Why Disagree With Jesus?

Rose

This article from AIG was enjoyable to read. When a Christian apologist was surprisingly confronted with an accusation of teaching false information, this was the response:

“In the context of the first marriage between Adam and Eve, do you think Jesus was wrong in Mark 10:6 when He said that God made them male and female at the beginning of creation? Or do you believe that the creation has been around for 13 billion years and marriage first came about at the end of creation a few thousand years ago with Adam and Eve?”

The apologist, Bodie Hodge, then wrote an article documenting the encounter and laying out a case for why this question is unanswerable for those who want to believe both Old Earthism and the words of Jesus. One belief or the other will be compromised…and as we will see below, many Christians choose to hold more tightly to their Old Earthism.

Mr. Hodge lays out a solid case in his article showing the typical responses he’s gotten from those holding old earth positions and why they fail:

  1. “Biblical creationists have the same problem since Adam/Eve were not created at the beginning since they were created on day 6 and not day 1.”This is a poor response from old-earthers because then they bring the words Jesus said in to question. Jesus includes the creation week as “the beginning of creation” because (since He is the Creator) man and woman were made on day 6. The old-earther assumes incorrectly that only the 1st picosecond (or 1 minute or 1st day…) of God’s creative works to be “the beginning”. This response claims Jesus was wrong. Don’t be like those who respond this way, because Jesus cannot be wrong.
  2. “Jesus was talking about the beginning of marriage. This passage deals only with marriage not the age of the earth.”This is another poor response from the old-earther, but is sadly more typical of the way many people want to read scripture. Or should I say read INTO scripture. Jesus said “At the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.” Like the Jehovah’s Witnesses do with John 1:1 to avoid the clear teaching that Jesus is indeed God, old-earthers like to add the words “of marriage” to protect their old age beliefs and rather than see the actual words of Jesus, they actually put words in his mouth. They would rather reinterpret God’s revealed Word to protect their old age beliefs than let scripture speak.
  3. “The beginning of creation is just the figurative 6 days (13 billion years)”What the old-earthers are doing here is redefining the word “beginning” to mean whatever they want. In this case, they want it to mean 13 billion years (Also, what is a year prior to sun/earth revolutions?). Jesus spoke the words recorded in Mark 10:6 about 4000 years after Adam was created. To make their reinterpretation of “the beginning of creation” work, using a scale of 1 inch to represent the 4000 years Jesus was talking about, the beginning of 13 billion years is almost 52 MILES away. That’s a strange (at best) way to refer to marriage happening after 13 billion years. Will the End time be an equal amount away from when Jesus spoke these words? Should Christians expect another 13 billion years before Christ makes his glorious return? Only if you’re a consistent old-earther.

Old Earthism just cannot get around the pivotal words of Jesus without accusing Jesus of wrong, changing scripture, or redefining words.

This is just ONE example from scripture that refutes old earthism. There are many others than just the ones linked below:

After posting the link to Mr. Hodge’s article on Twitter, an old-earther decided to write a rebuttal article here.

The author of that article, who goes by Christian Defenders (CD), makes no attempt to answer the actual piece that Mr. Hodge originally wrote. CD simply argues that the Hebrew word for day (yom) can have multiple meanings. Clearly, CD has never investigated any teachings of biblical creationists, because we all know this to be true. The rule of hermaneutics is that when biblical interpretation is needed, we use scripture to interpret. The days of Genesis 1 were intended by the author to communicate a literal 24 hour day. I cover this information in greater detail here. Exodus 20:11 is strong evidence that the beginning of creation is speaking of literal days, because it actually refers to the Genesis 1 account when God tells the Jews to work for 6 days and rest on the 7th day, just like God did during creation week.

