A review of How to Know God Exists, by Ray Comfort

Ray Comfort is the author of over 70 books, including several on the creation-evolution debate. In his book How to Know God Exists, he shows the reader that evolutionary theory is incapable of explaining such dilemmas as the origin of life, gaps in the fossil record, and macroevolution.

 

Perhaps author Comfort’s best argument for the existence of God, is his discussion of the conscience and morality.

(selections from Reagan Schrock's book review, published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 48, Number 4, Spring 2012)

If we are simply highly evolved animals, why and how do we know right from wrong? What makes us decide, for example, that murder is wrong? “The problem with atheism,” writes Comfort, “is that it has a shifting morality. There are no moral absolutes. How can there be, when [according to atheism] morality is thought to come through human consensus, rather than divine mandate” (p. 87)? If humans are just biological machines composed of random chemicals that formed over millions of years, there is no reason to believe in moral absolutes.

As Comfort points out on the same page, this is one of the clearest differences between humans and animals. If humans are just animals that are more highly evolved than the rest, why are we the only species to have a clear sense of justice? Why do we punish wrongdoers? No other animal does anything like this. If someone is wronged, most of us naturally want to make it right.

“We know right from wrong,” continues Comfort, “because the conscience is an impartial judge in the courtroom of the mind. It speaks to us irrespective of our will” (p. 87). This is why a lie detector (polygraph) works so well to detect lies. Our conscience tells us lying is wrong and we react physically. For example, a person’s blood pressure and heart rate will spike when he lies and the polygraph picks up the changes. If there were no absolutes, the polygraph would not work because we would not have a conscience to tell us when we err.

This book is a welcome addition to the field of apologetics, especially for the layman.

How to Know God Exists by Ray Comfort
Bridge-Logos Publishers,
Alachua, FL, 2007, 192 pages,
$13.00.

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)http://www.amazon.com/How-Know-God-Exists-Comfort/dp/088270432X

A review of The Devil's Delusion, by David Berlinski

Did you see the 2008 documentary Expelled in the movie theatres? You may remember David Berlinski’s conversation with Ben Stein in the film. Berlinski holds a philosophy Ph.D. from
Princeton, has served on the faculty of several universities, and lives in Paris.

Recently, Berlinski wrote The Devil's Delusion (2009), as an encouragement for people “frustrated by endless scientific boasting. They suspect that as an institution, the scientific community holds them in contempt” (p. xvii).

(selections from Don B. DeYoung's book review, published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 48, Number 4, Spring 2012)

The author readily takes on and exposes the shallow atheistic arguments of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and others in this sorry band of doubters. Many of Berlinski’s phrases and statements are quotable, and a sampling follows.


• Natural selection is described as “the Darwinian business of scrabbling up the greasy pole of life” (p. 17).
• Regarding the science establishment,“the worldwide fraternity of academics who are professionally occupied in sniffing the underwear of their colleagues for signs of ideological deviance” (p. 52).
• Concerning Stephen Hawking’s 1988 A Brief History of Time: “Widely considered fascinating by those who did not read it, and incomprehensible to those who did” (p. 98).
• Concerning the popularity of the multi-universe idea: “It is better to have many worlds than one God” (p. 135).
• An understatement concerning the comparable mysteries of the particle-wave nature of light and the Trinitarian nature of the Deity: “This is not an analogy that has captured the allegiance of scientific atheists” (p. 93).
• “A miracle is what it seems: an event offering access to the divine” (p. 182).
• “Computer simulations of Darwinian evolution fail when they are honest and succeed only when they are not” (p. 190).
• “Although Darwin’s theory is very often [said to be] as well established as gravity, very few physicists have been heard observing that gravity is as well established as evolution. They know better and they are not stupid” (p. 191).
• If God directly addressed scientists, he might say, “You have no idea whatsoever how the ordered physical, moral, mental, aesthetic, and social world in which you live could have ever arisen from the seething anarchy of elementary particles” (p. 201).

Berlinski suggests that evolutionary science itself has become an unwieldy, outdated religion complete with an ecclesiastical hierarchy, museum edifices, Darwinian holy books, and extreme efforts to convert doubters. Supporters of this secular worldview are thus in a similar position to the geocentrists of the 1600s, including inner doubts that cannot be expressed in public.

