SEEING THE BIBLE AS GOD’S VIEW OF HISTORY

I do hope this account of the first five books of the Bible by RABBI ERIC TOKAJER will bring them alive for you as it did me.

The Bible is a history of the world from beginning to end, and that history is told over and over, one page at a time. Every word written adds more colour to the picture, and every phrase written provides more depth and contrast to help us see the fullness of the story as it is retold. To lay the foundation for what I am saying, let’s simply look at the first words of each of the five books of the Torah.

The book of Genesis begins with the words, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1, TLV). So, Genesis begins by introducing us to GOD.

The book of Exodus begins with the words, “Now these are the names of the sons of Israel who came into Egypt with Jacob, every man with his family” (Ex. 1:1). ” Exodus begins with the word “and,” connecting us to the book of Genesis, which introduced us to GOD. Exodus introduces us to the children of Israel, who are in bondage because they went to Egypt.

The book of Leviticus begins again with the word “and.” “And the LORD called Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying ..” (Lev. 1:1, MEV). The “and” connects Leviticus to Exodus and Genesis as the picture continues to be painted. In Leviticus, GOD calls Moses from inside of the Tent of Meeting while Moses is outside of the Tent of Meeting. We are introduced to a GOD who is inviting His people into His home.

At this point, we have been introduced to GOD. We have been introduced to His people in bondage in Egypt. We have been introduced to GOD calling to man.

The book of Numbers also begins with “and.” “And the LORD spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the Tent of Meeting on the first day of the second month in the second year after they went out from the land of Egypt, saying” (Num. 1:1). The “and” in Numbers connects the book of Numbers to the book of Leviticus. In Leviticus, we are introduced to Moses as one who has entered GOD’s home.

So, in Genesis, we are introduced to GOD. In Exodus, we are introduce to GOD’s people in trouble/bondage. In Leviticus, we are introduced to a GOD who invites His people into His home. In Numbers, we are introduced to a GOD who has welcomed His people into His home.

The Book of Deuteronomy begins with the words, “These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel on this side of the Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain opposite Suph, between Paran and Tophel and laban and Hazeroth and Dizahab” (Deut. 1:1). Deuteronomy, like Genesis, does not begin with the word “and” because it is the conclusion of the story being told in the Torah. What story, you may ask? The same story told with every word and every stroke of paint: the Gospel.

Genesis tells us about GOD. Exodus tells us we are in bondage. Leviticus tells us GOD wants us to dwell with Him. Numbers tell us how we dwell with Him. Deuteronomy tells us to tell others about Genesis through Numbers so they can participate in Deuteronomy themselves. You see, the Bible/Torah isn’t a bunch of commandments and a burden too heavy to carry.

The Bible/Torah is our history, yours and mine. Each word is a stroke of colour that introduces us over and over to GOD. And when we view it from the right perspective, we are impacted by the beauty and intricacy of the Good News in every word and phrase that GOD loves us so much that He wants to spend eternity with us.

ZOMBIE SCIENCE: EVOLUTION THE “UNIVERSAL ACID”

This and the previous post promote two books which need to be promoted widely. ZOMBIE SCIENCE in particular reveals how devastating this theory has been to the authority of God’s Word. It actively promotes a materialistic philosophy. Here is what Jonathan Wells thinks of clergymen who claim that evolution and God are “bosom buddies”. Get real!

Image result

Jonathan Wells wrote Icons of Evolution, back in 2002 in which he identified common themes in college textbooks that are used to illustrate evolution, even though they are dubious and even discredited. In this forceful sequel Jonathan refutes criticisms of his original work, and shows that, far from being corrected, these icons not only persist, but have been joined by new icons. That is why we are dealing with zombie science. Wells clearly shows that evolution, as currently taught, has a stifling effect not only on religion, especially Christianity, but also on science itself. Evolutionist ideology – not innocent mistakes. They are intentional – done to promote evolutionism and its materialism at all costs.

According to the establishment science is supposed to deal with factual matters, while religion is relegated to subjective feelings and imagination. This right then and there is prejudicial to religion. Wells quips:

“In effect, this is just a restatement of materialistic philosophy. It’s a bully tactic to convince religious believers that they are not entitled to say anything about objective reality” (p.172). No kidding!

