Evolution Is Most Certainly a Matter of Belief—and so Is Christianity

One of the most misleading headlines imaginable recently appeared over an opinion column published in USA Today. Tom Krattenmaker, a member of the paper’s Board of Contributors, set out to argue that there is no essential conflict between evolution and religious belief because the two are dealing with completely separate modes of knowing. Evolution, he argued, is simply “settled science” that requires no belief. Religion, on the other hand, is a faith system that is based in a totally different way of knowing—a form of knowing that requires belief and faith.   Continue at Al Mohler

Evolutionists Running Scared

The anti-creationist website Panda’s Thumb has an item about the upcoming debate between Bill Nye (the “Science Guy” of TV fame) and me. AiG released information about this February 4 debate yesterday on our website.

It didn’t take long before social media went nuts when Christians and non-Christians began to find out about this debate.

But there is a common thread through the social media posts from secularists others—they want Bill Nye to cancel. Why? Well read this post on the Panda’s Thumb website:

Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham?!

Let us hope not, but a reader just sent me the following from Mr. Ham’s Facebook page:

‘Well the big news for 2014 as we begin this new year is that in February, at the Creation Museum, I will be debating the well known Bill Nye The Science Guy! In the next day or so we will post more details including how you can buy tickets to this event. It’s quite rare these days for such a well known evolutionist to publicly debate a creationist–so we do expect a lot of media interest. For now, I just wanted to let you know about this–keep watch for details!’   Continue at Ken Ham

“Found Out” by the Huffington Post!

Well, I have a confession to make to you. The large liberal news and commentary website Huffington Post, through its clever investigative efforts, has discovered something startling about me. Now, because HuffPost has made this matter public, I have no option: I have to make a public admission.

Under the headline “Dinosaurs Were On Noah’s Ark, According To Creation Museum’s New Radio Ad,” HuffPost dropped this bombshell:

No dinosaurs described in the Bible? No problem, according to creationism proponent Ken Ham, who recently argued that despite popular opinion, dinosaurs and Biblical characters did co-exist—in fact, they traveled together on Noah’s Ark.

Ham, the president/CEO and founder of Answers in Genesis-U.S. and the Creation Museum, made the unconventional claims during a new 60-second radio ad for the museum released this week.

Well, they found me out. I confess! Yes, I admit I believe dinosaurs and people lived at the same time. Furthermore, I do believe two of each kind of dinosaur (roughly at the family level of classification) were on board Noah’s Ark.   Continue at Ken Ham

Watch “The Great Delusion—The Spiritual State of the Nation” for Free

The Answers Mega Conference continues through Friday here in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee. We have many speakers giving talks related to the decline of the culture and how you can be equipped to give answers to those who attack the authority of God’s Word.

My presentation on Monday evening titled “The Great Delusion” focused on the spiritual state of this nation. God’s Word is being attacked at its very foundation, and most Christians do not understand the problem or how to combat it. It is also my assertion that this culture is under judgment—under the wrath of God as described in Romans chapter 1. In many ways, I believe Romans 1 describes the state of the culture in America. How then should we view the leaders (including the president) that govern this nation? You may be surprised at the answer.

It is vital for everyone to understand the delusion—the great lie against God and His Word that has swept the nation and is sweeping the world. Yes, the news is depressing! God is judging America for its rebellion, its wickedness. But the good news is we can do something about this.   Continue at Ken Ham

Doubting Darwin

The sky is falling! Many interest groups and journalists raced to tell that to the public when a modest but important bill became law in Tennessee early in April.

 The law instructs teachers and administrators to "create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues." 

What's not to like? The law, similar to one in Louisiana, also protects teachers who help students (I'm quoting from the official legislative summary) "understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught. ..." Oh, here's the problem: Evolution is one of the theories that can now be analyzed and critiqued. 

The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, and many others have gone ape over the inclusion of evolution. They revere critical thinking and the freedom to explore, but not when it might produce irreverence toward their idol.   Continue at  Marvin Olasky

ACLU Needs Legislation to Protect Its Anti-God Religion

Wake up Christians! When the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is  successful in getting the Ten Commandments out of public places and the teaching of creation, the Bible, and prayer out of public schools, they did not get religion out.

