Biblical Creation and Evangelism

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  The hands up yonder at the Darwin Ranch (near Deception Pass) are in a "Katie, bar the door!" frame of mind.  Question Evolution Day is near, and they have an intense dislike people examining the evidence that is presented for quark-to-questioner evolution. It is interesting that many people who tell us to "question authority" are willing to accept pronouncements about origins and even theology because of some vague "scientists say" attitude. We can have an impact and keep the pressure on  using the internet . Flickr /  sentex64  ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) Despite the claims of prosperity preachers, the Christian life is not fun and games. It is spiritual warfare (Eph. 6:10-20, 2 Cor. 10:3-6). We will  have persecution (2 Peter 3:14, Rom. 8:35, Mark 4:17, Heb. 10:33, 2 Tim. 3:12), so we can't just sit back being saved, not fulfilling God's commands to grow and influence the world (2 Peter 3:18, Matt. 5:13-16). It take God-given c

We have discussed some rather in-depth subjects here, but there is a question that I bypassed. After all, most of the major creation science organizations deal with it, so I made the erroneous assumption that it was not needed. That is, where did Cain get his wife? While the question is an honest one for people who are new to biblical creation teachings, it is also treated like a "Gotcha!" question by atheists and other evolutionists. They act like it cannot be answered, therefore, Genesis is a myth. Or, therefore, evolution. Who knows what they looked like? Here are two ladybugs from Pixabay / Ron van den Berg It's okay to admit it if you don't know the answer, but there are plenty of resources (including the one linked below) that you should investigate and get back to the person asking the question. None of that, "Just have faith and believe" excuse stuff, you savvy that, pilgrim? Especially for the young'uns. The quick answer is that if people actual

Many of us engaging in apologetics are confronted with people who say they want to ask questions, but instead, they want to slap leather with us. It seems that they want to play the "Gotcha!" game, and if an apologist is unable to answer a question or objection, they can further justify their rebellion against God. (Embarrassing the apologist is a bonus.) A favored tactic of scoffers is to turn a discussion into a shootout, rapidly firing their statements and not allowing a response.  Cropped from Pixnio / Amanda Mills In the Nye-Ham debate, Bill Nye exploited the debate rules and indulged in a related tactic known as elephant hurling , where Ken Ham was unable to respond in the allotted time. Something I've pointed out many times is that misotheists and other evolutionists often rely on intimidation. While 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to sanctify Christ and be ready to answer, there is no command about getting pummeled. Also, there comes a time when we discern that we're b

Long ago when I was first becoming serious about apologetics, I followed Dr. Craig. While he could easily dismantle atheism, some things made me uneasy. When it came to ridiculing biblical creationists , I was done. Later, I learned of his belief in molinism  and  dancing around biblical inerrancy . Craig has been garnering attention with his book  In Quest of the Historical Adam , where he bushwhacks not only biblical creationists, but foundational beliefs in Scripture. He has clearly saddled up to ride with the fifth column of theistic evolution and rejection of biblical authority. Unsplash / Aaron Burden (modified) Of course, Craig is not stupid or inexperienced, which makes the downward spiral of his material all the more execrable. Several creationists have analyzed his book and pointed out serious errors in reasoning, and revealing his disdain for the Bible. By my reckoning, to say that Adam was not real when Jesus, Paul, and others in the Bible said he was was, and to relegate

This is a title I never thought I would use. A recent post on Twitter asked what you would say to a stranger on the street, but that is not usually the best approach. When it comes to apologetics, Christians and creationists who are informed on their subjects use analogies and other things as springboards. Indeed, I have referred to Stargate SG-1 , and used Star Trek:TNG  as inspirations for creation articles. Augustine probably never made a pickle analogy (apologies to  Pietro Perugino ) Sometimes when watching a show, I will remark to my wife about how something we are seeing was designed by our Creator. In conversations, people like to have something in common or relatable. The discussion can move into more important subjects. I was surprised that a kosher dill pickle can be used to make four points about creation and in evangelism. Food, even dill pickles, can provide relevant insights for creation apologetics. Since November 14th is National Pickle Day, this is a good time to cons

The article featured below makes a couple of points, both of which are important to Christians. Apologists and those who value rational thinking should take note of them. One is a common error in logic called appeal to authority . The other important point extends from the first: old Earth compromisers claim that Augustine and other church fathers were "on their side", and people just assume that they are being truthful. People who want the facts can check things out nowadays. Original image: St Augustine in his Study , Sandro Botticelli, 1490 Don't be disunderstanding me here, citing authorities in their areas is necessary. It becomes fallacious when there's an emotional component that is manipulative. Also, getting an opinion from someone who is unskilled in an area is a fallacy, such as quoting Clinton Richard Dawkins, an angry atheist, on matters of theology. Referring to him on zoology or animal behavior might be more accurate. Matt Slick of CARM says, "My

