BiblicalInsights.net

I recently visited the Ark Encounter exhibit in Williamstown, KY.  The exhibit is not quite finished at this time (July, 2016), but it is completed to the point that a visitor can enjoy the conceptualizations and renderings based upon the Biblical account of Noah’s ark and the universal flood of Genesis 6-9.  The exhibit is massive in size and requires a lot of walking to see.  Ken Ham is director of Answers in Genesis and is responsible for the construction of the ark exhibit.  He is a young earth creationist.  Opposition to the Ark Encounter exhibit has already surfaced.  Barbara King wrote an article attacking the basic concept of the exhibit as anti-science because it is anti-evolution.  The most important clash between science so-called and the Bible is focused on chronology.  The Biblical chronology beginning with Genesis 1 :1 and continuing to today allows for around 6,000 years of human history.  Evolutionists argue for a much longer period of time.  Evolutionists hold that the universe is around 14 billion years old.  The earth is about 4 to 5 billion years old.  They also teach that human lineage evolved 6 million years ago and our own species about 200,000 years ago.  King objected to the display of humans and dinosaurs on the ark (There’s No Controversy: Let’s Stop Failing Our Children on Evolution, July, 28, 2016).  She claims that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago and that humans have only been on the earth for about 200,000 years.  The difference between the chronology of the Biblical account of the creation of man and the chronology of evolution cannot be reconciled without destroying the veracity of the Biblical account.  Keep in mind that most of Bible chronology is given within the context of the history of the men and women who were involved in bringing the Messiah into the world.  If you destroy the chronology that is imbedded in the genealogy accounts of Christ, you destroy faith in the accounts themselves and they under gird our faith in Jesus of Nazareth as the one who is the Messiah (both creator and redeemer of mankind).  Those who want to hold to the Bible and evolutionary chronology must compromise.  These individuals are known as theistic evolutionists.  Theistic evolutionists generally believe that the Biblical accounts of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and the flood of Noah’s day are myths.  They deny the historical and literal aspects of these accounts.  But, when they do so, they also impact the genealogies of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Why do they do this?  They desire to harmonize, in some way, what the Bible says with evolutionary chronology.  By making these accounts myths, they actually agree with the evolutionist who holds that Noah’s ark is fiction.  King quotes from the Patheos blog with which she agrees, “…and there wasn’t even a mention of how the whole Noah’s Ark story is fiction.”
King’s article focused on an NBC Nightly News broadcast by Kevin Tibbles from the site of the Ark Encounter in which Tibbles failed to affirm evolution.  King interpreted this as a failure to teach our children science (evolution).  She said, “The NBC segment was a prime example of a missed opportunity in mass-media science literacy education–education that’s sorely needed.”
This expressed opinion is precisely the reason there is a clash between the Bible and science (macro-evolution).
The chronology of the Bible cannot be reconciled with the chronology of evolution.

John Morris wrote The Young Earth.  In this book, Morris gives ten geochronological arguments from different features of the earth that point to a young earth rather than an earth that is billions of years old.  On page 137, Morris quotes from G. Richard Bozarth’s article, “The Meaning of Evolution” published in the American Atheist on February, 1978, p. 30, “Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science (by this, he means naturalism-Morris) to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary.  Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god.  Take away the meaning of his death. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing.”
In light of this quotation, how could any Christian attempt to harmonize what the Bible teaches with what evolutionists teach? The meaning of evolution is that Jesus is not our redeemer and Christianity is nothing!
Another interesting quotation comes from Phil Sanders.  Sanders wrote an article on the rise of religious skepticism titled, “Religious Skepticism on the Rise”, Spiritual Sword, January, 2016, pp. 16-20.  The article revealed that 22.8 percent of Americans now identify themselves as unaffiliated with any religious group.  Sanders states, “This segment of society has grown from 16.1 percent in 2007 to 22.8 percent in 2014 and is growing faster than any religious group in America. Sanders lists the characteristics of a skeptic:
1.  Skeptics question the validity or authenticity of something claiming to be true.
2.  They doubt the truth of Christianity and dismiss the important elements of it.
3.  They have no use for the “organized church” and consider the Bible to be full of ancient and dubious myths.
4.  Skeptics of biblical Christianity doubt whether there is a knowable God who intervenes in the world, whether miracles are possible, whether the soul is immortal, whether there will be a resurrection, and whether there is an afterlife.
5.  Many skeptics are empiricists, who only believe what they can perceive through their five senses.
6.  Others simply deny our ability to know anything for certain.
7.  Skeptics are not sure God even exists, so they see no reason to give him any place of authority or relevance to their lives.
The Barna Group found the three primary components that lead to disbelief in God’s existence are: (1) rejection of the Bible; (2) a lack of trust in the local church and (3) cultural reinforcement of a secular worldview.
Sanders identifies one of the influences of the secular worldview to be the common perception in public education, in the media, and at most museums that the universe is billions of years old and humanity evolved from lower forms of life.  Most theistic evolutionists hold to these views (see my book review on John Otis’ book, Theistic Evolution A Sinful Compromise).  “This constant emphasis on an ancient earth and evolution from so many “credible” sources of the world does not escape the attention of our young people who may not know how to answer this faith destroying theory” (Sanders, p. 17).
The theory of evolution means that Jesus is not our redeemer and Christianity is nothing!  The theory of evolution is a faith destroying theory.  Any person who attempts to harmonize the theory of evolution with the Bible is being irrational.  Let God be true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4).

