Creation vs Evolution

by

Give me four years to teach the children…

Vladimir Lenin infamously declared, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” The national indoctrinationgovernment of this country, formerly known as these United States of America, wants our children from age 5 – 18, 22 if they can get it. Do we think this education is morally neutral? Or is there a system within and of the world that works iniquity and never sleeps?

Colin Gunn has published a movie that aims to educate Americans about the dangers of government education. Parents are not to be condemned but educated about this arena. To that end, Gunn offers this movie for free viewing from 22 – 31 December.

Here’s a note from Colin:

This season, as people spend time at home together, we hope that families will take the time to watch and share our movie with loved ones, especially those that need to hear the truth about the American public school system and decide whether they should continue using them.

Even in the last few years we have seen a dramatic decline in the school system making our message all the more urgent. We’ve recently seen astonishing moves by the educational establishment, with the Department of Education’s full-on support of the Supreme Court ruling on homosexual marriage, and in recent months, a significant campaign to normalize transgender lifestyles to our youth. The public schools have gone from bad to worse, and there are no excuses left.

Now is the time to act.Please take the time to share our message through your emails and social networks. Go here: www.watchindoctrination.com/free

I pray you take the time to watch the movie. Don’t allow the prince of the air to rule your children. Be informed and prepared.

by

What Does God say about Bioethics?

Christian Bioethics 517UykgR7dL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-v3-big,TopRight,0,-55_SX278_SY278_PIkin4,BottomRight,1,22_AA300_SH20_OU01_

A review by Stuart Brogden

This book, subtitled A Guide for Pastors, Health Care Professional, and Families, is part of a series on Christian ethics published by B&H Publishing Group. I dare say anyone within each of those groups would be challenged to think more biblically about the relevant issues as well as being better informed by reading this book. In the preface, the series editor tells us the thesis of this book by asking this question: “How do we move from an ancient text like the Bible to twenty-first-century questions about organ transplants, stem-cell research, and human cloning?” This book, written by an ordained minister of the gospel (C. Ben Mitchell) and a physician (D. Joy Riley), gives solid counsel and these emotionally charged issues in 9 chapters, and is broken up into four parts: Christian Bioethics, Taking Life, Making Life, and Remaking/Faking Life. The format of each chapter is a look into a real life situation immersed in the subject, followed by questions for reflection, and Q & A between the authors. Other than a too frequent quoting of Roman Catholics as though that Church is Christian institution, this team provides solid insight from God’s Word on each of these topics.

Chapter 1 gives the reader an overview of the Hippocratic Oath which opened my eyes to the ancient context and false gods the oath was originally made to and the awareness that most doctors today do not subscribe to this oath, which we mostly know as the pledge to, First, do no harm. This was spelled out in explicit language that forbid euthanasia and abortion. The absence of a doctor’s oath to “do no harm” may cause a patient to wonder how much he can trust his doctor. In summing up this topic our physician author observes (page 22, italics in original) “Doctors should work hard to be trust-worthy and humble.” A few pages later (page 28), as they address stem-cell research, our minister reminds us, after quoting 2 Peter 1:3, “God has not left his people without guidance in every area of life. Although the Bible is not a science textbook, its message speaks to the deep underlying values that can guide decisions about scientific matters. Although the Bible is not manual of medicine, its truths may be applied to medical decision making.” This is a key perspective for every child of God to properly understand how to walk in the light of God’s Word. Much of the rest of chapter 2 is good advice for properly reading and understanding the Scriptures, taking into account literary, historical, and cultural context as well the genre of what is being read.

