Biblical Creation and Evangelism

For centuries, people took the Bible as written. This includes a literal six-day recent creation. For some reason, many decided to give secular science views preeminence over Scripture. Some rejected the Bible outright, others had a pretense of belief with a modified view. Something I cannot understand is why such people essentially tell God what he says and means about creation week. Do they prefer the applause of atheists for their compromises on recent creation? Some are essentially Deists, adding not only billions of years, but evolution to their pusillanimous religion. Ten Commandments section of Bible image, Unsplash  Tim Wildsmith (modified) To be blunt, sometimes when professing Christians are particularly enamored with a faulty belief, they reason like atheists. F'rinstance, the Hebrew word yom  does not always mean a literal day. Although it is used with what I call qualifiers in creation week that clearly indicate that those are literal days, some folks find when the wo

Gardens. Many people make gardening a major hobby, spending hours in them, weeding, pruning, planting, and doing all sorts of things to gussie them up. The results can be quite impressive. Then some folks do just enough to keep their small patch going. People who read classic (in this case, old) literature, they have probably noticed gardens being mentioned or even playing significant parts in the stories. If you study on it, you should remember that gardens were in the Bible. The first was Genesis 2:8 when God planted a garden in  Eden. Church garden, RGBStock / Adrian van Leen Biblical creationists talk about the dominion mandate , which is when God told mankind to subdue and rule over the earth as stewards. That means we take care of it for its benefit , not exploit or run roughshod over it. Environmental extremists have an evolutionary view that makes Earth more important than humanity. One approach is rewilding , which is essentially to just l et everything go and have nature take

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  When using the word nurse , context is very important because of the variety of possible meanings. For many people, it is the noble field dominated by females who provide medical services. Many are usually under the authority of doctors or nurses with higher training and education levels.  My recent surprise hospital admission caused me to think on a number of things, sometimes helping me complete thoughts from those thrilling days of yesteryear. This time it is about personal modesty. Nurses and IV pole, Pexels / Anna Shvets Nurses in hospitals, clinics, and so on have pretty much "seen it all." This is something that I discussed with various nurses. People are often at their most vulnerable and are dependent on medical folks on many levels. Many actually care about patients. I have had my private parts exposed and touched (the Foley catheter hurt me plenty, especially since they couldn't get it right until the fourth attempt .) Worse, it is impo

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

Some time ago, I sat up pondering where the sun went after it set, and then it dawned on me. There are many Christians who are unwilling to believe that day  in Genesis 1 is a literal day. They try to scheme ways of obscuring the plain reading of the text. When I was young, I read the creation account and had no reason to think day was anything unusual. That is the way people have treated it for a very long time, with few exceptions. Sun obscured by tree, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen With the advent of belief in deep time in the past couple of hundred years, Christians compromised and tried to find ways to force long ages into the Bible. For them, does day still mean day? Allegories, mythologizing, compromising and other shenanigans do violence to the text. Opinions of secular science cannot tell us what Scripture means. Why do those Christians insist on this? Is it to look good to atheists as well as other Christian compromisers? Do they seek the approval of men over that of the Cr

There can be no denying that the idea of someone changing sexes has gone from a rare aberration into acceptance in recent years, and the rest of us are being coerced into being enthusiastic about it. We are called hateful and phobic for not accepting the the reality they are attempting to create and foist upon the world . Even more so for Christians and biblical creationists who believe what God's Word says about the created order. It is not  "hateful" for speaking the truth and trying to turn people from their flawed beliefs; they deny the Bible and science . Distorted woods, original image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Amazingly, people try to put evolution into Genesis and pull out transgenderism! People who do this reject the Bible and denigrate those of us who believe it. They ignore creation science evidence (and some, albeit inadvertent, secular evidence) supporting how we all came from Adam and Eve. Evolutionists believe humanity had multiple first ancestors, and because

People have been fascinated by ideas about the end of the world almost since it began — maybe Adam and Eve speculated on the subject. People lived for decades in terror of nuclear annihilation, and that specter looms again. NASA tells us why the Mayan prophecy of 2012 was wrong, but they  are incorrect because they speak from a naturalistic paradigm. Some consult the vague stuff of Nostradamus and various fortune tellers, others expect a giant rock from space. All wrong. The world will  end, but not in any way these folks expect. End of the World, Pixabay / Geralt (Gerd Altmann) When people say that the Genesis Flood is just an allegory, point out that Peter referred to the Flood as real when he wrote about the coming Big Bang at the end of the world in 2 Peter 3:5-10. Also, Jesus likened the end to the Flood in Matthew 24:37-39. There is a Judgment coming, and people need to be ready. There are people who think that perhaps the world will not be destroyed and remade, but more like i

