Supra-Intellectual Faith

Supra-Intellectual Faith
Believing God in an Intellectualized Culture [at appropriate time, click]

Supra-Intellectual Faith
Believing God in an Intellectualized Culture Intellectual Faith Believing God in an Intellectualized Culture A culture strongly influenced by elite naturalists whose a priori belief is that there is no God. — Foolish intellectuals. — Ps.14:1; 53:1 “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” [click] A culture strongly influenced by elite naturalists whose a priori belief is that there is no God. — Foolish intellectuals. — Ps.14:1; 53:1

Creation: Is it important?
Creation is just a side-issue? Faith in Jesus Christ is what’s important Creation: Is it important? [click] Creation just a side-issue? Isn’t it? [click] Faith in Jesus Christ is what’s important…. Isn’t it?

Creation: How important is it?
Faith in Jesus Christ is of utmost importance However Faith without understanding is It is seed sown on rocky soil; the sprout withers. Creation: How important is it? [click] Faith in Jesus Christ is of utmost importance However [click] Faith without understanding is [click] It is seed sown on rocky soil; the sprout withers. If your faith is not founded on truth, it’s irrelevant. If you don’t understand — and accept — the truth of God, your faith will be weak, and susceptible to corruption and death. [click] Blind Faith

Creation: Why is it important?
It’s the Gospel! The Gospel doesn’t start in Matthew. The Gospel doesn’t start with the Birth of Christ. The Gospel starts at Genesis 1:1 If you don’t understand the bad news, how can you understand the good news? Creation: Why is it important? [click] It’s the Gospel! [click] The Gospel doesn’t start in Matthew. [click] The Gospel doesn’t start with the birth of Christ. [click] The Gospel starts at Genesis 1:1. [click]

Creation: Why is it important?
If you don’t start with Genesis You’re starting in the middle of the story You can’t explain suffering and death If you don’t believe the Genesis account You’re saying Jesus is wrong You’re denying the Foundations of our faith You’ve got death before SIN If you don’t start preaching the Gospel with Genesis, [click] you’re starting in the middle of the story. [click] You have no explanation for suffering and death. [click] If you don’t believe the Genesis account, you’re saying [click] Jesus is wrong. [click] You’re denying the foundations of your faith. [click] You’ve got DEATH before SIN!

Jesus Said… “… ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” Lk.16:31 “… ‘How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!’ ” Lk.24:25 Jesus Said [click] “… ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” Lk.16:31 [click] “… ‘How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!’ ” Lk.24:25 Jesus wasn’t just talking about the prophets’ statements about HIM. He was speaking of faith in ALL that the prophets have written. What truth would there be in a prophetic statement about Jesus if the rest of what the prophets had written was unreliable? What good is prophecy if all of it isn’t true! [click]

Other scriptures say… “...the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar...” 1 John 5:10 “...let God be found true, though every man be found a liar...” Romans 3:4 “For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’ ” Romans 4:3 “Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.” Psalm 119:160 Here is what other scriptures say about God’s Word. [click] “...the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar...” 1 John 5:10 [click]“...let God be found true, though every man be found a liar...” Romans 3:3-4 [click]“For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’ ” Romans 4:3 [click]“Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.” Psalm 119:160 God’s Word is truth! [click]

Believing God Intimidated Split minds Give up either Science or Faith
No “Rational” person, no “Educated” person Don’t be intimidated Split minds Realm of Faith / Realm of Science “The Bible was not intended to be a Science book.” But it is intended to be truth! Creation and Evolution: Both require FAITH! Many people, even many Christians, have been intimidated into thinking that you have to [click] give up science in favor of faith, or give up faith in favor of science. The world has convinced them that science & God are enemies. Evolutionists will often begin statements supporting their view with phrases such as [click] “No rational person,” or “No educated person” with intent to intimidate those who disagree with their dogma. This is really an emotional appeal to the uneducated and insecure who, wanting to appear rational and educated, will tend to side with the evolutionist. Who wants to appear to be irrational? Whenever an evolutionist wants to belittle a creationist, he will appeal to rationality by saying, “The rational person will agree with me.” What he really means is, “I’ll call you rational if you agree with me.” [click] Don’t be intimidated. Some have consciously split their minds to allow themselves to believe in God and evolution at the same time. They try to divide their beliefs into what they [click] call “the realm of faith” and “the realm of science.” In matters of the physical world, they give “science” preference, and in matters of morality and spirituality, they give “faith” preference. They say, [click] “The Bible is not intended to be a science book.” These people believe “science” does not involve faith, and that “faith” need not become entangled with science. This is quite a challenge to do in practice, because the divisions are not that clear-cut. Besides, if the Bible is not truth, what basis does it have for establishing morality? [click] God has told us the truth, and it is not limited to moral and spiritual matters. Let me say, [click] both creation and evolution require faith. They are both interpretations of our world, whether with God or without God. Neither belief can be observed.

God and Evolution What about Creation and Evolution?
“Maybe God used Evolution to create!” While some try to separate God from science, [click] others try to reconcile the Bible with Evolution. [click] Maybe God used Evolution to create! Both Creationists and Evolutionists agree this is the most ridiculous position of all. It simply cannot be done unless you relegate the entire Bible to the realm of allegory. — Some reconciliation! [click]

Creation and Evolution?
“Can’t I believe in Creation and Evolution?” Can’t I believe in Creation and Evolution? [click] You can not and you must not. [click] You can not and you must not.

Creation and Evolution?
“Why can’t I believe in Creation and Evolution?” Sequence Time Death Billions of Dead Things Before Sin Why can’t I believe in Creation and Evolution? [click] Sequence Time Death Billions of Dead Things Before Sin

Why you cannot believe both the Bible and Evolution
Sequence Creation sequence: Day 1: Light, Water, Heavens and earth, night and day Day 2: Expanse [Stretching of the Universe] Day 3: Dry land, plants Day 4: Stars, sun, moon Day 5: Sea creatures, birds Day 6: Land creatures, man The Order is Inconsistent with Evolution Sequence The sequence is out of order. [click] In the Genesis account, the sun wasn’t created until day four, plants were created before the sun, flying creatures before land creatures. The order is entirely inconsistent with what Evolution teaches.

Evolution sequence Expansion Space Stars, Sun Earth Water Moon Death Plants Sea creatures Land creatures Dinosaurs Mammals Birds Sea creatures from land creatures Man Creation sequence: Light Water Space, Earth Expansion Plants Stars, Sun, Moon Sea Creatures, Birds Land Creatures (including Dinosaurs) Man Death In the Evolution account, [click] • the Big Bang theory says the sun came first, • flying creatures evolved from land creatures, and many more inconsistencies appear the closer you look. Here you can compare them side by side. Man is not the result of millions of mutations, but the finalization of God’s creative work. God created us in His image. God didn’t leave it up to chance.

In fact, according to God, the Earth is the oldest object in the universe! The Earth was created on Day 1, but the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars weren’t created until Day 4. In fact, according to God, the Earth is the oldest object in the universe! [click] The Earth was created on Day 1, but the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars weren’t created until Day 4. [click]

Time “Millions of years” is inconsistent with what God says in His Word. What about…? “Gap Theory” “Day/Age Theory” “Theistic Naturalism” (Theistic Evolution Theory) “Progressive Creation” All try to add “millions of years” to the Bible, and all produce some mighty strange conclusions... Time [click] “Millions of years” is inconsistent with what God says in His word. Even trying to [click] impose the “Gap Theory,” the “Day/Age Theory” or “Theistic Naturalism” into the Bible produces some mighty strange conclusions. “Theistic Naturalism” often called “Theistic Evolution” is an interesting oxymoron. Evolution is an attempt to explain our existence without God. Therefore, Theistic Naturalism is an attempt to explain our existence without God — with God. Hmmm…. [click] You simply can’t insert any significant period of time into God’s Word without doing severe damage to its truth. [click]

…such as millions of years of death before sin. You simply can’t insert any significant period of time into God’s Word without doing severe damage to its truth. Time [click] “Millions of years” is inconsistent with what God says in His word. Even trying to [click] impose the “Gap Theory,” the “Day/Age Theory” or “Theistic Naturalism” into the Bible produces some mighty strange conclusions. “Theistic Naturalism” often called “Theistic Evolution” is an interesting oxymoron. Evolution is an attempt to explain our existence without God. Therefore, Theistic Naturalism is an attempt to explain our existence without God — with God. Hmmm…. [click] You simply can’t insert any significant period of time into God’s Word without doing severe damage to its truth. [click]

Death God says death came through sin. What is death?* Judgment – punishment for sin Separation – represents our current relationship with God A blessing! An opportunity to be reconciled to God *The Relevance of Creation by Ken Ham Death [click] God says death came through sin. Before Adam and Eve’s sin, there was no death! Do you believe that? [click] What is death?[1] [click] 1. Judgment – punishment for sin [click] 2. Separation – represents our current relationship with God [click] 3. A blessing! An opportunity to be reconciled to God [1] The Relevance of Creation by Ken Ham [click]

