Biblical Creation and Evangelism

The way some people cling to their "deep time" beliefs, sometimes including evolution, while claiming to believe the Bible is mighty disconcerting to me. They are elevating man-made science philosophies to the magisterial position and are telling God that he is wrong. Scriptural teaching begins to unravel — and that's why unbelievers attack the foundations of the Christian faith, the book of Genesis. Image credit: Pixabay / bluemorphos Now, don't get all het up, I'm not saying that every professing Christian who goes in for long ages is deliberately sabotaging the Bible or is unsaved. (If you study on it a spell, you might begin to wonder why some people attack biblical creationists and have a fervent desire to believe Earth is ancient.) What I am  saying is that many people really don't know what the Bible teaches, and the implications of forcing millions of years into the text. Especially when Jesus, Peter, Paul, and many others in Scripture believed

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There are some professing Christians who will say that since the Bible does not give a direct date of creation, they can gallop the Eisegesis Trail and shove millions or billions of years into the Bible. It doesn't work that way. Not only are they showing their bent toward compromise, but their lack of biblical knowledge, and essentially calling Jesus, Paul, Peter, and others liars.  There is a right way to interpret Genesis , and it's a good idea to believe what Jesus believed and taught . Many serious problems arise when people play fast 'n' loose with Scripture. The Penitent Apostle Peter  by Anthony van Dyck, 1618 The Old Testament is extremely important for understanding the New Testament. We were told that scoffers would come, and there would be apostasy. Peter referred to Genesis several times, and made it clear that not only was there a judgement by global Flood at the time of Noah, he likened it to the coming Judgement by fire. M

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen In the original article, " The Dirt on Theistic Evolution ", which I recommend reading before continuing with this one, I took theistic evolutionists to task for their inconsistencies on their claims to believe the Bible and their magisterial views of science. The creation account was the primary emphasis in that article. This time, I'm focusing on the Genesis Flood account. The Deluge / John Martin, 1834 Old-Earth creationists, theistic evolutionists, Hugh Ross, and other owlhoots who want to compromise on what Scripture plainly says for the sake of "science" need to find some way to ignore the account of the Genesis Flood. They must wedge long ages into the Word of God so it appears to agree with current atheistic interpretations of scientific evidence. Biblical creationists uphold the authority of Scripture, and tend to be skeptical of old Earth science — especially when such science is full of bad logic and atheistic presu