Taken from a very comprehensive book review by Jerry Woodmorappe Journal of Creation Vol.32 (1) 2018

SCIENTISTS EXPLAIN LIFE IN A FINELY TUNED UNIVERSE

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.”  Romans 1:18-20 

Image result

The book, A Fortunate Universe – Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos is full of helpful information for those seeking to understand the extent to which our universe in finely tuned for life. The authors are well qualified to write on the subject. Geraint Lewis is Professor of Astrophysics at the Sydney Institute for Astronomy and Luke Barnes has a Ph.D. in astronomy from Cambridge University in the UK.

At the atomic level, the level of fine tuning is phenomenal, both concerning the mass of the various particles and the four fundamental forces at play: gravity, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force. Lewis and Barnes conclude “Playing these forces off against one-another has a drastic effect on the universe , with an almost imperceptible region of stability”.

In the penultimate chapter the authors deal comprehensively with objections to the view that fine-tuning is a reality, and demonstrate that these carry little weight. Interestingly, they comment:

“The fine-tuning of the Universe for life is unique in our experience for the strength of the opinions expressed … Even those who don’t think fine tuning means anything simply must enthusiastically explain, in great detail, exactly why it doesn’t mean anything.”

Barnes takes the view that the fine tuning is not accidental but purposeful. To him the universe “contains good things like free moral agents and all that they can do and learn and appreciate” These he feels reflect the intent of a creator (pp. 347-348). On his blog, he has been very critical of atheists such as Victor Stenger, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Carrier.

Lewis is more sceptical and argues that the presence of evil and suffering makes God’s existence unlikely: “I would expect a morally perfect being to create a morally perfect universe” (p. 346). He sees a multiverse as a more probable explanation for fine tuning. “Ours is but one of a vast sea of universes each with differing laws of physics and properties of matter, set at their birth through some cosmic role of dice …” Lewis is obviously not aware of Biblical history. God did make a morally perfect universe in fact He made a perfect universe. It was mans sin that resulted in God cursing the earth introducing death and suffering. Fortunately, our loving Creator has provided atonement for our sin, in His death on the Cross. Eternal life in a new heaven and earth is available to all who will repent of their sin and acknowledge Jesus as their Saviour and Lord. Also, realistically, multiverse thinking can have no place in science. Apart from being unobservable (and therefore untestable) it logically leads to the view that no data set should be regarded as evidence for anything. In a multiverse it could always occur by chance!

In conclusion; a life-sustaining universe requires a number of fundamental physical constants to be very precisely determined, and creationists rightly view this is evidence of intelligent design.

In addition, the big bang could not produce a life-sustaining universe unless many additional characteristics were exquisitely fine-tuned. This is so improbable that, to any reasonable mind, such a naturalistic explanation must be seen to be utterly, utterly implausible.

Taken from an extensive book review by Dominic Statham C.M.I.

 

OUR UNIVERSE – UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN?

Despite the overwhelming evidence for design in the universe, Intelligent Design’ (ID) is virtually outlawed in academia. They recognise that it must mean that there is an intelligence behind the design, an intelligence outside and above the design itself; and in the context, the design of living things. The term ID is mocked at school (pupils who espouse it have been humiliated by teachers) and universities and it is dismissed in the media.

unintelligent-design

INTELLIGENT DESIGN is not really a very intelligent term, because it is tautologous: design must by its very nature be intelligent. Perhaps this can be best explained by looking at the other side of the coin. Could there be such a thing as ‘Unintelligent Design’?

It is incongruous that popular TV presenters of the “natural” world  such as David Attenborough, continually make references to ‘design’. Many features are referred to as ‘a wonderful design’, or it is said that they are ‘designed to’ accomplish some specific end, such as keeping warm, attracting a mate, enabling flight, or whatever. And yet, David Attenborough is utterly opposed to any idea of an outside intelligence.

If ID is not an acceptable concept, but the fact of design is acknowledged, then the only alternative is ‘Unintelligent Design’. Now this does not mean ‘bad’ design (good design and rubbish design both qualify as design), but the absence of any intelligence behind the design.1 Let us give a little thought to what this means. Design’ carries with it the idea of purpose—indeed it is essential to the very concept of design, which must be a teleological act. If it isn’t purposeful, it is no longer design, but merely accident. If something is designed it must be the product of intelligence, whether low or high-level intelligence.