Billions of Dead Things Before Sin The fossil record is “Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth.” -Ken Ham God says death came into the world through sin after creation was finished. Under evolutionary hypothesis, the fossil record marks millions of years of suffering and death. If You try to say God created through evolution, then you have billions of years of suffering and death before sin. When God finished his creation, He called it “very good.” How could a good God call suffering and death “very good?” (Gen.1:31) You’ve got Billions of Dead Things Before Sin! [click] The fossil record IS “Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth!” [click] God says death came into the world through sin after creation was finished. [click] Evolution says suffering and death have been around for millions of years. [click] If you try to say God created through evolution, you have billions of years of suffering and death before sin. [click] When God finished, he called His creation “very good.” How could a good God call suffering and death “very good?” [click]

Many evolutionists, including the late Carl Sagan, point this out in ridicule. Carl Sagan: “Evolution would be the most wasteful, inefficient, and cruel process that could ever be conceived by which to ‘create’ human beings. It is absurd to suggest that the omnipotent, omniscient, loving, and saving God of the Bible could ever be guilty of such a thing!” The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.109 Atheists seem to understand the situation better than the majority of Christians. Here’s a quote from the “American Atheist” magazine: “Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science [sic] to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary.... If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing!” Genesis and Evolution, American Atheist 30 (Jan.1988):7, as quoted in The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.119 Many evolutionists, including the late Carl Sagan, point this out in ridicule. “Evolution would be the most wasteful, inefficient, and cruel process that could ever be conceived by which to ‘create’ human beings. It is absurd to suggest that the omnipotent, omniscient, loving, and saving God of the Bible could ever be guilty of such a thing!” -The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.109 Atheists seem to understand the situation better than the majority of Christians. Here’s a quote from the “American Atheist” magazine: “Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science [sic] to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary.... If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing!” -Genesis and Evolution, American Atheist 30 (Jan.1988):7, as quoted in The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.119 [click]

Why you MUST not believe both the Bible and Evolution
God is not a liar! God said “Six Days.” Jesus said all things would be restored. God was there. Evolutionists were not. No Justification We’ve seen why you can not believe both the Bible and Evolution. Now we’ll look at why you MUST not believe both the Bible and Evolution. [click] God is not a liar! [click] God said “Six Days” [click] Jesus said all things would be restored [click] God was there. Evolutionists were not. [click] No justification. [click]

God is not a liar! “...the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar...” 1John 5:10 “What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.” Romans 3:3-4 “Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.” Proverbs 30:5 “Thy word is true from the beginning… Psalm 119:160 God is not a liar! [click] “...the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar...” 1John 5:10 [click]“What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.” Romans 3:3-4 [click]“Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.” Proverbs 30:5 [click]“All your words are true: all your righteous laws are eternal.” Psalm 119:160 [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days” Not only in Genesis 1, but also in the 4th commandment “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Exodus 20:11 He wrote it in stone — With his own finger “When the LORD finished speaking to Moses on Mount Sinai, he gave him the two tablets of the Testimony, the tablets of stone inscribed by the finger of God.” Exodus 31:18 God said, “Six Days” You’ve heard people refer to something being “written in stone” to indicate that it cannot be changed, right? Or they’ll say, “It’s not like it’s written in stone!” to indicate that something is not firmly decided. Well, God not only said “in six days” in Genesis, but He repeated it when he gave the Ten Commandments to His people in the wilderness, [click] “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Exodus 20:11 and He wrote it in stone with his own finger! [click] “When the LORD finished speaking to Moses on Mount Sinai, he gave him the two tablets of the Testimony, the tablets of stone inscribed by the finger of God.” Exodus 31:18 [click]

“But I believe the word ‘day’ means something other than an ordinary day.” “Yom” (Hebrew for day) Always means an ordinary day when Modified by a number Accompanied by “evening,” “morning,” or both Used in plural form, as in Exodus 20:11 So in Genesis chapter 1, we see… Night, evening, morning, number, day, evening, morning, number, day… Many will say, “But I believe the word ‘day’ means something other than an ordinary day.” Where would you get an idea like that? [click] Let’s consider the Hebrew word for day, “yom.” Some will say that this Hebrew word is non-specific and can refer to an indefinite period. While this word can mean an indefinite time period, it almost always means a literal day. [click] It ALWAYS means an ordinary day when [click] Modified by a number [click] Is accompanied by “evening,” “morning,” or both [click] Is used in a plural form, as in Exodus 20:11 [click] So in Genesis chapter 1, we see Night, evening, morning, number, day, evening, morning, number, day… [click] [Aside – do not discuss unless it comes up] Some have tried to say that Genesis 1 and 2 describe separate creation events, however there are several reasons why this cannot be, two of which are Inconsistent order (with Evolution) and Billions of dead things before sin, as we already discussed . The distinction to make regarding Genesis chapters 1 and 2 is that Genesis 1 is a summary of what God did in creation week, while chapter 2 essentially says, “Now, let’s look at some detail in a few important areas.”

God goes out of his way in the Hebrew language to tell us these are ordinary days. I think God’s trying to tell us something! God is going out of His way to say, “It’s an ordinary day!” There is no clearer way He could have said it! [click] [Aside – do not discuss unless it comes up] Some have tried to say that Genesis 1 and 2 describe separate creation events, however there are several reasons why this cannot be, two of which are Inconsistent order (with Evolution) and Billions of dead things before sin, as we already discussed . The distinction to make regarding Genesis chapters 1 and 2 is that Genesis 1 is a summary of what God did in creation week, while chapter 2 essentially says, “Now, let’s look at some detail in a few important areas.”

“But in 2 Peter 3:8, it says, ‘With the Lord a day is like a thousand years…” Let’s read the rest of the verse… “And a thousand years are like a day.” Well, that cancels that one right out. “But in 2 Peter 3:8, it says, ‘With the Lord a day is like a thousand years…’.” [click] Well, let’s read the rest of the verse… [click] And a thousand years are like a day. That cancels that one right out! Peter is saying that God is patient. He’s not trying to make a theological modification to Genesis Chapter 1. Furthermore, a word in Greek in the New Testament cannot modify the meaning of a word in the Hebrew language. The early chapters of Genesis are a chronological historical narrative. Every indication is that it is to be taken literally. [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days”! He is not inept. God created language God is able to say what He means God is powerful enough to create the universe in an instant — let alone six days! God said “Six Days”! He is not inept! [click] God created language. [click] God is able to say what He means in a way people can understand. God’s writing is not so obscure that it would take man 4000 years to finally understand what he meant. [click] God is powerful enough to create the universe in six days. Do you believe that? [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days”! He is not inept. Why did God take so long? Where do we get our Year? Earth and Sun Where do we get our Month? Earth and Moon Where do we get our Week? Genesis Chapter 1 — It’s the only source of a seven day week. And as Jesus said, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” Mark 2:27 God took seven days so we could follow His example and have a day of rest! Now the question we might ask is, “Why did God take so long? Why did He take six days?” [click] Where do we get our year? [click] Earth and Sun [click] Where do we get our Month? [click] Earth and Moon [click] Where do we get our Week? [click] Genesis Chapter 1 — It’s the only source of the seven day week. And as Jesus said, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” Mark 2:27 [click] Why did God take six days? So we could have a day of rest. God created for six days and then rested. The Sabbath was made for man. [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days” Jesus said all things would be renewed To the way they were in the beginning. He didn’t mean a state of struggle and death. He meant harmony and life. Mt.19:28 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Acts 3:21 whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time. Rev.21:5 And the one sitting on the throne said, “Look, I am making all things new!”* And then he said to me, “Write this down, for what I tell you is trustworthy and true.” The word “new” here means restored — not different. Isaiah 11:6 “The wolf will live with the lamb…” Jesus said all things would be restored. [click] To the way things were in the beginning When God says He is going to restore all things, He means he will set everything back to its state of perfection as it was before sin entered creation. No suffering. No death. The way it was meant to be. [click] Mt.19:28 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. [click] Acts 3:21 whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time. [click] Rev.21:5 And the one sitting on the throne said, “Look, I am making all things new!”* And then he said to me, “Write this down, for what I tell you is trustworthy and true.” The word “new” here means restored — not different. [click] Isaiah 11:6 “The wolf will live with the lamb…” [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days” Jesus said all things would be restored God was there. Evolutionists were not. God is infallible. Man is fallible. God is Holy. Man is sinful. If you’re going to put your faith in God, shouldn’t you believe what He says? “God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” Numbers 23:19 God was there. Evolutionists were not. God is infallible. Man is fallible God is Holy. Man is sinful. If you’re going to put your faith in God, shouldn’t you believe what He says? How can you believe God will save you if you don’t believe what He said about how he created you? Does God speak truth sometimes and then lies other times? Scripture says [click] “God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” Numbers 23:19 [click]

