…at least do it properly. Do a little research, and then shoot your best shot. Christianity has survived 2000 years of constant attack and persecution.
At least a dozen “science” reporting outlets falsely reported that the Bible got history wrong. If they had just done a few minutes of research by actually reading what the Bible said, they would see that forensic science is only JUST NOW catching up with divine revelation.
Here’s one of the headlines:
“The Bible was WRONG: Civilisation God ordered to be KILLED still live and kicking”
Sadly, God’s people were duped (Joshua 9) and flat out disobeyed in several other circumstances (Judges 1) to allow the Canaanites to live among them. The findings of this forensic research doesn’t conflict with the Bible…it confirms scripture!
Finding Canaanite DNA in living people is exactly what one would expect to find, because that is how the Bible reported it.
We can trust God’s divine revelation about history, and we can trust him with the forgiveness of sins. Jesus fulfilled the scriptures by taking on the punishment of sin and defeating death. It is his great love that leads us to repentance.
My little younger brother pointed me to your show a couple of years ago, and I’ve been listening ever since. I really appreciate the friendly format of the show. Every guest is treated with sincerity and the “debates” are free from personal attacks. Thanks for putting on a great show.
So, I just listened to your latest Unbelievable podcast with Phil Copan. He handled a tough position of answering critical questions with dexterity. It did seem however that the atheist caller, Andrew, got the best of Phil when Phil was unable to answer the major flaw of old earthism. We could all hear the relief in Andrew’s voice when he knew he would not have to contend with a Christian who consistently and faithfully interpreted the Bible. When Andrew pointed out that since Phil believes in billions of years that there would have to have been terrible suffering and destruction prior to the sin of mankind, Phil could only deflect the question. His defense was to say that the atheist was in no position to judge evil, and this is true: atheism cannot account for evil in their worldview. But as a Christian, he did not present a positive and compelling case for believing that the suffering and bloodshed was a beautiful part of God’s “Very good” creation. His only defense was a very poetic passage in Psalm 104, that he mistakenly believes was part of the pre-fall world. A proper exegesis would show that this passage poetically deals with both creation, flood, and post-flood times.
As I have listened to your show, almost every Christian guest that you have capitulates to the atheist’s origins story of billions of years. But there is no reason to give up Biblical authority to accommodate the atheist’s origins story. Biblical authority is at stake here.
Here is a short list of contradictions that are introduced into biblical interpretations when one accepts the atheist’s origins story of billions of years:
Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” The earth was not formed billions of years after the beginning.
Genesis 1:29-30 “everything that has the breath of life in it-I give every green plant for food.” Animals were created as vegetarian. No predatory behavior until after the fall.
Genesis 1:31 “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.” Because of God, we recognize goodness, and death/suffering/bloodshed is not part of this goodness. God chose to represent the death of his Beloved for thousands of years by having his people sacrifice an animal. But if animals had been callously dying for billions of years, why would the Almighty symbolize the cruel death of his son with something as common as animal death?
Genesis 3:18 “It (the ground) will produce thorns and thistles for you” If thorns are a result of the fall of mankind, why are there fossilized thorns that evolutionists claim are millions of years old?
Genesis 3:20 “Adam named his wife Eve because she would become the mother of all the living.” Phil and other old earthers disregard this passage by claiming that Adam and Eve could have been a representative couple within a large clan of hominids. All of humanity has to be a descendant of Adam and Eve for these Biblical passages like Gen 3:20 and Romans 5 to make sense theologically.
Exodus 20:9,11 “Six days you shall labor and do your work…For in 6 days the LORD made the heavens and the earth” It wasn’t billions of years or eras.
Isaiah 66:25 “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox…they will neither harm nor destroy” This passage is pretty clear that predatory behavior is harmful/destructive and is not part of God’s intention.
Mark 10:6 “At the beginning of creation God made them male and female.” Jesus was teaching that mankind was created at the beginning of creation and not billions of years after the beginning…or must you question whether the Creator knows about modern cosmology?
It would be nice to hear Christians defend God’s word without having to capitulate to the atheist’s primary tool for hammering at Christian foundations…the Word of God. And it is a shame that some Christians have rationalized the marginalization of scripture to accommodate modern political correctness in science, culture, and relationships.