In his closing, CD laments that Hodge uses the phrase “undermine the gospel”. It would be wise for CD to read to context to see why Hodge uses this phrase. Because if one attributes theological errors to Jesus, then the gospel IS undermined. Not mentioned by Hodge, but shown above, old-earthism demands that death, suffering, and thorns be present prior to the curse of sin. But Genesis 3 clearly teaches that these enemies are a result of the rebellion of mankind. God spoke that his creation was not just good seven times, but VERY good. It was only after this, that man sinned and God cursed creation with death, suffering, and thorns. Believing old-earthism CAN be a gospel issue.

It’s not that old-earthers have a vendetta and are out to take down Christianity from the inside, but when they allow outside influences, interpretations, and culture to participate in biblical interpretation, then heresies abound! It’s the same type of thinking that allows gay ministers (because – culture) and women pastors praying for Planned Parenthood (because – social justice)…

As someone who believes the Bible clearly teaches what the world refers to as young earth creationism, I do not care so much about the age of the earth directly as much as I am passionate about correct exegesis of scripture. God revealed Himself in creation, in the Bible, and in Jesus. All of these revelations are self authenticating and in agreement. As shown, Jesus speaks of a young earth. As shown here, creation speaks of a young earth. Finally, with exegesis and the conclusion of our understanding of God’s revelation, the Bible teaches of a young earth.

Because we can trust God about his revelation of history, we can trust Him with our future.

Creation is not PseudoScience, but Evolution IS

CampingRiverI always learn a lot when I read the articles from Jason Lisle at Biblical Science Institute.

In his most recent article, he answers the question about what is science, knowledge and pseudoscience.

dictionary.com defines science as “systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.”

Knowledge is true, justified, belief.

pseudoscience is anything that is claimed to be scientific, that in reality is not

The origins account from the Creator, that we sometimes call creation never claims to be knowledge that is obtained from the scientific method. Creation is a historical fact and because it makes no claims of scientific epiphany, it cannot be pseudoscience.

Dr. Lisle however makes a strong case that the Grand Theory of Evolution is indeed pseudoscience. It claims to be supported by the scientific method but changing of one kind of creature into another kind of creature has only ever been assumed…never observed or demonstrated.

Biblical creation is not a scientific fact, but is rather the historical fact that justifies our confidence in the scientific method.  Science is predicated on biblical creation.  Creation is therefore not pseudoscience, but is recorded history that rightly informs our evaluation of scientific evidence in the present.  Conversely, evolution is rightly classified as pseudoscience since it is purported to be science and yet cannot be demonstrated by observations or experimentation in the present.

We can trust the Creator with what He has revealed about the past, and we can trust Him with our future. Praise Him!

What Ignites Your Passion?

This past week, a gay bully, Brian Sims, posted two videos of himself in front of Planned Parenthood in Philadelphia harassing an elderly woman and a group of teenage girls. He repeatedly misrepresented and verbally assaulted the pro-lifers, simply because they had come to the abortion-mill to pray for the babies.

In response to the disgusting videos, several people in the Pro-Life movement have coordinated a counter protest to this man’s attitude. I myself was tempted to buy a ticket to Philadelphia to join the protest. Sims’ behavior was reprehensible, and his “logic” was fallacious and wicked.

Here’s a video of Matt Walsh organizing the protest.

But I got to thinking, as reprehensible as Sim’s behavior was, is not the depraved actions INSIDE the abortion mill MORE reprehensible? We’ve seen the video of the bully, and it’s awful, but the BIGGER bullies are INSIDE Planned Parenthood with lab coats and stainless steel tools.

The more gross sin is the dismemberment and murder of unborn children. All sin in a rebellion against God, and for forgiveness, we are ALL in need of repentance through grace.

As Christians, we should be sharing the gospel with the lost. I hope that through these events, many people will realize their need for the Savior and that the actions that flow from redemption bring glory to God instead of judgment. Pray for the single women, who feel like they must kill their child to find happiness. If possible, donate time to mentor kids in single-parent families. Be-friend a needy family and help provide for earthly needs, so that they will listen to you when you enlighten people about their spiritual needs. Get involved in the foster parent program in your area. Teach your own children how to read and interpret God’s Word. Pray for forgiveness in your own life.