God is not a liar! God said “Six Days” Jesus said all things would be restored God was there. Evolutionists were not. No Justification! The only reason to believe in evolution is if you don’t believe in God and His Word. That’s a rather precarious position for a Christian to hold, don’t you think? No justification! The only reason to believe in evolution is if you don’t believe in God and His Word. That’s a rather precarious position for a Christian to hold, don’t you think? There is no reason to believe in Evolution! If you’re a Christian, you should believe God. Let me say this again: Evolution is an attempt to explain our existence without God! When you try to reconcile the Bible with Evolution, which one always gets compromised? It’s always the Bible. As a Christian, you are unjustified in believing in evolution. You are contradicting the very one you say you believe. [click]

God Was There The Creation account has three points in its favor right from the start: There is an adequate cause for the effect, Intelligence and a plan, God was there. He has given us His testimony; His Word This testimony was entrusted to reliable men of God who wrote it down for us God Was There! The Creation account has three points in its favor right from the start: [click] 1. There is an adequate cause for the effect We have God! Evolutionists have… pause …matter. [click] 2. Intelligence and a plan God had a reason for creating the universe, there was thought, there was intelligence, there was direction. [click] 3. God was there [click] He has given us his testimony; His Word [click] He entrusted his testimony to reliable men, whom today we call “men of God.” [click]

The REAL Battle It’s not God vs. Science
It’s Truth vs. Orthodoxy Judeo-Christian religion vs. Secular Humanist religion God vs. the Ungodly “It’s the Word of God v. Man’s fallible theories.” Creation 23(2) March-May, 2001, p.18 Galileo wasn’t fighting God, but an ungodly orthodoxy that included the Church. The REAL Battle You see, it’s not God v. Science. It never has [click] been. It’s truth v. Orthodoxy. [click] It’s the Judeo-Christian religion v. the Secular Humanist religion. [click] It’s God v. Evolutionists. [click] It’s God v. the ungodly. [click] “It’s the Word of God v. Man’s fallible theories.” -Creation 23(2) March-May, 2001, p.18 [click] Even in Galileo’s day, it was not God v. science but rather, God v. the orthodoxy of an ungodly priesthood, whose view of the Bible was distorted by the pantheistic teachings of Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle, standing in the way of truth. [click]

The Orthodoxy “It is unscientific to believe any explanation that indicates the existence of God — even if it’s true!” We have a similar orthodoxy today that calls itself “the Scientific Community.” In their way of [click] thinking, it is unscientific to believe any explanation that indicates the existence of God [click] — even if it’s true! [click]

Absurdity This arbitrary assertion leads to one of two necessary conclusions: Either science and truth go separate ways (if God turns out to exist) or There is no God. The humanistic evolutionist, of course, believes the second. This arbitrary assertion, if true, leads to one of two NECESSARY conclusions: [click] Either science and truth go separate ways (if God turns out to exist) or [click] There is no God. [click] The humanistic evolutionist, of course, believes the second. [click]

But God Exists! The conclusions are false because the assertion is false. Science and belief in God go hand-in-hand. God is the Author of Science However, neither of these conclusions is correct because the assertion is false. [click] Science and belief in God go hand-in-hand. [click] The truth is that God is the author of science. Science and belief in God go hand in hand. [click]

Modern Interpretation?
Should we apply contemporary scientific interpretations to the Bible? Just how much does man know? Just how much does man not know? “Scientific facts” get discarded every day! (Actually it’s not the facts that get discarded, but the interpretations of the facts.) Some Christians have been intimidated into believing that you need to interpret the Bible through our current understanding of the world; that is, to [click] apply contemporary scientific interpretation, and modify the Bible accordingly. Christians must resist this temptation! [click] One only needs look at the current state of medical science to see clearly how little man knows. [click] Scientific “facts” are regularly discarded in light of new “facts.” [click]

Fallible Man or Infallible God?
Should we take the word of fallible men who were not there over the Word of our infallible God who was there? Of course not! “We should judge the words of man against the word of God, and not the other way around.” -Ken Ham Fallible Man or Infallible God? Should we take the word of fallible men who were not there over the Word of our infallible God who was there? [click] Of course not! It is presumptuous and arrogant of us as Christians to try to interpret God’s revelation through our incomplete knowledge of the world rather than to interpret our world through God’s revelation. [click] “We should judge the words of man against the word of God, and not the other way around.” -Ken Ham [click]

In the past, many interpretations of the Bible were wrong, not because the scriptures were wrong, but because man tried to interpret the scriptures in the context of the accepted “scientific” ideas of the day. - The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.206 In the past, many interpretations of the Bible were wrong, not because the scriptures were wrong, but because man tried to interpret the scriptures in the context of the accepted “scientific” ideas of the day. [click]

In the early ages, “if Christians had built their world view on the Bible —as Kepler, Newton, and others tried to do much later— [instead of building it on Greek “science”] the development of true science might have come much sooner.” -The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.203 In the early ages, “if Christians had built their world view on the Bible —as Kepler, Newton, and others tried to do much later— [instead of building it on Greek “science”] the development of true science might have come much sooner.” [click]

Isn’t Evolution a Proven Fact?
“What about all the scientific discoveries that indicate there is no God and that evolution is a fact?” There are no such discoveries. There are many assertions. All such statements are based on the biased conclusions of fallible people. All facts must be interpreted. Science doesn’t draw conclusions; people do. Isn’t Evolution a Proven Fact? What about all the scientific discoveries that indicate there is no God and that evolution is a fact? [click] There are no such discoveries. [click] All such statements are based on the biased conclusions of fallible people. [click] All facts must be interpreted. You’ve heard people say, “The facts speak for themselves.” Facts NEVER speak for themselves. A fact is an inanimate object, n observation, a piece of scientific data, or something of that nature. To conclude anything about a fact, you have to associate other information with the fact. Typically people bring stories to the fact, based on their preconceived ideas. [click] Science doesn’t draw conclusions; people do. The conclusions you draw about any fact will be based on the world-view you bring to the fact. [click]

Objectivity Which of these statements are true about scientists?
They wear white lab coats They work in laboratories They are unbiased They have white hair None! Let’s talk about objectivity for a moment… Which of these statements are true about scientists? [click] They wear white lab coats [click] They work in laboratories [click] They are unbiased [click] They have white hair [click] None! [click]

Objectivity We’re all human. We’re all fallible. We all have biases.
The question is… What bias are you biased with? Will you be biased on the side of God’s Word? or not? Infallible Scientists? We’re all human [click] We’re all fallible. [click] We all have biases. [click] The question is… What bias are you biased with? Will you be biased on the side of God’s Word? or not? [click]

Present is the Key to the Past?
Evolution says “The present the key to the past.” Jesus indicated that the past is the key to the present: “…‘Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, …for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” Matthew 19:4 “…‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.’ ” Matthew 19:8 “…‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’ ” Luke 16:31 Believe it! Jesus Did! [click] Evolutionists like to use the phrase “The present is the key to the past.” But that’s a misleading, ideologically motivated reflection of a philosophy diametrically opposed to the Bible. That philosophy is uniformitarianism. It means that everything we see can be explained in terms of natural processes we see every day. It rejects catastrophes, and shuns special events as explanations for things. As Christians, we know the Bible is the key to the past. As people, we also know extraordinary and non-repeatable catastrophic events have occurred in the past. [click] Jesus indicated that the past is the key to the present! [click read scripture]

Believe it! Jesus did! Jesus referred to Genesis and the Old Testament as truth many times: Reference Topic Genesis Reference Genesis Matthew 19:4 Created male and female 1:27, 5:2 Mark 10:6 Created male and female 1:27, 5:2 Matthew 19:56 Cleave to his wife; become one flesh 2:24 Mark 10:79 Cleave to his wife, become one flesh 2:24 Matthew 23:35 Righteous Abel 4:4 Luke 11:51 Blood of Abel 4:8-11 Matthew 24: Noah and the Flood 6:1-22, 7:1-24, 8:1-22 Mark 13:19 Creation which God created 1:1, 2:4 John 8:44 Father of lies 3:45 Old Testament Luke 16:31 Moses and the Prophets Luke 24:25 Believe all that the prophets have spoken Jesus referred to Genesis and the Old Testament as truth many times: [click repeatedly until footnote appears, reading the topic for each line. [click] Taken from: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, Does the New Testament Support Genesis 1-11?, by Dr. Walt Brown.