We can trust God’s revelation about the past; therefore He is trustworthy about the future! Praise the Creator!!!
In today’s Christian culture, things labelled as Christian are allowed almost complete free-reign within the walls of Christendom. Christian music, Christian singles websites…attach Christ to it or stick a Christian fish on it, and Shah-bang! It’s acceptable to the millions of people, who identify themselves as Christians…with hardly a challenge. In an effort to engage the Christian culture through printed media, the periodical, Christianity Today writes articles about religion and other contemporary issues.
In The Enemy Within, Part 1, an analogy was crafted using Homer’s epic poem, The Illiad. The Greeks brought down the mighty city of Troy without massive siege-works or modern explosives. Instead, they used Guile, Deception, and Temptation.
Today’s modern Trojans, the protestant Christian church, has been fighting off attacks for centuries. A new tactic emerged in the 1800’s to replace God’s involvement in Creation through a “scientific” cause…evolution. And until recently, this tactic was wielded only at the hands of atheists. Although the mighty Trojan wall, God’s Word, has repelled the direct attack in a head-on fashion from the interior of protestant Christendom, the plot of evolution has recently been courted by those claiming to be have the interests of Christianity at heart.
Christianity Today’s article, The Search For the Historical Adam, is a prime example of the Trojan Horse at the gates. As soon as the solid wall of God’s Word can be marginalized through the deception of evolution, the final destruction on the effectiveness of the church can begin from within.
There are guardians on this wall. Those, who feel it is their duty to preserve God’s Word with valiant efforts. Answers In Genesis, Creation Ministry International, the Institute For Creation Research, and a hundred others are fighting the likes of Francis Collins and Reasons to Believe, who choose to rationalize the Bible by claiming it to be mythology. It is truly beyond the pale to hear these modern Greek warriors in their veil of scientific credentialism, their Trojan Horse, wield the enemy’s weapon, evolution, as if it were something that the church should embrace. And why did Christianity Today fail to interview even one of the guardians in their “unbiased” article? Only those within the Trojan Horse were interviewed for their contribution to the battle.
Scanning the websites of the guardians, it is easy to see that there is plenty of scientific evidence and scriptural evidence to deflect the flaming arrows of the enemy. But we on the inside of the walls must not yield to the pressure of desiring cultural acceptance, and we must continue to trust God’s Word as true.
Let’s not end this prolonged war the way the Trojans did by opening the gates willingly to the enemy. We must recognize the attack for what it is and stand firm on God’s Word.
Do you remember the epic journey of Odysseus, Achilles, and Agamemnon in their quest to “rescue” Helen from the clutches of the Trojans? Since the Greeks won the war, they got to portray the Trojans as the villains, but what if a Trojan history book had survived. Could it be that Paris rescued Helen from an abusive marriage to Menelaus? What might have changed in the perspective of the story in how we remember this ten year war today?
And do you remember how the Greeks were finally able to defeat the Trojans after failing for TEN years? The Trojan Horse. The Greeks constructed a massive hollow horse and hid a dozen warriors inside. They left the “gift” at the gate of Troy and pretended to sail away. Once the Trojans let the horse through the gates of their protective wall and celebrated the departure of the Greeks, their fate was sealed. The Greek warriors inside the horse opened the gates of Troy to allow the Greek army inside, and sleeping Troy was destroyed.
The wall that protected Troy for a decade was impotent to stop the attack from within. Once the Greeks deceptively eluded the walls with the gift horse, the destruction of Troy was imminent.
Today, the idea of a Trojan horse is synonymous with inviting something that looks attractive into a vulnerable interior to its ultimate doom.
The Word of God has stood as an impenetrable wall around Christendom since Guttenburg first printed the Bible on his printing press. Once people could read the Bible for themselves, heresies in the church were slowly discarded and evangelism has been able to grow. The bride of Christ has been under constant attack from many angles, but God’s Word has repelled the attacks.
But in the last 150 years, a cleverly devised and insidious plot has surfaced to attack faith in God as Creator.