The chapter addressing abortion is sobering and probably eye-opening for most. The authors make a full-court press to establish the humanity of every life, starting from conception. Mitchell makes the essential connection between our view of Jesus and our view of humanity, developing the humanity of our Lord to show how every mortal is given value by the Creator – above all other life forms – from the time the egg is joined with a sperm. At the end of chapter 3, the authors exhort Christians to be active in opposing abortion and supporting life, but they draw no lines of getting involved with pro-life Roman Catholics. Christians must be deliberate and biblically thoughtful in deciding who to get cozy with in the public arena. The next chapter covers death and dying, providing thought-provoking observations about the details of pain and suffering and how one’s Christian world view informs us. A key element in handling the death of any person, they tell us, is to remember the patient (perhaps a close relative) is a human being, not merely a patient to be treated. “Much of the suffering of dying persons comes from being subtly treated as nonpersons.” (page 85) There is discussion of the efforts to extend life, even at the expense of that life being human. It is a long-held desire of fleshly human beings to grasp eternal life in our present form, without submitting to God’s revealed plan of redemption – which includes our death and resurrection. Being a faithful child of God includes how we approach death – do we trust our heavenly Father in our dying as did our Savior? Again, we get faithful advice (pages 100 & 101): “Through the resurrection of Christ, God has given us grounds to hope that death, however awful, will not have the last word.” Amen!

As they move from taking life to making life, the reader is presented with a biology lesson on how babies come into the world. They take this opportunity to reinforce the Christians view of anthropology (page 113): “Knowing that pregnancy occurs at fertilization rather than at implantation will help us make several important distinctions later.” They then cover several options medicine has provided for artificial this or that, discussing the line we cross regarding family integrity and God’s authority, observing (page 123), “When a third party intrudes on the procreative relationship, the divinely instituted structure of the family is altered. Trouble is bound to follow.” This may be unwelcome by some, who have such a great desire for a child that their love for the Word of God is overshadowed. All of us fall into this pit on one issue or another from time-to-time, so let us not rush to judgment.

The last part of this fine book covers the definition of death and the forces behind the changes we’ve seen in the last 50 years; organ donation and transplants; cloning and human/animal hybrids; and life extension practices. In this last category, we are introduced to trans-humanists, a group that wants to extent life in the human body and beyond. This was the topic of recent movie, Transcendence, which traced the consequences of a computer scientist whose “essence” was transferred into a powerful computer he had built. It gets very ugly before it ends. In summing up how we who profess Christ ought to look at aging, Mitchell provides a contrast between Christians and Trans-humanists (page 181): “Interestingly, the trans-humanists and Christians seem to have some common concerns. We share:

  • The quest for the good life.
  • Longing for immortality
  • Pursuit of the relief of human suffering
  • Appreciation for technology’s benefits.

“Where we differ is in the mean to achieve these aims. For Christians the good life and the goods of life are found in God and his presence in our lives. The good life is not defined by the number of years one lives but the reality of God’s presence in however many years one lives. While we, like the apostle Paul, long for immortality, Christians understand that they already possess it. … Another place we differ with the trans-humanist is in loathing every human limitation. Because we are creatures and nor creators, we accept most limitations as gifts from the One who made us.”

And while there is much more in this book that will do the reader much good, I think that is a wonderful point on which to end this review. Christian – are you content with our God’s provision in your life? Do we think we deserve better than YHWH has given us? To quote the Apostle, “Who are you, oh man, to answer back to the One who made you thus?” Let us, as did the Lord Jesus, trust ourselves to the One who judges justly. Trust God, rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances, for this is the will of God for you in Christ Jesus. In living and dying – and all that comes between those two finite points.

by

The Fallacy of Pope Francis

Big Bang Theory true according to Pope Francis

Once again, the world has the distinction of hearing “Thus says the man in the white robe” instead of “thus says the Lord.” If we question the veracity of God’s Word and the foundations which He has established, then it will be easy to cut out further parts of Scripture. Here are a few things to consider as to whether pope Francis is right or wrong.

There are several problems with Christians accepting the Big Bang Theory and the theory of evolution.

1.  It questions the validity and work of the Trinity. Genesis states that each member of the Triune Godhead was involved in creation.

A.  God the Father is attributed with the work of creation throughout the Old Testament. If creation is not true, then we must exclude every writer who spoke and wrote falsely giving credit to the holy God. This means that Job, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the five books of Moses, and others must be taken out of the Bible.

B.  God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, speaks of the creation during His earthly ministry, especially when He addresses the matter of marriage being between one man and one woman.  If Jesus was wrong about creation and the beginning of the world, then He cannot be God for He spoke at least one lie.