Believe it! Jesus did! All New Testament Writers referred to Genesis chapters 1-11 as truth.* Reference Topic Genesis Reference Acts 14:15 Who made the heaven and the earth 2:1 Acts 17:24 God made all things 1:1-31 Acts 17:26 From one man [God] made every nation of men Indirect Romans 1:20 The creation of the world 1:1-31, 2:4 Romans 4:17 God can create out of nothing 1:1-31 Romans 5:12 Death entered the world by sin 2:16-17, 3:19 Romans 5: Death reigned from Adam 2:17 Romans 8: Creation corrupted 3:17-18 I Corinthians 6:16 Two will become one flesh 2:24 I Corinthians 11:3 Head of the woman 3:16 I Corinthians 11:7 In the image of God 1:27, 5:1 I Corinthians 11:8 Woman from man 2:22-23 I Corinthians 11:9 Woman for the man 2:18 I Corinthians 15: By a man came death 2:16-17, 3:19 I Corinthians 15: To each. . . seeds of its own (kind) 1:11, 1:21, 1:24 I Corinthians 15:45 Adam became a living being 2:7 I Corinthians 15:47 Man from the earth 3:23 II Corinthians 4:6 Light out of darkness 1:35 II Corinthians 11:3 Serpent deceived Eve 3:16, 3:13 Ephesians 3:9 Created all things 1:1-31, 2:1-3 Ephesians 5:3031 Cleave to his wife, become one flesh 2:24 Colossians 1:16 All things created by Him 1:1-31, 2:13 Colossians 3:10 Created in His image 1:27 I Timothy 2:1314 Adam created first 2:18-23 I Timothy 2:14 Woman deceived 3:16, 3:13 I Timothy 4:4 Everything created by God is good 1:10-31 Hebrews 1:10 In the beginning God made the heavens and earth 1:1 Hebrews 2:78 All things in subjection under man 1:26-30, 9:23 Reference Topic Genesis Reference Hebrews 4:3 Works were finished 2:1 Hebrews 4:4 Rest on the seventh day 2:2-3 Hebrews 4:10 Rest from His works 2:2-3 Hebrews 11:3 Creation of the universe 1:1 Hebrews 11:4 Abel offered a better sacrifice 4:35 Hebrews 11:5 Enoch taken up 5:21-24 Hebrews 11:7 Noah’s household saved 7:1 Hebrews 12:24 Blood of Abel 4:10 James 3:9 Men in the likeness of God 1:27, 5:1 I Peter 3:20 Construction of the Ark, eight saved 6:14-16, 7:13 II Peter 2:5 A flood upon the ungodly, eight saved 6:8-12, 7:124 II Peter 3:45 Earth formed out of water and by water 1:67 II Peter 3:6 The world destroyed by water 7:17-24 I John 3:8 Devil sinned from the beginning 3:14 I John 3:12 Cain slew his brother 4:8, 4:25 Jude 11 The way of Cain 4:8, 4:16, 4:25 Jude 14 Enoch, the 7th generation from Adam 5:3-24 Revelation 2:7 Tree of life 2:9 Revelation 3:14 Beginning of the creation of God 1:1-31, 2:14 Revelation 4:11 Created all things 1:1-31, 2:1-3 Revelation 10:6 Who created heaven. . . and the earth 1:1, 2:1 Revelation 14:7 Who made the heaven and the earth 1:1, 2:1, 2:4 Revelation 20:2 The serpent of old, who is the devil 3:1, 3:14 Revelation 21:1 First heaven and first earth 2:1 Revelation 21:4 No more death, sorrow, crying or pain 3:17-19 Revelation 22:2 Fruit of the tree of life 3:22 Revelation 22:3 No more curse 3:14-19 Revelation 22:14 The tree of life 2:9 All New Testament writers referred to Genesis chapters 1-11 as truth! [all scriptures presented at once, not to read, but just to show that there are many. The attendees can read them in their handouts.] [click] Taken from: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, Does the New Testament Support Genesis 1-11?, by Dr. Walt Brown.

Believe it! Jesus did! Some interesting points:
Every New Testament writer refers to the early chapters of Genesis (Genesis 1-11). Jesus Christ referred to each of the first seven chapters of Genesis. Every chapter of Genesis 1-11, except chapter 8, is referred to somewhere in the New Testament. Every New Testament writer apparently accepted these early chapters of Genesis as historically accurate. Some interesting points: [click] Every New Testament writer refers to the early chapters of Genesis (Genesis 1-11). [click] Jesus Christ referred to each of the first seven chapters of Genesis. [click] Every chapter of Genesis 1-11, except chapter 8, is referred to somewhere in the New Testament. [click] Every New Testament writer apparently accepted these early chapters of Genesis as historically accurate. [click] Taken from: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, Does the New Testament Support Genesis 1-11?, by Dr. Walt Brown.

Believe it! Jesus did! Some interesting points (continued): Two thirds of the New Testament books have references to Genesis (18 of 27) Only these do not Galatians, Philippians, I and II Thessalonians, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and II and III John More interesting points [click] Two thirds of the New Testament books have references to Genesis (18 of 27) [click] Only these do not Galatians, Philippians, I and II Thessalonians, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and II and III John [click] Taken from: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, Does the New Testament Support Genesis 1-11?, by Dr. Walt Brown.

Take God at His word Your salvation depends on it!
(That’s what faith is all about!) Why do we need a savior? “To save us from our sin.” If evolution happened, death was already occurring before man evolved. But if death came before man, and was not a consequence of Adam’s sin, then sin, with death as a punishment is a fiction. And if sin is a fiction, why would we need Christ to save us from our sin? See 1Corinthians 15:21-22,45 Take God at His word Your salvation depends on it! (That’s what faith is all about!) [click] Why do we need a savior? [click] “To save us from our sin.” [click] If evolution happened, death was already occurring before man evolved. But if death came before man, and was not a consequence of Adam’s sin, then sin is a fiction. [click] And if sin is a fiction, why would we need Christ to save us from our sin? See 1Corinthians 15:21-22,45 [click]

What is Evolution? Explaining the Universe without God
The idea that the Universe is self-originating The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.213 Evolution can take many forms, of which Darwinism is only one. What is Evolution? Let me say it again: [click] Evolution is an attempt at explaining the existence of everything through natural processes — Without God. [click] It’s the idea that the Universe is self-originating. [click] It identifies reality with matter, space, and time instead of a Creator [click]

What is Evolution? “The essential attribute of an evolutionary concept is that it identifies ultimate reality with the universe of matter, space, and time, rather than with the transcendent Creator of that universe.” The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.207 Evolution can take many forms, of which Darwinism is only one. [click] “The essential attribute of an evolutionary concept is that it identifies ultimate reality with the universe of matter, space, and time, rather than with the transcendent Creator of that universe.” -The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.207

Isn’t Evolution a Modern Idea?
Not at all! One form of Pre-Darwinian Evolution was known as “The Great Chain Of Being.” The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.38 Long ages have long been a belief of pagan religions. The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.46 Even in Christ’s day, Greek Stoics and Epicureans believed “everything on the earth evolved directly from the earth material itself.” The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.212 The Gnostics had similar beliefs against whom Paul wrote: “Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen.” -Romans 1:25 The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.213 But, isn’t evolution a modern idea? [click] Not at all! [click] Pre-Darwinian Evolution was known as The Great Chain Of Being. [click] Long ages have long been a belief of pagan religions. [click] Even in Christ’s day, Greek Stoics and Epicureans believed “everything on the earth evolved directly from the earth material itself.” [click] The Gnostics had similar beliefs against whom Paul wrote: “Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen.” -Romans 1:25 [click]

is fundamentally an atheistic teaching.
Evolution IS Atheism Since Evolution was devised to explain our existence without God, Evolution… is fundamentally an atheistic teaching. A Christian must NOT believe in Evolution! Evolution is Atheism [click] Since Evolution was devised to explain our existence without God, Evolution… [click] It is fundamentally an atheistic teaching [click] A Christian must NOT believe in Evolution! [click]

Evolution IS Atheism Evolutionist Richard Lewontin: ‘We take the side of science [sic] in spite of the patent absurdity…, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the…unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior…commitment to materialism. …[W]e cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’ Richard Lewontin, ‘Billions and Billions of Demons,' The New York Review, p. 31, 9 January 1997 Here’s a quote from evolutionist Richard Lewontin: ‘We take the side of science [sic] in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’ [emphasis added] – Richard Lewontin, ‘Billions and Billions of Demons,' The New York Review, p. 31, 9 January 1997. [click]

What About Science? What is Science?
Study of observable, repeatable processes and events in the present. What about the past? We cannot observe the past. We can only make conjecture and speculation about the past, based on experiments in the present. Well, what about Science? [click] What is science? [click] It is the study of observable, repeatable processes and events in the present. [click] What about the past? -Millions of years in the past… Is that Science? [click] You cannot observe the past. The best you can do when “scientifically” studying the past is to perform actions in the present using processes existing in the present [click] to make conjectures and speculations about the past. Remember: [click] Science doesn’t draw conclusions, people do! [click]