At this writing, we are in the final days before Christmas 2022. From the condition of the formerly United States to other parts of the world, and even in the lives of individuals, some people are not feeling it. Put up the tree, watch some movies, buy presents. Depression is rampant at Christmas. We get focused on our obligations, our problems, our ailments. All those songs about feeling happy seem to make things worse for some of us. I reckon that the problem is not with Christmas (how can it be?), but with our focus. Bible and Christmas, Pixabay / congerdesign It's time to saddle up and ride to the top of the hill and get the big picture. The big stores, songs about "the most wonderful time of the year" (which are nonsensical outside certain latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere anyway), other trappings are add-ons or even corruptions of the true meaning of Christmas. It is far, far greater in its scope and impact than people can imagine, and prophesied back in Genesis!

There are some people who call themselves "Red Letter Christians" because they think that only the words of Jesus in red letters are important. So much for spiritual growth! Such a view is not only silly, but self-refuting simply because Jesus referred to other parts of Scripture. A slightly more reasonable but still erroneous idea is that the Old Testament was fulfilled and we are living under the New Testament (Covenant), so it is not needed. As with the Red Letter view, this one shows ignorance and biblical illiteracy — a problem that too many professing Christians have in some form. Genesis 2:24-25, Pexels / Brett Jordan Related to all this is how some people mythologize and allegorize the first eleven chapters of Genesis. This is often done by people who want to believe in long ages and various compromising positions. If they would actually read the Bible without liberal spectacles to color their perceptions, they might see that these areas are treated as history through

The inerrancy of Scripture in the original autographs (manuscripts) is a doctrine that many professing Christians claim to believe, but we also acknowledge that there a a few copyist and other minor errors that have crept in over the centuries. Also, it is obvious that not all translations agree with each other. There are public statements on doctrine and inerrancy that have been signed by famous Christian people, and one is something that I would sign myself. However, the wording about Genesis and creation is such that theistic evolutionists, old earthers, and biblical creationists find it acceptable. Old Bible with Genesis, RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander Something this child has long believed should be an alarm bell is when they say they believe the Bible is without error, then turn around and say that it doesn't mean what it says on the very first page. They also have to reject evidence for recent creation, tap dance around numerous passages of Scripture (especially those th

The idea that the waters above or firmament in Genesis 1:6-8 indicated a canopy was used by biblical creationists a few decades ago, but knowledgeable creationists have mostly abandoned it [ 1 ]. The idea was promoted by Dr. Henry M. Morris, and the Institute for Creation Research still has some hints about it [ 2 ], but they were seeing problems with it in the late 1990s [ 3 ] and have pretty much put it out to pasture today [ 4 ]. I taught that idea myself. Part of its appeal is its explanatory power. RGBStock /  Sias van Schalkwyk One of the challenges of creation science material (and scientific material in generally, if you study on it) is that things change — often quickly. Theories and conjectures are modified and even rejected, but someone may own a book or video from a few years earlier that influenced their thinking. Perhaps an underinformed lecturer is spreading outdated information. So, we have to cowboy up, get informed, and make changes when necessary. Theories come and

Mockers as well as compromisers on biblical authority point to Genesis 2:17 and say that it is untrue, that Adam did not drop dead when he ate the forbidden fruit. Therefore, Genesis cannot be taken more than a fictional story or allegory. A more in-depth approach shows that they are wrong. Knowledge of the Bible is necessary, and it is very helpful to get the perspective of people who have spent time studying and writing about it. One of these is Charles Haddon Spurgeon. Although this child has taken heat from both Calvinists and Arminians for refusing to identify with either group, Spurgeon is popular with Calvinists. That doesn't matter here, because the man referred to as the Prince of Preachers has some important material for us. He preached a huge number of sermons , and was known for keeping his listener enthralled. Spurgeon also was faithful to Scripture and spoke so that people could understand his messages. The sermons on Five Kinds of Life help give us a fuller understan