C.  God the Holy Spirit is attributed with the inspiration of the Scriptures. 2 Peter 1:21 says, “For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” Thus, if the words written are attributed to the moving of the Holy Spirit, then we can only come to one of two conclusions. 1) Either the prophets wrote contrary to the leading of the Holy Spirit, or 2) there is no Holy Spirit that guides into all truths.  Therefore, the Holy Spirit made a mistake in the work of inspiration which makes Him no longer God, or the Bible is not inerrant and we have nothing which we can believe.

2.  If these theories are correct, then there is no hope for mankind.

A.  There would be no reason to accept any absolutes.

B.  There would be no morals on which to base our lives. If survival of the fittest is truly an underlying principle of evolution, then logic MUST dictate that what Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Nero, Genghis Khan and others did is acceptable. They weeded out those who added nothing to the gene pool.

C.  There would be no such thing as sin. Any “wrongdoings” are only based on one’s upbringing, culture, and societal mores. What would be unacceptable in one culture must be acceptable in another. Therefore, as one example, if evolution is correct, then what ISIS is doing cannot be considered as wrong. If evolution is correct, then we have no right to correct the actions of another culture or society that has “evolved” in a different manner than we have.

D.  Fighting against the inevitable will be a horrific exercise in futility if evolution is correct. Therefore, those who have some deformities, or the wrong skin color, or mental imbalances are doomed to eventual extinction for they add nothing to society and the future of a greater man.

E.  If evolution is true, then there is no sin to die for. There would be no reason for Jesus Christ to have died for a sub-species of animal that has simply evolved from a primordial soup. If evolution is true, then Christ died in vain as a good person, and not as the God-Man.

Now, here is a further thought about the article I have linked to at the top in which pope Francis endorses these false theories. Many in so-called evangelical circles have decided that the Roman Catholic church is also Christian and that their teachings are compatible in many ways with evangelicalism or fundamentalism. There is little that could be further from the truth than this thinking. The Roman Catholic religion is not based on Scripture but on the traditions of man.

Many want to claim that Roman Catholics are going to heaven, but the ONLY way to heaven is by grace through faith alone in Christ alone. The RCC does NOT teach this, and has NEVER taught these truths. To the pope and the teachings of the RCC, all who believe that salvation is only through Christ are to be considered anathema and accursed to the deepest regions of hell.

Before somebody accuses me of hating those who do not believe like me, this is not about me. This is about what the Bible teaches. Either God is true or He is not. If He is not true, then He cannot be God and we are yet in our sins. My prayer is that people will come to Christ alone and realize the joy that comes by believing by faith in the work of creation and the finished work of Calvary.

These theories of the big bang and evolution are NOT based on the truth of Scripture. Any time, science comes up with a new theory designed solely to undermine intelligent design and the truth of a Creator, then the Bible trumps the scientist. The Bible does not ever discredit true science but endorses the truths of what we find in the scientific world.

To conclude, my response to the false teaching of the pope, the heresies of the Roman Catholic church, the false theories of science, and the falsely held positions of a growing number of people in evangelical circles is based on the words of Martin Luther when he was being held to account by the religious establishment —

My belief is based on God and His infallible, inerrant Word. Here I stand, I can do no other. So help me, God.

 

 

by

Science is Always False

If the title sparked your attention, good.

That was the point. The phrase first uttered by apologetic giant, Gordon H. Clark, and resounds louder today than ever. If you are unfamiliar with Clark’s apologetic on this topic I would recommend you examine the lecture as it will provide context for this post. If you have time, I recommend the audio as well as the written explanation.

I deeply enjoy science. Prior to finally going after philosophy as a major, physics and chemistry were strong choices for how I would spend my days. I don’t think that scientists are more evil than the rest of humanity. I think that they are people who look at what is in front of them to come to their conclusions, and trust in the “scientific method,” as a way of finding both facts and truth.

Getting to the Point

I am a Young Earth Creationist (YEC). I think that you should be too.

I am not a scientist. I don’t play one on TV, and I didn’t come to my conclusion about the age of the earth because of science.

I am a Theologian. I don’t play one of TV, but radio, the internet and in person are fair game. I can define the Protoevangelium and many other theological terms without a second thought. I listen to worship songs before singing them, and can think of no better way to past the time than with a cigar, a beer and a group of men who want to talk theology.

I came to my conclusion about the age of the earth theologically. I came to my conclusion about the age of the earth without the input of things outside of the scriptures and I did so for several reasons.

