BiblicalInsights.net

I have recently posted a review of the book titled, Genesis 1 and Lessons From Space by Nobie Stone.  This book is published by the Warren Christian Apologetics Center, Vienna, WV under the direction of Charles Pugh III.  Pugh states regarding the work of Nobie Stone, “This promises to be a fascinating journey through the cosmos and the associated scientific and religious thought” (p. xi). The reader must judge for himself/herself whether or not this is true.  I found the book to be challenging to my faith because of the many logical, philosophical, scientific and theological errors it contains.
Nobie Stone is a theistic evolutionist.  He allows for the Gap Theory and affirms a modified form of the Day-Age Theory.  Guy N. Woods in Questions and Answers, vol. 1, p. 17 remarks concerning the Day-Age Theory: “The day-age theory is a consequence of the evolutionary theory.  But for that speculative view such a hypothesis would never have been advanced.  The theory itself is patently opposed to other affirmations of the sacred writings; why, then, should we concede that there is merit to its imaginations in this area? Conservative Geologists (E.G., George McReady Price), have long since shown, in the most convincing fashion, that the “onion-skin” hypothesis and the geologic time-time (sic) based thereon are fanciful and false; we ought not, therefore, to give credence to its suppositions in an area where it is obviously in conflict with inspiration.  It is not possible to force the Mosaic account of creation into conformity with the evolutionary hypothesis. Life, according to that theory began in the water; life, according to the Holy Spirit, began on the land! Which shall we believe?”  Woods makes it abundantly clear that the theory of evolution is not compatible with Scripture.  The contrast is between the fallible words of men and the infallible word of the living God.
Charles Pugh III indicates in the Publishers Afterward that the Warren Christian Apologetics Center is not a “cookie cutter” of the apologetics of Thomas Warren for whom the center is named.  This means that the apologetics of the center is not the “same as” the apologetics of Thomas Warren. What is the difference?  Pugh remarks, “The Center’s work includes the availability of venues whereby respected scholars from various disciplines, in some fashion supportive of the Christian worldview, are engaged for presentations that make contributions of varying degrees to the overall field of apologetics for Christian evidences.”  Pugh will present views in the field of Christian apologetics that are not necessarily true according to the Scriptures, but “in some fashion” support the Christian worldview.  I do not believe that Thomas Warren would have done this.  Thomas Warren wrote a book titled, On Church Cooperation and Orphan Homes.  In this work, Warren states that a Christian cannot support error.  Whenever an entity, religious or otherwise, supports error, then that entity is disqualified from receiving funds from New Testament churches or New Testament Christians.  Warren states, “Oh,” someone says, “but you said that a church might help someone who is not a member of the church.” Yes, I certainly did say that.  And I say it again.  But I never did say that a church could give to anyone or to any thing if such giving would enhance the spread of error” (p. 195).  The Warren Center under the direction of Charles Pugh III has published error without refutation and disseminated it worldwide via Amazon.com.  The Christian worldview is stated in the Scriptures.  Any doctrine that contradicts the Scriptures is not the Christian worldview.  Theistic evolution contradicts the Scriptures. Theistic evolution is not the Christian worldview.  Pugh includes a disclaimer about material that is published by the Warren Center on p. 158.  You can read it in my review.  This disclaimer is necessary for Nobie Stone’s work because of the many logical, scientific, philosophical, and theological fallacies it contains. The obvious contradiction between the stated mission of the Warren Center to uphold and defend the Christian worldview and the means (publishing materials that teach error without any refutation and disseminating such throughout the world) should be apparent to any rational person.  Every faithful gospel preacher is under a solemn apostolic charge (II Tim. 4:1-3) to oppose this type of  material and contradictory effort.

Wayne Jackson, in the July, 2015 issue of the Christian Courier, wrote an article titled, “When Time Becomes God.”  The article is an excellent treatment of the question regarding the age of the earth.  How old is the earth?  How do we know?  Does it make any difference?  Does it matter what writers of Scripture say about this issue? Does it matter what Jesus says about it?