We all have ultimate starting points. Those of us who believe the Bible are to presuppose that it is true, just as unbelievers presuppose materialistic or pagan mythologies. Both biblical creation science and adherents of universal common descent use  operational and historical (forensic) science. Things become more complicated when discussing Noah's Ark. Credit: RGBStock /  Savvas Stavrinos Using science and what is observed in living things today, creationists also reason from Scripture to determine how Noah and the others provided food for carnivores on the Ark. In the beginning, creation was very good. There was no carnivory until after Adam sinned, and humans were not permitted to eat meat until after the Flood . Since God brought pairs of animal kinds  (which were probably very different than species living today ), they were intended to be kept alive. Noah didn't say, "Put the ugly ones off to the left so we can feed them to the carnivores." Obviously, there h

As regular readers have noticed, the Christian worldview makes sense of what is seen in the world. Logic, science, mathematics, and other necessary but intangible things are impossible without God. It is often easy to dismantle spurious arguments from professing atheists, but Christians are called to a higher standard . Deluge (II) by Mikalojus Konstantinas Ciurlionis, 1904 A professing Christian decided to slap leather with Dr. Jason Lisle regarding the lengths of the days before the Genesis Flood and why days are longer now. It did not go well. The challenger acted like an atheist in several ways by using logical fallacies, uninformed conjectures, exceeding what was written in the Bible — and lying. Dr. Lisle corrected him with Scripture, reason, and mathematics. This guy, like atheists, seemed to resent being kept on topic. We here examine some assertions made by Troy, a young earth creationist who has made some very unorthodox claims about conditions before the Genesis flood.  He

Unbelievers often look for any excuse to mock the Bible, thinking that if they can find a meaningful error, the entire Bible is wrong. (That is the fallacy of composition.) One of these alleged errors is when Moses wrote that grasshoppers were four-legged insects. Waitaminnit! Credit: Unsplash / Natália Dudás Scoffers as well as honest enquirers find something that seems wrong at first glance, but resourceful people tend to dig deeper instead of using superficial readings to "settle" the matter. (Skeptics try to find alleged contradictions, but those are easily dispatched .) Sometimes it's a matter of the scoffer misquoting a verse. We have frequently considered context  here, and there are several ways consider that: The immediate  context of the verses above and below the one in questions Larger context, including chapters Context including other books of the Bible Historical and cultural contexts Linguistic context Science (some owlhoots have complained about the Bible

There is a pair of verses that may perplex Christians at first glance, and scoffers call it biblical contradiction. This is Proverbs 26:4-5. The claim that they are a contradiction is easily dismissed, but the question about not answering a fool according to his folly, followed by answering, can be clarified. It is also a powerful method for defending and presenting the faith. Originally, this now-public domain image by Sidney Paget was used to illustrate the 1903 Sherlock Holmes story " The Empty House " The Bible makes it clear that God calls unbelievers fools . That's not God being on the prod and calling them stupid, but it is deeper than that because it is about character, not intelligence (although some exhibit a lack of intelligence). Do a Bible search with theWord , other software, or online and look for fool , foolish , and similar words. It's not gratuitous abuse. I can't think of a good way to open a discussion by telling someone that he or she is a foo

There are times when a mocker will say something like, "Prove to me your God exists". A Christian may ask, "What kind of evidence are you willing to consider?", which is a reasonable question. (One actually told me to provide it, then he would consider if it was acceptable. I knew where that would lead!) Unbelievers already have all the evidence they need, but they suppress the truth (Rom. 1:18-23). Credit: Photos-public-domain.com We can present all the evidence (or proof) we can, and if someone does not repent and make Jesus the Lord of his or her life, we may think that we've failed. But our job is to sanctify Christ as Lord in our hearts and be ready to make a defense of our hope (1 Peter 3:15), and salvation comes through the working of the Holy Spirit, not because of our skill and eloquence (1 Cor. 2:1-5). Considering how many Christians get uppity because they have the One True Interpretation of Scripture™, perhaps pride is one reason that God has not mad