The Devil’s Delusion
by David Berlinski
Basic Books, New York, 2009
238 pages, $16.00.

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Does compromise lead to repentance and faith?

So many “evangelicals” are trying to force the evolutionary ages of geology into the Genesis account of creation. Instead of defending our biblical Christian faith, they are trying to accommodate it to the unbelieving worldview of evolutionary naturalism.

Some will even refute Darwinism and do an excellent job of it. But then they still try to accommodate the evolutionary ages of the naturalists, which in turn requires rejecting the worldwide cataclysm of the Flood. They seem indifferent to the fact that this means accepting a billion years of a suffering, dying biosphere before Adam’s fall brought sin and death into the world.

It is even sadder when they feel that this compromising approach will convince the scientific establishment to accept Christ and the gospel.

The point is that no dilution of the creation/Flood record of God’s inspired Word, no matter how well-motivated and persuasively written, is going to budge the evolutionary establishment in science or education one iota. They hold their position for religious reasons, not scientific, and scientific arguments for “intelligent design” are rejected just as vigorously as arguments for recent creation or a global flood.

The American Scientific Affiliation has been advocating a compromise between evolution and creation for years. Their widely distributed book, Teaching Science in a Climate of Controversy, was a collection of well-planned essays designed to encourage such a middle-of-the-road system for classroom teaching. The result was a series of bitter attacks by the evolutionists. The Science Teacher magazine, for example, published a series of essays by leading scientists repudiating it, entitled “Scientists Decry a Slick New Packaging of Creationism.”¹ One of the authors, Dr. Lynn Margulis, called it “treacherous,” a polemic designed “to coax us to believe in the ASA’s particular creation myth.”

The excellent book Of Pandas and People was written to present biology in terms of “intelligent design,” without any reference to God, the Bible, or creation, hoping that it could be adopted as a high school biology textbook. Again, nothing doing! It was merely a sneaky way of getting creationism into the schools, said its opponents, and they won.

Another very popular advocate of compromise says that teaching recent creation and worldwide Flood views will keep people from coming to Christ. “Because of the implausibility of such a position,” says Dr. Hugh Ross, “many reject the Bible out of hand without seriously investigating its message or even reading for themselves the relevant passages.”²

Dr. Ross does not document this statement, and he is wrong. Many scientists do accept the biblical record at face value, and there are now thousands of scientists who have become young-earth creationists, not to mention multitudes of non-scientists.

What the compromise approach does, however, is not to bring the lost to Christ, but causes many who are already Christians to doubt their Faith as they go down the slippery path of compromise.

(excerpted from Henry M. Morris, Defending the Faith Acts & Facts April 2011, Institute for Creation Research)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

References (selected)

1. Bennetta, W. J., ed. Scientists Decry a Slick New Packaging of Creationism. The Science Teacher. May 1987, 36-43.

2. Ross, H. 1991. The Fingerprint of God. Orange, CA: Promise Publishing Co., 144.

Dinosaur Addiction can have Awful Consequences

This almost worshipful fascination in this generation is growing explosively. One wonders how many leading modern evolutionists were drawn into evolutionism and away from God through their childhood study of dinosaurs. Stephen Jay Gould, for example, testifies that he got his start that way, and he is probably today's leading spokesman for evolution.

(for more, see Henry M. Morris, Dragons in Paradise, Acts & Facts, March 2011, Institute for Creation Research)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

Did Animals Eat Meat Before the Flood?

"Scripturally and scientifically, the answer appears to be yes. God created a world which was perfect and free of death, violence, and carnivorous behavior. After the Fall and the Curse, some animals became violent carnivores and even cannibals. The fossil record bears abundant testimony to this fact. Man, however, was not given meat to eat until after the Flood. The Bible also tells of the new heavens and new earth, where once again meat-eating and violence will be unknown."

Selections from Did Animals Eat Meat Before the Flood? by Andrew V. Ste. Marie

(These selections by Marko Malyj are of the article published in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 16, Number 1, January/February 2011, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2011/CM16%2001%20low%20res.pdf.)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

The Bible describes the perfect world God created in Genesis 1 and 2. One of the most notable attributes of the pre-Fall world was the absence of carnivorous (meat-eating) behavior.