  1. Science is always False. The Scientific Method is void of a solid philosophical defense when dealing with non-repeatable events like abiogenesis, and other such origin based questions. 
  2. The assumption of uniformity is bunk.  (I will leave an expanded explanation of this for a later time.)
  3. I actually believe in Sola Scriptura.
  4. I think that the best person to tell us how we got here, is the person who got us here. ( A bit circular, I know… I am a presuppositional apologetist what do you expect? )

The question I have for you, dear reader, is what caused you to come to the conclusion about the age of the earth that you did?

by

Controversial?

A Georgia member of the House of Representatives recently stated that he believes the Bible, and that evolution is false, and the earth is approximately 9000 years old. That’s not controversial as far as I’m concerned.

But since some people think it’s controversial, I appreciate the stand he’s taken. The truth will ultimately win the day, and isn’t determined by popular vote.

Here’s the story from the Washington Post.

ATHENS, Ga. (AP) Georgia Rep. Paul Broun said in videotaped remarks that evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory are “lies straight from the pit of hell” meant to convince people that they do not need a savior.

The Republican lawmaker made those comments during a speech Sept. 27 at a sportsman’s banquet at Liberty Baptist Church in Hartwell. Broun, a medical doctor, is running for re-election in November unopposed by Democrats.

“God’s word is true,” Broun said, according to a video posted on the church’s website. “I’ve come to understand that. All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell. And it’s lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior.”

Broun also said that he believes the Earth is about 9,000 years old and that it was made in six days. Those beliefs are held by fundamentalist Christians who believe the creation accounts in the Bible to be literally true.

Broun spokeswoman Meredith Griffanti told the Athens Banner-Herald (http://bit.ly/Us4O0Z ) that Broun was recorded speaking off-the-record to a church group about his religious beliefs. He sits on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

It seems unlikely that Broun’s remarks were supposed to be kept private. The banquet was advertised, Broun spoke before an audience and the video of his remarks was posted on the church’s website.

by

Science & Faith: Friends or Foes?

I received an advertisement for a conference where the question “Science & Faith: Friends or Foes?” will be answered—or at least discussed. I don’t know what the speakers will say about it, but I thought it was an interesting question.

The answer is that anyone who puts any stock in science has faith that the future will behave as the past. This is one of the fundamental assumptions on which science is built. When you do an experiment on Tuesday, under the same conditions, you expect the same results on Thursday.

If you try to start your car, and it doesn’t turn over, you wouldn’t assume the laws of physics had changed. You would assume the laws of physics were the same, and that the battery was dead.

Atheists have no good reason for this fundamental assumption. They don’t believe there is someone or something that ensures the laws of the universe will remain constant. Essentially, their faith in science is blind.

Many atheists I’ve spoken with mock Christians for being unscientific. The irony is that they cannot account for why science works.

If you ask an atheist why he or she assumes the future will behave as the past, you won’t get a good answer. Usually, the individual will offer a fallacious answer: The future always has been like the past so it always will look like the past. That is begging the question. If you get him or her to understand this answer is flawed, the atheist will usually say that he or she will continue to trust in science as long as it continues to work. By saying this, he or she admits to being irrational and having no reason for his or her beliefs—taking a blind leap of faith.

Why, then, does science work? What makes the future behave as the past? Christians have an omniscient Being who has revealed to us that He upholds the universe (see Colossians 1:17 and Hebrews 1:3). He maintains order in the world. He is the reason science works.

The ultimate authority for Christians is the God of the Bible; He provides reasonable answers for why the world works. Atheism is bankrupt, because its ultimate authority and assumptions are fallacious. Atheists who love science are being inconsistent with their own worldview, and borrowing from the Christian worldview. Science and the Christian faith are indeed friends.

by

Sermon of the Week: “The Flood” by Voddie Baucham

We’ve seen Veggie Tales versions of the great flood, talking about the love of God on Noah and his family, everyone having a fun time with the animals and the water. The Scripture is very clear – the flood came upon the Earth (the whole planet) because the Lord (Creator, Judge, and sustainer of ALL things) judged mankind for his sin.