So I stumbled across this timeline from an organization that claims to believe the Bible:
See if you can note the obvious problems with this timeline before I get into them. It’s okay. I’ll wait…
As noted in the About link on this blog, “This blog exists to share the trustworthiness of God’s Word, the Bible.” Let’s start our evaluation of this timeline when compared to God’s Word.
I’m going to start on the foot-notes of the timeline. “All dates are approximate and subject to change, and reflect the best established evidence.” What have we said time and again about evidence? Everyone interprets evidence according to their worldview. Evidence, by itself, cannot convince someone of their need for a savior. The BEST EVIDENCE is the eye-witness account of the Almighty in his special revelation not the priests of Darwin claiming the universe to be billions of years old.
“Earth forms (4.5662 bya)” This timeline would have you believe that after more than 9,000,000,000 years, the earth formed. This is in direct conflict with the 1st verse of the Bible. Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth.” Think of how different the very beginning of this timeline would look if they started with Genesis 1:1 rather than Stephen Hawking’s research.
“Moon forms (~4.5 bya)” The moon forms?????? How about Genesis 1:16 where God MADE the moon on day 4. And yet, you can clearly see on this timeline, that the authors put the creation of the moon on Day 1 in direct opposition to the Bible. Timeline trustworthiness meter: Waning. Far side of the moon.
“Oceans become permanent (~3.8 bya)” They say Day 1, but the Bible says Day 3 in Genesis 1:9-10. Timeline trustworthiness meter: Lost at sea. Abandon ship! Somewhere in the Bermuda triangle.
“first land plants…(650 mya)” On day 5? This timeline continues to show that they would rather uphold the interpretations of Dawkins, Hawkings, and Bill Nye than to trust what God has written in his word. Plants were not created on day 5 as incorrectly shown on the timeline. The eye-witness testimony of Almighty God says in Genesis 1:11 that Day 3 is when plants were created. Timeline trustworthiness meter: Wilted. Barren. Full-of-fertilizer
“Animals, reptiles, dinosaurs, mammals – Day 5” Wait a minute, Mr. Timeline! The Bible tells us that these animals were all created on day 6. Timeline trustworthiness meter: Dry bones. Extinct.
“Modern humans” According to the timeline 13,700,000,000 after the beginning – man arrives. According to Jesus (Mark 10:6) “But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female.” Timeline trustworthiness meter: Do you really want to go against the words of Jesus? Genesis 3:1 “Did God REALLY say…?”
Can you find more than that?
The inaccuracies in this timeline can be fixed with a correct understanding of God’s revelation in scripture. Specifically, the group at reasons.org have butchered the exegesis of the worldwide flood. If one reads the eye-witness testimony of the worldwide flood and looks at the world around us, we see clearly that there is no need to mythologize the Bible to accommodate atheistic interpretations of evidence. Studying God’s word can fix these inaccuracies.
We can trust what God has revealed about history, and our faith in his revelation about the future is secure. Praise Him!
Last night there was a nationwide one-night-only release of the movie, Is Genesis History. My family went to watch, and the theater was packed. In fact, it appeared that they oversold the movie, because several people stood along the walls and sat on the floor. This tells me that there is a market for such movies. In fact, as I was researching their website this morning for this post, there will be a second one-night-only release of the movie on March 2nd. So, if you missed last night’s showing, grab a friend, and see if the question gets conclusively answered.
“Is Genesis History” is a documentary in which Dr. Del Tackett travels the world trying to answer the question of whether the conventional paradigm (cosmic evolution, geological evolution, and The Grand Theory of Evolution) or the Genesis paradigm best accounts for the evidence that is seen in today’s world. He defined a paradigm as the framework in which evidence in interpreted. So in this question, do purely naturalistic forces best account for the evidence that is observed today or does the narrative of Genesis give us insight into earth’s history.
***** SPOILER ALERT!!! The conclusive answer to the question of whether Genesis is indeed history is revealed below. ******
I won’t give away all of the spoilers in the movie, as there were over a dozen scientists weighing in on the evidence, but I do want to hit a couple of the highlights.