Of course, Adam and Eve sinned and everything changed, including diets. Carnivorous activity is a prominent aspect of our world today, but when did it begin? It is not specifically mentioned in the Curse (Genesis 3:14–19). People were not given meat to eat until after the Flood (Genesis 9:2–4). But what about the animals? Did they begin to eat meat before the worldwide Flood? Scripturally and scientifically, the answer appears to be yes.


Biblical Evidence

The Bible describes the world before the Flood in Genesis 6:11–12: "The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." The Hebrew word basar (flesh) seems to refer mainly to people, but also to animals (see Genesis 6:19, 7:15–16, 21).

People had corrupted their way and “cast[ed] off” God’s laws. The animals had apparently done the same. This is not meant to imply that animals were willfully sinning. point is that animals, as well as people, were engaging in corrupt activities which God had not originally built into His perfect creation.

The Bible clearly implies that there was violent animal life prior to the Flood. Paleontology tells the same story.

Pre-Flood violence and carnivorous activity revealed in the fossil record

Much of the fossil record was certainly formed during the Genesis Flood. There is general agreement among many young-earth creationists that at least the so-called Cambrian through Cretaceous rock layers were laid down in the Flood. Therefore, in this paper only evidence of carnivorous activity in these layers will be presented.

Ichthyosaurs. Ichthyosaurs were marine reptiles which resembled dolphins. Many well-preserved skeletons have been found in various places around the world. Gut contents have also been found; fish and fish scales, cephalopod (squids and octopi are cephalopods) hooklets, smaller ichthyosaurs, small turtle bones, and even a bird bone and pterosaur (flying reptile) remains have been found in the stomach areas of
fossilized ichthyosaurs.^1,2

Sharks. Sharks were also predators before the Flood. The (now presumed extinct) “Ginsu Shark” Cretoxyrhina seems to have been a vicious mosasaur killer. Partly digested mosasaur pieces have been found inside fossil specimens of Cretoxyrhina.³

Crocodile-like reptiles. Phytosaurs were reptiles similar to crocodiles with nostrils near their eyes. An animal vertebra has been found with tooth marks perfectly matching phytosaur teeth. One metoposaur (giant amphibian) skull has a row of phytosaur tooth marks from the back of the skull into the brain case.⁴ Stomach contents found in Belodon, a type of phytosaur, indicate it fed on a variety of reptiles.⁵

Theropod dinosaurs. Theropods were the two-footed, meat-eating dinosaurs such as Tyrannosaurus rex and Velociraptor. There is a large amount of evidence showing many of these animals to have been carnivorous.

The "Fighting Dinosuaurs" fossil.

Tyrannosaurus rex is by far the best known theropod. There is good evidence it ate meat and may have attacked live animals. Bite marks attributed to T. rex have been found on approximately 18 dinosaur
bones.^6,7 The famous “fighting dinosaurs” fossil preserves a Velociraptor locked in combat with a Protoceratops (similar to a small Triceratops).⁹ Other Protoceratops bones bear Velociraptor tooth marks.¹⁰

Cannibalism. Even with all this evidence of violence and carnivorous activity in the fossil record, the fossils tell of yet more pre-Flood corruption of God’s perfect creation — cannibalism. Some fossils of the theropod Majungatholus from Madagascar have teeth marks exactly matching Majungatholus teeth. Whether Majungatholus hunted or scavenged its own kind, it was a cannibal.¹¹

Summary

God created a world which was perfect and free of death, violence, and carnivorous behavior. After the Fall and the Curse, some animals became violent carnivores and even cannibals. The fossil record bears abundant testimony to this fact. Man, however, was not given meat to eat until after the Flood. The Bible also tells of the new heavens and new earth, where once again meat-eating and violence will be unknown.

"The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea." (Isaiah 11:6–10)

References (selected)

1. Kear, B. P., W. E. Boles, and E. T. Smith. 2003. Unusual gut contents in a Cretaceous ichthyosaur. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 270:S206–S208.