How old is the Earth? Approximately 6000 years old
What about millions of years? Who says? Science? Evolutionists! Based on assumptions! Appearance of age? “But, it looks old!” It is old! It’s 6000 years old! How old is the Earth? [click] Approximately six thousand years. [click] What about millions of years? Millions of years??? [click] Who says? [click] Science? No, [click] Evolutionists. In every case where someone has stated something is more than approximately 6000 years old, if you examine their assumptions and methods, you can see that it isn’t necessarily so. [click] What about the appearance of age? [click] “But, it looks old.” [click] It IS old! It’s 6000 years old! [click] (fade) [click]

How old is the Earth? Approximately 6000 years old
“No, I mean it looks millions of years old!” How do you know what millions of years looks like? Can you tell the difference between a six thousand year-old rock and a six million year-old rock? Not really. We do not have the proper frame of reference to do so. “No, I mean it looks millions of years old.” [click] How do you know what millions of years of age looks like? [click] Can you tell the difference between a six thousand year old rock and a six million year old rock? [click] No. We do not have the proper frame of reference to do so. [click]

How old is the Earth? Did God make the Earth look old?
No. God told us how old everything is. If we presume it looks older than God said it is, that’s our own misinterpretation. How can we know? Perceptions and inference? Conjecture based on interpretation? Take the word of someone who was there. Who was there? GOD Did God make the Earth look old? [click] No. God told us how old everything is. [click] If we presume it looks older than God said it is, that’s our own misinterpretation. [click] Would God create a world to appear older than it is? Probably not. That would be deceptive. When we say something looks old, it’s we who are assigning the age, not God. Remember, God told us how old the world is. Is it His fault if we don’t believe Him? Is it His fault if we see His creation and reach an incorrect conclusion based on our preconceived ideas? If we conclude it is older than God said it is, that’s our own misinterpretation. Do we know what six million years looks like vs. six thousand years? No. [click] Then how can we know? [click] Perceptions? [click] Conjecture based on interpretation? [click] Shouldn’t we take the word of someone who was there? [click] Do we have the word of someone who was there? Absolutely! [click] God was there. God is infallible. Our own fallible interpretation of the facts leads some of us to conclude great age. When people assert a date of more than 6000 years, it’s based entirely on their assumptions. [click]

How old is the Earth? Evolutionists keep increasing the age of the earth. Since 1900, evolutionists have increased the estimated age of the earth by 100 times! Why? The more they discover, the more they realize there is not enough time to explain the implications of their hypothesis —Evolution. Evolutionists keep increasing the age of the earth. [click] Since 1900, evolutionists have increased the estimated age of the earth by 100 times! [click] Why? [click] The more they discover, the more they realize there is not enough time to explain the implications of their hypothesis —Evolution. [click]

Evolution is a Fact! Isn’t it?
What about all the evidence for Evolution? Evolution Has never been observed Has no mechanism to make it work Has no transitional forms We see degeneration and extinction… Not evolution. Evolution is a FACT! Isn’t it? [click] What about all the evidence for Evolution? [click] Evolution has never been observed. [click] Has no mechanism to make it work [click] Has no transitional forms [click] We observe degeneration and extinction… Not evolution. [click]

Evolution is a Fact? One Evolutionist said
“‘Today we are less confident and the whole subject is in the most exciting ferment. Evolution is ... nagged from within by the troubling complexities of genetic and developmental mechanisms and new questions about the central mystery —speciation itself.’” Keith S. Thompson (Biology Yale), “The Meanings of Evolution,” American Scientist 70, 1982 p.529, as quoted by The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.24 This was 100 years after Darwin’s book that supposedly solved the problem! It makes you wonder “…why evolutionary Biologists persist in believing in evolution at all. Where’s the evidence?” The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.24 One Evolutionist said: “‘Today we are less confident and the whole subject is in the most exciting ferment. Evolution is ... nagged from within by the troubling complexities of genetic and developmental mechanisms and new questions about the central mystery —speciation itself.’” [click] This was 100 years after Darwin’s book that supposedly solved the problem! [click] It makes you wonder “…why evolutionary Biologists persist in believing in evolution at all. Where’s the evidence?” [click]

Evolution is a Fact? Natural Selection* Evolution demonstrated today?
Adds no information Evolution requires a way to add new information Mutations (errors, corruption of what was) Loss of information Most are harmful, a few are neutral, no known good Downhill process It gets rid of information. The only way to get the information back is to breed the species with a variety that still has the genetic information. Evolution demonstrated today? Simple variation of traits within existing populations “New species” are a reduction in the gene pool Natural Selection [click] Adds no information [click] Evolution requires a way to add new information [click] Mutations (errors, corruption of what was) [click] Loss of Information [click] Most are harmful, a few are neutral, no known good [click] Downhill process [click] It gets rid of information. [click] The only way to get the information back is to breed the species with a variety that still has the genetic information. [click] Evolution demonstrated today? [click] Simple variation of traits within existing populations [click]“New species” are a reduction in the gene pool [click] *Creation Magazine, 23(3) Jun-Aug 2001 p.28-29

What Scientific Evidence is there for Creation?
Evidence for Creation What Scientific Evidence is there for Creation? We live in the same world as evolutionists We have the same animals We have the same fossils We have the same Science We share the same facts! What scientific evidence is there for creation? Do we live in the same world as evolutionists? [click] We live in the same world Do we have the same animals? [click] We have the same animals Do we have the same fossils? [click] We have the same fossils Do we have the same science? [click] We have the same science Do we have the same facts? [click] Believe it or not, we have the same facts as evolutionists! [click]

All facts must be interpreted!
Evidence for Creation All facts must be interpreted! Your interpretation will depend on your world-view. You take your world view to the fact and come up with a story about the fact. Creationists don’t disagree with evolutionists on science or the facts, We disagree on the history. Remember: All facts must be interpreted [click] Your interpretation will depend on your world-view. [click] You take your world view to the fact and come up with a story about the fact. With regard to things in the past, we’re providing a history of the fact. [click] Creationists don’t disagree with evolutionists on science or the facts, [click] We disagree on the history. [click]

Evidence Dating Methods Most dating methods indicate a young earth
Fossils – contain unfossilized bone, blood cells, and sometimes soft tissue Decay of Earth’s magnetic field Helium in the atmosphere If earth is as old as evolutionists say, there should be a million times more helium atoms. Helium atoms cannot escape the atmosphere. Moon’s recession from Earth Salt in the sea Erosion of continents Number of people alive today Radio halos in crystals Many more! Evolutionists downplay these dating methods. Dating Methods [click] Fossils – contain unfossilized bone, blood cells, and sometimes soft tissue [click] Decay of Earth’s magnetic field [click] Helium in the atmosphere If earth is as old as evolutionists say, there should be a million times more helium atoms. Helium atoms cannot escape the atmosphere. [click] Moon’s recession from Earth [click] Salt in the sea [click] Erosion of continents [click] Number of people alive today [click] Radio halos in crystals [click] Evolutionists downplay these dating methods. [click]

Radiometric Dating Methods
Evidence Radiometric Dating Methods C14, K-Ar, U-Pb, Ru-Sr Three assumptions: Known initial quantities Constant decay rates No contamination of quantities or outside influences These assumptions cannot be known Radiometric analysis —even from the same sample— produce inconsistent results Radiometric Dating Methods [click] Carbon-14, Potassium-Argon, Uranium-Lead, Rubidium-Strontium all have [click] Three assumptions: [click] Known initial quantities [click] Constant decay rates [click] No contamination of quantities or outside influences [click] These assumptions cannot be known [click] Results —even from the same sample— produce inconsistent results [click]

Evidence The Fossil Record Huge gaps between every major life form
Non-living to single cell Single-cell to multi-cell Invertebrate to vertebrate Sea creatures to amphibians Amphibians to reptiles Reptiles to mammals Mammals to man And more! The Fossil Record [click] There are huge gaps between every major life form [click] Non-living to single cell [click] Single-cell to multi-cell [click] Invertebrate to vertebrate [click] Sea creatures to amphibians [click] Amphibians to reptiles [click] Reptiles to mammals [click] Mammals to man [click] And more! [click]

Evidence The Fossil Record Abrupt appearance Fully formed
No transitions Many living creatures identical to fossils Creatures/plants once thought extinct are found alive Coelacanth Diatonyds (“extinct” rodents) Wollemai pine Evidence of dinosaurs contemporary with man There is the Abrupt appearance of simple and complex life forms in even the “lowest” strata. As well as the abrupt appearance of all major animal groups. There is the sudden development of animals with skeletons. [click] Animals are all fully formed. There are no transitions. [click] Many creatures living today are identical to fossils. [click] Creatures and plants once thought to be extinct are found alive: [click] Coelacanth found off the coast of Madagascar [click] Diatonyds found in SE Asia [click] Wollemai Pine Tree found in Australia [click] There is evidence of dinosaurs living contemporary with man. Pterodactyls in the Southwest US and Africa, T-Rex in Scandinavia, Cerotopsians (Tricerotops), and Sauropods (Apatasaur) in Africa. [click]