This blog addresses whether God’s Word is the authority, so let’s start with the imminent Biblical scholar, Steve Boyd PhD, and what he had to say about Genesis. When questioner, Dr. Tackett asked Dr. Boyd about whether Genesis claims and/or appears to be historical, Dr. Boyd replied unequivocally that the author of Genesis intended his audience to understand the text as having actually happened in history. The Hebrew people were God’s chosen people, and Genesis reveals the history of God’s interaction with their patriarchs in a smooth genealogical line. A paraphrase of one particular interaction with Tackett, Dr. Boyd says, someone would have to bring their own alien interpretation into the Genesis text to claim that the Bible can accommodate billions of years by redefining the Hebrew word for day. It is clear from the text, that the Hebrew word for day in this context is not plastic enough to mean billions of years as some groups would have us believe. So, from this interview, the question is answered with the affirmative: Genesis is history.
Dr. Tackett also interviewed Dr. Paul Nelson. They met in a computer museum and talked about the history of information. One particular interaction caught my attention. They discussed how biological evolution claims to be plausible by building from a single celled organism to all of the diversity of life by compiling more and more cells over millions of years. In the same way, do we get complicated computer operating systems and programs by adding zeros and ones (which is the foundation of computer language) randomly over years and years? Both ideas are equally ridiculous according to their interview. This interview also affirmed that Genesis is history.
The last point I wanted to make in this post wasn’t drawn out in great detail, but the idea of the Eye Witness was brought up. When discussing issues of history, an eye witness has value. As an analogy, consider a crime that is being investigated by a local police station and the FBI. Both offices employ a forensics team to help determine the culprit, however, the FBI has an eye witness that was at the scene of the crime. Now consider that this eye witness was a justice on the supreme court…someone who is very familiar with evidence, law, and judgement. Would the local police office, who employed ONLY a forensic team in their investigation be able to build as solid a case that accounted for all of the information as the FBI, who employed a forensic team and had an eye witness? The Genesis narrative is written as history from the perspective of the Supreme Judge, and his eye witness account is not lightly dismissed.
I highly recommend the movie. There’s no action, no CGI, and no plot twist, but the information is fantastic, the experts well-spoken, and the conclusion is important.
Since we can trust what God has revealed about history, we can trust Him with our future.
In debates between Christians and Materialists, sometimes Christians will bring up the apologetic that since there is an objective morality, then there must be a God. Materialists have countered using the Euthyphro Dilemma. In short, this dilemma was a story told by Plato describing a fictional encounter between Socrates and Euthyphro. In it Socrates asks, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods.”
To transliterate this parable to modern thinking and applying it to the monotheistic God:
“Does God define what is right, or does good define God?”
The dilemma then, for Christians, would be if they answered affirmative to the first part of the question, “Yes, God defines what is right”, then the materialist can say that God has the ability to be arbitrary or capricious. God could essentially change his mind on what He defines as right and wrong.
Were the Christian to answer the second part of the question with the affirmative, “Yes, Since something is good then God commands we do that,” then God is unnecessary since there is a standard greater than God to which he must submit. If there is something greater than God, then that greater something is what should be worshiped.
Neither answer is palatable for the Christian, and that is why it is so important that Christians study their Bible. With correct Bible study, we see that this is a false dilemma.
Isaiah 45:19 says “I, the LORD, speak the truth; I declare what is right.”
Does this spring the materialist’s trap into saying that God can arbitrarily decide right from wrong? It might, unless we take further notes from his eternal Word.
Hebrews 13:3 tells us “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”
Malachi 3:6 “I the LORD do not change.”
So, God both defines what is right, and He never changes. God’s very nature is good. “For the LORD is good. His steadfast love endures forever.” Since God’s very nature is good, then He defines for us what he expects and how we should reflect his image by our actions. We were created in God’s image, and to be excellent reflections of his image, it is imperative that humans follow his commands…and thus, fulfill our purpose.
In part 2 of this post, I want to go deeper into this discussion to see if we as Christians can answer this question of absolute morals, how it is communicated, and what is our purpose.
If you’re interested in further research on how philosophers discuss the Euthyphro Dilemma, you can look here.