The only alternative to design by an intelligent agent is design by evolution—which, one assumes, must be ‘Unintelligent Design’. But we have already determined that design is not logically possible without intelligence, at some level. How are we to resolve the paradox? According to most dictionary definitions, evolution is a blind stochastic process, simply a description of what allegedly happened in the past without any intelligent input. A process cannot design anything, thus evolution cannot design! But perhaps evolution is more than a process? Although a non-material entity, maybe it has mysterious powers to direct and select. If so, the same powers that theists ascribe to a Creator God are simply being ascribed to evolution. This rather gives the game away.        For its proponents, belief in evolution is a faith, a creed, just as surely as any other faith. We might even say that evolution has become ‘god’ as far as its adherents are concerned, able to do anything ascribed to it. The question needs to be asked. How come evolution is being taught as fact in our schools and universities?

In conclusion, if we refuse to accept the concept of Intelligent Design in the natural world, we have to conclude that our existence is merely the result of countless random events and is utterly meaningless. The presenters of popular science programmes need to take note: nothing is designed to work, and the fact that it does is just an accumulation of billions of accidents. There is one philosophical problem, however. We are creatures who design incessantly. Where did we get our concept of design if there was no such thing?

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Extract of article by  published by Creation Ministries International,  8 March 2018.

 

HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?

How old is the earth? Six to ten thousand years old? Older? How precisely can a creation date be calculated? Does the Bible teach a six thousand year old Earth? Why do most scientists believe the earth is old? This Creation Ministries video explores one of the most controversial issues in the church, and answers these and many more questions regarding when God created.

BROAD COALITION OF EVANGELICALS RELEASE A TIMELY STATEMENT ON HUMAN SEXUALITY

A broad coalition of Christian leaders, including J. I. Packer and Francis Chan, have released a statement articulating God’s design for human identity as male and female. 

Dr. Richard Land (shown here), president of Southern Evangelical Seminary and Christian Post executive editor is one of the Nashville Statement’s initial signatories. He said, “The answer to the question ‘What and who is a human being?’ is the mega-ethical issue of our time. It impacts everything,” He noted that if the meaning of the human person cannot be defined in Scripture, the very Gospel is at stake.

“This statement is an attempt to equip the Church to address this issue from a biblical, Christian perspective,” Land said, “to provide a catechism for churches, for Bible study groups, for Sunday schools, families, college students, to equip themselves to understand what the Bible says about these issues and to do so in a positive way.”

“And if we truly love people, we are going to tell them the truth,” he emphasised, “and telling the truth to people is often hard. Telling the truth to segregationists about race was not easy. But they were trapped in racism. It stultified their souls and they were accountable to God for it and it was our responsibility as Christians to tell them the truth: God is no respecter of persons.”

When one engages sexuality issues, Land said, one must deal with the doctrine of creation, and specifically God’s creation of human beings. Although marred and twisted by the Fall, human beings are the only part of His created order that are imprinted with the divine image, he added, and that divine image cannot be separated from His plan for marriage and human sexuality.

Such a statement is needed, they say, in order to resist the spirit of the age and for the church to maintain its counter-cultural witness in a world that seems “bent on ruin.”

The document contains a preamble and 14 articles responding to the current realities in the Western world regarding the many messages swirling in society and even in some churches about sexuality, particularly homosexuality and transgenderism, which have come to the fore in both politics and church life in recent years.

“Evangelical Christians at the dawn of the twenty-first century find themselves living in a period of historic transition. As Western culture has become increasingly post-Christian, it has embarked upon a massive revision of what it means to be a human being. By and large the spirit of our age no longer discerns or delights in the beauty of God’s design for human life,” the statement’s preamble reads.

Important articles in the Nashville Statement say:

Article 4

WE AFFIRM that divinely ordained differences between male and female reflect God’s original creation design and are meant for human good and human flourishing.

Article 7

WE AFFIRM that self-conception as male or female should be defined by God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption as revealed in Scripture.

WE DENY that adopting a homosexual or transgender self-conception is consistent with God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption.

The authors of the Nashville Statement assert in Article 10 that matters pertaining to sexuality, including homosexual practice and transgenderism is an not an area where faithful Christians can “agree to disagree,” but that this is central to the Gospel message.

Katie McCoy, assistant professor of theology in women’s studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Forth Worth, Texas, commented to CP, “The gender issues facing women today hit at the core of our being. McCoy, who is also the editor of BiblicalWoman.com, is among the Nashville Statement’s initial signatories.

When asked what she wants the Nashville Statement to accomplish in the Kingdom of God and how it marks this present moment in church history, McCoy said she hopes it brings boldness to everyone to proclaim the timeless truths of Scripture.

