Creation Article Podcast

Although evolutionists since Darwin have been foisting such nonsense on the public, anyone who bothers to investigate the role of the coccyx can see that this is not true. The coccyx does, in fact, make a valuable contribution to the human body, while its alleged derivation from tailed ancestors is based on evolutionary assumptions, not hard facts.

Secular scientists have often challenged creationists to explain the Ice Age. Also, they claim that there were numerous ice ages, possibly up to fifty, at intervals of 100,000 or 40,000 years over the past 2.6 million years. This has to be met by accepting the biblical history and examining the data.

Creationists often point out the circularity and non-falsifiability of evolutionary theory: all potential finds can be explained (or at least accommodated) by the Darwinian paradigm. This illustrates the fact that Darwinism is not empirical science, but rather a philosophical starting point that is being assumed from the outset, and from which all available data are always interpreted.

In his History of the Inductive Sciences, William Whewell describes Sir David Brewster as ‘the Johannes Kepler of Optics’. Though the world today is largely ignorant of Brewster’s contribution to our wellbeing, he received a greater degree of recognition in his lifetime than almost any other physicist before or since.

“I would like to present a balanced view to our visitors.” As a Bible-believing creationist this will be tricky, especially concerning your relationship with those who are employing you. With a public commercial audience, it would not be a good idea to criticise evolution/millions of years and push creationist views.

Even if you scrupulously pre-screen every game, documentary, movie, and book your children consume, evolution will sneak in somewhere, and the best thing you can do is make sure your children are prepared with good creation information, and more importantly, that they know that they can come to you with questions.

Honeybees do not have the benefit of a university education, yet they perform the multiple, complex functions needed to produce honey, and handle complex organic chemistry with ease. Such complexity does not arrive by fortunate happenstance. Honeybees operate using pre-installed programs that only work if all the elements are in place from the word ‘go!’

Preserved in amber, the bee is dated at 100 million years old on the evolutionary timeline. The lack of great morphological change supports the biblical creation model in which bees were created only about 6,000 years ago. Ironically, the way in which this bee was fossilized may also point to a massive flood.

Debate rages about whether there is ‘design’ in nature, or if the teaching of intelligent design is even ‘science’. However, the best robotics engineers have yet to design a navigation program as good as a bee’s and run it on a chip with the energy efficiency of a bee’s brain. So it’s reasonable to believe that the honeybee was designed by a Master Programmer whose intelligence is beyond our own.

I want my students to be able to catch this vision as I did, to be critical thinkers and able to grasp the significance of this world and their place in it. ‘The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge … My son, eat honey, because it is good; and the honeycomb, is sweet to your palate; so shall the knowledge of wisdom be to your soul’.

Among the wonders of God’s creation, the honeybee provides some startling evidence against evolution, and for design and purpose by the Creator.

While a lot of modern people want to separate theology from history, in the New Testament the two are inextricably tied together. We should be encouraged that the New Testament authors placed such a great confidence in the Bible’s history, and that should inspire us to be equally as confident.

Because we know that we do, in fact, reason in a generally reliable way, the evolutionary worldview must not be correct. Evolution lacks the resources that enable us to trust in our own rational faculties, but Christianity succeeds where evolution fails.

Accounting for all presently known relevant details and assuming the Babylonian Captivity began in 587 or 586 BC, we can say with confidence that the Bible places limits on the year of creation between 5665 and 3822 BC. If the traditional historic date of 587 BC or 586 BC for the Captivity is correct, the earth cannot be more than 7,680 years old.

Those of you who are unable to drink milk as adults today without feeling nauseous (or worse) can take heart from being closer in that respect to the originally ‘physically-perfect’ first man and woman than are those of us who are milk-drinking ‘mutants’!

There’s no need for ‘magic decoder ring’ hermeneutics; at best, it’s a distraction from what should be our focus, and at worst, it is directly contradictory to the plain meaning of the text.

If we apply the normal principles of biblical exegesis (ignoring pressure to make the text conform to the evolutionary prejudices of our age), it is overwhelmingly obvious that Genesis was meant to be taken in a straightforward, obvious sense as an authentic, literal, historical record of what actually happened.

God pronounced judgments on the serpent, Eve, and Adam. Because of sin, the serpent would crawl on his belly and eat dust, Eve and all women after her would have pain in childbirth, and Adam and all of his descendants would experience painful toil on the earth until death. But in the middle of these terrible pronouncements, there is a glimmer of hope.

