Want Some Answers ???

Hi Dale,

If you are so sure about the articles you email, can you answer a few questions?

The Bible says ‘God is good’ and in Genesis 1:31 God described His just finished Creation as ‘very good’. How do you understand the goodness of God if He used evolution, ‘nature red in tooth and claw’, to ‘create’ everything?

According to progressive creationist’s understanding, fossils (which show death, disease and bloodshed) were formed before people appeared on Earth. Doesn’t that mean that you can’t believe the Bible when it says that everything is in ‘bondage to decay’ because of Adam’s sin (Rom.8)? In your view, hasn’t the ‘bondage to decay’ always been there? And if death and suffering did not arise with Adam’s sin and the resulting curse, how can Jesus’ suffering and physical death pay the penalty for sin and give us eternal life, as the Bible clearly says (e.g. 1 Cor.15:22, For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all shall be made alive)?

If the Genesis accounts of Creation, the Fall, the origin of nations, the Flood and the Tower of Babel—the first 11 chapters—are not historical, although they are written as historical narrative and understood by Jesus to be so, what other unfashionable parts of the Bible do you discard? The Biblical account of creation in Genesis seems very specific with six days of creative activity, each having an evening and a morning. According to the evolutionary sequence, the Biblical order of creation is all wrong. Do you think God should have inspired an account more in keeping with the evolutionary order, the truth as you see it, if indeed He did use evolution or followed the evolutionary pattern in creating everything?

If the Genesis account does not mean what it plainly says Dale, but must be ‘interpreted’ to fit an evolutionary world, how are we to understand the rest of the Bible? How are we to know that the historical accounts of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection should not also be ‘reinterpreted’? Indeed, can we know anything for sure if the Bible can be so flexible?

Dr Niles Eldredge, well-known evolutionist, said: ‘Darwin . . . taught us that we can understand life’s history in purely naturalistic terms, without recourse to the supernatural or divine.’ (N. Eldredge, Time Frames—the Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, 1986, Heinemann, Lon, p.13.) Is it not philosophically inconsistent to marry God (theism) with evolution (naturalism)? If God ‘created’ using evolution which makes Him unnecessary, how can God’s ‘eternal power and divine nature’ be ‘clearly seen’ in creation, as Romans 1:20 says? Evolution has no purpose, no direction, no goal. The God of the Bible is all about purpose. How do you reconcile the purposelessness of evolution with the purposes of God? What does God have to do in an evolutionary world? Is not God an ‘unnecessary hypothesis’?

If God created over millions of years involving death, the existing Earth is not ruined by sin, but is as it always has been—as God supposedly intended it to be. So why then should He want to destroy it and create a new heavens and Earth (2 Peter 3 etc)?

Looking forward to your answers.

REPLIES -

Hi Dale, 

I get many emails from various cults. A few post articles, pages or books because they can't formulate ideas on paper that can withstand scrutiny. But others because they don’t want to be questioned. Their minds are made up and not interested what anybody says. They want people to believe, but without questions. Since you don't discuss your articles and have no explanation for the problems they raise, then perhaps you might be interested in this by Dr Gitt from his book 'Did God Use Evolution? (p.89-93).

>>Mark, Since half my Progressive Creation article is centred on knocking evolution I will treat this item with the distain it deserves. Direct it at evolutionists - not me. Regards, Dale<<

Then just what do you believe?  Do you believe in long ages. Is "morning and evening" one solar "day". You believe the 'million of years' but ignore the consequences. Did death exist before Adam and Eve? Yes or no?  Perhaps if you were more ready to explain what you believe?   This below is about "Progressive Creationism"  if not why not? Until you are willing to come out and say what you really do believe - then who knows what you believe? The consequences of Progressive Creation (mentioned below) are VERY serious!! If someone posted this to me, I need to do some explaining fast. Or at the very least do some serious thinking as to what I believe.

>>I'm sure you would like to arm wrestle Mark but 'm sticking to my guns. Swapping cut & pastes if fine. Detailed responses if far too time consuming.Christian regards, Dale <<

A policy that breeds confusion and doesn’t answer questions, with the impression you can’t do otherwise. Waste other people’s time posting them articles yes, defend the articles, no. Ask them to believe without question, yes, spend time explaining what you believe, no. 'A faith not worth defending is not worth believing'. 

When people write to me and avoid discussion, it’s because they hide what they believe and are shamed. I suspect you believe some weird stuff about the Bible and don't want it exposed. 'If something is true, it can stand to be questioned, if not, it needs to be questioned'. The truth might not matter to you Dale, but it matters to me.  If you don't discuss the articles you post and have no explanation for the problems they raise, it’s no wonder you think people want ‘to arm wrestle’......

There's no explanation (in the articles you sent) that indicates Ross doesn't corrupt the meaning of the Bible.  Read carefully (tell me it's not true of you) --- 

As soon as one allows millions of years for the fossil layers – then one has accepted death, bloodshed, disease, thorns and suffering before Adams sin. The Bible is clear that death, bloodshed, disease, thorns and suffering are a consequence of sin. God requires the shedding of blood for the remission of sins (Heb.9:22). For this reason Christ came (Jn.1:29). So the millions of years which the Progressive Creationists argue for, indicate that there was shedding of blood before sin. This destroys the foundation of the atonement and the message of the cross. A very serious matter!!. 

When witnessing to long ager's their world-view of vast ages makes the gospel is of no consequence. To them both past and future have unlimited time at their disposal. Even if they accept the concept of God, the long ages means we won't convince them of God’s love or the salvation message.  To them science and millions of years question the Bible right at the start.  The ‘millions of years’ control their thinking. So they believe Christ’s death is unimportant because death has been used by God (or Mother Nature) over millions of years of development.

Ross allows unscientific theories to interpret the Bible and taking a non-literal interpretation acceptable. He believes a whole host of weird things that only come from his mind. Do you stand with Ross? Then it’s no wonder you avoid discussion!! You certainly have a lot to explain.  Next time you write to the Challenge Weekly, think what Christians could write about you. Wow!!