Far from being a nice, fun story for children, the tale of Noah’s ark is a sober reminder of the consequences of sin – no less so than Sodom and Gomorrah. What awaits all whose name is not written in the Lamb’s Book of Life is foreshadowed by the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and the flood that destroyed all life on the surface of the Earth, save eight persons and animals on the ark.

But for those who are loved and saved by the grace of God, we have this promise which cannot be broken: “There is, therefore, no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 8:1) Do not sweep away the lesson of God’s wrath on sinners (not their sin – their persons) because it is so difficult for our human souls to accept. Do not lose heart because God is righteous and His judgment is sure – as are His promises to His chosen ones. Rejoice if your name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life and worship God because of His mercy on the redeemed and for His judgment on the wicked, as do the angels in Heaven.

Listen here to The Flood.

by

IndoctriNation

I just finished watching this movie. A gentle but forceful examination of the government school system in our country, revealing why it can not be reconciled with a Christian worldview.

WACO, Texas, Oct. 12, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ — As the 2012 presidential race begins to draw public attention, a new film seeks to bring education to the forefront of public debate. ‘IndoctriNation: Public Schools and the Decline of Christianity in America,’ a documentary that explores the origins and social impact of America’s public school system, will be released on DVD October 18, followed by public screenings in select cities across the US. The controversial film has sparked debate among Christians and atheists over the roles of faith, and government in education.

Recent news coverage has highlighted the controversy of several presidential candidates who will seek to dismantle the US Department of Education if elected, a goal shared by Ronald Reagan but abandoned by the Republican Party in recent years.

“People are starting to wake up to the damaging effects of a government controlled education monopoly,” says ‘IndoctriNation‘ co-director, Colin Gunn, a Scotland-born filmmaker living in Texas. He continues, “We now are facing all these problems in America – high taxation, welfare dependency, government debt – and as Christians and conservatives we have to see we can’t solve those problems until we solve the public schooling problem.”

Gunn, a homeschool father of eight, asserts that school problems go much deeper than Federal involvement in education. Last summer, he took a road trip across the USA in a yellow school bus, along with co-director Joaquin Fernandez and the Gunn family, recording interviews for ‘IndoctriNation.’ He spoke with teachers, administrators, parents, evangelical leaders, and other whistleblowers who gave insight into the complex political, economic, and moral problems with America’s educational system.

‘IndoctriNation‘ has garnered support from Christian ministries and influential leaders. MOVIEGUIDE® founder, Dr. Ted Baehr, gives his endorsement, saying, “‘IndoctriNation‘ is an extremely important movie. Every church in America should show [it].”

“Every Christian parent with a child in a government school should see this,” says Cal Thomas, syndicated columnist and FOX News contributor.

John Taylor Gatto, former New York City and New York State Teacher of the Year, has long been an outspoken critic of government schools and is featured in the film. Gatto asks candidly, “Is there an idea more radical in the history of the human race than turning your children over to total strangers who you know nothing about, and having those strangers work on your child’s mind?”

Since a large majority of Christian children attend a public school, Gunn will seek to reach their families when the film is shown at screenings sponsored by churches and individuals who are concerned about the effects of public education on today’s youth.

Colin Gunn is an award-winning producer, director, and accomplished animator. Originally from Hamilton, Scotland, Gunn is now a US citizen and lives in Waco, Texas with his wife and eight children.

More information about the ‘IndoctriNation‘ film and public screenings can be found at www.indoctrinationmovie.com.

by

Public Schools are criminal operations

From the Gunn Brothers – http://www.colingunn.com/ – comes a new film, Indoctrination.

Samuel Blumenfeld, former fan of public schools, is featured in this new film from Colin Gunn. I first became aware of Blumenfeld decades ago through this book. He is a firm advocate of God’s plan for children and is bold about sin.  In the film, Blumenfeld makes concise points of public school policy that clearly and explicitly classifies them as criminal operations. Watch the trailer and then support the film so more people will hear the Christian response to what started as an experiment. Something has gone horribly wrong.

by

What’s The Big Deal on Creation?

Many Christians point out that the word “day” in Genesis chapter one can mean something other than a 24-hour day and, therefore, the scientific view that the world is billions of years old can be reconciled to the Scriptures.

