Skip to main content


The Best Evidence for the Young Earth?

Biblical creationists are occasionally requested to give what we consider the best evidence for creation, and closely following, the best evidence that the earth is young. We have quite a bit of scientific and logical evidence for both. However, it is a serious mistake to try to "out evidence" a skeptic, because they often counter with something else (often unrelated — be careful of distractions), then you counter the counter, ad nauseum, even though the evidence is on the side of biblical creationists. Credit: Unsplash / Robert Lukeman Many times, atheists and evolutionists will reject what we present out of hand because of their naturalistic and deep time presuppositions. They are not in the habit of honestly considering books, videos, articles, and so on, and find rescuing devices. Creationists often have links thrown at us, which can be from atheistic and evolutionary sites, compromising Christians, and so forth. Scoffers have a habit of finding something written for

The Inconsistent Message of Compromise

Edited about 19 hours after publishing. Israel was warned by God to stay true and avoid the idols and false teachings of other nations, but they repeatedly rebelled. Eventually, they were decisively conquered. Later, God provided the Redeemer, and Christians were told in no uncertain terms to stay true to God's Word and the teachings of the apostles. Still, compromise happened and many false teachings had to be opposed by the faithful. Cry of prophet Jeremiah on the Ruins of Jerusalem , Ilya Repin, 1870 Gallop ahead to more recent times. Scientists believed in recent creation until the likes of Hutton, Lyell, and Darwin hijacked science with gradual change and deep time. Christians saddled up with them, compromising on the plain teachings of Scripture. We have that problem today, and biblical creationists are the minority while compromisers are doing great harm to the truth. One big problem is, I believe, that professing Christians, from the 19th century through today, s

That Awful Question about Children who Died

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This is an article I did not want to write, and a subject many of us try to avoid discussing. Sadly, anguished parents and many other people want to know if their children who died early are in Heaven. They may have been lost through accidents, miscarriage (a word I detest because it implies that the loss is the woman's fault), or other reasons. For whatever cause, a child is missing. Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann Atheists and some uninformed professing Christians chide Bible believers, saying that infants and young children are damned because they did not make a saving profession of faith in Jesus. Such a vile, wicked claim is based on bias and woefully incomplete theology. It also impugns the integrity and mercy of God, and raises the question that Abraham asked God in Genesis 18:25. The question of the eternal destiny of the very young is not something that is Calvinist versus Arminian theology, either. I have some problems with both camps, as

Creation and Other Miracles

Christians must necessarily presuppose not only the existence of God, but also that miracles have happened. Creation itself was a miracle. Other miraculous events, such as the Genesis Flood, involve God using what already exists but still transcending the usual workings of nature. The power of God was shown when he bodily raised Jesus from the dead. Credit: Freeimages / Robert Linder Unfortunately, the word miracle  is vastly overused and cheapened. "I rode my horse all the way into town and he didn't go lame, it's a miracle!" No, it's not. "The boss miraculously kept the meeting to the allotted time". No miracle there either, pal. Dr. John MacArthur is much more specific: What is a miracle? Let me give you a simple definition. A miracle is an interference with nature by a supernatural power. A miracle is something outside our box invading our little box, something outside our world coming into our world and making waves and ripples. Miracles ar

From the Beginning of Time

A common sentiment in love songs and starry-eyed romantics is a promise to love someone "until the end of time". They are unknowingly admitting that time itself has a beginning. There is a related idea that God was bored, sitting there doing nothing since eternity past, so he decided it was time to commence doing some creating. This view erroneously assumes that time always existed. It is fair to ask where time itself came from. Credit: Unsplash / Tim Aterbury It causes some amazement when people stop to consider that Genesis 1:1 describes time, matter, and space in one verse. All three are linked. Some secularists know this, and manufacture their own atheistic creation mythologies involving the Big Bang, the "inflation theory", evolution, and so forth. Only the biblical worldview makes sense of reality. Further, God is outside the limits of those things he created, but he steps in when he sees fit. This is difficult for us to contemplate, because were are