In a technologically modern world, we have become so accustomed to having things instantaneously. The latest fad is to purchase external Siri, Alexa, Google boxes that answer your voice questions and perform simple online tasks. Today’s window of focus is 140 characters or seven second Vines.
We can be easily tempted to let someone else read, study, pray over, and digest God’s Word – so that they can summarize the message for us. But as a citizen in the eternal Kingdom, don’t let that temptation manifest itself in your life as your primary intake of the Word. Study your Bible. Besides the benefit of enjoying a nourishing time with the Creator and pondering the Words of life, there’s a danger in only letting someone else tell you their thoughts about God’s Word.
In my most previous two posts, I pointed out the exegetical flaws of some men, who have metastasized their peculiar interpretation of scripture. So that they can accommodate their belief in billions of years, they are forced to claim that the flood of Noah’s day was a local flood. It has been shown over and over again how this teaching is false, but in my personal Bible study this week, I came across yet another scripture that refutes their teachings.
Isaiah 54:9 says, “To me this is like the days of Noah, when I swore that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth. So, now I have sworn not to be angry with you, never to rebuke you again.”
Hugh Ross assumes that Psalm 104:9 is talking ONLY about the creation week, so that the waters of creation could not cover the earth again in Noah’s day. But Isaiah clearly teaches that the waters DID completely cover the earth during Noah’s day, so Ross’s assumption that Psalm 104 is solely about creation week is false.
Another reason why we know that Psalm 104 is not solely about creation week but also includes post-fall timeframe is because of verse 21: “The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God.”
Genesis 1:30 tells us that carnivorous activity was not part of God’s original creation. “And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground – everything that has the breath of life in it- I give every green plant for food.”
If lions are stalking prey in the poetry of Psalm 104, then it must be, at the very earliest, after sin’s curse affected the universe, but is even more likely talking about the post flood world in which the author of the Psalm lived.
Studying God’s word for yourself is a blessing in so many ways, not the least of which is being able to identify false teachings.
Since we can trust God about what He has revealed about the past, we can trust Him with our future!
Earlier this week I reviewed at debate between Biblical creationists and old earth creationists. I pointed out the clear problem that old earthers have with Bible exegesis.
Today, I want to bring light to a major problem that they continue to propagate. The old earther, Hugh Ross, continues to claim that the Bible teaches that the flood of Noah’s day was a local flood. There are a number of biblical problems with the claim that the flood of Noah’s day was simply a local flood. We’ll discuss a few of them here.
Hugh Ross struggles to make his point using Psalm 104 as his primary text. In fact, the only place in the Bible that he can bend the words to his liking is verse 9 of Psalm 104.
You (God) set a boundary they (the waters) cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth.
This poetic passage includes phrases like:
“O LORD…you are clothed…”
“He wraps Himself in light”
“He stretches out the heavens like a tent”
“He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the winds”
“He makes winds his messengers, flames of fire his servants”
“He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved”
This passage is clearly a passage of poetry. Why build one’s doctrine on poetry at the expense of historical revelations from God?
So, Ross’s assumption is that the entire passage of Psalm 104 is a commentary about only the creation week, and he claims that (rather than Genesis’ historical account) this poetry is a solid foundation upon which to establish his untenable position. In his belief that the entire Psalm 104 passage is about creation, Ross says that the flood of Noah’s day could not have covered the earth since verse 9 says that the water will never again cover the earth. Since the creation account talks about how the earth was brought forth from water, Ross thinks that his sandy foundation in the Psalms absolves him from proper exegesis. It is important for us a Christians to interpret the Bible according to its genre and within the context of the whole of scripture. I’ll show below how the rest of scripture does not allow a local flood.
For a biblical creationist, the resolution is simple. Psalm 104 is a poetic account of both creation, the flood, and post flood world as a way to bring glory to the Almighty.
So, let’s look at some of the other reasons why the local flood advocated by Ross is contradicted by God’s Word.
At the end of the worldwide flood in Genesis 9:11, God promised to never flood the earth again. His covenant was memorialized with God placing the rainbow in the sky. If Noah’s flood was a local flood, then God would have broken his word by allowing local floods all over the earth.