Christians do not need Hawking’s elusive ‘grand unified theory’ of the universe to know the mind of God or to know who they are, why they exist, and where they are going. As matters stand at present, there is no better astronomic theory for the origin of the universe than the inspired explanation of the Bible.

Natural selection should be part of any creation model. It is not proof of evolution. It is not even good support for evolution. Natural selection is not a threat to the Bible or to biblical history. It was a factor that would have been in play if struggle had not entered the world, but its importance only increased when it did.

In the search for a way out of this uncomfortable position, I have found that most atheists seem to gravitate to one particular explanation for consciousness: that it is an emergent property of matter which is ‘activated’ by the particular complex arrangement of our brains. The atheist wants to believe that this mysterious ‘emergent property’ of our brains is able to free us from the stark nature of matter that it behaves according to only rigidly predictable ways—according to the laws of physics and chemistry.

Dawkins professes to find himself highly disturbed that anyone at all accepts young earth or creationist views, and is even more despairing that despite years of evolutionary indoctrination in our schools, creationism just doesn’t seem to be going away. He would be well advised to remove the log cabin from his eyes prior to giving creationists advice on extracting the mote he thinks he sees in their eyes.

Altogether the waters were receding for more than seven months before the earth was dry and Noah could open the door of the Ark. The Wollomombi Gorge at the edge of the large plateau near Armidale, Australia, is a good example of the sort of geologic signatures that the receding waters of Noah’s Flood carved onto the earth.

The standard source of the new information needed in evolutionary theory has long been mutations—inherited changes in the DNA which until recently have been assumed to be almost exclusively random, i.e. genetic copying mistakes. An obvious implication is that any purposeful adaptation system would have been intelligently designed to generate the variety needed for creatures to be able to survive and adapt in this fallen world.

Neither racism—nor the idea of evolution—started with Darwin. However, Darwin’s writings greatly fueled racism, providing a ‘scientific’ justification for it. The origin of the earth’s different ‘races’ has long caused unnecessary confusion among both Christians and non-Christians. The truth is surprisingly simple.

Were the ten plagues of Egypt, as recorded in Exodus chapters 7–11, all overt miraculous acts of God? No, according to the natural-cause-and-effect theory of Greta Hort. Concerning the miraculous, a god who cannot work miracles is not a god worth following.

The Bible draws a clear line between animals and humans, and gives us ethical guidelines. While it may be right under certain circumstances to clone animals to benefit people, it is absolutely wrong to try to clone humans.

The earliest Christians boldly proclaimed the Resurrection as the central tenet of the faith and ultimate proof of Jesus’ deity. The apostle Paul confirms the historicity of Genesis in 1 Corinthians 15:21–22 ‘For since by [a] man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.’

I was able to catch the children’s attention when talking about natural selection, variation within a created ‘kind’, the origin of ‘races’ where all people came from, and, of course, dinosaurs. The Bible suddenly became connected to the real world. It wasn’t just a book of stories about morals to beat them over the head with. It dawned on them that the Flood of Noah was real history accounting for much of the geology we see in the world today, the Tower of Babel could account for the origin of different people groups, and that the Bible explains dinosaurs and so on.

Viruses are a part of a system that helps to produce the variety that is critical for life and, importantly, they carry resistance to disease from one organism to another. Most viruses live in their host without causing problems. Pathogenesis is evidence of something gone wrong, a mutation or the accidental movement of genes, and not evidence of a system deliberately designed to cause human disease and suffering.

The false belief system of evolution has been used since its inception to dull people to the moral absolutes of Scripture, whether justifying Nazism, Stalinism, the abortion holocaust, indifference to starvation in Africa, or the maltreatment of indigenous people.

We are all connected with the first Adam (the natural and legal head of the human race) as depraved and guilty sinners, and so are included in the sentence of death which God pronounced on him. However, all who are connected with the last Adam, Jesus, through repentance and faith in His redeeming work, are forgiven, have ‘received the free gift of righteousness’, and so ‘have passed from death to life.’

Only when we insist that the terms of the debate be fair and accurate will we have any chance to clearly communicate the truth of creation and the bankruptcy of Darwinism to the world at large. As we have undertaken to demonstrate here, evolutionists have been guilty of hiding behind the misleading use of the term ‘fitness’; it is now time for honest scientists to adopt a more realistic, objective look at the parameters of life.

It is difficult for many to understand why seemingly credible witnesses make up fantastic stories—so fantastic in some cases that it would be normal to think that no one would make such incredible claims unless they were true. Human beings are complex creatures and for some their emotions and beliefs can override reality.

