As humans, I think we all like to put things into human terms. I know that I do. And so I find it appealing to think of the origins debate as a conflict between Darwin and Moses.
But though the discussion may be framed in such a way, it is important to remember that it is more than just a matter of Moses vs. Darwin. It is a conflict between the word of God and the word of men.
Moses was a man. And Genesis was written by Moses. But Moses was a prophet of God, and he wrote down what God spoke to him (Numbers 12:5-8, John 5:46, 2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21).
An old friend of mine used to refer to the Bible as "an ancient text", as if to lessen its authority. And theistic evolutionist, Peter Enns has made the statement that "an ancient text give us ancient science, not modern".
But these speak wrongly about God's word. God's word is not antiquated, nor is it static. God's word is living and vibrant. It is more than just an ancient text. It keeps on being true (Psalm 119, John 17:17, Hebrews 4:12-13).
There can be no greater authority on science and origins than the One who created the universe and all that exists (Genesis 1:1, John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16-17).
Some try to reinterpret what God clearly tells us about our origins. But the only reason for such theories as the day/age, or the gap theory is to attempt to harmonize God's word with the word of men.
And those men who first developed the doctrines of deep time, and evolutionism (Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Erasmus Darwin, Charles Darwin, Charles Lyell and others), were attempting to explain the universe, and life without God.
These individuals interpreted the data under the assumption that Genesis is not true, and that no supernatural/Divine hand was or is involved. Thus, evolutionism is rooted in a rejection of belief in God.
Once a person acknowledges the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; it becomes wholly, completely, entirely unnecessary to accept evolutionism.
God created the heavens and the earth. And He did it in six literal, 24 hour days, just as He has says that He did. This is a certainty because there was no death before sin entered the world by on person (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:21-26).
Material written by trained scientists, who affirm biblical creation, can be read at the following sites:
www.answersingenesis.org
www.icr.org
http://creation.com/
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Saturday, May 4, 2013
The Head and the Heart
Suppose two people are debating which part of the body is most important. Imagine that one of them insists the head is the most important part, while the other firmly defends the heart as being the most important. But isn't it true that the body must have both a head and a heart to live, and can not dispense with either one?
The literal, bodily resurrection of Jesus the Messiah is the heart of Christian doctrine and apologia, and the Genesis creation/fall is the head. It hardly seems reasonable to believe the one and not the other.
And actually, the resurrection is a validation of the history recorded in Genesis. Jesus constantly made statements that validate both the Divine inspiration and the historicity of the Old Testament narrative. (For examples, see John 5:46, John 8:56, Luke 24:25-27, Mark 10:6, Matthew 5:18, Matthew 23:31-35, and Matthew 26:52-56). And His resurrection gives assurance that Jesus is the Son of God, so that His statements possess Divine authority.
But Jesus' resurrection from the dead was not merely to prove that He is the Son of God. Jesus arose from the dead to conquer death. God considers death to be an enemy to be destroyed (1st Corinthians 15:21-26). Death is not a part of the original created order. It was introduced into the world by sin. (Romans 5:12).
For theistic evolutionism to be true, there would have to be billions of years of death, disease, and suffering before humans even appeared on the earth.
If the sedimentary rock layers of the geological column were laid down slowly over 4.5 billion years, the fossils inside them would show this to be the case. Death would be a part of the original created order. And so it would be silly for God to view death as an enemy to be destroyed.
However, if the rock layers were laid down slowly, there would be no fossils in them. Those organic things would have decayed in open air, being reduced to dust before the sediment could cover them. This is especially obvious in the case of polystrate fossils.
Those layers were laid down after the Genesis fall. And they were laid down swiftly, by the flood that God sent to judge sin during Noah's lifetime. And truly, all scientific data can be best interpreted and understood within the framework of the Genesis creation/fall/flood scenario.
When Paul the apostle addressed a pagan audience at the Areopagus in Athens, he gave a message that centered on creation (Acts 17:24-30). Note the sweet affirmation that all nations are descended from one man (verse 26). So far, Paul's audience listened.
It's a rum thing because at the end of his speech he mentioned the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah. And it was at that part that some in his audience mocked him (verses 31 & 32). This is the opposite of what often happens in contemporary Christian apologetics.
Nowadays, it is common for people to believe in the resurrection and yet scoff at Genesis. It is as though Paul's generation viewed the head as the most important part, and saw no use for the heart. And the current generation views the heart as most important, and sees no use for the head.
Visit:
www.answersingenesis.org
www.icr.org
and http://creation.com/
The literal, bodily resurrection of Jesus the Messiah is the heart of Christian doctrine and apologia, and the Genesis creation/fall is the head. It hardly seems reasonable to believe the one and not the other.
And actually, the resurrection is a validation of the history recorded in Genesis. Jesus constantly made statements that validate both the Divine inspiration and the historicity of the Old Testament narrative. (For examples, see John 5:46, John 8:56, Luke 24:25-27, Mark 10:6, Matthew 5:18, Matthew 23:31-35, and Matthew 26:52-56). And His resurrection gives assurance that Jesus is the Son of God, so that His statements possess Divine authority.
But Jesus' resurrection from the dead was not merely to prove that He is the Son of God. Jesus arose from the dead to conquer death. God considers death to be an enemy to be destroyed (1st Corinthians 15:21-26). Death is not a part of the original created order. It was introduced into the world by sin. (Romans 5:12).
For theistic evolutionism to be true, there would have to be billions of years of death, disease, and suffering before humans even appeared on the earth.
If the sedimentary rock layers of the geological column were laid down slowly over 4.5 billion years, the fossils inside them would show this to be the case. Death would be a part of the original created order. And so it would be silly for God to view death as an enemy to be destroyed.
However, if the rock layers were laid down slowly, there would be no fossils in them. Those organic things would have decayed in open air, being reduced to dust before the sediment could cover them. This is especially obvious in the case of polystrate fossils.
Those layers were laid down after the Genesis fall. And they were laid down swiftly, by the flood that God sent to judge sin during Noah's lifetime. And truly, all scientific data can be best interpreted and understood within the framework of the Genesis creation/fall/flood scenario.
When Paul the apostle addressed a pagan audience at the Areopagus in Athens, he gave a message that centered on creation (Acts 17:24-30). Note the sweet affirmation that all nations are descended from one man (verse 26). So far, Paul's audience listened.
It's a rum thing because at the end of his speech he mentioned the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah. And it was at that part that some in his audience mocked him (verses 31 & 32). This is the opposite of what often happens in contemporary Christian apologetics.
Nowadays, it is common for people to believe in the resurrection and yet scoff at Genesis. It is as though Paul's generation viewed the head as the most important part, and saw no use for the heart. And the current generation views the heart as most important, and sees no use for the head.
Visit:
www.answersingenesis.org
www.icr.org
and http://creation.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)