Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label Hugh Ross

The Spiritual Realm, UFOs, and Dark Matter?

When people say that something is spiritual, the connotation is of wispy and ghostlike things, or simply the unseen. Since we are spiritual beings that live in bodies, that concept is not quite right. There is also the spiritual realm  that theologians and others have discussed for many years. Where is that? Despite being materialists, secularists know that there is more to people than just being meat machines. They have tried to find the soul and the origin of consciousness , but were doomed to failure from the get-go because of their presuppositions. UFO at night via PxHere People are beginning to realize what some Christians have been saying for a long time: UFOs (well, now the term is Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) are of a spiritual, not physical, nature. Spirit beings such as angels and demons can pop into our realm from the one in which they live and show themselves — or be active and unseen. Some of us contend that UFOs and space aliens are demonic. It has been suggested that

Animals and Dinosaurs on Noah's Ark

There are people who promote compromise views against creation and in favor of an old earth. However, the מַבּוּל ( mabbul , the Hebrew word that is used only for the Genesis Flood) was very destructive and caused what is seen in geology today. Secularists and churchian compromisers adhere to uniformitarianism (slow and gradual processes), so they cannot have the global deluge in their paradigms. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Cimerondagert  ( CC by-SA 4.0 ) The Bible makes it clear that the earth was created in six literal days, and that the Flood was global, not local. Those who ridicule biblical creationists have problems with biblical authority, and since we know believers by their fruit, they need to examine themselves to see if they are indeed in the faith. That's right, I said it!  Atheists, Deists, and old earthers ride for the same brand. Why is that? Mayhaps they prefer the praise of men over the praise of God. It may come as a shock, but the global Flood had both punishmen

Augustine Did Not Support Old-Earth Views

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

Pre-Adam Men and the Gap — Heretics Twisting Genesis 1

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen To borrow from Chris Rosebrough (who is linked below), I'm not asking people to read this or watch the video with open minds, but to have open Bibles. My opinion and yours are not worth a whole lot, nor are our traditions. Only God's Word matters (Isaiah 40:8, Mark 13:31). Way back yonder, I was a follower of "Word of Faith" heretic Kenneth Copeland and some of his gang, but I didn't go whole hog on his teachings. Still, I accepted too much at the time. One of several things he said that I rejected out of hand was his affirmation of the "gap theory", where there are supposedly millions of years between the first two chapters of Genesis. I disremember why he wanted to use this gap eisegesis , especially since there is nothing to support it in the rest of Scripture, and I don't think there's anything about it in church history, since an old Earth is a relatively new phenomenon in liberal Christian thinking. Mrs

Why Do Some Christians Accept Theistic Evolution?

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen They Say Compromise Is Good  A few months back, I getting dissatisfied with the church I was attending, and wanted to saddle up and find another church in the Kingston, New York area. Not very promising, since there are polar opposites: emotionally-driven gatherings, and the traditional liberal outfits. Those who actually believe the Bible and can give proper exegesis are difficult to find around here. One church had some standard fare in their statement of faith (including the inerrancy of Scripture, which is very important), and I reckoned that I could get along with that. But not a peep about creation. I sent them an e-mail inquiring about their position on it. The response was disappointing, saying that creation was an unimportant side issue, and anyway, the Framework Hypothesis  was just fine for that pastor. Not hardly! The Framework Hypothesis is a compromise position where Genesis does not mean what it says [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] . His church claim

Special Revelation is Superior to Natural Revelation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Some Christians say that nature is the "67th book of the Bible" because "natural revelation" (Romans 1:19-20) comes from God and cannot conflict with Scripture. However, there is a caveat that nature needs to be properly understood. People who do that tend to be compromisers, interpreting the written Word of God in light of current science trends and philosophies. I remember reading how an old-earth Christian was excited about how the Big Bang had been "proven right", so his faith had support. Our faith is supposed to be in Scripture (Isaiah 40:8, Matthew 24:35), not ever-changing naturalistic interpretations of what is observed by scientists. Indeed, what did this guy do when his "proof" of the Big Bang was dropped on the dusty trail ? Worse, some of these people will compromise with evolution, saying that God used it in creation, as if adding God to atheistic views somehow gives that a blessing. Natural revelati

Science, Faith, Genesis and Compromise

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

Saturday Resource: OEC Compromisers

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

Are Old Earth Creationists Heretics?

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