I would like to share some of the comments of bro. Jackson regarding this important and controversial topic.  For the entire article, please go to the Christian Courier website.
The Beginning of Creation
In the New Testament, the phrase, “from the beginning” is used more than twenty times.  The context determines the point of the beginning under consideration.  For instance, it may apply to an event within a certain time frame, e.g. the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (John 6:64).  However, on a number of occasions, it refers to the beginning of the world (Matt. 24:21).  Let’s consider some of the passages in which Jesus used this phrase in reference to the beginning of the world (Gen. 1:1).
First, Jesus placed Adam and Eve (the first humans) at the beginning of the creation. Mark 10:6, “But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female.”  In contrast, those who affirm organic evolution and theistic evolution have billions of years between the point of the beginning of the universe and the appearance of man on the earth.  Does this trusted testimony of the savior, Jesus Christ, (also the creator of the all things -Col. 1:16) have any authority in deciding the question of the age of the earth?  If we believe Jesus, it does!  Was Jesus ignorant of chronology?  Did He misrepresent the facts to accommodate human ignorance?  In either case, He would forfeit His claim to deity.  The deity of Jesus Christ is at stake in regards to the truth of the age of the earth.
Second, Jesus places the fall of man at the beginning.  The book of Genesis does not give a precise chronology for the time between Adam and Eve’s creation and their fall and subsequent banishment from the Garden of Eden.  But, it could not have been very long.  In John 8:44, Jesus said, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.  He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”  Jesus said that Satan was a liar and a murder “from the beginning.”  When creation was complete, Satan brought death upon the human race by his deception of Eve and Adam.  In this way, sin entered into the world and death by sin (Rom. 5:12).  There is no room for billions of years to pass from the beginning of the world until the fall of man.
Third, Jesus places the death of Abel, “at the foundation of the world.”  Luke 11:45-52.  Jesus said, “That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation.  From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.” How could this statement of the Lord be harmonized with evolutionary chronology?  Abel was one of the sons of Adam and Eve.  Notice, too, that Jesus speaks of the first family as historical people and not as mythological characters.
Fourth, Jesus predicted that the tribulation that would occur with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. would eclipse all previous human suffering even “from the beginning of creation” (Mark 13:19).  Clearly, Jesus extended human history back to the very beginning of the earth’s creation as recorded in Genesis 1.  Why is Jesus’ testimony so arrogantly disputed by evolutionists and theistic evolutionists today?  They are unbelievers.
Time:  Evolution’s God
Professor George Wald of Harvard University once declared:  “Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, and the probable virtually certain.  One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles” (quoted by Wayne Jackson, Christian Courier, July, 2015, p. 4).  Given enough time, something can come from nothing.  Given enough time, non-living things can give rise to living things (spontaneous generation).  It is expected that atheists would argue in such an illogical fashion.  What is distressing is that some misguided Christians, who profess allegiance to the Bible as God’s word, have ingested the evolutionary dogma to a significant degree, compromising the testimony of Jesus Christ.  “The “pied-pipers” lead youngsters into the maze of that deadly hybrid ideology known as theistic evolution” (Wayne Jackson, Christian Courier, July, 2015, p. 5).
H. S. Miller, General Biblical Introduction, p. 51 states, “He [Christ] was completely and eloquently silent concerning any error, contradiction, inaccuracy, myth, legend, or forgery in the Old Testament; strangely and criminally silent, if such existed.  These either did or did not exist.  If they did exist, He was either (1) ignorant of them, in which case He was not omniscient, hence not the unique Son of God, hence an impostor, hence a sinner, hence no Savior; or He (2) did know of them and deliberately chose to be silent, to deceive the people, in which case He was a dishonest man, a deceiver, an impostor, a sinner, and no savior” (quoted by Wayne Jackson, Christian Courier, July, 2015, “When Time Becomes God”).
The previous is the logical dilemma from which no atheist or theistic evolutionist can escape.  “Pity the compromiser who abandons the testimony of the Son of God in deference to the whimsical, ever-vacillating revisions of atheistic speculation” (Wayne Jackson, Courier, p. 5).