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

For a very long time, people accepted the genealogies in Genesis as accurate chronologies: chronogenealogies. After Christians began ceding science to secularists with the advent of deep time and Darwinism, excuses were found to deny their accuracy. There are many problems with this, including casting doubt on God's preservation of Scripture, his care for us, trusting Jesus, and a tacit denial of the truth of God's Word from the beginning. People have lost sight of the purposes of the genealogies. Unsplash / Priscilla Du Preez On a somewhat side note, someone was hawking his book about leaving atheism and coming to Christ. Since he is in the flaming liberal United Methodist denomination (in which I was raised and my father was a pastor for fifty years), I suspect he has some serious theology problems. His reaction to my comment says a great deal: It's unfortunate that you think only those who follow your unorthodox, recently cult derived interpretation of the Bible can clai

It is common to take a stroll in a wooded area and encounter critters, which often scamper away. Others freeze in place as a defense, or possibly doing threat assessment. They usually want to get away from us. Animals have fear of us and of each other.  Our apartment is on the second floor of three. Lots of trees in the area. Squirrels show no fear in leaping up onto our porch, but when we go outside, they run off.  Wikimedia Commons /  Jineshpanchal  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) One was on the porch when a big hawk landed on the railing. That's never happened before. The rodent froze in terror and just laid there. The hawk just looked at it, probably not hungry at the moment. If we had gone to the sliding glass door, I lack belief either would have stayed put. Even domestic animals show fear of humans, including pets around strangers. Animals that have gone feral or never knew human contact are in touch with their inner wildness. It takes a mighty long time to make friends with a feral animal

Some people try to dismiss Genesis as myth containing spiritual truth using elements from the pagan neighbors of the Hebrews. Others say it is misunderstood, as if the Creator of the universe was unable to communicate with us. With closer inspection, we see that Genesis is a historical narrative. Credit: RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander The idea that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological should not be accepted by professing Christians, as there are serious problems that result. (One of these is that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others referred to these chapters as literal history, so by denying this, one is calling them liars!) Also, there are repercussions with the gospel message. Read some classical mythology, then come back to Genesis and see the difference. Myths are vague and have a different flow, but the Bible is precise. Indeed, even the sequence of creation days is specific — a day itself is defined. Interestingly, many translations have in Genesis 1:5 less accurate by us

Some professing Christians are setting themselves up as authorities to say that God did not mean what he said in the Bible. This is a serious problem. Unfortunately, gullible people are being deceived about our alleged goodness, and humanoids that existed before Adam. Credit: Unsplash / Krys Amon American author John H. Walton has some odd views that can be considered Gnostic , and Irish theologian Niamh Middleton presents some beliefs that are truly off the rails. These sidewinders are not only rejecting biblical authority, but are also accommodating atheistic views of origins as well when they accommodate theistic evolution. False teachings like these seriously damage the gospel message. Today, many modern writers who describe themselves as evangelicals openly disagree with the core Christian doctrine of original sin. Some argue instead that Jesus seeks out original goodness in us. They reject a historical Fall in the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve rebelled against the clear instru

The immediate reaction from some people would be that God stopped his creation work, as stated in Gen. 2:2, Ex. 20:11 and 31:17. It may be surprising to learn that God is still creating today, but in a different way than he did in the beginning. Credit: Photos Public Domain This is not like some owlhoots who say God is still creating today through theistic evolution. No, he didn't transform a pre-Adamite group of subhumans by giving them souls in a mangled metaphor of Genesis. There are certain acts of creation that are still happening today. God created both man and animals with  nephesh , which means life or soul (see " Brain and Body are not the Soul " for more in-depth material that also refutes naturalistic claims). He is not creating new stuff like he did during creation week, but makes some things out what already exists. Then there's the news in 2 Cor. 5:17 that is so important to Christians. But didn’t God rest from His creation work on Day Seven? The correc

There are some professing Christians who insist on finding ways of adding long ages into the Bible, but they ignore the context. While the context is frequently the surrounding verses, it can also mean culture, languages, and more. We look now at make  and create . Credit: Freeimages / Fernanda Ferrari Those owlhoots have attempted to bushwhack the plain meaning of Scripture by saying that they are different aspects of creation, and that make  means using material that was already created. Their eisegesis becomes heinous when their alleged distinction is used to give them license to add millions of years. Some even try to shove evolution into the picture. It won't work, especially when the greater context includes the New Testament. Many people who have written on Genesis 1 have attempted to make a very significant distinction between two Hebrew words found there: bara (בָּרָא, to create) and asah (עָשָׂה, to make or do). Theistic evolutionists (TEs) and old-earth creationists (O

There are professing Christians who believe that the Genesis Flood was a local event. Worse, some say it was allegorical. Mayhaps they were not taught well, have not seriously read the Bible — or fully believe it. Denying the global Flood has serious repercussions.