From Genesis 6:17 – Genesis 7:23 God reveals in his Word 20 superlatives describing his utter destruction of the earth and all air-breathing animals with a flood. The old earthers have got to overcome or dismiss each usage of these 20 superlatives to accommodate their local flood story.
Genesis 7:19 says “They (the waters) rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.” It cannot be a local flood because all the high mountains under heaven were covered with water.
Genesis 8:4 specifically mentions the mountains of Ararat. Today Ararat measures almost 17,000 feet high. It’s likely that this peak was taller in the past since it has lost height from multiple eruptions. The only mountain specifically mentioned in the Biblical account was Ararat. So, we know that the flood would have had to at least cover this mountain. There is no basin deep enough to contain the amount of water necessary to cover Mt. Ararat. Therefore, the flood of Noah’s day could not be a local flood according to the Bible.
Matthew 24:38-39 are the words of Jesus. “For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark, and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood took them all away.” Another superlative. All were washed away in the flood. Everywhere on earth, all were washed away according to Jesus, and if they are all washed away, it must have been a worldwide flood.
1 Peter 3:20 Only 8 people in all of the earth were saved from the worldwide flood.
1 Peter 3:21 The worldwide covering of the earth by water symbolizes baptism. If the flood was a local flood, does baptism just need to be partial covering of water. The symbolism of Jesus’ death (which was complete) and the complete covering of the earth by water, is strongly recognized in the complete submersion by water in baptism.
2 Peter 2:5 Only 8 people in all of the earth were saved from the worldwide flood.
2 Peter 3:6 The world was deluged and destroyed. There’s no room here for a local flood.
The old earthers have to dismiss or re-interpret each of these revelations from God in order to make their localized flood fit.
There’s no need to build doctrine on the poetry of Psalm 104 at the expense of the historical account in Genesis as well as the other passages in scripture that clearly teach God’s judgment on the sin of mankind with a worldwide flood.
Thankfully, there is hope. God has a plan of redemption that those who confess their sin and rely on the atoning sacrifice of Jesus will not only be spared from God’s wrath but be joint heirs with Him in the eternal kingdom.
Everyone interprets evidence according to their worldview. If you find evidence that might somehow seem to conflict with reality, one is forced to come up with a rescuing device to protect their worldview. People are usually more concerned with protecting a worldview than knowing the truth.
Here’s an example: Humans were not supposed to have started working with aluminum until about 200 years ago (materialist worldview), so aliens must have visited earth 250,000 years ago (rescuing device).
So, instead of the Biblical worldview, which states that mankind was working with metal just 7 generations after Adam (Genesis 4:22) , someone, who has a naturalistic worldview will need to fabricate stories about aliens bringing complex metal workings from other galaxies as a rescuing device.
Don’t let an atheist tell you that they have evidence and a Christian has only faith. Everyone has the same evidence. We all interpret evidence according to our worldview. Here’s another example:
DNA has verified half-life of 512 years. The extrapolated maximum time that DNA is readable under perfectly preserved conditions is less than 1 million years. So, if DNA is found in a dinosaur bone then there are at least two options when interpreting the evidence.
The creationist says, ‘Since we know how long DNA can last, and we found DNA in dinosaur bones, then the dinosaur bone is MUCH younger than 65 million years. This fits well with a biblical time frame.” The worldview is defined by the Bible.
The atheist says, ‘Since we know dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago, and we found DNA in dinosaur bones, then there must be some unknown mechanism that preserves DNA MUCH longer than we expected.” The worldview is defined by deep time.
Same evidence…but because of different worldviews, then different conclusions are reached.
In the original case above, the atheists use aliens as a rescue device for their worldview since they do not believe the biblical account that humans have been smart from the beginning.
Therefore, evidence alone does not determine truth. One must evaluate the mechanism for interpreting the evidence (worldview) to see if the worldview can withstand scrutiny. The Christian worldview can make sense of
Preconditions for intelligibility
Universal-unchanging-immaterial laws (laws of logic, physical laws…)
Beauty, Truth, Love, Purpose
The atheistic worldview is deficient in its ability to accommodate these self-existent properties.