Ulrich Zwingli, Neglected Reformer

I suppose you thought that everyone was finished with material about the Reformation. We had the 500th anniversary of what is considered the beginning of the whole thing, where Martin Luther put out his 95 theses on what was the social media of his day.  Huldrych (Ulrich) Zwingli by Hans Asper , 1531 / Wikimedia Commons The Reformation continued developing and theology was being refined. Newer Reformers appeared on the scene, and not all were in agreement. Sincere, thinking people will disagree (just like not all biblical creationists are in lockstep). Ulrich Zwingly is often tacked on as an afterthought to Christian history, which is unfortunate. He upheld the authority of Scripture and was in trouble for disputing Papal decrees. This was not just a dispute over religion, but was a threat to governmental authority at the time. One reason I delayed posting this was to make an emphasis about how Zwingly is neglected. [S]trangely, one of the leaders of the Reformation, often c

You Cannot Be Neutral

Neutral is useful for machines and a color palette, but for people, not so much. You can be neutral about a variety of topics, but that kind of neutrality is often hitched up in the team with apathy and ignorance, among others. Will Manchester United win the next FA Cup ? I neither know nor care, so I'm neutral. Do you have an opinion on my picture of the Catskill Mountains near the Ashokan Reservoir, or are you neutral? I am neutral about your opinion. When emotions are involved, it becomes more difficult to remain neutral. From there, we have matters of involving spirituality, origins, and so forth. Whether atheists and evolutionists believe it or not, they have faith-based positions just like Christians have. When discussing God, the Bible, creation, evolution, and other things, unbelievers often say that they want to "leave God out of it" and to discuss on "neutral ground". Sorry, pilgrim, you cannot be neutral. As the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen said abo

Apostasy, Deconversion, and Atheism

There are people who have actively chosen to leave the Christian faith, using a pretense of intellectual and even moral superiority to those who do believe. Some professing atheists claim that they are "former Christians". These riders of the owlhoot trail exhibit little or no accurate knowledge of the Christian faith, however, and often attack Bible believers, even seeking to destroy us in the public square. Especially biblical creationists, as they need evolution in atheism. Credit: Pixabay / Edward Lich Although atheism is a blatant rebellion against God, another form of rebellion is to "deconvert" from orthodox beliefs. Michael Gungor used to believe in creation, then went on to theistic evolution, and went on record rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible . Singer Don Francisco came out rejecting inerrancy as well. Some pastors and teachers who held to the Bible's teaching on homosexuality jumped on the compromise wagon. Karl Giberson does not exhib

Logic and the Bible 2: Unbliblical Worldviews

In " Logic and the Bible ", we saw that the three main laws of logic are impossible without God. That does not mean a requirement to believe in God's existence, or to be a believer in Jesus Christ is necessary for logic to work. However, it works because God exists, whether someone believes or not. Now we can saddle up for another part of our journey. Credit: Freeimages / Drew Pendleton It seems like we should be able to file this under "Completed", but some folks will not be satisfied with what Dr. Lisle said before. Just as we see Darwin's disciples use rescuing devices even after deep time and evolution are shown to be insufficient, people try to get around the necessity of God for logic to exist. We cannot assume laws of logic exist because of our experiences, because we may have faulty memories, be deluded, and the irrational assumption that logic will be the same in the future. There is also the claim that logic is a convention ; that is, the

The Deity of Jesus

Some people try to do away with the extremely important doctrine of the deity of Jesus. Some will give a simplistic reaction along the lines of, "He never said 'I am God'", somehow demanding that exact phrase in the Bible, and ignoring all the other evidence that Jesus did indeed claim deity. Other owlhoots such as cultists, atheists, and liberal theologians sidestep the truth for their own purposes. Credit: Unsplash / Jacob Meyer The idea that Jesus is not who he claims is an ancient heresy called Arianism , which was made by Arius in the 4th century. It has been around in various forms for all these years, and the most common example is evinced in the Jehovah's Witnesses.  As C.S. Lewis pointed out in Mere Christianity, it is nonsensical to claim that Jesus was a "great moral teacher" while claiming to be God. Indeed, Christianity itself is worthless if Jesus is not God in the flesh, our Creator, who died for our sins and then bodily rose fro