But how does one determine when the Hebrew word “yom” means a 24-hour day and when it means an undetermined length of time? As with all interpretation, context is key.

And, as with all Scripture, understanding the authority of God as the ultimate rule of interpretation of His Word and His creation is foundational to everything else.

 

 

In this hour long free video from Answers in Genesis, you will see how dangerous it is to play fast and loose with the Word of God and be taught why the “yom” must mean 24-hour day in Genesis chapter 1.

May the Lord God of Heaven be our guide – and not any snake who relies on human “wisdom” to cause us to question His Word.

by

Is your Worldview based on the world?

Many professing Christians think man has more wisdom than God in determining how long the creation took. Of course, few people put it in those terms, but that is what it boils down to. Here’s an example.

What are the consequences of disbelieving in a literal 6 day creation? We deny the clear teaching of the Old and New Testament. Jesus taught (recorded in Mark 10:6) that man and woman were created in the beginning of creation – not after a long, long time.

And when we deny the clear teachings of the elementary things of Scripture, why should our children believe us or our pastors when they are taught about sin and deliverance from its consequences? If creation is reduced to a fairy tale, we have breached the foundation of God’s revelation to man. God stated out His special revelation to man with the words, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Creation is important to Him – it ought to be to us.

For a few days, you can download a 40 minute video in which Ken Ham describes the importance of believing God’s Word – for you and the next generation. In it you will find out:

The next generation is already calling it quits on traditional church. Next Sunday, look around, two thirds of the young people in your church are already disengaged from the message they are hearing. And it’s not just happening on the nominal fringe; it’s happening in the most solid “Bible-believing” churches.

In this important DVD, Ken Ham discusses the profound cultural changes taking place in our Western world, as God’s Word is rejected and man’s fallible ideas are welcomed. Ken relates some of the shocking statistics presented in the book Already Gone that reveal the reasons why young people are leaving church and abandoning the faith of their parents.

The church is failing to give children real answers to their questions. We are losing our kids long before college. But this is far from a hopeless situation. Ken explains how we can fight back for our children, and what we can do to ground our children in the faith and prepare them for the challenges of the secular world.

HT to my good friend at PurposeDrivel

by

The improbability of evolution.

From Samaritan Ministries:

This is the human genome in book form. If you were to print all of your DNA in only one cell of your body, it would fill all of these books in this bookcase. It’s estimated that the human body has 50 to 75 trillion of these bookcases.

by

The Offense of Biblical Creation & The False Authority of Science

John Piper keeps getting himself into hot water with the reformed folks he has been among for decades.  Latest is his comfort with the unbiblical quasi-scientific perspective on the age of the Earth.

As asked in the article below, “why would there be a need to harmonize the creation account with modern science? To prove it’s true ….or false? Why, to prove it is false of course.”  The child of God knows the Bible is true.  The Bible tells us not to trust the “wisdom” of man, as the “foolishness” of God is above (better than) the “wisdom” of man.  Yet we tend to trust men when they speak with the authority given them by other men – even when it cannot be reconciled with Scripture.

On whatever the Bible speaks, it is Authoritative and trustworthy.  Nothing man can discover or develop is able to disprove the Word of God.  Be careful what you believe.  You say you believe in Christ – believe in the Word of God.

What follows is from: http://5ptsalt.com/2010/07/16/piper-sailhamer-the-offense-of-biblical-creation-the-false-authority-of-science/#comment-4457

Piper & Sailhamer: The Offense of Biblical Creation & The False Authority of Science

Biblical truth is always offensive. The Biblical narrative on creation is certainly no exception. Scripture is quite explicit in how the universe and all that it contains came into being, and since the fall of man it’s description as recorded by God for us has been hated.

Creation is recorded as a series of totally supernatural, perfectly executed, final acts in 6 literal days. Modern philosophy and all social sciences of men have long attempted to refute the biblical account, and were in fact, created for that very purpose, to deny God’s truth.

In so-called modern times, the biblical teachings of creative, final acts by the God of Scripture have been superceded by scientific ‘processes’ so that the results of creation are placed within and are products of history and time (time itself viewed as a process, not a creature of God). In fact, much of modern historical geology is based on the philosophical assumption that the biblical account of creation ex-nihilo is false.