2. Norman, D. 1985. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs. Crescent Books, New York, NY.

3. Wieland, C. 2005. Dragons of the Deep. Master Books, Green Forest, AR.

4. Taylor, J. 1999. Fossil Facts and Fantasies. Mt. Blanco Publishing Co., Crosbyton, TX.

5 Walker, C., and D. Ward. 1992. Fossils. DK Publishing, Inc., New York, NY.

6. Longrich, N. R., J. R. Horner, G. M. Erickson, and P. J. Currie. 2010. Cannibalism in Tyrannosaurus rex. PLoS One 5(10):e13419.

7. Longrich et al. (ref. 22) list 17 such specimens. Their list does not include the Edmontosaurus skull with T. rex bite marks (ref. 8).

8. Taylor, J., and A. V. Ste. Marie. 2010. Creationists can be paleontologists! The Witness 8(7):3–12.

9. Hodge, B., and B. Davis. Two Fighting Dinosaurs? Retrieved July 18, 2008 from www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n1/two-fighting-dinosaurs.

10. Hone, D., J. Choiniere, C. Sullivan, X. Xu, M. Pittman and Q. Tan. 2010. New evidence for a trophic relationship between the dinosaurs Velociraptor and Protoceratops. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 291:488–492.

11. Rogers, R. R., D. W. Krause, and K. C. Rogers. 2003. Cannibalism in the Madagascan dinosaur Majungatholus atopus. Nature 422:515–518.

The Evolution of the Trojan Horse

During the 1800s, England hosted three major “Trojan horse” attacks on the Genesis account of the worldwide Flood. The first one was especially influential, opening the door for the others. Each attack was hospitably “invited” into Christian circles and produced ruinous corruptions to the worldviews of those who unsuspectingly played “host” to such visitors.

Originally, Christian scientists and leaders treated the Biblical account in the book of Genesis as a literal record of a global deluge. "Throughout the entire eighteenth century [i.e., 1700s], and well into the nineteenth [i.e., 1800s], an imposing list of scientists and theologians produced works in support of the Flood…. That the Flood was universal and that it was responsible for the major geologic formation of the earth was accepted almost without question in the western world during that period."¹
 

The first such Trojan horse was introduced, ironically, by a French Protestant creationist, Baron Georges Cuvier. Cuvier proposed a theory of “multiple catastrophes” that treated the Genesis record as mostly irrelevant (if not misleading) for understanding the natural world and its catastrophic past.² Cuvier’s theory was employed in 1814 by Thomas Chalmers for his ruin-and-reconstruction “gap theory,” an unequal and humanistic yoking of unbiblical “science” notions with the early chapters of Genesis.

The next breed of Trojan horse involved in the assault on the Genesis account of the Flood was grounded upon the anti-catastrophist uniformitarianism of Charles Lyell, Darwin’s ideological mentor. As Lyell’s old-earth uniformitarian theory gained popularity, catastrophist views of geologic history (including Cuvier’s) lost popularity. Consequently, efforts to preserve academic “respectability” led some Christians to mix Lyell’s anti-catastrophist dogma with a non-catastrophist view of the Genesis Flood, the so-called “tranquil flood” theory promoted by the likes of Carolus Linnaeus and John Fleming.³

Another Trojan horse was welcomed during the 1800s, the “local flood” theory of John Pye Smith.⁴ Thus, long before Charles Darwin published his atheistic concept of “natural selection” (a bait and switch metaphor that arbitrarily replaced the all-wise and all-powerful Creator with a magic force called “nature”), many of the leaders in Christian circles, both scientists and church leaders, had already closed the book of Genesis—at least as to what it teaches about the global Flood.

Today Christendom faces new breeds of Trojan horses (e.g., BioLogos, Intelligent Design deism, day-age “progressive creation,” framework hypothesis, etc.), which lie in wait to attack our understanding of Genesis and what it teaches about the Flood. Beware—and keep your Bible open!