But don’t be motivated by a bully (pray for him) who mistreated some people in Pennsylvania. The problem is much bigger and much deeper than that.

As a side note: From these news reports, it appears that this particular Planned Parenthood has repeatedly failed health inspections, failed to report child rape, and performs no background checks on employees.

DEBATE: Apologetics Methodology Presuppositionalism vs Evidentialism

Christians are called to share the gospel. Many evangelists try to throw evidence at people to convince them of the truth of Christianity.

While evidence does point to the truth of Christianity and the revelation of God, people will always interpret evidence according to their worldview. So, the non-believer will take evidence presented and claim it is evidence for THEIR worldview. The non-believer will also incorrectly assume they can justify laws of logic, truth, morality, and induction without the One True God, who revealed Himself in creation, in scripture, and in Jesus.

I really enjoyed reading the article below where I got the following quote:

“Even when/if the classical or evidentialist apologist begins with a Christian worldview, both approaches, even combined end up falling victim to the deserved title of “god of the gaps” arguments. Let’s suppose that a Christian provides a convincing argument for the existence of God, such that the debate opponent surrenders. The question that follows is “which God?” From here we cannot really get to Jesus Christ, because this involves proving the Scriptures according to Christianity are from God, before we could ever get to arguments for the resurrection of Christ.”

https://presupp101.wordpress.com/2019/04/30/debate-apologetics-methodology-presuppositionalism-vs-evidentialism/

calvinist4life's avatarPresuppositionalism 101

Hello faithful readers and guests, here recently I decided to participate in somewhat of a formal debate with another Calvinist on the subject of Apologetics methodology. I confess to being reluctant (for a number of reasons), I turned him down several times, but he persisted to hint and nudge over a period of months, and so I finally gave in.

Here below is my (rather short) opening statement, with a link to more of the (more detailed) debate on christianforums.com below. So far I have completed the first round, and thinking about the direction I might take for the second. Comments, thoughts, etc. are welcome and appreciated.


Brother Mark Kennedy and I have agreed upon a friendly debate on the subject of apologetics, more specifically apologetic methodology. Mark will be making the case for Evidential Apologetics, while I make the case for Presuppositional Apologetics.

The format will be as follows:

View original post 1,150 more words

Please God or Man?

If you haven’t had a chance to watch Living Waters Ministries, The Fool, let me encourage you to take 60 minutes to do so.

 

I’ll admit, I sure don’t like being called an idiot or ignorant for my beliefs, but that should in no way hinder us from sharing the gospel of Jesus. What an amazing ministry that Ray Comfort has for sharing the gospel because of the ridicule he has endured.

Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice. – Philippians 1:15-18

I’ve heard and still hear Christians tell me that it’s important to preach the gospel a certain way or don’t talk about creationism because it’s not well-regarded…all to not seem ridiculous to the lost.

What rubbish! What does the child of the King and joint heir to the eternal kingdom care about the petulant approval of mankind?

For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. – Galatians 1:10

  1. Repent of your rebellion
  2. Study the Word
  3. Share the good news of abundant life through faith in Jesus!
adventure boy girl idyllic

Photo by Nandhu Kumar on Pexels.com

 

Replacing Darwin

Good video on the reason Darwin’s theory is no longer valid:

New information!

The Bunchernator's avatarCreation Bunch

The New Origin of Species

by Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson

Science has come a long way since Darwin made his claims in the 1800s. Several remarkable scientific discoveries have been made that shed new light on the earth’s origins. In addition, much of the evidence Darwin presented for his argument no longer seems like clear evidence for evolution. What if Darwin was looking at the same evidence today using modern science; would his conclusions be the same? Could modern scientific discoveries overthrow Darwin’s reign? Watch this talk to find out how recent findings are rewriting a century and a half of “settled science.” Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson (Ph.D Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard University, Research Biologist) presents “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species”.

image credit: Original artwork based on “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species” book cover

