Biblical Creation and Evangelism

One of the reflexive responses of compromisers regarding Genesis is, "You can't take it literally". To me, that says, "I reject anything that indicates a creation week of 24-hour days, a young Earth and a Noachian flood, because I add millions of years and interpret the Bible through "nature", which is the  67th book of the Bible ." That is a very bad idea: A straightforward reading of the book of Genesis does  not  give any "wiggle room" for any of those  compromise doctrines to add huge amounts of time It leads to a series of compromises through the Bible God takes a dim view of people tampering with his word and "exceeding what is written" (for example, Prov. 30.6, Deut. 4.2, Rev. 22.18-19, 1 Cor. 4.6 NASB) But...what does it mean  to take Genesis "literally"? I tend to cringe when people say that, because misotheists will find all sorts of strange things to take out of context and then accuse Christians of believing &q

As I have said many times here, when we engage in apologetics, we need to be well-grounded in the Word and good instruction, as well as walking in the Spirit (Eph. 5.18), using the armor of God (Eph. 6.11-19). We must be proclaiming the gospel with boldness (Eph. 6.19, Acts 13.46, Phil. 1.14). Prayer is essential to our task as well as our daily lives (Eph. 6.18, Jude 1.20, 1 Thess. 5.17). If we attempt to engage in apologetics without having a real Christian walk, we are asking for trouble. Further, people who do not really believe the Bible simply undermine the gospel, and the efforts of apologists who do believe the Bible is God's Word; a "high view" of Scripture is essential. When compromisers say that the Bible needs to be interpreted by adding current man-made science philosophies, that it is only for "spiritual truth", adding views that are either unscriptural or anti-scriptural, saying that the Bible is not reliable — they need to examine themselves and

If we are going to be effective soldiers for Jesus, we have to be firm on the basics: Get into the Word, spend time in prayer, fellowship with other believers and get good teaching. If you are not doing these things on a regular basis, you have no business  getting in Satan's face — you'll be shredded. But if you are doing those, then add your spiritual combat gear (Ephesians 6.10-18) and apologetics training books, videos, lectures, audios or whatever. And remember, the whole thing is not only about being strong in the Lord and growing in faith ourselves, but to be able to present the gospel. You do care that people are dying without Christ and spending eternity in Hell, yes? The first part of the basics, getting into the Word, is vital. Do you believe  the Word of God? Or is the Bible something that you do not consider all that important? If that is the case, I urge you to check yourself and see if you are truly saved . You cannot expect to be an effective witness if you d

Did you know that the one who was most influential in forming the modern scientific method was a Biblical creationist? Yes, it was Sir Francis Bacon. Although he has been called a great man of faith, he actually did damage to our understanding of science. He wanted to leave God out of science and be strictly secular with it. He had an unscriptural belief that God's revelation was expressed in "two books". One of those is the Bible, the other is nature. When "interpreted correctly", they are in harmony. (Frankly, this sounds cultic, smacking of the Mormon claim that the Bible is true "as far as it is translated correctly".) Compromisers like Hugh Ross will give priority to the current understanding and beliefs of modern science trends, interpreting the Bible to fit with those preconceptions. Christians gradually surrendered science to the secularists. Then, they began sacrificing their belief in the authority of Scripture. There are two parts to the fo

And whoever is so bold that he ventures to accuse God of fraud and deception in a single word and does so willfully again and again after he has been warned and instructed once or twice will likewise certainly venture to accuse God of fraud and deception in all His words. — Martin Luther In a previous brilliant article (oops, almost forgot that this is not the "with attitude, in-character" Weblog), I discussed Fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism , and the errors made regarding the defense of the faith. Now I have learned something else that runs parallel. One of the fundamentals of Fundamentalism is the inerrancy of Scripture. (I am not a Fundamentalist, but I hold to this position, as do many other non-Fundamentalist Christians.) Although Christians had been instrumental in the development of sciences through the years, we surrendered to the secularists. The Bible came under assault from Darwinists, uniformitarianism and "Higher Criticism". Instead of adh

It seems that Old Earth Creationists (OECs) who use atheistic methods and interpretations of science and then add huge amounts of time into the early chapters of Genesis are more extreme than I thought. No, I am not saying "extreme" as in "blowing up buildings belonging to Biblical creationists". What I mean is that they have to keep twisting Scriptures and forcing excuses to justify their compromising positions. From Ken Ham's Weblog: After watching what turned into a two-hour debate between Hugh Ross and me on TBN television last week, AiG board chairman, Pastor Don Landis, gave an address to the AiG staff yesterday morning titled “Contending for the Faith” (Jude 3). Jude 3 states “Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” His powerful address focused on challenging the staff t