They just replaced the Christian religion with their religion of atheism. They are involved in this effort again, this time in Ohio, as a Fox News report explains:

A proposal by an Ohio school district to add creationism to a list of controversial topics deemed appropriate for classroom discussion has ignited a debate over the separation of church and state among parents and a civil rights group.

The Springboro Board of Education took comments on the proposal at a meeting Thursday night attended by parents, students and teachers. Some parents urged the board to abandon the plan, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio sent a letter to the board, saying the policy would violate the separation of church and state. [Read more at this link.]

I get so tired of reading the same old misrepresentations and false information from the ACLU and secular media (even from Fox News, which is less hostile towards Christianity) when it comes to the creation-evolution issue in public schools.    Continue at Ken Ham

Monkeys Using Tools?

Every so often, another story comes up in the news about animals that are supposedly demonstrating a more human intelligence because of their ability to use tools. On the Answers in Genesis website alone, we’ve collected and commented on a variety of reports about animals using tools. From spear-making chimpanzees to crows that can use tools to their advantage, evolutionists love to use these as alleged proof that animals are closer to human intelligence than we think. 

For example, in 2005, we wrote about widely circulated stories of gorillas in the wild using tools in an article titled Gorillas and Tools? And do you know what the observers found so impressive then?

A female gorilla crossed a pool of water by using a detached stick to test the water depth and then trying to use it as a walking stick. The second case involved another female gorilla who picked up a dead shrub and used it to lean on while looking for food in a swamp. According to the BBC report, she then placed the trunk down on the swampy ground and used it as a bridge.

You can read two more stories on apes using tools from our weekly News to Note publication at the links below:

• News to Note, “BBC News: ‘Ancient Chimps Used Stone Tools”
• News to Note, “BBC News: ‘Chimpanzees “hunt using spears”’

In another example from 2009–2010, there were a few stories about the intelligence of crows.    Continue at Ken Ham

The Adam and Eve Battle—it’s Actually a Deeper Serious Problem!

Dr. Deborah Haarsma (previously a professor at Calvin College, a Christian college in Michigan) is the newest president of BioLogos (an  organization attempting to get the church to reject a literal Genesis). She recently contributed to a series of articles on whether there really was an historical Adam. Her article, “Historical Adam: Embracing the Questions,” does just that—it embraces questions and provides no answers. In fact, it sows more doubt and confusion than anything.

Haarsma accepts evolutionary ideas and mixes them with Scripture, a view that is known as theistic evolution or evolutionary creation. After listing a number of artifacts that evolutionary scientists have dated as anywhere from 15,000 to 200,000 years old, Haarsma claims, “These discoveries fly in the face of the conventional reading of Genesis, in which Adam and Eve lived just 6,000 years ago in the Middle East and were the progenitors of all humankind.”

Aside from the obvious problem that Dr. Haarsma relies on evolutionary beliefs to substantiate her claim, she also has misrepresented the “conventional reading” of the history in Genesis: we have no idea where the Garden of Eden was located! So we cannot begin to guess where Adam and Eve resided. You see, after the Flood, when Noah and his family exited the Ark, they may have renamed many things with names they were already familiar with. The Garden of Eden can’t be located now because there are layers of dead things covering the land that was buried during the Flood, not to mention that the land itself would be completely rearranged (see A Catastrophic Breakup). Since there was no death and suffering until sin entered the world, the Garden couldn’t have been sitting on top of layers of dead creatures.   Continue at Ken Ham

We Now Know That Lucy Said: “Duh … duh … duh”

The evolutionists are at it again! Over the years, we’ve heard a lot about “Lucy” (Australopithecus afarensis), which evolutionists believe is a relative of humans as part of the supposed evolutionary history of man. Although much of the study of Lucy’s bones has been dedicated to reconstructing her physical body, complete with exhibits and artists’ renditions that depict a human-like Lucy, a recent article in Discover magazine is taking a different approach—evolutionists are trying to reconstruct Lucy’s vocal cords to show how she would have communicated as the supposed ancestor of humans. 

At the Creation Museum, we recently unveiled a new exhibit on Lucy, which emphasizes that our “starting points” make a difference in how we interpret evidence. In our exhibit, we show that Lucy was simply an ape, probably resembling a small gorilla. We also have on display a cast of all the bones found from her body: only 47 out of 207.  Continue at Ken Ham

Darwin’s Bulldog—Thomas H. Huxley

Charles Darwin had little time for the scientific, theological and moral controversies engendered by the publication of his Origin of Species in 1859. Not so Thomas Henry Huxley (1825–1895), who leapt to the fray, even dubbing himself ‘Darwin’s bulldog’.