I recently uploaded a new book review.  The book is by John Otis and is titled, Theistic Evolution A Sinful Compromise.  Otis writes to expose a serious problem in the Presbyterian Church in America concerning the doctrine of creation.  He attacks the false notion of theistic evolution within the PCA.  Otis believes in the superiority of the Scriptures over the false concepts of evolution.  He recognizes the crux of the matter to be one of hermeneutics (the science of the interpretation of the Scriptures).  He also affirms that theistic evolution is a “Pandora’s Theological Box.”  You are invited to read the review under the Book Review page.  Just click on the page and then click on the name of the book.  The book consists of 322 pages, but the review is only seven pages.  The doctrinal compromise of theistic evolution has been advanced in the churches of Christ by the Warren Christian Apologetics Center under the direction of Charles Pugh III.  The Center recently published a book by Nobie Stone titled, Genesis 1 and Lessons From Space.  Dr. Stone is a theistic evolutionist.  The warning of John Otis in his book should serve as a warning to other religious groups who seek to compromise the Scriptures by advocating a concordant view between the Scriptures and Evolution.

An excellent article appeared recently in Apologetics Press titled, “Is Gap Theory Linguistically Viable?” (December, 2015, vol. 35, no. 12). It was written by Justin Rogers who holds a Ph.D. in Hebraic, Judaic, and Cognate Studies from Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.  Rogers clearly shows that the Gap Theory violates clear biblical teaching. This is remarkable in light of the fact that Nobie Stone allows for the Gap Theory in his book, Genesis 1 and Lessons From Space, p. 67.  Stone states, “The point here is that there is a grammatical break between the first sentence and the second, which begins with the word now.  It is such an obvious break that it has been suggested that the first sentence is not a sentence at all, but a title for the following material; although this has its own problems.  We simply ask the question, “What right do we have to impose any constraint on this clear break?” Is it continuous? Is there a gap? We truly do not know.”  Dr. Rogers is much more definite than Dr. Stone.
What is the Gap Theory?
The Gap Theory is an effort to harmonize Genesis 1:1-2 with the evolutionary concept of an Earth that is billions of years old.  The theory holds that there is a gap between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2 that would allow for billions of years of time to pass.  Proponents of the Gap Theory insist that “science” requires an Earth that is billions of years old.  Consequently, the Scriptures must be made to “fit” science.  Gap theorists then twist the Scriptures to make them fit their theory.  Obviously, to many Christians, this is backwards.  Scripture should take precedence over scientific theory (scientism is not a fact, but a philosophy).  Evolution is not a fact, but a theory based upon presuppositions that include a materialistic interpretation of origins.
What Are The Linguistic Arguments?
Rogers states the specific linguistic arguments that Gap theorists allege.  First, Gap theorists begin by affirming that the Hebrew term bara in Genesis 1 means “create” (from nothing) and asah  means “restore” (at a later time) (p. 135). Rogers comments, “By interpreting the Hebrew in this fashion, Gap theorists believe they can accommodate an Earth billions of years old without compromising the essential integrity of the Genesis account.  The bara state of Creation occurs first (Genesis 1:1), and, after centuries or even billions of years, the asah stage of Creation occurs (the “six days,” Genesis 1:2ff) (p. 135).  Rogers shows that this sharp distinction between these two Hebrew words does not hold up under further examination.  He affirms, “…these terms (along with eleven others-DS) are used interchangeably of God’s creative activity” (p. 136).  For instance, the term bara is used of the creation of man (Gen. 5:1 and 6:7) which, if Gap theorists were correct, only asah should have been used.  While these terms are often found in parallel constructions of God’s creative activity, they are not always synonymous terms (p. 136).
Second, Gap theorists make three arguments on the grammar of Gen. 1:2.  “They claim: (1) the Hebrew waw implies a gap in the narrative; (2) the verb form “was” (hay tah) signals a new beginning; and (3) the nouns tohu va-vohu imply a re-creation from a degraded, earlier Creation (pp. 137, 140).  Rogers answers each of these arguments.  First, when the waw is attached to a noun it is disjunctive and signals a shift in the narrative.  The disjunctive waw can simply provide background information to the story being related (e.g. Genesis 13:13), or explain what is happening simultaneous with the narrative, but elsewhere in location (e.g. Genesis 37:36, translated well as “meanwhile” in the ESV).  In these cases, the waw sets up a parenthetical remark which functions to explain the preceding information (p. 140).  Rogers addresses the second grammatical feature, the hay tah or “was.”  Gap theorists mistranslate this term insisting it means “became” or “had become.” Rogers acknowledges that this can be a possible meaning, but that the context determines the actual meaning.  In this context, the word “was” refers to the time when God began his work of creation.  It serves as a copula (a word that joins parts of one thought to another).  “Was does not mean that the earth remained in this shapeless state for a long time; nor does it mean that it became such after being something else earlier” (Reyburn and Fry, 1997, p. 30) (p. 140).  “This point is recognized by virtually every decent translation of the Hebrew text since the Septuagint (cf. the Latin Vulgate and the mountain of English translations)” (p. 140).
Rogers addresses the final grammatical consideration, the  Hebrew phrase, tohu va-vohu (“without form and void”-KJV).  Gap theorists affirm that these terms imply a depreciation of the original Creation. Rogers replies, “While the Gap theorists are correct to understand tohu va-vohu to mean a state of creation God did not regard as ideal, nothing in the Hebrew words themselves implies a depreciation of Creation. Rather, the expression conveys the amorphous nature of the Earth before God provided His creative structure to it” (p. 141).
Rogers concludes, “There is nothing in the Hebrew text of Genesis 1 to demand a gap of time” (p. 141).

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).