(excerpted from Johnson, J. J. S. 2011. Just Say No to Trojan Horses. Acts & Facts. 40 (2): 17-18.)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

References (selected)

1. Morris, H. M. and J. C. Whitcomb. 1961. The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 91.

2. Ibid, 92.

3. Ibid, 95-99.

4. Ibid, 107-113.

Celebrating 50 years of "The Genesis Flood" by Whitcomb & Morris

"The question of the historicity and the character of the Genesis Flood is no mere academic issue of interest to a small handful of scientists and theologians. If a worldwide flood actually destroyed the entire antediluvian human population, as well as all land animals, except those preserved in a special Ark constructed by Noah (as a plain reading of the Biblical record would lead one to believe), then its historical and scientific implications are tremendous."

This quote is from the forward to The Genesis Flood, written by Dr. John C. Whitcomb and Dr. Henry M. Morris in 1961. This February we celebrate the 50th anniversary of its publication.

This book re-defined the science and Bible debate in the 20th century. Earlier in the century, by the time of the Scopes trial in 1925, Christian scholarship had either embraced some form of theistic or day-age evolution, or had consigned the ages of evolution to a “gap” between the first two verses of Genesis 1. Creation was relegated to a “secondary doctrine”—not even included in the famous “Five Fundamentals of the Faith.” Science had become the purview of evolutionists, and Christianity essentially retreated from the scientific arena and capitulated to the intellectual pressure of academic secularism.

The two authors submitted the manuscript to every science-educated Christian they knew of, asking for a serious critique. But so strong was the grip of evolutionary thinking that few would even read the manuscript. Careers and reputations were on the line with any questioning of the status quo. Most preferred to look the other way and ignore the subject. Those who considered the issue at all had comfortably compromised with theistic evolution or the gap theory and did not think it necessary to take a stand.

The Genesis Flood propelled Henry Morris into such prominence that even his detractors refer to him as the father of the modern creation science movement. That book, in the sovereign plan of God, became the catalyst that opened the gates to the pent-up flood of Christian professionals who, like God’s loyal “seven thousand” in the days of Elijah, had not yet bowed their knee to the Baal of evolutionary compromise. A revival among scientifically trained Christians had begun.

Published by Presbyterian & Remormed publishers, The Genesis Flood has been continuously in print for 50 years, and the Institute for Creation Research, which was founded by Dr. Morris in 1970, celebrates the impact of this work and these men. The full impact of this book and these two men will not be known until eternity.

Countless individuals have told how The Genesis Flood changed their lives, giving them a new perspective on science and the book of Genesis. Many have noted that the Christian education movement would never have taken hold without the book, for now the whole Bible could be believed without apology. Certainly this is true for the homeschool movement, which flourished with its underpinnings. The case could also be made that the biblical inerrancy movement would never have gained traction without it, for until that time few held to an inerrant Genesis. It is also true that most of the signers of inerrancy documents did not and still do not hold to a literal and inerrant view of Genesis, yet rank and file Christians could not support inerrancy until Genesis could be defended. This undergirding was supplied by The Genesis Flood.

Many Christian leaders still vilify those who insist the great Flood was global and geologically significant, as is so well expounded in The Genesis Flood. But even evolutionary thinking has shifted in response to many creation challenges, such as catastrophism in geology, gaps in the fossil record, design in living things, etc. Today there are many thousands of creation scientists, hundreds of creation organizations, and millions of creation believers, a movement all catalyzed by the publication of The Genesis Flood.

Over a year ago, ICR published the authorized update to this book with the release of Earth’s Catastrophic Past: Geology, Creation & the Flood by former ICR science researcher Dr. Andrew Snelling. It updates the scientific data, and presents an updated and expanded look at the topic that many see as key to understanding biblical earth history.

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)

Excerpted from:

Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Celebrating the Classics", Acts & Facts, February 2011, Institute of Creation Research.

Henry M. Morris III, A Flood of Influence: The Impact of Henry Morris and The Genesis Flood in Modern History, Acts & Facts, February 2011, Institute of Creation Research.

John D. Morris, The Creation Movement’s Firm Foundation, Acts & Facts, February 2011, Institute of Creation Research.

Best Qualified Candidate Expelled Over Views on Evolution, Design

For daring to question evolution, an astronomer who was the best qualified candidate to become director of a new observatory lost out. “No one denies that astronomer Martin Gaskell was the leading candidate for the founding director of a new observatory at the University of Kentucky in 2007 – until his writings on evolution came to light,” a report on Courier-Journal reported. Martin Gaskell is suing the University, claiming that his views on evolution, religion and intelligent design cost him the position.