 

Darwin called him, ‘My good and kind agent for the propagation of the Gospel—i.e. the devil’s Gospel.’

 

It was Huxley, not Darwin, who enraptured and outraged audiences in the 1860s with talk of our ape ancestors and cave men. London turned out—from cardinals to Karl Marx—to be tantalized and tormented by his scintillating lectures. ‘Bushy-bearded labourers with blistered hands flocked to his talks on our ancestry. He drew the sort of crowds that are reserved for evangelists or rock stars today.’

‘Out of his provocations came … the West’s new faith—agnosticism (he coined the word).’³

Youth and self-education

Thomas was born in Ealing village, near London, in 1825, the seventh of eight Huxley children. Neglected by his father, he grew up in poverty, with only two years of formal schooling. Living in the industrial squalor of the 1840s, where the Church was a rich man’s luxury, he sought redemption through self-education. 

At the age of 12 he read James Hutton’s Theory of the Earth and had his first encounter with anti-biblical geology. An avid reader of history, science and philosophy, he taught himself almost everything he knew until he entered Charing Cross Hospital medical school.⁴ He put himself through Part 1 of the Bachelor of Medicine exam at London University, winning the gold medal for anatomy and physiology, but did not present to sit Part 2.

He then became Assistant Surgeon (‘surgeon’s mate’) on HMS Rattlesnake for a southern oceans surveying voyage (1846–1850). Although Huxley had no formal university degree,⁶ the publishing of his researches on the structure of various marine invertebrates from this trip secured his future acceptance by the British scientific community.⁷ In 1851, at age 25, he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society (F.R.S.), which also awarded him its Royal Medal in 1852, a year before Charles Darwin received the same honour.   Continue at Creation Ministries

Darwinism "Has Pretty Much Reached the End of Its Rope"

An interesting paper was recently published by David Depew and Bruce Weber in the journal Biological Theory. The paper bears the title "The Fate of Darwinism: Evolution After the Modern Synthesis." Its abstract summarizes the article's contents:

We trace the history of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, and of genetic Darwinism generally, with a view to showing why, even in its current versions, it can no longer serve as a general framework for evolutionary theory. The main reason is empirical. Genetical Darwinism cannot accommodate the role of development (and of genes in development) in many evolutionary processes. We go on to discuss two conceptual issues: whether natural selection can be the "creative factor" in a new, more general framework for evolutionary theorizing; and whether in such a framework organisms must be conceived as self-organizing systems embedded in self-organizing ecological systems.

This paper is interesting in at least two respects. First, there is the curious use of the word "Darwinism" to describe the modern evolutionary synthesis. It is frequently asserted by our critics that "Darwinism" is a pejorative term invented by creationists and proponents of ID as a form of derision. The term, however, is used widely in the mainstream scientific literature -- albeit not always in a consistent manner. The authors define "Darwinism" thus:

Darwinism refers to its author's proposed causal explanation of evolution -- natural selection -- and to theories in which this process plays the dominant role in evolution, including human evolution.

The second point of interest is the paper's claim that "Darwinism in its current scientific incarnation has pretty much reached the end of its rope." Furthermore, as the authors argue,

...it is largely because Lamarckism, saltationist (sudden) mutationism, and inner-driven orthogenesis, to name the most enduring alternative traditions in evolutionary biology, failed to become mathematized empirical sciences with at least a foothold on value-neutrality that Darwinism still rules the evolutionary roost.   Continue at Darwinism

A New Translation to Allow for Evolution and Millions of Years?

Every so often, new translations of the Bible are released because some people think they’ve found a better way to translate it or because they want to make it easier to read. Well, recently, Thomas Nelson and the Ecclesia Bible Society released their translation of the entire Bible, called The Voice. (The New Testament was released in 2011, and the compiled Old and New Testament was released this month.) The team who did the translation describes The Voice this way:

The Voice is a dynamic equivalent translation that reads like a story with all of the truth and wisdom of God’s Word. Through compelling narratives, poetry, and teaching it invites readers to enter into the whole story of God with their heart, soul, and mind. This bold new translation engages readers like no other Bible. (http://www.hearthevoice.com/about-the-translation)

The Voice actually looks and reads like a script to a play, with short bits of commentary on how certain characters—including God—are reacting. Unfortunately, a literal translation of the words of Scripture does not always support these bits of commentary.