By the early nineteenth century the central presupposition of uniformitarianism that “the key to the past” had been popularized by James Hutton and Charles Lyell (who in turn influenced Darwin). (Douglas F. Kelly, Creation & Change, p. 163)

Perhaps placing some general creation assertions of the Bible against modern philosophical sciences will be helpful:

Bible Modern Sciences
All things, seen and unseen, are the creative final acts of the sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, Triune God, ex-nihilo. All things are result of processes, placed within  and products of history.
Meaning of history is to be understood in God. Time and history are determined and governed by God. Foundation of history is eternity, not time. Meaning of history is to be understood in the progress of man. Time and history are products of natural processes.
God is Sovereign in all things and holds the very life and breath of created man at His disposal and according to His good pleasure. The only god tolerated is a god working with man for a common purpose, to conquer and control time and history.

John Piper has been greatly influenced by a book on old earth theories entitled Genesis Unbound by John Sailhamer. In a critical review of the book over at Answers in Genesis, we’re told that Sailhamer “adopts a unique view of the creation account in order to harmonize it with the claims of modern science.”

We are further told in this review that:

“Despite his plea to allow the text of Genesis to speak for itself, Sailhamer fails to take his own advice. He writes: ‘Given what appears to be true about the age of the earth, it is likely that millions or billions of years transpired during this time of “the beginning”’ (p. 105). Such a comment clearly indicates that Sailhamer has allowed the claims of modern uniformitarian science to determine what the text is saying.”

Now why would there be a need to harmonize the creation account with modern science? To prove it’s true ….or false? Why, to prove it is false of course. If it were believed to be true there would be no need for proof. Belief vs. Unbelief.

Another question: What is this uniformitarianism? If John Piper is ‘most at home’ with Sailhamer’s view on creation, as he has stated in his recent video, what does that really tell us? More importantly, what are the ramifications for those who sit under Piper’s teaching at Bethlehem Baptist and the internet?

We’ll take these questions one at a time, but first, let’s define uniformitarianism and show why it’s important that you understand the idea behind Sailhamer’s views:

Uniformitarianism is the belief that the origin and development of all things can be explained exclusively in terms of the same natural laws and processes operating today…Uniformitarianism has been the backbone of modern historical geology and is responsible for the current widespread assumption that the earth is billions of years old…[The Uniformatarians] insist that all geological features and formations, once attributed to geologic cataclysms, can now be satisfactorily explained by ordinary processes functioning over long periods of time. (Scott M. Huse, The Collapse of Evolution, pp 7,8)

Processes. Sound familiar?

1) Why would anyone want to harmonize the creation account with modern science?

Because on some level they reject the biblical account. An argument could be made for curiosity I suppose, but curiosity can be a form of doubt. Either way, it is unbelief isn’t it?

2) If John Piper is ‘most at home’ with Sailhamer’s view of creation, what does that really tell us?

It tells us he is ‘at home’ with allowing modern science (uniformitarianism) to determine what the Bible is saying. In other words, the ‘science’ of natural processes has taken a position of a higher authority than the Word of God itself.

3) Finally, what does this mean, in general, for those who sit under Piper’s preaching and instruction at Bethlehem Baptist and those who follow his teachings on the internet?

It means that there is at least one area of John Piper’s belief system that is not grounded in Scripture: Creation. For the Christian, creation is to be understood as a series of supernatural acts, not processes. Every attempt, either by Sailhamer or Piper, to read or force process philosophies into any Biblical text, to allow the possibility of days being turned to ‘ages’, to allow room for ‘scientific’ interpretations is to yield the authority of God and His inerrant Word to process philosophies of unregenerate man. It is, at the gist, an abandonment of the absolute Sovereignty of God and of the Biblical principle of sola scriptura.

To allow this type of teaching, as harmless as it may seem to so many, is to give a nod of approval to a lie. It is to attribute supernatural powers to ‘natural processes’ rather than final creative acts of God.

This issue my friends, is not about men, it’s about biblical doctrine. It’s about the truth of God. Please do not willingly compromise it. Reject error. Find this error in your own local churches, if it exist, and root it out for the glory of God and His Son Jesus Christ.

