Biblical Creation and Evangelism

There are professing Christians that seem somehow compelled to malign biblical creation, finding excuses to deny the plain reading of Genesis — despite the rest of biblical context. Why do they need to insert long ages into the Bible? This was unknown until the nineteenth century. Some of those who compromise with atheistic interpretations of science have denied the history of understanding six-day recent creation, and even make false accusations regarding the Church Fathers. As usual, claiming special insight that has been missed for thousands of years should be a red flag. Creation, Pixabay / Beate Bachmann One can often find an outlier or crackpot that agrees with strange views, which is an appeal to dubious authority. Almost all of the Church Fathers of note believed in recent creation in six days, the Genesis Flood (which is usually rejected or changed to suit the views of old earthers), and so on. They also held to other major Christian doctrines. Some critics of biblical (‘young

A fairly common remark that biblical creationists hear is something like, "Creation, evolution, the age of the earth — all those things are side issues. We need to focus on preaching the gospel." I had one of these a spell back, only this one was amazingly sanctimonious. Unfortunately, because so many people misrepresent us, we need to frequently point out that believing in a young earth and rejecting evolution are not salvific (required for salvation) issues. This does not mean that they are unimportant or even irrelevant! Creation Tiles, Unsplash / Alex Shute One simple reason to refute evolution as well as affirm creation and the young earth is that those things have been stumbling blocks to many people. Also, it should make an impression on Christians how the church fathers as well as the way people in the Bible viewed the importance of creation. Irenaeus (c. 130–202 AD), a significant leader in the early Christian Church, wrote Against Heresies to counter wrong ideas in

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

There are professing Christians who falsely claim that the church fathers believed that the earth was far older than Scripture indicates, and that biblical (young age) creationists are wrong. It would be a mighty big help if they did their homework on people like Augustine. St. Augustine in his Study , Sandro Botticelli, 1490 It is important to note that Augustine did not consider his writings to be sacred writ, his views changed in some areas, and he freely admitted that his understanding was imperfect. It did not help matters much that he was unskilled in Hebrew and Greek, and he had access to weak Bible translations. He believed that everything was created in an instant (he should have consulted Exodus 20:11, 31:17). Old-earthers must reject the global Flood as well. While Augustine was in no wise a young-earth creationist as we understand the term, claims that he believed like the pagans that Earth was far older are disingenuous. Old-earthers claim Augustine as support for figurati

People may have thought that we had the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, considered to have "officially" begun on October 31, 1517 when Martin Luther posted his Ninety-five Theses on the "social media" of his time. Read an article, listen to a message, have a German beer and ride off into the sunset. Not so. As we saw in several posts last year, the Reformation had its beginnings long before that date, and continued afterward. Luther at the Diet of Worms , Anton Werner 1877 Dr. Albert Mohler had been presenting a series on the Five Solas which I was looking forward to posting in time for the big anniversary observance. Delays happened, so I decided to save them for y'all in time for the 501st anniversary. Before obtaining those, I recommend reading his article, " Here We Stand ". They lectures are in MP3 format, so you can download and listen to them at your convenience. Free of charge, naturally. Each link will take you to the page where

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen People who want to slap leather with biblical Christianity may think they have some new concepts, but they are actually reworking old false teachings. This applies not only to those things that have been condemned as heresies, but the remarks of mockers and "skeptics" are often rehash hoary thinking from past centuries. Fausto Sozzini (Faustus Socinus) was cracked Derived from a public domain image at Wikimedia Commons Before I go further, I must say that I'm doing something I've done before: taking material from smarter people and adding thoughts that pertain to my own areas of study. This article was heavily influenced by Phil Johnson's series on five major heresies (linked below). I hope you'll ride the trail with me and you'll see how some things come together. There have been several times in Christian history when the faith appeared to be on its way to becoming hopelessly corrupted. God raised up faithful men to uph

Liberal theologians and theistic evolutionists attempt to say that Adam was not a literal person, but an archetype (or "protoplast"). The Bible does indeed use "type and shadow" imagery with real people (such as Joseph as a type of Christ ), but that does not excuse saying that Adam was not real. Adam and Eve expelled from Eden / Paul Gustave Doré, 1866 Saying that Adam was not real is essentially saying that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and many others in the Bible were wrong or even lying. The motive behind this is to reject the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, and elevates man's opinion above God's Word. Some people compromise with evolutionary ideas without thinking it through, but it leads to further serious compromises all the way through the Bible. There are some old Earth creationists as well as theistic evolutionists who falsely say that the Church Fathers rejected a literal Adam, or that the a ncients did not understand science, so they tol