The team of writers and researchers on this translation included Tremper Longman, a Bible scholar who regularly voices doubts about the historical trustworthiness of Genesis. Longman has said that the creation account in Genesis does not conflict with evolutionary ideas (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8Pk1vXL1WE).   Continue at Ken Ham

See also: Biologos, Theistic Evolution, and Misplaced Confidence

IMAGE

Mount St. Helens in Washington State

For months, scientists cautiously awaited the certain eruption of Mount St. Helens. Instruments measured the volcano’s activities, and geologists gathered to study the volcano and its impact on the surrounding area. May 18, 1980 began as a bright morning giving no hint of what was about to occur. Just after 8:30 A.M. (PDT), an earthquake a mile beneath the volcano unleashed energy that had been confined for decades. The explosion loosened the already unstable northern side of the volcano, and not only changed the visage of that portion of the Cascades, but deeply shook the foundation of the geological timescale once believed to be “set in stone.”

The Eruption

In the months before its eruption, Mount St. Helens signaled to many observing geologists that a catastrophic event was about to take place. As magma produced and filled caverns just below the surface, the mountain’s northern slope began to bulge under the pressure. It bulged from 5–50 feet (1.5–15 m) outward each day, creating a very unstable surface. Concerned geologists watched while they closed roads, prevented residents from returning to their homes and recorded and analyzed the volcano’s activities.   Continue at AnswersInGenesis

See also: Mt. St. Helens and Catastrophism

Evolution’s End? President Obama Calls for Same-Sex Marriage

Is President Obama’s “evolution” on same sex marriage finally complete? His call for the legalization of same-sex marriage yesterday is an historic and tragic milestone. An incumbent President of the United States has now called for a transformation of civilization’s central institution. And yet, no observer of this president could be surprised. The arrival of this announcement was only a matter of time.

The White House confirmed this within hours of the President’s announcement. As The New York Times reported on May 10, “Advisers say now that Mr. Obama had intended since early this year to define his position sometime before Democrats nominate him for re-election in September.”

Previous news reports indicated that the 2012 platform for the Democratic Party would likely include a call for same-sex marriage. The pressure was on the White House, with the President caught in an awkward and embarrassing situation in which major figures on both sides of the controversy believed that his public position did not reflect his true convictions.

In December of 2010, the President told Jake Tapper of ABC News, “My feelings about this are constantly evolving.” Last October, he told George Stephanopoulos, “I’m still working on it.” As Dan Amira of New York magazine summarized that comment, “President Obama won’t say if he’ll stop pretending to oppose gay marriage before the election.”   Continue at Al Mohler

See also: A Solemn and Sincere Warning to President Obama

What I Hope We Remember After President Obama’s Public Support of Same-Sex Marriage

 

The Authority of the Word of God

I believe… the account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the earth and the universe. The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six consecutive twenty four hour days of Creation. The various original life forms (kinds), including mankind, were made by direct creative acts of God. The living descendants of any of the original kinds (apart from man) may represent more than one species today, reflecting the genetic potential within the original kind. Only limited biological changes (including mutational deterioration) have occurred naturally within each kind since Creation.

The special creation of Adam (the first man) and Eve (the first woman), and their subsequent fall into sin, is the basis for the necessity of salvation for mankind. Death (both physical and spiritual) and bloodshed entered into this world subsequent to and as a direct consequence of man’s sin. The great Flood of Genesis was an actual historic event, worldwide (global) in its extent and effect and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.   Continue at John Samson

Darwin's Heretic: Did the Co-Founder of Evolution Embrace Intelligent Design?

One of the most renowned biologists of the nineteenth century, Alfred Russel Wallace shares credit with Charles Darwin for developing the theory of evolution by natural selection. Yet one part of Wallace’s remarkable life and career has been completely ignored: His embrace of intelligent design. “Darwin’s Heretic” is a 21-minute documentary that explores Wallace’s fascinating intellectual journey and how it sheds light on current debates. The documentary features University of Alabama at Birmingham Professor Michael Flannery, author of the acclaimed biography, “Alfred Russel Wallace: A Rediscovered Life.” You can purchase a DVD of this video plus more than 30 minutes of bonus material at http://www.darwinsheretic.com.