“[Theological] orthodoxy will be increasingly unaccepted and unacceptable but with a statement like this comes the reminder that we are not as alone [as we think], that the truth is never quite on the fringes,” McCoy said.

“And God’s people will remain faithful to God’s Word no matter how unpopular it is, no matter how culturally unacceptable it is.”

The statement’s initial signatories include a multi-generational and racially diverse array of men and women leaders in the body of Christ from a variety of denominations. Over 100 prominent theologians, Bible scholars, church pastors and ministry leaders, seminary presidents, college professors, Christian public policy thinkers, and writers have all already signed on. Baptists, Anglicans, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, nondenominational evangelicals, and almost every other historic Orthodox Protestant tradition are represented among those signatures and additional signers continue to be added.

 

 

NEW FILM “IS GENESIS HISTORY?” SAYS UNEQUIVOCAL YES!

Dr. Del Tackett is part of an upcoming film titled “Is Genesis History?” and he’s hoping the documentary will give Christians the confidence they need to stand strong on the Word of God, particularly the creation account, without compromise.

“I’m hoping that people will look at the film and they would realise that they don’t have to accede to the accusation that if you hold to a position of [young earth], of a literal historical position in Genesis, then [you are] unscientific or stupid,” Tackett told The Christian Post during the premiere screening at The Creation Museum earlier this month.

“My hope is that those people that want to hold to biblical truth would walk away with the confidence that there is credible evidence and there are credible scientists, that they could be sure that what God has given us is true and can hold onto that.”

The documentary follows Tackett as he embarks on an eye-opening educational journey through evidence that supports historic claims from the book of Genesis, featuring commentary from renowned scientists and Bible scholars.

The film explores the questions and findings of the universe being created in six literal days, as well as whether or not humans evolved, the validity of a global flood, what happened to the dinosaurs and more.

“Here’s my position, and I think it’s one of the things that I’ve learned throughout the film: We are in an amazing time when the research is allowing us to see so much data that reinforces a Creator, that reinforces what He told us in the beginning,” Tackett said to Christian Post. “And I think it’s going to be increasingly difficult for the current paradigm to last much longer.”

“I would tell Christians, ‘If you are going to put your trust in Evolution and you’re going to say that God’s Word is now just an analogy, or it’s just some kind of simile, you’re twisting the Word of God because of a paradigm that is already really shaky.’ I would say, ‘You have that backwards. We start with the Word of God. We start with the record that God has given to us and stand on that, then begin to view the world around us. That’s when things will make sense.'”

The same is true when people try to make sense of evil, he noted. “If you come from a natural position, you won’t understand it. But if you come from it as it is described in the word of God, then it does make sense.”

“We live in a time where the current scientific paradigm is infiltrating a lot of the seminaries and a lot of the hierarchy in evangelical Christianity because people have been led to believe that science has settled this issue of deep time,” Tackett lamented.

If Christians are now feeling that they have to somehow rectify their faith for a scientific perspective, Tackett said then they are ripping out the foundation of everything that God has given to His creation.

“You lose the concept of a God that speaks life into existence, you lose the concept of male and female, you lose the concept of marriage, and the origin of sin and why there is evil. You lose the concept of a God that is holy, who judges sin and who will judge sin again,” he explained.

What the Bible scholar sees today is a generation caught in the current belief of creation without God.

“The world is still captive in the current paradigm. That paradigm, just as every paradigm in the past, really doesn’t allow any other questions,” Tackett pointed out.

What Tackett failed to say is that the theory of evolution has been the most successful ploy that Satan has concocted. It provides the excuse for fallen man to reject God, and despite the fact their is no mechanism (or evidence) to take you from “goo to you”, they won’t except the obvious – intelligent design because it requires a designer – GOD.

BETSY DE VOS APPOINTED EDUCATION SECRETARY

With the election of Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary, there is NO doubt now, that Trump is God’s man to bring Him back into the Nation’s life and hopefully make what is on their currency “In God We Trust” meaningful.

betsydevos_si

Rev. Robert Sirico, the founder of the Grand Rapids-based Acton Institute and a long-time DeVos family friend, describes her as a “solid evangelical Christian” who is active in her church and “orthodox in her beliefs and personal commitment to Jesus Christ.”

John Booy, another long-time friend, told CBN News that DeVos integrates her faith into all areas of her life and that it’s led her to a “deep sensitivity to those who have not had the privilege she’s grown up with.”

