Did God Really Say…? Part 3

Ah, Science

As I mentioned two days ago, some Christian scholars claim they’re simply following the “science” when it comes to how old our universe/world is. They claim the “science” points to an old earth fashioned over billions of years, and that we should adhere to that “science,” leave Genesis alone, and just preach the Gospel.

And yet! “Science” will also say that the supernatural doesn’t exist, thus a non-existent God cannot become a man. “Science” will say that a virgin cannot become pregnant; that miracles don’t happen; that dead men can’t come back to life. So, why are we told to follow the “science” when it comes to the age of the earth but disregard “science” when it comes to Jesus as God’s Son, His virgin birth, and His death & resurrection?

And why do I put science in quotes? Because real science doesn’t actually say anything; scientists do. Did you know historical science cannot be replicated for testing? Did you know the different methods scientists use to date rocks and fossils yield different answers, thus they can’t conclude a “right” answer? Did you know rocks and fossils don’t come with their birth dates printed on them?

Regardless of how much scientific data someone were to show me, at the core of all the papers and books and conferences on macro/Darwinian evolution is man’s assumption that the world began billions of years ago. No matter how scientists go about calculating their date-settings, their mathematical findings, their archeological digs, the supposed “geological column,” etc., their answers are only as good as their foundations—and their foundations are based on assumptions, because (once again) mankind was not there at the start of the universe to know how it began. Therefore, science doesn’t point to an earth that is billions of years old; scientists do.

Now, someone could argue that young earth creationists base their beliefs on the assumption that the Bible is telling us the truth—and that someone would be correct! The difference, however, is that the Bible has stood the test of time—archeology, extra-biblical sources, historical texts, prophecy, and more all attest to the Bible’s accuracy and trustworthiness. Man’s word, on the other hand, has not stood the test of time.

Man’s word can barely stand the test of a few days. I can give you oodles of examples from the last three years in the United States of America alone that show just how far man and government will go to cover, discredit, censure, and outright lie about the truth to serve their own purposes. But I can also give you two examples from three seconds ago that attest to the folly of man’s word: “What is a woman?” and “A boy can become a girl.”

Just Scratching the Surface

I haven’t mentioned that whenever the Hebrew word yom (English: day) is combined with “evening” or “morning” or a number in the Bible, it’s always understood as a twenty-four-hour day. To paraphrase Ken Ham, God must have known man would try to explain away the “day” in Genesis 1, so He used all three modifiers: “evening” and “morning” and a number.

I haven’t gone into the fact that God said it was “good” after each day of Creation, yet if evolution is true, then death, disease, and weeds are not only “good,” they came before mankind, which means once again God discredits Himself, since He tells us in Genesis 3 that death, disease, and weeds are the result of Adam’s sin.

I haven’t “dived” into the account of the Global Flood, even though God hung the rainbow in the sky as a promise to Noah that He would never again destroy the world with a flood, but if the Flood was just a local thing and we’ve since had many local floods … then God didn’t keep His promise, did he? To say nothing of the fact that in both Matthew 24:37 and Luke 17:26, Jesus likens the days just before His Second Coming to the days of Noah, but how can He equate something that will happen to something that never happened and hope His audience understands the power and promise in His words?

I haven’t spotlighted the articles that claim to have found “missing links” over the years, but when analyzed, we learn people have either jumped to conclusions based on their previously held assumptions, created a picture of a supposed missing link based on a few scattered bone fragments, or straight up lied. According to Dr. Terry Mortenson, “Each of the following so-called ape-men have turned out to be either fully ape, fully man, or fully hoax:

• Lucy (Australopithecus afarensis) – fully ape
• Lucy’s “daughter” – fully ape
• Neanderthal – fully human
• Piltdown Man – hoax (50-year-old orangutan bones that were tampered intentionally mixed with 600-year-old human bones)
• Nebraska Man – hoax, built from the tooth of an extinct pig
• Boxgrove Man (1994–1995) everything found (two teeth, shin bone, stone tools) was clearly human, but the reconstruction showed a creature fully human from the neck down, but with an ape-like head.”

Not Necessary for Salvation

But do come back tomorrow for my final thoughts!

If you missed the earlier posts, you can find them here: Part 1, Part 2
Go to Part 4.