My friend, Pastor Jim McClarty wrote this about the following video: “I don’t often post youtube videos… I try to be selective. But I thought this short documentary was well done and it taught me something I didn’t know about the history of Darwinistic Evolution. Even his partner in the development of his theory of natural selection broke rank and insisted that an honest examination of the evidence leads to the conclusion of design and a designer. Interesting stuff.”  HT: John Samson

C. H. Spurgeon on Evolution

At one of the memorable gatherings under "The Question Oak," a student asked Mr. Spurgeon, "Are we justified in receiving Mr. Darwin's or any other theory of evolution?"

The President's answer was:—"My reply to that inquiry can best take the form of another question,—Does Revelation teach us evolution? It never has struck me, and it does not strike now, that the theory of evolution can, by any process of argument, be reconciled with the inspired record of the Creation. You remember how it is distinctly stated, again and again, that the Lord made each creature 'after his kind.' So we read, 'And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.'

"And again, 'And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.'   Keep Reading >>>

Peter Enns on Paul, Adam, and Evolution

For Peter Enns, evolution denies the historical Adam and Eve, and that gives rise to the questions he’s trying to answer. The fact that Paul viewed Adam as the first human being has, for Enns, been shown to be wrong scientifically. Enns asserts that Paul is theologically right on the point that Jesus defeated sin and death, but that he “may be wrong” on what caused the problem–Adam’s sin. Though he “may be wrong” on that, Enns asserts, Paul is right about sin and death and the solution. Enns says that even if Adam and Eve didn’t bit an apple, sin and death are real.

Enns seems to want to keep the theology while discarding the history as he explains: “I don’t need a historical Adam to make all that happen… I understand why Paul says what he says, cause he’s an ancient man, cause he’s a Jew.”

For Enns, the theory of evolution carries as much authority as Scripture, and it shows that Paul was wrong about Adam being the first human. Moreover, the interpretations that Paul and the other biblical authors provide of earlier Scripture are just possibilities, not necessarily correct readings that function as controls on how those earlier texts should be read.

Peter Enns is trying to combine two different religions, evolution and Christianity...  Read the rest HERE

False Start? The Controversy Over Adam and Eve Heats Up

Each generation of Christians faces its own set of theological challenges. For this generation of Evangelicals, the question of beginnings is taking on a new urgency. In fact, this question is now a matter of Gospel urgency. How are we to understand the Bible’s story, if we can have no confidence that we know how it even begins?

In terms of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the most urgent question related to beginnings has to do with the questions related to the existence of Adam and Eve as as them first parents to all humanity and to the reality of the Fall as the explanation for human sinfulness and all that comes with sin.

A report from Barbara Bradley Hagerty of National Public Radio a few weeks is an undeniable sign that even the secular world now recognizes that this is a question central to Christianity. Hagerty, a skilled religion reporter, also talked to several others. Her interviews were broadcast as report on August 9, with Steve Inskeep of NPR as host.    Keep Reading...

Generation of Barbarians?

Robert Bork once famously said that the next invading barbarian army would be populated by our own children. Such a notion really doesn't seem so outlandish in the light of the increased riots perpetuated by the young, bored, immature generation of monsters that occupy large swaths of society (and evidently, especially English society) all over the world.

I don't mean to be alarmist, but it sort of appears that the barbarian invasion of England has begun, and my guess is that this generation of bored, violent, impulsive youngsters is not going away any time soon. I want to highly recommend this article from the UK Daily Mail by Max Hastings. You may not agree with everything in the article, but there is no question that Hastings has his finger on something here. The truth is, if I hadn't read this article this evening, I probably would have typed out something similar at a furious pace.

While you're at it, it wouldn't hurt to read this pessimistic little article from the Christian Research Journal from a few years ago.

I just want to make one observation as well, from a Natural Law perspective. Reading this article from Max Hastings causes me to reflect that all men - secular or religious - know that what is happening the world over is wrong. They can see that children have been raised to think of themselves as impulsive animals and responsible to no one, and now the price is being paid by society.

[An additional article that I would recommend is by Mike Ovey. Another one by Scott Stinson is quite unsettling, as well.] 

 

HT: Bring the Books