DeVos and her husband Dick DeVos spoke at a 2001 Christian philanthropic gathering about their faith.  She described a desire to be active in education to influence the culture and help “advance God’s kingdom.”

Dick DeVos spoke about wanting to drive better performance across all education.  “Our Christian worldview, which for us comes from a Calvinist tradition, which is to be very much a part of the world and to provide for a greater opportunity, a more expanded opportunity someday for all parents to be able to educate their children in a school that reflects their worldview,” he said.

Booy is principal at the Potter’s House, a Christian K-12 school in Grand Rapids.  DeVos has actively supported the school for years and Booy says she became passionate about reforming education while meeting parents there.  The school opened in 1981 to provide a choice for families in the low-income neighbourhood surrounding it.  At the time, their public school ranked third-lowest in the state.

Ingersoll, the University of North Florida scholar, says that “it’s a long-standing goal of the religious right to dismantle public education” and that religious conservatives like DeVos “don’t see public schools as religiously neutral.” If an education is not Christian, then it is anti-Christian. This is a view, she suggests, DeVos shares with Mike Pence, the religiously conservative vice president, who is expected by some to have Dick Cheney-level influence in the Trump administration. Moreover, it is a view that can’t be ignored. Creation cannot be taught in public schools only evolution which is also teaching children atheism.

This is just one more Christian appointed by Trump to high office in government.

 

CHRISTIANITY STANDS OR FALLS ON THE HISTORICAL ACCURACY OF GENESIS

How did Christ and His Apostles view the Old Testament?

According to Jesus, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35) and “not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished” (Matthew 5:18). When referring to the Old Testament, He would often assert, “It is written”, making clear that He considered Scripture to be the final authority in all matters of faith and life. Along with the Pharisees He regarded the Old Testament as truly God’s Word. When quoting Genesis 2:24, for example, He affirmed that it was God speaking (Matthew 19:45) even though the passage itself does not specifically state this.6

Looking for Answers pic

In his second letter to Timothy, the Apostle Paul wrote, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). Commenting on this verse, and the New Testament in general, Frederick C. Grant, Professor of Biblical Theology at Union Theological Seminary wrote, “Everywhere it is taken for granted that what is written in scripture is the work of divine inspiration, and therefore trustworthy, infallible, and inerrant.”7

From this it might be understood that Professor Grant held to a similarly high view of Scripture. Not at all! In fact, he believed much of the Bible to be based on myths. Despite this, and along with many other liberal theologians, he recognised the Apostles’ unswerving commitment to the Old Testament as the Word of God and as unquestionably trustworthy in everything it teaches.

It is not difficult to see why scholars understand this to be true.8,9 In the Apostle Paul’s thinking, the Jews had been “entrusted with the oracles [the very words] of God” (Romans 3:2). When referring to the Old Testament he had no hesitation in affirming, “The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers …” (Acts 28:25). Similarly, when quoting from the Psalms, the Apostle Peter stated that, while the words came from the mouth of David, it was the Holy Spirit speaking (Acts 4:2425). Moreover, he affirmed that “no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20–21).

Both Jesus and His Apostles undoubtedly regarded Genesis as history. Jesus, for example, affirmed the creation of Adam and Eve (Matthew 19:4), the murder of Abel (Luke 11:5051), the Noahic Flood (Matthew 24:37–39) and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Matthew 10:15). Moreover, for Him, these were not simply interesting stories; rather they provided the basis for understanding important spiritual truths. Similarly, the Apostle Paul built his teaching on events recorded in the Old Testament, such as the doctrine of Original Sin (Romans 5) and the role of men and women in the church (1 Timothy 2:12–14). The writer to the Hebrews referred to the accounts of Abel, Enoch and Noah as real events that happened to real people (Hebrews 11). Significantly, this letter was written to encourage Christians who were facing serious persecution; but what use are mythical characters to those potentially facing death? The idea that anyone would think that such people might be helped by reminding them of stories suitable only for Sunday School children is absurd. The writers of the New Testament undoubtedly accepted the first book of the Bible as historical and Huxley was right: if Genesis is wrong, Christianity was built upon no more than “legendary quicksands”.

Where does your church, your denomination stand on the inerrancy of scripture? Ask your pastor to get one of the excellent PhD speakers from Creation Ministries to come speak at your church on the evidence for the Genesis account of Creation. His response may surprise you.