Tag Archives: Creation

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 11, 2015 · 10:30

Clothing

Fashion-And-Modern-Youth

Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.   (Zechariah 3:4b)

Someone asked about clothing. How did it develop, and what does the Bible have to say about it? If you consult secular sources, you may learn that “Evidence suggests that human beings may have begun wearing clothing as far back as 100,000 to 500,000 years ago.”[1] Of course, those guesses find their basis in evolutionary thought, which is inconsistent with biblical chronology.  These same sources admit that “It is not known when humans began wearing clothes, but anthropologists believe that animal skins and vegetation were adapted into coverings as protection from cold, heat and rain…”[2] We can agree that clothing has been important in human history from the very beginning.  “The wearing of clothing is exclusively a human characteristic and is a feature of most human societies.”[3] I do not know this for a fact, but I would venture to say all human societies, even the most primitive, wear some type of clothing.

As for what the Bible has to say, Genesis 2:25 tells us that both the man and the woman were naked at the time of their creation. Genesis 3:7-8 tells us that after they sinned, they discovered that they were naked, and were ashamed. Why were they ashamed? I cannot be dogmatic about this, but I think that when they were first created (in the image of God), they had an aura (light) about them. I arrive at this conclusion from examples given in the Bible of individuals, like Moses, acquiring a glow or radiance about them from being in the presence of God. Angels are described as having this glow (Acts 10:30). Jesus had this glow at His transfiguration (Matthew 17:2), and He has it in the descriptions of Him given in Revelation 1:16. So, I believe Adam and Eve had this glow about them, and when they sinned, the light went out, and they saw that they were naked. More than that, they recognized that they had lost something of the image of the One in whose image they were made. They lost their identity with their Creator, and they were afraid (Genesis 3:10).

At the end, God (and I believe this was God in human form – the pre-incarnate Christ) sacrificed innocent animals (probably sheep or goats), and He made clothes to cover the fallen couple. There is an interesting but subtle play on words here with the Hebrew word for skins – ‛ôr. It is pronounced the same as the Hebrew word for light – ‘ôr – but it is spelled differently. The former is spelled with an aleph (א), and the latter is spelled with an ayin, (ע). Before the Fall, they were clothed in light, ‛ôr, and after the Fall they were clothed in skins, ‘ôr. That Jesus shed the blood of innocent animals in order to provide coverings for His fallen creatures, Adam and Eve, speaks of “atonement” – Hebrew kâphar meaning “to cover.” We see in this a representation of the Gospel: Jesus, the innocent Lamb of God, shedding His blood to cover our sins.

Our clothing, then, should serve as a reminder of our sinfulness and of God’s provision for covering that sin. Like the fig leaves Adam and Eve sewed together (Genesis 3:7), our clothing is inadequate to cover our sins. Clothes wear out, they get dirty, or they fall out of fashion. Daily we have to change one outfit for another. However, in heaven, our clothing will not wear out or have to be replaced.[4] “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, … These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7:9, 14). I do not know, but I think that our “robes” will be that same “light” which covered Adam and Eve before the Fall.

Do you have your heavenly wardrobe reserved? If you are not sure, here are some other articles that may help answer your questions:

No One Escapes Judgment

You Don’t Go to Hell Because You’re A Sinner

Only One Way In

Notes:

 

[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_clothing_and_textiles accessed October 9, 2015.

[2]  Ibid.

[3]  Ibid.

[4]  See “Clothing In Heaven” https://erniecarrasco.com/2014/11/30/clothing-in-heaven/

3 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Creation, Current Events, End Times, Gospel, Heaven, Salvation, Second Coming of Christ, 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 , , , , , , , , , ,

July 5, 2015 · 10:30

The Rainbow

I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.  (Genesis 9:13)

From the beginning of time Satan has attempted to pervert everything that God created and called “very good” (Genesis 1:31). A prime example is revealed in last week’s ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States that homosexual cohabitation should be regarded as “marriage” and protected as a legal right under the Constitution of the United States. Such a ruling stains the bounds of reason considering that the same protection finds no haven in the Constitution for heterosexual unions. The lack of understanding demonstrated by five out of the nine justices illuminates the depths of depravity to which our nation has declined. The court’s decision prompted exhibitions of jubilation from what used to be the White House (now bathed in the colors of the rainbow) down to the streets of America. Local news media fight to maintain objectivity in reporting the atrocity as the grins on news anchors’ faces betray their accord with the order.

Regardless of the decision handed down by these black-robed oligarchs, “marriage” was defined by God at Creation. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:27). Out of the side of man, God created the woman (Genesis 2:21) “And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22, emphasis mine). In doing so, God effectively performed the first marriage ceremony. Marriage is not a human institution, it is a Divine institution, so much so that the relationship between Christ and His church is described as a marriage (Matthew 22:2-14; John 3:29; Ephesians 5:23; Revelation 18:23; Revelation 19:7). So, aside from the lawlessness of this act by this Supreme Court, it is the height of arrogance for mere man to redefine what God has already established. But, that is nothing new!

So, what does this have to do with the rainbow, you might ask. The rainbow has been adopted by the sodomites as a symbol of their perverted cause. Like the devil, who I imagine is reveling in his presumed victory; they have taken a sign of God’s promise not to destroy the earth by water again, and have used it as a banner to flaunt the kind of perversion that brought about God’s wrath in the first place (Genesis 6:5; Genesis 19:1-9).  Franklin Graham, son of famed evangelist Billy Graham and founder of Samaritan’s Purse, said, “God is the one who gave the rainbow, and it was associated with His judgment. God sent a flood to wipe out the entire world because mankind had become so wicked and violent.”[1]

Note that God identifies the rainbow as His bow: “I do set my bow in the cloud” (Genesis 9:13, emphasis mine). Indeed, the rainbow in the Bible is always associated with the throne of God. The prophet Ezekiel’s description of God’s throne (Ezekiel 1) defies human explanation, but one of the features is the rainbow that surrounds the throne.

And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake. (Ezekiel 1:26-28, emphasis mine)

A similar description of the rainbow surrounding God’s throne appears again in Revelation.

And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne. And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald. (Revelation 4:2-3, emphasis mine)

And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: (Revelation 10:1, emphasis mine)

God’s throne is also his “judgment seat.” The Greek word translated “judgment seat” is bēma, and it is translated as throne in Acts 12:21, “And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them” (emphasis mine). This brings us back around to the rainbow surrounding the throne of God from where He sits in judgment.  “But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Romans 14:10). “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (2 Corinthians 5:10).

The poor misguided souls who celebrate their perversion beneath the colors of the rainbow call down upon themselves the judgment of God. The foolhardy President of the United States who bathes the People’s House in the colors of the rainbow in celebration of the Supreme Court’s foolish ruling unwittingly calls God’s judgment down upon our nation. This may well be the final nail in the coffin that America has built for itself

I see dark days ahead for our nation, but if you are a born-again follower of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, a brighter day is coming, and it may come sooner than you think. In the meantime, Jesus said, “Occupy till I come” (Luke 19:13). “Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid … Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 5:14, 16). This is not the time for passivity.

Notes:

 

[1] World News Daily, “Franklin Graham: ‘Gay’ Rainbow Ends Badly,” http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/franklin-graham-gay-rainbow-ends-badly/, accessed July 2, 2015.

4 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Christianity, Creation, Current Events, End Times, Evangelism, Gospel, Heaven, Politics, Religion, Second Coming of Christ, Theology

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