Evidence The Fossil Record
Out of place embedded rocks (Brown, 7th ed., fig.93, p.145) Trees crossing multiple strata (Brown, 7th ed., fig.11, p.10) Geologic column (Brown, 7th ed., #69, p.29, #69, p.77) Non-existent over much of the earth Not complete anywhere Strata often incorrectly sequenced Rock embedded in strata that shouldn’t be there. [click] Trees crossing multiple strata – some even upside-down. [click] Inconsistencies in the Geologic column [click] Non-existent over much of the earth [click] Not complete anywhere [click] Strata often incorrectly sequenced: it’s out of order [click]

Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy Comets
Should not exist. Oldest no more than 10,000 years (Brown, 7th ed., #89, p.33) No hyperbolic orbits (Brown, 7th ed., fig.125, p.195) Presumption of an “Oort cloud” Completely undetectable (Brown, 7th ed., fig.125, p.195) Let’s talk about Near-Earth Astronomy. [click] Comets are quite an enigma in the solar system. [click] None have hyperbolic orbits. If comets were a random phenomena in the Solar System, statistically, we should see a percentage of them coming into the Solar System on orbital paths that will not bring them back to the Sun. [click] Based on how much material is lost on each pass around the Sun, comets should not exist. The oldest can be no more than 10,000 years old. [click] To address this fact, Evolutionists have made up an imaginary source for comets called the “Oort Cloud.” It is a region outside our Solar System containing cometary material from which comets get knocked and begin their journey around our Sun. Even this hypothesis should produce some hyperbolic orbits. [click] The Oort Cloud is completely undetectable. “However, it must exist because we have comets.” [click]

This is not bad science…
Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy This is not bad science… it’s not science at all! This is not bad science… [click] It’s not science at all! It’s wishful thinking. It’s story telling. You might as well believe in Santa Claus! [click]

Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy Where did comets come from? Earth!
Fountains of the great deep More on that in another talk So, where DID comets come from? [click] Earth! [click] Fountains of the great deep spewed forth massive amounts of water, water vapor, dust, rock and debris. [click] More on that in another talk. [click]

Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy Recession of the Moon Dust on the Moon
Has to be relatively “new” or The Moon should have been long gone from Earth (Brown, 7th ed., Technical notes, pp ) Dust on the Moon 4.6BY should have resulted in the accumulation of at least 50’ of dust and up to ’ -but it’s only 3/4” deep indicating a maximum age of only 7000 years. [Evolutionists have done some serious back peddling on this by revising their hypothesis on space dust to greatly reduce the expected accumulation.] (Brown, 7th ed., #86, p.33) The Recession of the Moon Recession is the incremental increase of distance the Moon recedes from Earth each year. [click] The Moon has to be a relatively “new” acquisition of the earth or [click] It would be long gone. [click] Dust on the Moon [click] 4.6BY should have resulted in the accumulation of at least 50’ of dust and up to ’ -but it’s only 3/4” deep indicating a maximum age of only 7000 years. [Evolutionists have done some serious back peddling on this by revising their hypothesis on space dust to greatly reduce the expected accumulation.] [click]

Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy Sun Earth
Faint young sun and the earth. Even 25% less heat makes a permanent deep-freeze. (Brown, 7th ed., #49, p.23) No indication that the sun evolved or has ever been significantly different from what we see today. Earth Meteoritic dust should be everywhere (Brown, 7th ed., #82, p.32) Decay of magnetic field 50% every 1400 years. (Brown, 7th ed., #83, p.32) Let’s talk about the Sun [click] What about a faint young sun and the earth? If it gave off even 25% less heat, the Earth would be in a permanent deep-freeze. [click] There is no indication that the Sun evolved or has ever been significantly different from what we see today. [click] The Earth itself. If the age of the Earth is as Evolutionists claim [click] Meteoritic dust should be everywhere [click] Also, there is a decay of magnetic field 50% every 1400 years. If you take that back much more than 6000 years, the magnetic field gets phenomenal! [click]

Evidence Near-Earth Astronomy Planets
Rotations different (some retrograde), orbits off plane. (Brown, 7th ed., #43, p.21) Planets. In addition to the fact that each planet is uniquely distinct with little in common with each other [click] their Rotations are radically different from each other. Some of them retrograde (spinning in the opposite direction to that of Earth). [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Supernova in 1987: SN1987a
blue dwarf* & red giant as a binary system. Evolutionary theory would have predicted the Red Giant to collapse into itself and nova, but the blue “giant” went supernova instead. The wrong star blew up! *Originally, the pair was described as a blue dwarf and a red giant. Since the event, they have revised the description of the one that blew up to be a blue giant — an unknown star type before the event. Distant Astronomy [click] A Supernova in 1987, named SN1987a gave astronomers quite a surprise. [click] A star in a binary system consisting of a Blue Giant and a Red Giant, went Supernova. [click] Stellar Evolution Theory would have predicted the Red Giant to collapse into itself and nova, but the blue dwarf went nova instead. “This completely contradicts everything we have believed about stellar evolution.” “We’ll have to start all over on our paradigm of stellar evolution.” [click] Some Astronomers claimed at the time that “All existing theories of stellar evolution are now disproved.” [click] They have since re-written the interpretation facts of the case to fit their pre-conceived theory. [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Supernova in 1987: SN1987a
Some quotes immediately after the event: “This completely contradicts everything we have believed about stellar evolution.” “We’ll have to start all over on our paradigm of stellar evolution.” “All existing theories of stellar evolution are now disproved.” (ACC Astronomy course, 1987) They have since re-written their interpretation of the facts of the event to fit their pre-existing theory. Distant Astronomy [click] A Supernova in 1987, named SN1987a gave astronomers quite a surprise. [click] A star in a binary system consisting of a Blue Giant and a Red Giant, went Supernova. [click] Stellar Evolution Theory would have predicted the Red Giant to collapse into itself and nova, but the blue dwarf went nova instead. “This completely contradicts everything we have believed about stellar evolution.” “We’ll have to start all over on our paradigm of stellar evolution.” [click] Some Astronomers claimed at the time that “All existing theories of stellar evolution are now disproved.” [click] They have since re-written the interpretation facts of the case to fit their pre-conceived theory. [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Stars and Starlight
God Stretched out the heavens Isaiah 42.5; Isaiah 44.24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; Jeremiah 51:15 Creation has no more problem with starlight than Evolution does. Let’s consider… Stars and Starlight How did light from millions of light-years away reach the Earth in only 6000 years? [click] The Bible tells us Isaiah and Jeremiah that God stretched out the heavens: [click] Isaiah 42.5; Isaiah 44.24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; Jeremiah 51:15 There are many other problems with starlight and Stellar Evolution Theory [click] Creation has no more problem with starlight than Evolution does. [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy The Big BangTheory Red-shift quantized
God’s stretching of the heavens may explain this quantization Let’s talk about some of Big Bang’s problems: [click] One of the interesting characteristics of starlight is that it is red-shifted. Many astronomers attribute this to the Doppler Effect, a change in pitch or frequency as an object moves closer or farther from the observer. They then conclude that the particular star is moving away from us rapidly. The mysterious thing about the red-shift is that it is quantized. In other words, stars only move “away from us” at specific speeds; never any speed in between. Odd. [click] God’s stretching may explain both the Red Shift and why it is quantized. [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Big Bang? Cosmic Background Radiation
In front of some galaxies Predicted temperature (30°K) not found (3°K instead) Eddington already calculated 3°K in 1926 as the temperature of space due to starlight. Other problems (Brown, 7th ed., #55, p.70-72) Heavy hydrogen –not mixed, comets 2x, oceans 10x (Brown, 7th ed., #27 p.27) Order from chaos (hot gas has no information) (Brown, 7th ed., #16d, p.49) Universe speeding up and slowing down Rate of expansion increases with distance Matter is clumped even on large scale Galaxies shouldn’t exist No Population III stars exist (hydrogen and helium) The Big Bang theory has many other MAJOR problems: [click] Cosmic Background Radiation is [click] in front of some galaxies! The hypothesis was that the CBR was the outer remnant of the Big Bang. Nothing should be on the other side of it in our universe. [click] The predicted temperature of 30ºKelvin for the CBR was not found. Instead they found a temperature of 3ºKelvin. Evolutionary Astronomers then tried to say their theory was validated by this discovery. This was dishonest because [click] Eddington had already calculated, in 1926, the temperature of space due to starlight to be 3ºKelvin. [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Big Bang?
Most people (even most scientists) do not understand it. They envision a dense ball of hot matter exploding into an empty space. What they do not realize is that the dimension of space must be included in the expansion. The dimensions of space itself were part of the exploding ball. Space itself was once the size of the head of a pin. Space itself expanded. Big Bang? Most people (even most scientists) do not understand it. They envision a dense ball of hot matter exploding into an empty space. What they do not realize is that the dimension of space must be included in the expansion. The dimensions of space itself were part of the exploding ball. Space itself was once the size of the head of a pin. Space itself expanded. (Humphries, also Brown #55, #56, & #57) [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy Big Bang?
Astronomer and Mathematician Sir Fredrick Hoyle, who was by no means a Creationist said, “Big-Bang cosmology refers to an epoch that cannot be reached by any form of astronomy, and, in more than two decades, it has not produced a single successful prediction.” Hoyle, F., Home is where the wind Blows, 1994, as reported in The Skeptic, 16(1):52 Astronomer and Mathematician Sir Fredrick Hoyle, who was by no means a Creationist said, “Big-Bang cosmology refers to an epoch that cannot be reached by any form of astronomy, and, in more than two decades, it has not produced a single successful prediction.” [click]