(for more of this article, see Best Qualified Candidate Expelled Over Views on Evolution, Design, Creation-Evolution Headlines, December 2010)

(also published in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 15, Number 6, November/December 2010, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2010/CM15%2006%20low%20res.pdf)

(for additional info see Daily Mail, Christian astronomer sues university that said his appointment would be 'huge public relations mistake', 17th December 2010)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Adam's descendents were too numerous for a local flood

"If Adam's listed descendents each produced only 10 offspring during his lifetime, Adam would have had more than 10 million descendents when he died at age 930." (Downing 2011)

Adam died 492 years before the flood, according to Bishop Usher's Biblical chronology, and even earlier in other interpretations of the biblical dating. Extremely long lifetimes are definitely reported in the pre-Flood account of Genesis, tailing off to present-day expected lifetimes only long after the time of Abraham.

This is another strong evidence that the Genesis account upholds a global flood! A local flood could not have wiped out 10 million people. Only a global flood could have done this. The book of Genesis teaches us that God saved only Noah and his family from destruction, by His grace. All others perished, because of their sin and rebellion.

References

Downing, Jim. 2011. 75 Years as a Disciple-Maker, an Interview with Jim Downing, Mission Frontiers 33(1):30.

Did God Design Eons of Death into the Creation?

If there were eons of pain, suffering, and death before the awful rebellion of Adam brought "death" into the world, then the suffering of our Lord Jesus becomes unnecessary.

Some have suggested that all living things were originally designed by God to die, that over the millions of years in which animal and pre-human life was developing, death played a perfectly natural role in the creation. Some have even taught that the death which God threatened Adam with was a "special" kind of death that applied only to humans.

Necessary death and long ages are exactly what atheistic science would advocate. How can the God who is life create death as part of His own signature? How ludicrous to think God would design death into His creation, and then agonize over the necessity of His own death in order to bring us salvation. Death by the design of God is absolutely foreign to the revealed nature of God (Romans 1:20).

In Genesis 3--the turning point in Scripture--all of the "good" was instantly withdrawn by God, who by His word activated the "groaning and travailing" of the earth and its inhabitants. The ground was cursed, yielding thorns and thistles, surrounding Adam with sorrowful labor for the rest of his life until he himself would return to the earth from which he was fashioned.

But was God lying? Was He now blaming Adam for what He Himself had done? If the death pronounced by God is nothing more than a "symbol" of a greater message, then death can be relegated to a mystical musing that has no tangible meaning.

A most dangerous extension of the "death" equation is that physical death becomes essentially irrelevant in the punishment of sin. Gethsemane's agonizing was for nothing, and the hundreds of warnings, curses, and consequences detailed in Scripture are now twisted into allegorical advice or suggestions.

If there were eons of pain, suffering, and death before the awful rebellion of Adam brought "death" into the world, then the suffering of our Lord Jesus becomes unnecessary. If the "wages of sin" is nothing more than some sort of spiritualized distance from the Creator, then the entire burden of sin becomes nothing more than a mental attitude. Heaven and hell are "what you make of it."

(extracted from Henry Morris III, "The Issues of Death", Acts & Facts, November 2009, Institute of Creation Research)

Beware New Science Curricula for Christian Schools!

The BioLogos Forum, founded by Dr. Francis Collins (President Obama's pick to head the National Institutes of Health), is aggressively leading the charge into biblical compromise. BioLogos teaches that the Bible is not completely without error, that Adam was symbolic and not real, and that Genesis does not teach the creation of the material world. On their website they announce that if Christians today do not accept the theory of evolution, the Church will die off in the form of an insignificant cult!

BioLogos is conducting workshops for Christian school science teachers in order to train them how to teach evolution to their students - to supposedly harmonize the Bible and Darwinian evolution in the classroom. They are also developing an evolution-based science curriculum for use in homeschools and Christian schools. One of the BioLogos teachers, Dr. Peter Enns [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary for his views that are contrary to Biblical Inerrancy - MM], is even developing a Bible story curriculum for children! Anticipated to release in February 2011, this material is being published by homeschool guru Susan Wise Bauer. Parents, beware! BioLogos is also leading and participating in Christian conferences to influence pastors and other Christian leaders with the message that the Bible and evolution are compatible.