View original post

21 Reasons to Believe the Universe is Young

God’s revelation is sufficient to explain reality. Because of God’s revelation we have justification to perform and trust science

Here’s a list of 21 reasons to believe the universe is much younger than the modern academic paradigm would preach

If the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then whatever it teaches can be
known to be true—including what it teaches about the age of the Earth

#2: Polystrate Fossils
#3: DNA in “Ancient” Bacteria Support a Young Earth
#4: Human Population Statistics
#5: Carbon-14 in “Ancient” Fossils and Materials
#7: Human/Dinosaur Co-existence
#8: Tightly Folded Rock Strata
#9: Rapid “Slow” Processes
#10: Amount of Salt in the Sea
#11: Amount of Sediment on the Sea Floor
#12: 
Lack of Erosion Evidence Between Strata
#13: Helium in Zircon Crystals
#14: “Orphan” Radiohalos
#15: Clastic Dikes
#16: Faint Young Sun Paradox
#17: Rapid Decay Rate of Earth’s Magnetic Field
#18: Lunar Recession Rate
#19: Atmospheric Helium Content
#20: Spiral Galaxies
#21: Comet Contradiction

The Bunchernator's avatarCreation Bunch

Abundant evidence exists

by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

The Bible implies that the Earth is around 6,000 – 10,000 years old, while the conventional belief held by many is that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Is the Bible wrong about the age of the Earth? Abundant evidence exists from the disciplines of paleontology, archaeology, geology, astrophysics, and geophysics which supports the biblical time frame, while refuting deep time.

The age of the Earth, according to naturalists and old-Earth advocates, is 4.5 billion years. Young-Earth [or Biblical] creationists contend that the Earth is on the order of thousands, not billions, of years old. Is there evidence to support the young-Earth creationists’ premise?

First, as we have shown elsewhere, the biblical narrative implies that the Universe was created with an immediate appearance of age in many ways. Adam and Eve were not mere zygotes, but walking, talking, working, and procreating individuals…

View original post 563 more words

Responding to Skeptics

What God reveals, we can be certain about

Jonathan Silcox's avatarsixdaysblog

Over at Premier Christianity, geologist and priest Michael Roberts provides 10 questions to ask a young earth creationist. Old earth creationists and evolutionists have been asking these same questions for decades, but it’s as if Roberts thinks he’s the first to come up with them. On the contrary, young earth creationists have answered these questions for as long as anyone has thought to ask them. I’ll link to a response by Creation Ministries International, and then provide my own, responding to what I think is Robert’s main contention.

At the heart of these ten questions is whether or not the Bible really addresses geology and the age of the earth, and if it really matters. Roberts (and other evolutionists) wants to convince us there’s a huge majority of educated people, including scientists, who believe in God, evolution, and an earth that’s 4.6 billion years old. In other words, he’s…

View original post 1,698 more words

What Does the Rest of the Bible Say About Genesis?

Scripture is clear: there is no room for billions of years, evolution, or death/disease/suffering prior to the rebellion of Adam.

You do not need an astrophysicist or special guru to explain their radical personal interpretations of the Bible to you.

Read the Word and stay involved in a body of believers who trust God’s special revelation. The revelation of God contains the very words of life.

The Bunchernator's avatarCreation Bunch

Using scripture to interpret scripture

by Thomas Purifoy Jr.

Using scripture to interpret scripture is essential to understanding the Bible. Most of the people and events in the first chapters of Genesis are referred back to by both Old and New Testament authors. Even more importantly, Jesus Himself spoke often about Genesis.

It is these divinely-inspired statements that provide the interpretive framework for recognizing the historicity of Genesis. Three things become apparent when looking at these passages:

  1. The Biblical authors saw the events and people of Genesis as real history.
  2. They understood those historical events had spiritual and theological consequences.
  3. They realized those consequences continue to have an impact on the present day.

Since it is helpful to read what was actually said, here are some of the more important statements about Genesis.

Moses & Isaiah

“For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all…

View original post 594 more words