Evidence Distant Astronomy
“Cosmology is unique in science in that it is a very large intellectual edifice based on very few facts. The strong tendency is to replace a need for more facts by conformity.” Hoyle, et al., Nature 346: , Aug.30, 1990 In other words, Big Bang is a desolate theory, and in the absence of facts about stellar evolution, the orthodoxy imposes its beliefs on researchers. “Cosmology is unique in science in that it is a very large intellectual edifice based on very few facts. The strong tendency is to replace a need for more facts by conformity.” Hoyle, et al., Nature 346: , Aug.30, 1990 [click] In other words, Big Bang is a desolate theory, and in the absence of facts about stellar evolution, the orthodoxy imposes its beliefs on researchers.

Evidence Distant Astronomy
The farthest galaxies, 11 billion light years away, should show us what the early universe looked like. The light would have taken 11 BY to get here, so these distant galaxies should look young to us. Many of the farthest galaxies still look billions of years old! The universe is supposedly only 13 BY old. How did these galaxies become so “old” at a time when the universe itself was only 2 BY old? Some galaxies are older than the universe!? [click] The farthest galaxies should show us what the early universe looked like. [click] The light would have taken 11 BY to get here, these distant galaxies should look young to us. [click] Many of the farthest galaxies, 11 billion light years away, still look billions of years old! [click] The universe is supposedly only 13 BY old. [click] How did these galaxies become so “old” at a time when the universe itself was only 2BY old? [click]

Evidence Biology [Mathematician] Sir Fredrick Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 to the 40,000. Evolution from Space, 1981, Hoyle & Wickramasinghe The number of atoms in the entire universe is estimated at only 10 to the He called the evolution of life on earth “nonsense of a high order.” Hoyle, F., “The Big Bang in Astronomy”, New Scientist, Nov.19, 1981 Sir Fredrick Hoyle originated the 'Tornado through a junkyard assembling a Boeing 747' example, saying that believing in evolution is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard and assemble a Boeing 747. Hoyle, Nature, 294(5837):105, Nov.12,1981 Biology: Biological Evolution [click] Mathematician Sir Fredrick Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 to the 40, Evolution from Space, 1981, Hoyle & Wickramasinghe [click] The number of atoms in the entire universe is estimated at only 10 to the He called the evolution of life on earth “nonsense of a high order.” -Hoyle, F., “The Big Bang in Astronomy”, New Scientist, Nov.19, 1981 [click] Sir Fredrick Hoyle originated the 'Tornado through a junkyard assembling a Boeing 747' example, saying that believing in evolution is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard and assemble a Boeing Hoyle, Nature, 294(5837):105, Nov.12,1981 [click]

Evidence Biology from outer-space!
Did Sir Fredrick Hoyle’s conclusions lead him to believe in God? No. Sadly, he concluded life came… from outer-space! Did Sir Fredrick Hoyle’s conclusions lead him to believe in God? [click] No. Sadly, he concluded life came from outer-space. [click]

Evidence Biology In Darwin’s day people viewed living cells to be about as complex as a ping-pong ball. Today we know that a living cell is practically a universe in itself. In Darwin’s day people viewed living cells to be about as complex as a ping-pong ball. [click] Today we know that a living cell is practically a universe in itself. [click]

Evidence Biology The organic world is one of stability of kinds with provision for variation within the kind. There are unbridgeable gaps between the kinds. The organic world is one of stability of kinds with provision for variation within the kind. [click] There are unbridgeable gaps between the kinds. [click]

Evidence Biology If evolution were true, there should be no gaps. We should see a continuum of imperceptible gradations from one form to another. It would be impossible to tell where the classification of one organism should end and another begin. Speciation itself is something we should NOT see. This is powerful testimony that Evolution is false. -H.M.Morris, Many Infallible Proofs, p.264 If evolution were true, there should be no gaps. We should see a continuum of imperceptible gradations from one form to another. It would be impossible to tell where the classification of one organism should end and another begin. [click] This is powerful testimony that Evolution is false. [click]

Evidence Biology Abiogenesis – Spontaneous generation – does not exist today. We know life comes from life! Evolutionists have to assume life came from non-life. [click] Abiogenesis – Spontaneous generation – does not exist today. [click] We know life comes from life! [click] Evolutionists have to assume life comes from non-life. [click]

Evidence Biology Evolutionists have to assume This is not science.
A process that does not exist today existed in the past An chemically different environment that does not exist today existed in the past An oceanic composition that does not exist today existed in the past In order to explain the generation of primeval organisms that only existed in the past All from a belief system that tries to say the present is the key to the past! H.M.Morris, Many Infallible Proofs, p This is not science. Science deals with processes that exist in the present. Evolutionists have to assume [click] A process that does not exist today existed in the past [click] An environment that does not exist today existed in the past [click] An oceanic composition that does not exist today existed in the past [click] To explain the generation of primeval organisms that only existed in the past [click] All from a belief system that tries to say the present is the key to the past! [click] This is not science. [click] Science deals with processes that exist in the present. [click]

Evidence Biology The “earliest” and most “primitive” form of life discovered in the fossil record… found in the Precambrian rocks of southern Ontairo… [is] still living today. H.M.Morris, Many Infallible Proofs, p The “earliest” and most “primitive” form of life discovered in the fossil record… found in the Precambrian rocks of southern Ontairo… [are] still living today. [click]

Evidence Biology Vestigial organs.
Not knowing the purpose of a structure does not mean it has lost its function or has no function. All organs once identified as vestigial are now known to have a function. Furthermore, the idea that an originally perfect structure deteriorates over generations says nothing at all about how it was produced in the first place. The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.25 Vestigial organs. [click] Not knowing the purpose of a structure does not mean it has lost its function or has no function. [click] All organs once identified as vestigial are now known to have a function. [click] The fact that an originally perfect structure deteriorates over generations says nothing at all about how it was produced in the first place. [click]

Evidence Biology Morphology
Living entities that look alike came from a common ancestor? Living entities that look alike had a common creator. Morphology [click] Living entities that look alike came from a common ancestor? [click] Living entities that look alike had a common creator.

Evidence Language Languages are more complex the farther back in history you go. The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.253 Brown, 7th ed., #13, p.8 Evolution predicted the opposite. Languages [click] Languages are more complex the farther back in history you go. The most ancient texts have the most complex grammar we have ever found. [click] Evolution predicted that languages should get simpler in construction and grammar the farther you go back in history. [click]

Evidence Religion Religions all stem from monotheism, belief in a creator, and an eternal afterlife. Then they degenerated into polytheism, pantheism, and animism. Evolution predicted just the opposite. Researchers are baffled. -The Long War Against God, Dr. Henry Morris, p.292 Religion [click] Religions all stem from monotheism, belief in a creator, and an eternal afterlife. Then they degenerated into polytheism, pantheism, and animism. Evolution predicted just the opposite. Researchers are baffled. [click]

Evidence Consciousness Altruism
Self-awareness — Evolution cannot explain this. Altruism Taking action on the behalf of and to the benefit of another, often at the risk of one's own life. — Evolution cannot explain this. [Brown, 7th ed., #11] Consciousness [click] Self-awareness [click] — Evolution cannot explain this. [click] Altruism [click] Taking action on the behalf of and to the benefit of another, often at the risk of one's own life. [click] — Evolution cannot explain this. [click]

What about computer simulations that “prove” evolution?
All computer simulations are created by intelligent beings. Such programs do only what the programmer has instructed. That being the case, they present stronger evidence for creation than evolution. Computer Simulations What about computer simulations that prove evolution? [click] All computer simulations are created by intelligent beings. [cl.ick] Such programs do only what the programmer has instructed. [click] That being the case, they present stronger evidence for creation than evolution. [click]

Evolution Fails on Every Front
Creation/Flood theory explains every facet of “Life, the Universe, and Everything.” “The simplest, most logical and most scientific model of origins is still that of special creation.” H.M.Morris, Many Infallible Proofs. p.279 “The evolution model, on the other hand, continually encounters contradictions which require a multitude of auxiliary assumptions to be imposed upon its basic formulation.” -H.M.Morris, Many Infallible Proofs, p.282 Evolution Fails on Every Front Creation/Flood theory explains every facet of “Life, the Universe, and Everything.” [click] “The simplest, most logical and most scientific model of origins is still that of special creation.” [click] “The evolution model, on the other hand, continually encounters contradictions which require a multitude of auxiliary assumptions to be imposed upon its basic formulation.” [click]