There is a Biblical alternative for Christian schools. In Fall 2010, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) launched Science Education Essentials, a new line of science curriculum supplements that cover topics with a crucial bearing on creation and evolution. Five modules are now available:

Science Education Essentials
for Christian Schools

• The Origin of Life
• The Structure of Matter
• Human Heredity
• Genetic Diversity
• Geologic Processes

Each module includes a Teacher Content Book that allows K-12 science teachers to absorb the facts related to the topic, as well as a Resources CD-ROM that contains activity sheets, reproducible lab experiments, and PowerPoint presentations ready for teachers to use in the classroom. Each educational level was pilot tested with real teachers and their students on every science topic, allowing ICR's faculty to fine-tune these materials for maximum impact. Teachers may visit http://icr.org/essentials to learn more about this exciting new resource.

(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Confronting Evolutionary Ideas", Acts & Facts, January 2011, Institute of Creation Research)

Evangelical Seminaries and the Biblical Doctrine of Creation

What is most disturbing in our culture today is the way in which the Darwinian belief system - the "religion" of Darwin - has influenced those who name the name of Christ, even those calling themselves "evangelicals." For instance, two or three decades ago there were dozens of private Christian colleges that maintained a biblical doctrine of creation. Today, only a handful have resisted compromise.

Evangelical seminaries today are filled with professors who have compromised the biblical text. They train pastors that it's okay to teach evolutionary ideas - the Big Bang, millions and billions of years, common ancestry, etc. - to their congregations. Leaning on the understanding of men (who happen to wear lab coats and have impressive letters behind their names), these professors and pastors have opted not to lean on the understanding of God, placing science over Scripture when they open the book of Genesis.

(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Confronting Evolutionary Ideas", Acts & Facts, January 2011, Institute of Creation Research)

Why are Darwinists so Adamant?

Most scientists today refuse to acknowledge God as Creator, or even that the overwhelming evidence of design in the world around us points to any kind of Designer.

The Heavens declare the glory of God...

Admitting that there exists some sort of supernatural intelligence - a Creator - logically leads us to confront a Judge, and most people in the world are reluctant to face the One who will judge the intents of their hearts and punish their bad behavior.

Darwinism has thus given an "out" that sounds scientific to those who want to avoid confrontation with the eternal!

(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Confronting Evolutionary Ideas", Acts & Facts, January 2011, Institute of Creation Research)

Let us not Waver on the Savior and the Creator

Why do so many “Christians” and “churches” waver on the fundamental doctrines of the Bible? How can they deny God the power and might to create the world in six days? Why do they deny the detailed account of a flood that covered the entire world? When will they realize that they are treading on dangerous ground by turning God’s inerrant and inspired Word into a supposedly flawed book of myths mixed with history?

As we think of the birth of Jesus this month, we must remember that the Son of God not only created the world with great purpose, but that He also came to us to fulfill one grand purpose—the salvation of our souls. It’s so clear in Scripture—from Genesis to Revelation.

When “the reason for the season” is torn away from the pages of the Bible, why should we be surprised that Christian teachers—some calling themselves evangelicals—describe God as an evolutionist? May God have mercy on them!

And may God grant us all a renewed determination to take and maintain our stand for the Creator and His holy Word.

(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, Acts & Facts, December 2010, Institute of Creation Research)

Are you a 12-point Calvinist? TULIP, FABRIC & More

In 1619, in order to answer Arminianism, the Five Points of Calvinism were codified by the Synod of Dort. They are summarized by the acronym TULIP:

Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)

In 1910, in order to answer "Modernism", the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the USA, passed the Doctrinal Deliverance, which declared that Five Fundamentals were "necessary and essential" to the Christian faith.

In 1961, in order to answer Theistic Evolution, the modern Creation Science movement was revived with the publication of The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications, by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris, which reminded Bible believers how vital Creation and the Flood are to the faith.

These tenets of the faith after TULIP - the Five Fundamentals, Creation, and the Flood - may be summarized by the acronym FABRIC & M:

Flood of Noah was global
Atonement for sin by Christ's death
Birth from a virgin of the Lord Jesus Christ
Resurrection of Christ in his body
Inerrancy of Scripture
Creation in the six literal days of Genesis chapter one 

Miracles of Christ were a historical reality

Today, in the early 21st century, Biblical Christianity is coming under increasing pressure. The Five Points of Calvinism, the Five Fundamentals, and now Creation and the Flood are just 12 battle grounds of the faith, with More to come. TULIP, FABRIC & More.

Adam and Eve were Neolithic Farmers that God Chose?

Denis Alexander says that God called these two folks "into fellowship with himself so that they might know him as a personal God." This is what he writes in his book Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose?, published in 2008.

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, brings up Alexander's teaching, as well as similar viewpoints from the BioLogos Forum, in his speech “Why Does the Universe Look So Old?” given on June 19 at the Ligonier Ministries 2010 National Conference. Mohler shows that "theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. That is the very heart of this discussion."

Below are more of Dr. Mohler's comments.

Selections from Why Does the Universe Look So Old? by R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Ph.D

(These excerpts by Marko are from the article published by Institute of Creation Science Acts & Facts October 2010, also available at http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-universe-look-so-old/).


"Reconstruction" of Neolithic farmers at work

A couple of Neolithic farmers? Is that in any way a possible, legitimate exegetical reading of Genesis? More disturbing is not the contents of the book, but the endorsement from J. I. Packer on the front cover, who says, “Surely the best informed, clearest, and most judicious treatment of the question and title that you can find anywhere today.”

Peter Enns, a fellow at the BioLogos Forum, wrote a series of articles on “Paul’s Adam,” in which he states, “For Paul, Adam and Eve were the parents of the human race. This is possible but not satisfying for those familiar with either the scientific or archeological data.” He suggests that we must abandon Paul’s Adam; Paul, as far as he refers to Adam, was limited by his dependence on primitive understandings.

Karl Giberson, a professor at Eastern Nazarene University and Vice President of BioLogos, says, “Clearly the historicity of Adam and Eve and their fall from grace are hard to reconcile with natural history.” He continues:

One could believe, for example, that at some point in evolutionary history God “chose” two people from a group of evolving humans, gave them his image, and put them in Eden, which they promptly corrupted by sinning. But this solution is unsatisfactory, artificial, and certainly not what the writer of Genesis intended.

Was it true that, as Paul argues, when sin came, death also came?

Paul makes clear that, even though God has revealed Himself in nature—so that no one is with excuse—given the cloudiness of our vision and the corruption of our sight, we can no longer see what is clearly there. The heavens are telling the glory of God, but human sinfulness refuses to see what is plainly evident.

Theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. And that is the very heart of this discussion. While some would argue that the Scriptures are not in danger, the current conversation on this subject is leading down a path that will do irrevocable harm to our evangelical affirmation of the accuracy and authority of God’s Word.

Dr. Giberson is not someone attempting to defend the book of Genesis; his goal is to defend the theory of evolution.

Kenton Sparks, for example, writing for BioLogos, suggests that any rendering of the Bible as inerrant makes the acceptance of theistic evolution impossible.

Peter Enns, [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary, Marko] one of the most frequent contributors to BioLogos, suggests that we have to come to the understanding that, when it comes to many of the scientific and historical claims, the writers of Scriptures were plainly wrong.

Are we going to take our cosmology or the redemptive historical understanding of Scripture and submit these to interrogation by what we are told are the assured results of modern science? Doing so will certainly lead to disaster, to a head-on collision that should compel Christians to understand just what is at stake theologically and to be prepared to give biblically-sound answers.

(For more on the very low view of God's Word found in Alexander's book, also see Paul Taylor's review at Answers in Genesis)

Creation is the Foundation, by Henry M. Morris

Without the creation, a supposed gospel would have no foundation, without the promised consummation, it offers no hope, without the cross and empty tomb, it has no saving power. The wonderful threefold work of Christ: creation, conservation, consumation! (Colossians 1:16-20)

For more, see Creation is the Foundation, also Creation, Conservation, and Consummation: Communicating the full gospel of Christ, both by Henry M. Morris, founder of Institute for Creation Research.