Where did Cain get his wife? How do you know there’s a God? Could Noah get all the animals on the Ark? Was the flood global? Most Christians have questions about science and the Bible, and many struggle with their faith because of them. We should examine our foundations, which may lead us to a better realization of why we face the issues we do.

Since, they say, creation fails their definition of ‘science’, it is therefore ‘religion’, and (by implication) it can simply be ignored. But what is science? Many attempts to define ‘science’ are circular. The point that a theory must be acceptable to contemporary scientists to be acceptable, basically defines science as ‘what scientists do’!

In the second part of this article we will analyze several critical geological features of heavily eroded surfaces that further confirm the idea that Eden cannot be placed on the contemporary surface of the earth.

There are no textual, geographic, linguistic, or even probabilistic reasons to hold to a near-Mesopotamian Eden. The few words used in parallel before and after the Flood are easily explained and the specific geography given in Scripture does not match anything in the region, nor indeed anywhere on the earth today.

Eschatology is core to CMI’s ministry in one sense—we absolutely assert that the goal of Jesus’ work was to restore not just believers, but the entire physical creation. And this will happen when He comes again. No matter what various people believe about the timing, or how to interpret various prophecies, getting the biblical foundations right means we all should look forward to the day when we stand on the restored earth with our resurrection bodies, in the presence of our incredible Creator.

Satan and his host of evil angels are well aware of the truth of Scripture. Concerning God, ‘the demons believe—and tremble’ (James 2:19). And the temptation account suggests that Satan knows that the Genesis record of creation is true.

It is not ‘academically sophisticated’ to hold to the inspiration of Scripture. Some people argue that believing a priori that the Bible is true and without error in anything it teaches is an ‘unintellectual’ position. It is true that with a Christological starting point, we give up any appearance of an ‘impartial, academic’ viewpoint. Yet there are very good reasons to hold to the infallibility of Scripture, as we will argue in this article.

Supposedly, it began as a singularity, an unimaginably hot ‘point’ into which was compressed all the matter and energy now making up the billions of galaxies found throughout space. Biblical creationists, of course, should reject big bang theory because the order of events contradicts the Bible. Christians need not be intimidated into accepting secular accounts of origins.

The doctrine of the Trinity states that in the unity of the Godhead there are three eternal and co-equal Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the same in essence but distinct in role — three Persons (or three centres of consciousness) and one Being. The doctrine of the Trinity is difficult for some people to understand, but this is what God has revealed in Scripture about His own Being, so we should believe it.

Currently, to our shame, millions of people, including many of our own neighbours, have no idea that there is a biblical alternative to evolution. Having rejected God on the grounds of belief in evolution, the guys I met at a hospital were hardly likely to give the time of day to the church’s message of salvation in Jesus.

The idea that death was in creation before the Fall has major implications for the character of God. The same problem arises if one thinks that God used evolution to create. At some point, this allegedly ‘good’ God ordains a lottery of death that finally results in humans, and then God looks at His image-bearers, standing on top of layers upon layers of rocks filled with the remains of billions of dead things, and proclaims His whole creation ‘very good’?

Atheists not only can, but must be (at least to some extent) good without believing in God—even if they hate God with every inch of their being. If they are really made in the image of God as the Bible teaches (Genesis 1:27), then that fact must have some results. They, like all of us, are fallen (as explained in Genesis 3), but even so must still have an in-built sense of the reality and the importance of right and wrong.

A limestone shale slab from the Green River Formation, USA, has incredibly ‘captured’ a mass of 257 fish swimming together in a school. Interestingly, it is clear to evolutionists that the fish school’s fossilization absolutely required a rapid process.

Ignoring the 100 million killed last century through the evolution-fueled ideologies of Hitler and Marx, Prof. Richard Dawkins has eagerly attacked all the ‘Abrahamic religions’, including Christianity, as intrinsically slaughter-prone. His message: only belief in an afterlife would make one capable of suicidal atrocities. But it was not secularism, but America’s Biblical heritage which made it, for all its faults, the most just, free and religiously tolerant nation on Earth.

Christ’s birth is one of the greatest events in all of history. Although the popular media and most educational institutions largely ridicule the biblical version of the Nativity, a fair-minded analysis paints a different picture. Foretold by Old Testament prophecies, supported by historical evidence, and logically feasible based on the existence of the God of the Bible, the Nativity is much more than just a nice story.

Whatever may have been the exact nature of this star at Christ’s birth, it did give perfect witness to its Creator, Christ. Therefore, key representatives of the world’s great Gentile nations came to fall down and worship the King of the Jews, knowing that one day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ, the Creator and Redeemer, is Lord (Philippians 2:10,11).