is Adam
    8. Is there a gap?
    9. Like the Creator did, work six days and rest on the 7th
    10. At the beginning of creation God made them male and female
    11. Worldwide Flood
    12. Deep Time in scripture? Where?
    13. Can we help?
    14. Why not question scientific principles of other miracles?
    15. Is there a better way?
  2. Scientific reasons to exclude evolution
    1. Cosmological
      1. Short term comets
      2. Decaying Magnetic fields in planets, heat on planets/moons
      3. Faint Young Sun Paradox
      4. Super nova Remnants
      5. Laws of Thermodynamics
    2.  Geological
      1. Worldwide flood
      2. Polonium halos
      3. Erosion rates
      4. Hydrogen in Zircons
    3.  Biological/Genetic
      1. Human population growth
      2. DNA in fossil dinosaur bones
      3. Human mutational decay rate
      4. Mitochondrial Eve/Y-chromosome Adam
      5. Information Theory
      6. Living Fossils/stasis
    4. Misconceptions, Misinformation
      1. Junk DNA
      2. Chimp/human similarity
      3. Radiometric dating
      4. Geologic Column
      5. Evidence for evolution
        1. Antibiotic resistant bacteria
        2. Homology
        3. Horse evolution
        4. Whale evolution
      6. Convergence
      7. Missing Links
      8. ALL scientists believe in evolution

Thou Shalt Have No Other gods Before Me

This clear instruction from the Creator was given to Moses when he received the Ten Commandments. In the modern American culture it is not common for people to worship other deities (Baal, Molech, Zeus, Sun god…) But I would propose that people in America worship things intended to usurp the Creator:

  • Money
  • Comfort
  • Scientists
  • Sex
  • Sports
  • Their own children
  • Mother Earth
  • Deep Time (billions of years)

Do you find yourself worshiping at the altar of one of these false gods? Jason Lisle writes a good article encouraging Christians not to be lead astray by the false god of Deep Time.

Consider the Israelites.  Their main struggle was not with giving up God completely, but with adding other gods.  They wanted to merge their beliefs with the pagan practices of the day, and worshiped and served the gods of Canaan.  This was totally inappropriate, not only because the Canaanite gods are fictitious inventions of the mind, but because God alone deserves our worship and does not tolerate idolatry.  In the First Commandment, God states that “You shall have no other gods before Me.”  The phrase translated “before Me” has the meaning of “in my presence.”  Scripture is clear: God alone is to be worshiped as God (e.g. Matthew 4:9-10)

But according to his disciples, nothing is too difficult for Deep Time!  He is able to do any miracle!  Consider this famous quote from Dr. George Wald, “Time is the hero of the plot. … Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain.  One only has to wait; time itself performs the miracles.”  Yes, the gradual evolution of dust into people may seem impossible.  But with Deep Time, all things are possible!  He is the “hero of the plot!”  Compare this with the characteristics associated with the biblical God (Matthew 19:26, Jeremiah 32:17).

Devotees take their religion very seriously.  Deep Time must not be questioned.  That would be sacrilege!  Those who fail to worship at the altar of Deep Time are ridiculed, and face being expelled from the classroom.  Textbooks that fail to acknowledge the supreme lordship of Deep Time are not likely to be used, or even published.  Those who wish to work as professors must swear allegiance to Deep Time and His servant Evolution if they want to be hired.

You can trust God’s revealed Word, the Bible in matters of history. Therefore, we can trust his Word when he promises our future hope.

The Problem of Evil

…is only a problem for non-Christians. It has been said countless times on internet forums (85,500,000 Google results for “Problem of Evil”) and by pop atheists that the existence of evil is proof that God does not exist.


Photo by Mitja Juraja on

The skeptic’s argument goes something like this:

  1. God is good and all powerful
  2. God would not allow unjust suffering
  3. Evil/suffering exist


  • Either God is not good
  • Or God is not all powerful
  • Or God does not exist

One of the problems with the argument is that it leaves out the fact that God originally created mankind upright and that God’s creation was originally free of evil. The original pair of humans (Adam and Eve) rebelled against God’s 1 law, and this rebellion brought death, suffering, and destruction into reality (Romans 5 & 8) and onto their descendants. Even creation was affected by sin (Genesis 3:17-18, Romans 8:19-23), therefore it is not unexpected for the Christian to endure earthquakes, famines, and disease.

In addition to this reason, those who think the problem of evil is for Christians, ignore God’s purpose. God has sufficient reason to allow temporary evil for eternal glory. All of creation is intended to honor God and God would be justified in condemning everyone for their inherited guilt as well as their rebellion against His laws. But praise God that He has chosen to give mercy to the undeserving for His ultimate glory!

Here’s the catch for the skeptic: By the very fact that humans recognize the difference between evil/suffering/sadness and good/redemption/joy we have an ultimate standard: God.

The following video helps lay this out with great clarity.

If there were no God and everything proceeded forward from the Big Bang to stellar formulation to the concretion of the earth to chemical evolution of DNA to progression of the “Tree of Life” to humans by means of natural selection acting on random mutations, would humanity even be able to recognize evil/suffering/sadness? In that scenario death, pain, theft, rape, assault, fraud, and loss would never even be noticed because that would be the natural way of things. If humans are simply the a collection of chemicals that have become highly organized over the course of billions of years of pain, death, theft, rape, assault, and fraud, then why do we acutely feel the affects of these things when they happen to us? Why do we recognize them with anger and sadness as injustice when someone assaults us or steals from us or lies to us? We immediately understand that we have been WRONGED because someone has been evil to us. Do we not all recognize that the Nazi Holocaust was the result of people being evil to the Jews? Again, if we’re only the culmination of star dust, why do we recognize this evil as something wrong?

We only recognize evil because God exists and has set the standard for behavior. He allows evil because his purposes are higher. His purpose is love and for us to experience loving Him. If we were only created with the capacity robotically do right and love God then we would be mechanic. People have chosen evil…all of us, and that is why we need the love of God. He had his own Son punished for our evil, so that we would not have to face the wrath of the Eternal Creator if only we cry out to Him in repentance. Check out Romans 10:9-10

That if you will confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

The Price is Right

It appears that the “Prince of Reason” is merely a charlatan celebrity. His books and arguments have been shown to be completely refuted in The Greatest Hoax on Earth and The Irrational Atheist making him a charlatan.

But to qualify as a celebrity, he now charges between $100,000 and $500,000 to meet the “glorious one.”

But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’

I love the fact that after paying $100,000, you get a discount on their website to buy t-shirts.