Ironically, the fundamentally flawed atheistic worldview has helped modern Christianity by forcing questions and issues into our faces that were sidestepped and ignored. (I think some of the questions were also in the minds of believers as well, but we did not bother to ask.) One reason that people have abandoned their faith is when they would ask questions about the very first book of the Bible and receive scolding or pious non-answers. Apologists have been becoming more skilled, more knowledgeable and more plentiful. The same with apologetics ministries. I have been encouraging Christians from the beginning of this Weblog to know what and why we believe (2 Peter 3.18) so that we can share the gospel effectively (1 Peter 3.15, Jude 1.3 NASB) and be on guard against false teachers and compromisers (Matthew 7.15 ESV, 2 John 1.7, 2 Cor. 11.13-15). This includes the so-called "New Atheist" movement. (It has been pointed out that there is not much "new" in it, ju

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Part 1 of this 2-part series is here . Interesting... I was attacked three times in three days by OECs (Old Earth Creationists). I should not be surprised, I suppose. People love their pet doctrines, and get very passionate, even unchristian, in promoting them . The OEC in the previous post was banned for being obstreperous, illogical and judgmental, and had to continue fussing at me in e-mail correspondence. Also, there was another OEC who pulled similar nonsense and was extremely condescending. He met Mr. Banhammer as well. As I discussed in the previous linked post, OECs essentially use current trends in science and science philosophy to tell God what he meant in his Word. Although this kind of compromise (that's right, I said it) does not guarantee that the person disbelieves the Bible or is not really a Christian, their lower view of Scripture causes a domino effect on theology, with further compromise and excuses as a result. Liberal theolo

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This should be interesting, because I consider this a collaborative effort. From a Facebook exchange in one Page (taken from screen shots) to other forums with people offering some very insightful comments, and I am putting this together. From the outset, I have to repeat some things that I have stated before regarding Old-Earth Creationists (OECs): Many are caught up in the evolutionary propaganda and simply assume that the Earth is millions of years old Some have not thought through the theological implications of adding huge amounts of time to the Creation account Some have been deceived by OECs who misrepresent Young Earth (ie, Biblical) Creationists (YECs) Although I am reluctant to claim the label "YEC" because it is not complete, I use it. But instead, I prefer to be faithful to what the Bible teaches, and that is my final authority. Image credit: Answers in Genesis In fact, the whole thing seems to come down to Biblica

Pharisees came to him testing him, and asked him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a certificate of divorce to be written, and to divorce her.” But Jesus said to them, “For your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment.  But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female .  For this cause a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife,  and the two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.  What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” — Mark 10.2-9 , World English B ible Theistic evolutionists, progressive creationists, gap theorists and the like attempt to make the Bible say what it does not say. Since "science" (philosophies) have "proven" that the Earth is millions of years old, they add millions of years to the Bible. I have had people say to me, "The Bible doesn't say how old the Ea

"To be ignorant and simple now – not to be able to meet enemies on their own ground – would be to throw down our weapons, and betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen." — C.S. Lewis  By Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edited September 13, 2016   This is a difficult article to write because supporting documents are difficult to obtain. Although there is a plethora of material that states, essentially, "Christian Fundamentalism is anti-intellectual", I am unwilling to use it because of anti-Fundamentalist bias. (Ironic, really, that liberal analyses decrying the anti-intellectualism of Fundamentalism are themselves slanted and illogical in their approach.) There are some problems and bad connotations associated with the Fundamentalist movement , but I am not interested in emotionally-laden terminology. Therefore, this article will draw from my own thoughts, research and experiences. If pe

If I profess, with the loudest voice and the clearest exposition, every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christianity. Where the battle rages the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle-field besides is mere flight and disgrace to him if he flinches at that one point. — Elizabeth Rundle Charles , wrongly attributed to Martin Luther Do you have outlandish beliefs and doctrines? I don't mean strange cult stuff like the serpent seed doctrine or that you must speak in tongues or you are not saved . But then, I did not start with a fair question. Actually, do you think that your beliefs are outlandish, or seem outlandish to unbelievers? Further, are you embarrassed and hide your beliefs? Regular readers know that I am biblical ("young earth") creationist. I reject evolution because th

Evolutionists answer questions like, "Where did consciousness come from? Why do we like — and make — music? Where did the laws of logic come from? When did the laws of nature take effect" by offering guesses, speculation and more theories. They do not make sense, but only raise more questions. Theistic evolution is the belief that evolution happened, then they tack God's name onto it as if it is a blessing. (But if evolution happened, who needs God?) For them, God used the amazingly inefficient, wasteful and cruel method of evolution in his creation. Of course, the Bible does not mean what it says in Genesis, and they have as much tap-dancing with compromise and excuses as the atheistic evolutionists have. Here's a question to fluster theistic evolutionists: How do they explain the origin of morality? In recent years there has been a growing body of literature in which theistic evolutionists advance arguments in support of their belief that evolution, properly under