What will we do if new discoveries indicate evolution is true?
No fear: God is the author of Science. The facts of science will never be in opposition to God — only man’s opinions. Your starting premise will determine your conclusion regarding facts of science. New Discoveries What will we do if new discoveries indicate evolution is true? [click] No fear: God is the author of Science. [click] The facts of science will never be in opposition to God — only man’s opinions. Your starting premise will determine your conclusion regarding facts of science. [click]

Why does Evolution Persist?
Because of the a priori foundational premise that there is no God. The argument goes like this: There is no God We are here Therefore, we evolved. It persists because it must persist in order for people to not believe in God. Why does Evolution Persist? [click] Because of the a priori foundational premise that there is no God. A priori 2 a : being without examination or analysis : PRESUMPTIVE b : formed or conceived beforehand Proceeding from a known or assumed cause to a necessarily related effect; without reference to particular facts or experience. Made before or without examination; not supported by factual study. [click]The argument goes like this: [click] There is no God [click] We are here [click] Therefore, we evolved. [click] It persists because it must persist in order for people to not believe in God. [click]

Conclusion A Christian must not believe in Evolution because…
It’s the doctrine of atheists We must not let the teachings of atheists cloud our faith. It’s the lie from Satan “Did God really say…(Genesis 3:1) He created in six days?” The loss of faith comes from doubting the Word of God. Do you now see why a Christian must not believe in Evolution? A Christian must not believe in Evolution because… [click] It’s the doctrine of atheists [click] We must not let the teachings of atheists cloud our faith. [click] It’s the lie from Satan In 2 Corinthians 11:3 Paul warns us how way back in the Garden the serpent deceived Eve, and that we should be wary of this: “…just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may be somehow led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” Exactly how did Satan deceive Eve? In the garden, what did the Satan say to Eve? “You will not surely die.” In other words, “God really didn’t mean you’d die.” This creates doubt in God’s Word. The same is true here. He created doubt. [click]“Did God really say He created in six days?” It’s the same approach Satan used back then. [click] The loss of faith comes from doubting the Word of God. [click]

The Gospel “Why can’t we just teach the essentials?”
This is the ultimate “essential.” It is the first order of essence; an inseparable part of the gospel. Jesus IS the Creator! The Gospel! Why can’t we just teach the essentials and leave all this creation/evolution debate to the eggheads? [click] This is the ultimate “essential”. It is the first order of essence; an inseparable part of the gospel. Jesus IS the Creator! [click]

The Gospel Jesus IS the Creator! John 1:1-3,10
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made… 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him. The Gospel! Why can’t we just teach the essentials and leave all this creation/evolution debate to the eggheads? [click] This is the ultimate “essential”. It is the first order of essence; an inseparable part of the gospel. Jesus IS the Creator! [click]

The Gospel Jesus IS the Creator! Colossians 1:15-17
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation for by Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rules or authorities; all things were created by Him and for Him He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. The Gospel! Why can’t we just teach the essentials and leave all this creation/evolution debate to the eggheads? [click] This is the ultimate “essential”. It is the first order of essence; an inseparable part of the gospel. Jesus IS the Creator! [click]

The Gospel The Fall affected all aspects of man
Man has to be converted Spiritually Emotionally Morally Intellectually These do not all necessarily happen at once Let me read this from Donald E. Chittick: “Because the Fall affected all aspects of man, salvation also is for all aspects of man. [click] Man has to be converted [click] spiritually (to be alive and alert and responsive to God the Creator); he has to be converted [click] emotionally (to have peace with the Creator); and there has to be repentance (a [click] moral change); but man also needs to be converted [click] intellectually. He has to again move back to the Creator’s Word as his test for truth. Romans 12:2 describes this, ‘And be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.’” “Conversion involves a renewed mind. [To say it in today’s] terms, we start with a new worldview, the worldview of absolute truth given to us by the Creator. The Fall was a rejection of the Creator’s word as truth test. Conversion involves a rejection of man’s opinions as truth test and a return to the Creator’s word. Our presupposition now is that Scripture is our standard for truth.” “Conversion may involve all four steps at once, spiritual, emotional, moral, and intellectual. Often it does, but many times it does not. Some are spiritually converted, emotionally converted, and morally converted before they ever come near to being intellectually converted. Sometimes it takes long time to sort out the issues.” Donald E. Chittick Allowing for the theory of Evolution to be acceptable in your mind can actually prevent you from reaching Intellectual conversion as Christ wants. [click]

Inerrancy of Scripture
Are parts of God’s Word wrong? If one part is wrong, how do we know other parts aren’t wrong? This has serious implications for our belief in the inerrancy of scripture. Are parts of God’s Word wrong? [click] If one part is wrong, how do we know other parts aren’t wrong? [click]

Authority of Scripture
Can we throw out the parts of God’s Word we don’t like? The only way we know anything about being a Christian is through God’s Word. Without God’s Word, there can be no Christians, for we would know nothing about Jesus Christ and what he has done for all people. This has serious implications for the authority of scripture. [click] Can we throw out the parts of God’s Word we don’t like? [click] The only way we know anything about being a Christian is through God’s Word. [click] Without God’s Word, there can be no Christians, for we would know nothing about Jesus Christ and what he has done for all people. [click] We have faith in Jesus Christ, and we believe the things he believed and taught: God’s Word. [click]

We have faith in Jesus Christ, and we believe the things he believed and taught: God’s Word This has serious implications for the authority of scripture. [click] Can we throw out the parts of God’s Word we don’t like? [click] The only way we know anything about being a Christian is through God’s Word. [click] Without God’s Word, there can be no Christians, for we would know nothing about Jesus Christ and what he has done for all people. [click] We have faith in Jesus Christ, and we believe the things he believed and taught: God’s Word. [click]

Jesus is the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us. John 1:14 Believing God’s Word is what it means to be a Christian. If you don’t like God’s Word, perhaps you should be something else. [click] Jesus is the Word that became flesh and dwelt amongst us. [click] Believing God’s Word is what it means to be a Christian. [click] If you don’t like God’s Word, instead of being a Christian, perhaps you should be something else. [click] Jesus is the “last Adam.”

Jesus is the “last Adam.” If the first Adam is allegorical, why should the last Adam be real? Jesus is the “last Adam.” [click] If the first Adam is allegorical, why should the last Adam be real? [click] “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” 1Corinthians 15:44 [click] “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” 1Corinthians 15:44

If you try to add millions of years to the Bible, you’ve got millions of years of death and suffering before sin. — And God called it good! Paul tells us in Romans 6:23 Death is the penalty for sin. He also reminds us in Romans 5:12-14 that sin came into the world by man, and death came into the world by sin. Jesus is the “last Adam.” [click] If the first Adam is allegorical, why should the last Adam be real? [click] “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” 1Corinthians 15:44 [click]

However, if death was around for millions of years before man, the idea of death being “the wages of sin” is a myth. Death was already here! If you’re going to cast doubt on the “six days” in Genesis chapter 1 in order to fit millions of years into the Bible, you also cast doubt on Romans 6:23, and 5:12-14. Where does it stop? Jesus is the “last Adam.” [click] If the first Adam is allegorical, why should the last Adam be real? [click] “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” 1Corinthians 15:44 [click]

What Is The Gospel? Part I
Man was created with no imperfection; designed to live forever Man had fellowship with God Man rebelled and became separated from God Man became cursed with death What is the Gospel? [click] Part I [click] Man was created with no imperfection; designed to live forever [click] Man had fellowship with God [click] Man rebelled and became separated from God [click] Man became cursed with death [click]

What Is The Gospel? Part II
God provided a path of redemption through death Jesus, God’s son, took the penalty for our sin, and conquered death Through faith in Jesus, we can spend eternity with God. Part II [click] God provided a path of redemption through death [click] Jesus, God’s son, took the penalty for our sin, and conquered death [click] Through faith in Jesus, we can spend eternity with God. [click]

His name be praised forever!
What Is The Gospel? Part III New Heavens New Earth New Jerusalem All things restored to what they would have been all along: Life without suffering or death in a perfect place with our Redeemer and God. His name be praised forever! Part III [click] New Heavens [click] New Earth [click] New Jerusalem [click] All things restored to what they would have been all along : [click] Life without suffering or death in a perfect place with our God. [click]

What Is The Gospel? Amen. Part III [click] New Heavens
[click] New Earth [click] New Jerusalem [click] All things restored to what they would have been all along : [click] Life without suffering or death in a perfect place with our God. [click]

Supra-Intellectual Faith

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Supra-Intellectual Faith"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Supra-Intellectual Faith

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Supra-Intellectual Faith"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback