Category Archives: Evolution

October 25, 2015 · 10:30

A Day Is A Day

Evening and Morning Was One Day

Evening and Morning Was One Day

For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. (Psalm 90:4)

In a previous post, No Gap, I discussed the “Gap Theory” compromise of the biblical creation account.  The Gap Theory is only one of several compromises of theistic evolution.[1] Another popular compromise is the “Day-Age Theory.” This offshoot of theistic evolution maintains that God used long ages – billions of years – and evolution to create rather than the six literal days stated in the Bible. The Day-Age Theory attempts to stretch the days in Genesis 1into six long periods of undetermined time. “[The] ‘days’ of creation were interpreted figuratively as the ‘ages’ of geology.”[2]  In order to back up that assertion, the proponents of the Day-Age Theory will cite the psalm above or 2 Peter 3:8: “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”

Besides the hermeneutical problems with this view, a logical dilemma arises that refutes any form of theistic evolution. To see this, one must have a clear understanding of who God is and what His attributes say about Him. To begin with, God is inconceivably great beyond anything the human mind can imagine. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:8-9, emphasis mine). Considering God’s “thoughts,” one of His attributes is that of omniscience; He is “all-knowing.” Hence, He innately knows all that can be known, and there is nothing He does not know. “Shall any teach God knowledge?” (Job 21:22). “Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him?” (Job 40:2). “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?” (1 Corinthians 2:16). Since that is so, why would God need to take billions of years to create by means of evolution, slowly developing from a single cell one thing, and then the next, and then the next, etc. until in the end He evolved man? That makes God out to be something of a mad scientist experimenting in a laboratory to see what He can come up with next. God does not need to experiment! God has nothing to learn; He has no need to practice. Besides all that, billions of years of evolution also involves billions of years of death. This is contrary to God’s nature. “In him was life; and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4, emphasis mine). God is concerned with life, not death. “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26, emphasis mine). If death existed before the completion of creation, God would have erred when He said that it was “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Besides that, death before the fall creates greater theological problems. (I deal with this issue in No Gap.)

In addition we must consider God’s omnipotence; He is “all-powerful.” There is nothing He cannot do. “Is any thing too hard for the LORD?” (Genesis 18:14). “Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?” (Jeremiah 32:27). “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26). “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God” (Luke 18:27). “For with God nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37).

Given that God is all-knowing and all-powerful, i.e., there is nothing impossible for Him, it is not unreasonable to believe the Genesis literal six-day account of creation. In fact, given His omniscience and omnipotence, He could certainly have created in an instant what He took six days to create.

Simple logic with a basic understanding of God’s nature refutes theistic evolution and the Day-Age Theory. Furthermore, these compromises fail when applying proper hermeneutical principals. A plain reading and understanding of the text of Genesis 1, as I explained in No Gap, precludes any possibility of long ages. The Hebrew word, yom, for day can only mean a normal 24-hour day. To further stress this point, God encapsulated the completion each creation day between the boundaries of “evening and morning.” There is no other way to interpret this narrative without pulling in from outside sources information not contained within the text. This system of hermeneutics is known as eisegesis – reading into the text what is not there.

The proponents of the Day-Age Theory in attempting to legitimize their compromise will cite 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90:4, but when properly interpreted, in context, these passages speak of God’s eternal nature and have nothing to do with specifying time limits. God is not bound or limited by time; His transcendent nature places Him outside and inside of time simultaneously. Therefore, one day with Him is like one thousand years and one thousand years is like a day. Peter employs a literary device known as simile; otherwise he would have left off the “like.” Likewise Moses in his psalm says, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night” (Psalm 90:4, emphasis mine). But when God says He completed the work in one day, He means one day. So, why did He take six days to create rather than an instant? He created in six days and rested on the seventh day to set the pattern for our work week – six days of work, one day of rest. Have you noticed that the seven-day week is ubiquitous around the world? Furthermore, He wrote it in stone: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:8-11, emphasis mine). The Hebrew word yom for “day” used here in the Fourth Commandment, is the same word yom used in Genesis 1. God was not talking about long ages when He gave this commandment, and He was not talking about long ages when He gave His creation account.

Another argument offered by the compromisers suggests that Genesis uses “poetic” language. This argument falls apart simply by comparing the narrative text of Genesis 1-4 with the literary style of parallelism employed in the Wisdom Books: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs (Song of Solomon). One does not even need knowledge of Hebrew to see the difference. So, claiming that Genesis 1 employs poetic language is a weak argument in support of a sad compromise.

No long ages fit into the narrative of Genesis 1. The Day-Age Theory compromises and weakens the Word of God. It is a diabolical instrument of Satan to create doubt for God’s Word, and disparage the very character and nature of God. There is no gap in Genesis 1, and there are no long ages. A day is a day, plain and simple.

Notes:

[1]  Henry M. Morris, “Evolution and the Bible,” http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-bible/, accessed 10/23/15.

[2]  Ibid.

4 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Christianity, Creation, Death, Evolution, Origins, Religion, Satan

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 18, 2015 · 10:30

No Gap

earth-implosion

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Genesis 1:2)

Ever since Charles Darwin published his On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, (in which, by the way, he never addresses the main thesis of his book) it seems that Christian theologians have been scrambling to defend the Genesis creation account and allow for millions of years of evolution. Even now with all the great research being done by creation scientists in the fields of biology, cosmology, geology, meteorology, paleontology, physics, and others, and by great organizations like Answers In Genesis, Creation Ministries International, the Creation Research Society, the Institute for Creation Research and others, still we have far too many Christian pastors and theologians that cower at the roar of atheists and evolutionists when it comes to the question of origins. They fear being labeled as ignorant and uneducated and likened to geocentric flat-earthers. Rather than defend the clear teaching of Scripture on this matter, they will either completely capitulate to the evolutionists, or they will find some compromise to accommodate evolutionary concepts. What really frustrates me is when some of these cowards claim to defend the infallible, inerrant, Word of God. If the Word of God is truly infallible and inerrant, then compromise is not an option.

One such compromise is known as the Gap Theory which proposes that there is a “gap” of long ages – billions of years – between the first two verses of Genesis 1. “According to this concept, Genesis 1:1 describes the initial creation of the universe. Following this, the standard events of cosmic evolution took place, which eventually produced our solar system about five billion years ago. Then, on the earth, the various geologic ages followed, as identified by their respective assemblages of fossils (trilobites, dinosaurs, etc.).”[1] Following this, some sort of global cataclysm takes place destroying all life and God must re-create the earth. Thus, Genesis 1:2 is describing the earth “becoming” without form and void. This idea was popularized by the Scofield Bible, and widely accepted for almost a century, but it was due more to fear of ridicule than solid Bible apologetics.

The first problem with this view begins with the first word of the second verse – “And.” We must first keep in mind that the original text did not include chapter and verse divisions. The text was a continuous reading. The “And” at the beginning of verse two is the Hebrew letter waw (pronounced “vav”). In Hebrew grammar, this construct is known as a “waw consecutive” indicating that there is no break between what precedes it and what follows. The text, then, is one continuous thought without any break: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and the earth was without form, and void.” By the way, punctuation marks were not part of the original Hebrew text; punctuations were added by the translators as they thought proper according to English grammar. The same is true for the remainder of verse two: “and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Each of those “ands” is a “waw consecutive” indicating no break in the action. Furthermore, verses 3-5 all begin with a “waw consecutive,” indicating no break in the action from the beginning of verse one to the end of verse five. Simply analyzing the Hebrew grammatical construction of these first five verses of Genesis destroys any notion of “gaps” in the creation account in Genesis. Attempting to insert a gap in the text is simply sloppy hermeneutics.

The second problem presents itself with the final statement in verse five: “And the evening and the morning were the first day.” “Evening and morning” define a normal 24-hour day. In addition, the Hebrew word translated “day” is yom, and it is normally understood to mean a single 24-hour day. Although it is rarely used to indicate an undetermined time as in “the day of the Lord” or “in that day” or “in those days”; it is never used to indicate an indefinite amount of time as in millions of years. There are other options for specifying longer periods of time. For example, in Daniel 9:24, the use of shâbûa‛ meaning “seven” and translated “weeks” in the King James Bible (KJV), is used to indicate a period of seven years. Later, in Daniel 12:7, the use of mô‛êd, meaning “an appointment” or a “fixed season” and translated “time” in the KJV, is used to indicate a year, although “year” in Hebrew is actually shâneh. Hebrew does have a word for an indefinite amount of time; that word is ‛ôlâm, which is often used in the sense of eternity. So, God had other word options to indicate eons of time, yet He chose to use the word for a normal 24-hour day.

Finally, God regards “death” as an enemy. “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26, emphasis mine). At the end of the sixth day, God assessed His work, “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day” (Genesis 1:31, emphasis mine). Think about this: God, who is incapable of any error whatsoever, declares His creation, not just “good,” but “very good.” The Hebrew word for “very” is mǝ‘ôd, and it is an adjective meaning “vehemence” or “vehemently.” That is a very strong word describing God’s assessment of His perfect creation. Now think about this: if God considers death the enemy, why would He allow billions of years of death inserted between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and then turn around and exuberantly declare His creation “very good”? That makes no sense! God does not contradict Himself like that. Furthermore, the enemy, death, entered through Adam’s sin (Romans 5:12), and the penalty for sin is death (Romans 6:23). That being true, then how could death have existed before Adam’s sin? And if death existed in “the gap” prior to Adam’s sin, then how could death be “the enemy” and the “penalty” for sin? So, the “Gap Theory” raises some serious theological issues.

If a preacher, pastor, theologian or layman professes to believe in the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, it is time to claim ALL of it, stand by ALL of it, defend ALL of it, and stop making excuses and compromising with the secularists that disregard both the Bible and the Creator. There is NO GAP in Genesis. The only gap that exists is the chasm of sin that separates man from God, and that gap cannot be bridged by compromising any part of God’s Word.

Notes:

[1]  Henry M. Morris, “Why the Gap Theory Won’t Work” (http://www.icr.org/article/why-gap-theory-wont-work), accessed October 16, 2015.

12 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Atheism, Christianity, Creation, Evolution, Gospel, Origins, Religion, Salvation, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 19, 2015 · 10:30

Cain’s Wife

Cain and Abel, ivory panel from the cathedral of Salerno, ca. 1084. Image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ivory_Cain_Abel_Louvre_AO4052.jpg

Cain and Abel, ivory panel from the cathedral of Salerno, ca. 1084. Image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ivory_Cain_Abel_Louvre_AO4052.jpg

And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch … (Genesis 4:16-17)

The question of Cain’s wife comes up often with both serious students of the Bible and skeptics. The low hanging fruit tempts the skeptic to ridicule the Bible for the omission of important details. After all, the Bible only speaks of Cain and Abel; no others siblings are mentioned. If the skeptic adheres to evolutionary/atheistic thinking, he may use this to support his perspective by claiming there were many hominids around before the mythical first couple came around. Cain must have gotten his wife from one of the many available to him.

The Bible student may find himself without a defense because the skeptic is clearly correct – there are no other people mentioned at this point. Genesis 4 records the first family, which includes Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel; no others are mentioned. So where did Cain get his wife? Is the skeptic correct?

This can pose a serious problem even to a seminary trained “professional” because there seems to be no clear-cut answer. But here I want to direct my attention directly to those who claim to believe in the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture. If you are reading this now, and have doubts about the veracity of the Bible, you are welcome to check it out now.

If we believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, that it is without error and it is true in every respect – infallible, than we must accept it for what it says – period. Starting from the beginning, God created one man and one woman (Genesis 1:26-27; Genesis 2:7, 21-22). That was all; no other “hominid kind” were created. “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). In Genesis 4:1 Cain is born and in the next verse we are introduced to Abel. “And in process of time it came to pass” (Genesis 4:3) that a long period of time transpires and the boys are fully grown. The Bible gives no indication as to how much time elapsed between the first and second sentence of verse 2. Seth, the son to replace the murdered Abel, is born 130 years from Adam’s creation (Genesis 5:3), which means Cain and Abel could have been anywhere from around 30 to 129 years old. That said, “the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters” (Genesis 5:4, emphasis mine). It seems unlikely that in that span of time between the birth of Abel and the birth of Seth, Adam and Eve abstained from procreative activity. It is quite likely that they had a plethora of boys and girls – one every two to three years is not unreasonable.

At this point, the serious student of the Bible must conclude that Cain’s wife was one of his sisters. Did I hear a collective “Yuck!” out there? Suddenly someone recalls the biblical prohibition against marrying a close relative (Leviticus 18:6-20), so Cain cannot take a sister for his wife because that is prohibited by God’s Law. Here, science can aid our understanding of Scripture.

Let us first examine the time frame between creation and the time the Law was given to Moses. From Creation to the Flood was about 1656 years (Genesis 5). From the Flood to birth of Abraham was another 290 years (Genesis 11)[1]. From the birth of Abraham (Abram) until Israel went into Egypt was another 218, and Israel was in Egypt 430 before the Exodus and then another 40 years of wandering in the wilderness. So, from Creation to the Law was between 2594 years and 2604 years. This means that marrying within the family was not legally prohibited and Cain could indeed marry his sister. Remember that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all three married close relatives.

Now, for Cain to marry his sister presented no biological problem either, because Adam and Eve were created perfectly – their DNA was perfect. Harmful mutations had not corrupted their DNA, so close family marriages did not present a problem.[2] It took about 2600 years before the genetic load became significant enough for God to intervene by giving the prohibition not to marry a close relative.

Where did Cain get his wife? From his parents; he married his sister. This posed no problem biblically or biologically.

Notes:

[1] James J.S. Johnson, “How Young Is the Earth? Applying Simple Math to Data Provided in Genesis,” http://www.icr.org/article/how-young-earth-applying-simple-math-data-provided/, accessed July 17, 2015.

[2] Ken Ham, “Cain’s Wife: It Really Does Matter!” http://www.icr.org/article/cains-wife-it-really-does-matter, accessed July 17, 2015.

1 Comment

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Evolution, Origins, Poetry, Religion, Science, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

May 31, 2015 · 10:30

A Special Kind of Stupid

Image Credit: The Greanville Post, http://www.greanvillepost.com/2014/04/29/his-day-in-court-a-chimpanzee-makes-legal-history/

Image Credit: The Greanville Post: “His day in Court—A Chimpanzee Makes Legal History“

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.  (Genesis 1:26)

This week “Two research chimps got their day in court … Steven Wise, an attorney with the Nonhuman Rights Project, told Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Barbara Jaffe that Hercules and Leo, the 8-year-old research chimps at Stony Brook University on Long Island, are ‘autonomous and self-determining beings’ who should be granted a writ of habeas corpus, which would effectively recognize them as legal persons. The chimps, he argued, should be moved from the university to a sanctuary in Florida”[1] (emphasis mine).

Well, what can one expect! For years now evolutionists have been claiming that chimpanzee DNA is 98% the same as that of humans. If that is so, then it stands to reason that they should at least be considered 98% persons. Is that not so? However, the DNA findings exaggerate the similarity in a narrow segment of the genome and deemphasize the vast differences that clearly separate chimps from humans. Biologist Dr. Jeffrey P. Tomkins, Research Associate in Life Sciences for the Institute for Creation Research, researches these claims made by the evolutionists. In comparing 40,000 chimpanzee genomic sequences against the human genome, Tomkins found “that reported levels of human-chimp DNA similarity were significantly lower than commonly reported … For the chimp autosomes, the amount of optimally aligned DNA sequence provided similarities between 66 and 76 percent, depending on the chromosome. Only 69 percent of the chimpanzee X chromosome was similar to human and only 43 percent of the Y chromosome. Genome-wide, only 70% of the chimpanzee DNA was similar to human under the most optimal alignment conditions.”[2] The 28% (give or take) variance may seem small, but in genomics, it is huge. “While, chimpanzees and humans share many localized protein-coding regions of high similarity, the overall extreme discontinuity between the two genomes defies evolutionary timescales and dogmatic presuppositions about a common ancestor.”[3]

I am no scientist, but even without getting into the coded information contained in DNA, the differences between chimps and humans seem obvious to me. To make an evaluation, one needs only to ask a few simple questions.  Aside from some basic similarities like: chimps have hands, humans have hands; chimps have feet, humans have feet (albeit chimps have “thumbs” on their feet and humans have a big toe); chimps have faces, humans have faces; chimps express emotions, humans express emotions; chimps nurture their young; humans nurture their young; chimps live in communities, humans live in communities; chimps communicate (as do most other animals), humans communicate; chimps make “tools,” humans make tools. There may be other similarities, but basically, it ends there. The questions reveal the differences.

Chimpanzees can make simple “tools,” but can they replicate a tool or mass produce it? Do they teach their tool making techniques to others in their community? Do they improve their tools to make them more functional or employ their tools for a variety of different purposes? Chimpanzees can build shelters, but can they build permanent structures? Do they employ aesthetic design in their building efforts or are their shelters simply utilitarian? For that matter, do chips create anything – paintings, sculptures, music, etc.? What is the extent of their creative abilities, if any, and how do they compare to those of humans? Can chimpanzees do even simple math? Do they develop economic systems or practice even the most basic exchange systems? We know that chimps can communicate in some rudimentary ways, but have they developed a language? Do they exchange ideas, and if so, how is that accomplished? Have they ever developed a system of writing, and if they have, do they value it enough to preserve it? Do chimps study chimpanzee anatomy in order to “doctor” on one another? Do they research in order to find cures for chimpanzee diseases? Along the same lines, do chimps study other animals to learn their habits and habitats? Do they observe the stars at night and dream about visiting other worlds? Chimps play, but do they develop games with rules and teach the game to others in order to stimulate healthy competition?

The comparisons are endless, but the more questions one considers, it becomes all the more obvious that chimpanzees fall far short of human achievements and capabilities. Sure chimps have greater strength than humans. They can swing from tree to tree even using their feet to grasp branches; but they do not have the manual dexterity to play a flamenco guitar, harp, piano, or violin; or the grace to match the agility of a gymnast or to dance a ballet or to figure skate.

The evolutionists claim that humans and chimps originated from a common ancestor. If that is the case, then why have chimpanzees not advanced even to the level of the most primitive human tribes? Supposedly they have had the same 100,000 years as humans (according to evolutionists) to evolve beyond their lowly “animal” status. So why are they stuck at the point of their origin? The fact is that they are animals and humans are, well, humans. Chimps were created by the spoken word of God (Genesis 1:24-25); humans were formed (Hebrew yâtsar meaning form or mold) in the image of God (Genesis 2:7; 1:26-27). The difference in creation between beast and man is so distinct, from the Creator’s point of view as recorded in Scripture, that one would really have to be some special kind of stupid to attribute personhood to an animal on par with that of a human being. But, this should really not surprise us. The Bible teaches that those who profess such things have “changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever” (Romans 1:25, emphasis mine).

So, if these chimps really are “legal persons” – the “autonomous and self-determining beings” their lawyers claim – they should go out and hire their own lawyers!

 

 Notes:

[1] Krishnadev Calamur, “Research Chimps Get Their Day in Court in New York,” (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/05/27/410058029/research-chimps-get-their-day-in-court-in-new-york). Accessed May 28, 2015.

[2] Jeffery Tomkins, “New Research Evaluating Similarities Between Human and Chimpanzee DNA,” (http://www.icr.org/i/pdf/technical/Research-Evaluating-Similarities-Human-Chimp-DNA.pdf). Accessed May 28, 2015.

[3] Ibid.

2 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Creation, Current Events, Evolution, Origins, Science, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 8, 2015 · 10:30

What You Don’t Know

Genesis1

And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? (Mark 12:24)

Jesus faced His crucifixion just days away. Jerusalem was already in full Passover mode as Jews descended on the capital city from all over the Roman world. This was one of three holy convocations where Jews were to gather to celebrate the Feasts of the Lord (Leviticus 23). The Jewish religious leaders were already plotting to have Jesus killed, but because of His popularity, they couldn’t just kill Him. They had to bring up charges against Him that would warrant execution, so they tried to trip Him up with questions regarding their Jewish laws and traditions.

So it was in this case. First they approached Him with a question on paying taxes to Rome. They first tried to butter Him up with false flattery: “Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth” (Mark 12:14). They addressed Him as “Master,” i.e., “teacher,” yet they disregarded His teaching even though they stated that He “taught the way of God.” Their question failed to challenge Jesus. The answer was easy: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17).

The Sadducees, who “say there is no resurrection” (Mark 12:18), followed up with a question concerning the resurrection. Their question was well thought out – they thought. Seven brothers had the same wife, and they all died including the wife. In the resurrection, whose wife shall she be? Aha! Answer that one, Jesus! Jesus replied that there is no marriage in heaven, but before giving His answer, He chided them for their ignorance of Scripture and consequently the power of God (our verse above).

We do often err because we “do not know the Scriptures.” It’s no great challenge to find this ignorance working in a non-believing world, but it’s sad to find the same ignorance, albeit perhaps not as pronounced, among “believers.” One common example is the controversy over creation. Did God cause the Big Bang and then use millions of years of death and suffering to create life by means of evolution? Or did God create in six 24-hour days as clearly recorded in Genesis 1?

Those believers that support the Big Bang and evolution come in different varieties, but they all prefer “science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20) over the clear teaching of Scripture. They hold the word of man in higher regard than the Word of God. They do err because they “know not the scriptures, neither the power of God.” The power of God! God says, “My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure” (Isaiah 46:10). “I the LORD have spoken it, and I will do it” (Ezekiel 36:36). “And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible” (Mark 10:27). If God cannot do what He clearly said He did in Genesis 1, then neither can He part the waters of the Red Sea, cause the Sun to stop, or turn back ten degrees, make an ax head float, cleans a leper’s spots, turn water into wine, walk on water or calm the raging sea. If God cannot create as He said He did in Genesis 1, neither can He raise the dead, much less raise Himself from the dead. You do err because you do not know the Scriptures, and because you do not know the Scriptures, you do not know the power of God. What you don’t know can lead you astray. Jesus said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39).

Comments Off on What You Don’t Know

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Creation, Easter, Evolution, Gospel, Origins, Religion, Resurrection, Science, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,