John Piper:

Now, when it comes to the more controversial issues of how to construe Genesis 1-2 about how God did it and how long it took him to do it, there I’m totally sympathetic with a pastor who is going to lay his view down, having studied it, and is going to say to his people, “Here is my understanding of those chapters. These six days can’t be anything other than six literal days, and so that’s how long God took to do it. And this universe is about 10 or 15,000 years old. Though it looks old, that’s the way God made it. He made it to look old,” or something like that.

Or he might take another view that these days are ages.

Or he might take Sailhamer’s view, which is where I feel at home. His view is that what’s going on here is that all of creation happened to prepare the land for man.

In verse 1, “In the beginning he made the heavens and the earth,” he makes everything. And then you go day by day and he’s preparing the land. He’s not bringing new things into existence; he’s preparing the land and causing things to grow and separating out water and earth. And then, when it’s all set and prepared, he creates and puts man there.

So that has the advantage of saying that the earth is billions of years old if it wants to be—whatever science says it is, it is—but man is young, and he was good and he sinned. He was a real historical person, because Romans 5 says so, and so does the rest of the Bible.

That’s where I am, and I think every pastor should go ahead and say what he believes. [emphasis mine, ed.] (Online Source)

by

Is this you?

You look at a beautiful painting and you say to yourself, “There must have been a painter.”

You look at a motor vehicle of great workmanship and you say to yourself, “There must have been a manufacturer.”

You look at a meticulously detailed statue and you say to yourself, “There must have been a sculptor.”

You look at a massive bridge spanning a large body of water and you say to yourself, “There must have been an engineer.”

You look at a tall building and you say to yourself, “There must have been a builder.”

You look at a complex computer program and you say to yourself, “There must have been a programmer.“

You look at a well-written best-selling novel and you say to yourself, “There must have been an author.”

You look at the human body and say to yourself, “This must have been the product of an accident. A long time ago absolutely nothing from absolutely nowhere exploded and not only created absolutely everything, but also created order and it all occurred as a random accident.“

 

If this is you, then these are for you:

– The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God” (Psalm 14:1).

– Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, for he will despise the wisdom of your words (Proverbs 23:9).

– A scoffer seeks wisdom and finds none, but knowledge is easy to one who has understanding (Proverbs 14:6).

– The way of a fool is right in his own eyes (Proverbs 12:15).

– The foolishness of God is wiser than men (1 Corinthians 1:25).

– God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27).

– The wisdom of this world is foolishness before God (1 Corinthians 3:19).

– A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them (1 Corinthians 2:14).

– The word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18).

Let everything that has breath praise the Lord.
(Psalm 150:6)
by

How great Thou art.

And still, man, in the wickedness of his heart, is so depraved that he has the audacity to shake his fist at the sky and proclaim God doesn’t exist . . . or he goes to church and lives his life like God doesn’t exist.

by

Sermon of the week: “A Theology of Creation” by John MacArthur.

John MacArthur Two weeks ago we concluded our evolution / creation series by John MacArthur entitled The Battle for the Beginning. As a follow-up to that series I present this week’s sermon of the week by John MacArthur entitled A Theology of Creation.

This is a great message that covers the subject of creation, evangelicals who reject the first two chapters of Genesis for other theories about creation, and concludes with examining evangelicals who have bought the lie of radical environmentalism (who are “working for the Lord” by trying to preserve the very earth God cursed back in Genesis).

This will surely step on the worldview toes of many emergents, liberals, and post-moderns.


by

Sermon of the week: “The Implications of Evolution” by John MacArthur.

John MacArthur Your sermon of the week is the final installment from John MacArthur’s series The Battle for the Beginning, entitled The Implications of Evolution. We’ve been featuring this series every other week since May and you can find the whole series on MacArthur’s website here.

We will be featuring one more sermon from MacArthur on the subject of creation (unrelated to this particular series) in two weeks.

by

Sermon of the week: “Creation, Day 6” by John MacArthur.

John MacArthur Your sermon of the week is Creation, Day 6 by John MacArthur (three parts) from his series The Battle for the Beginning. We’ve been featuring this series every other week. The next installment will be in two weeks.

Creation, Day 6 (Part One)

Creation, Day 6 (Part Two)

Creation, Day 6 (Part Three)