There are Christians who are excited about using apologetics to defend and present the faith, and there are others who think that is a job for experts. All Christians are commanded to present the faith (2 Cor. 10:5, Col. 4:5-6, 1 Peter 3:15, Acts 17:22-31), but some are called to be more intense with it. And "tense" can apply to many of us. Mostly made at The Keep-Calm-O-Matic  using an image from NASA (Usage of images does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone) It is indeed unfortunate that some are intent on winning arguments rather than helping the lost come to Christ. Similarly, we can expend mental energy trying to analyze (and sometimes rehash) situations so we can give the most devastating arguments. Yes, by all means, do the best you can. Sometimes we may feel that we botched it. That happens. However, convicting of sin and saving people is the work of the Holy Spirit; we do not do the saving. It is not up to our brilliance (1 Cor. 2:1-5), which can lead to

Now there is a provocative title! Believers in an old Earth, evolution, and similar things are probably clutching their pearls while expressing their outrage. Secularists (and many professing Christians, unfortunately) insist that deep time is a scientific fact . We must teach children real science, right? Credit: Flickr / Marco Verch ( CC BY 2.0 ) What is actually happening is that children (as well as the rest of us) are being given stories based on naturalistic interpretations about the past; there is no actual empirical evidence that obliges us to believe that the earth is billions of years old. Children have been enamored with dinosaurs for many years, and this has been increasing in recent years. It is not surprising to find a youngster who can rattle off the names, secular dates, locations, and more of those terrible lizards. Movies and merchandising helped fuel the interest of many people. (I wonder how many were annoyed when the Jurassic Park movies made the Velociraptors

Some people claim that biblical (young age) creation is a recent phenomenon, but that is contrary to most of church history and to the Bible. Theophilus of Antioch was an apologist who believed the creation account in Genesis and defended the truth of Scripture. Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos /  Janaka Dharmasena Theophilus was a former pagan who converted to Christianity, then he wrote a long apologetic to a pagan named Autolycus about the truth of the Bible. He obviously knew paganism and the Scriptures, and affirmed the authority of God's Word — beginning from Genesis. We need to do the same in our own increasingly idolatrous and pagan cultures. In the second century, after the original disciples of Jesus had died, the fledlging Christian church was beginning to grow and expand into a hostile Greco-Roman world, and accusations were brought against them by unbelievers. These accusations came from a number of people, one of whom was Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia. Pliny wrote

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Christians are supposed to be ready to give reasons for the hope that is in us, and many feel they are witnessing for the faith in various online forums. However, one has to discern when time is being wasted. Made at Pablo , quote source is here As I have stated several times in the past, the word  debate  is used very loosely. Nowadays it can mean a screaming match, a structured exchange of points and rebuttals, an exchange of comments in various online forums, and all sorts of things. Let's consider internet activity. Minerals-to-mocker evolution is a cornerstone of atheism and for other rejections of the authority of God's Word. Although what is presented as scientific evidence is based on faith, assumptions, redefining words, circular reasoning, and poor research, evolutionists prefer to defend it no matter how foolish it looks. That is because admitting that evidence supports the Bible is infandous. Readers of my other sites may recall that I have d

Occasionally, apologists encounter discussions that all of reality is imaginary, as envisioned in several science fiction stories. (In one,our reality was the result of another being's dream, and it was waking up. They had to lull it back to sleep.) Sometimes the s elf-refuting Boltzmann Brains thought experiment is used. Another concept is drawn from The Matrix . How do we experience reality? Credit: FreeDigitalImages / Stuart Miles Presuppositional apologists will often ask unbelievers how they know what is real, and how they can account for their epistemology ( the study of knowledge ). How can we know that what we perceive through our senses is real or are we in a Matrix-like reality? Atheists appeal to their senses, but even without those imposed Matrix-illusion scenarios, this is not reliable as a universal principle. For example, someone with a mental illness or other altered state of consciousness may "see" and "experience" things that do not act

Whether knowingly or unknowingly, people are in rebellion against God. Some simply do not care about spiritual matters, other have a nominal religion with religious trappings but no commitment, others mask their hatred of God by claiming they "lack belief". How do they attain happiness? Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos / alexisdc According to surveys, there has been an increase in people who say they are unaffiliated with certain religions. I don't know if that means specific denominations, but this does not necessarily mean an increase in atheism. A person can be a Bible-believing Christian and yet not identify as Baptist, Presbyterian, etc. Atheism is irrational and incoherent, and impossible to live it consistently. When atheists spend their time angrily ridiculing Christians and misrepresenting biblical creationists — indeed, seeking their identities in unbelief — it is exceptionally difficult to believe them when they say they are happy. Sure, people can have some