evangelist, creationist
1951
We observe things in the present and then, okay, we're assuming that that's always happened in the past, and we're going to figure out how this happened. You see? There is a difference between what you observed and what happened in the past.
You see, none of us saw the sandstone or the shale [of the Grand Canyon] being layed down. There's a supposed ten million year gap there, but I don't see a gap, but that might be different from what Bill Nye would see. But, you see, there's a difference between what you actually observe directly and then your interpretation in regard to the past.
The question of origins can’t be proven through experimentation—indeed, there is no absolute proof for either evolution or creation! But a creation geologist looks at the layers of rock and the fossil record and finds that much of it fits in the biblical framework of a catastrophic global Flood, not in the evolutionary model of slow erosion over millions of years.
Bible-believing Christians who oppose same-sex marriage are not discriminating against homosexual people—they are taking a stand on the authority of God’s Word. They are applying God’s holy standards—as recorded in the Bible—to correctly identify sin as sin. Homosexual behavior is sin. All sin is evil. People need to understand what sin is, and not justify it and dress it up as something good and acceptable.
I believe President Obama’s legacy will be one that, in many ways, is greatly responsible for aiding in the catastrophic “spiritual climate change” seen in the USA, which is also reverberating in other Western nations. And really, dealing with “climate change” should be the priority for all Christians, i.e., in helping to change the nation’s spiritual climate, as today we see the culture becoming more anti-Christian.
What President Obama is talking about—this idea that all faiths are equal, especially Islam and Christianity, and that all people serve God in some way—is a dangerous misconception. It is increasingly becoming common in our pluralistic and inclusive culture. But nothing could be farther from the truth. A quick study of God’s Word and key Christian doctrines makes it clear that Islam and Christianity are utterly incompatible.
Evolutionary Darwinists need to understand we are taking the dinosaurs back. This is a battle cry to recognize the science in the revealed truth of God.
Secularism, with its moral relativism, is in direct opposition to Christianity and its absolute morality. The battle is between these two worldviews—one that stands on God's Word and one that accepts man's opinions.
Did you know you can ask very simple questions to the scientists who claim that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago? You could say to them, in a very nice way of course, "Excuse me, were you there?" You are actually asking them, "Were you there to see the dinosaurs when they first came into existence? Were you there to see them alive? Were you there to see them die out?" Obviously, they weren't there, so how could they really know everything about them?
First, just because God took a rib from Adam to make Eve would not mean that all of Adam's male descendants would have one less rib. Remember, it's our genes that determine how many ribs a person will have... Second, remember from your biology that ribs "regenerate." In other words, Adam would've had his missing rib back quite quickly.
You see, Adam had a perfect brain. We don't, because our brain has suffered from thousands of years of sin and the curse. Frankly, we're nowhere near as intelligent as Adam was.
The answers from Genesis tell us that there was no death, bloodshed, disease, or suffering before sin. All these things are a consequence of sin. That's why Christians can't believe in millions of years for the fossil record - it's a horrible record of death, disease, and suffering, which couldn't have happened in the Garden before Adam fell.
It's important for Christians to understand that if this event of the forbidden fruit was not history, then the Fall itself would not be literal. This would also mean that Christ's death on the cross would be meaningless.
Today, many men are not the heads of their homes, which has led to many family problems. If husbands would get their answers from Genesis, they'd know that theirs is to be a headship role, and they're responsible for the rules God has given families.
No apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
Because of the effects of sin, mistakes have added up in the genes of humans so that today, deformities could result from close relatives marrying. Adam and Eve's children would have had relatively few mistakes in the genes compared to today. So, provided it was one man for one woman for life - there would not have been a problem at all for Cain to marry his sister!
Now Noah didn't need to take all the SPECIES of land animals on board- just representatives of the KINDS. In other words, he didn't need all the varieties of dogs - just two dogs that would give rise to numerous species in the new world after the flood. Calculations show that probably only around 16,000 animals were needed on board the ark.
Really, it's because people have been influenced by evolution that they think dinosaurs weren't on the ark. We need to get our ANSWERS from the Bible - not evolutionists!
Personally, I don't believe insects had to be on board [Noah's ark]. You see, I don't believe they're classified in the Bible as having the "breath of life" as vertebrates are.
Most of us tend to think of Noah as much less advanced than we are. Actually, the opposite would be true. We've had 4,500 more years of the effects of sin and the Curse on our brains. I'm convinced Noah would have had the intelligence necessary to devise methods of feeding and caring [for the animals on the ark] that would put today's farmer's to shame. If farmers today have methods that could easily allow eight people to look after 16,000 animals - I've no doubt Noah could do much more!
We've all heard of the word "dragon". Dragon legends are numerous around the world. Legends tell us that the Chinese bred dragons. Many of the descriptions of these "dragons" fit dinosaurs. Could the stories about dragons actually be accounts of encounters with what we now call dinosaurs?
Baryonyx is on display at the Natural History Museum in London. If you ever get the chance to view this wonderful specimen, remember that you just might be looking at the skeleton of one of the dragons from English history and legend (e.g., Sir George the Dragon Slayer) or one of the dragons spoken of in the Bible.
We can't always trust what we see in museums, but we can certainly ALWAYS trust what we read in the Bible.
There's NO life on Mars. There were NO feathers on the dinosaur. Cloning has absolutely nothing to do with evolution... NOTHING has been or ever will be found to contradict the Bible.
Christians should take a stand on six literal days, a young earth, and global flood even if it causes division. Either God means what He says, or we may as well not believe any of the Bible.
The Bible teaches clearly that compromise destroys! We need to return to the authority of God's Word and its answers.
When you look at nations today like England, in which great revivals occurred generations ago, there's very little vestige of Christianity left in public life. The Church, by and large, is dead, with only pockets of small Bible-believing churches struggling to make an impact on what's now a very pagan culture.
Evolution actually involves much more than life arising from non-life by natural means. Evolution really does away with God, and thus allows people to explain their existence without any supernatural being involved.
Many times I recall my father, with my mother and us children in tow, going up to the pastor after a service. With Bible in hand he would challenge the pastor about some of the things he said in his sermon, quoting Scriptures that resounded with the words "Thus said the Lord," or "It is written..."… (To this day, when I quote verses that contain these phrases, an image of my father confronting the liberal pastors pops into my mind!)
Yes, Dad was considered a "boat rocker," and he was prepared to make waves when necessary. He felt that if you needed to create a tsunami to make things right, then so be it. Sure, he cared about what people thought of him, he cared about them very much... but he cared about the Bible more. The Word of God was the foundation of his life. It was the air in his lungs and the blood in his veins. He never ceased to read it, contemplate it, apply it, and defend it.
Many Christians have been duped into accepting a false idea: that there is a 'neutral' position they can take in regard to social issues. Some Christians even accept the myth that the U.S. Constitution declares that there should be a separation of church and state. They are hesitant to inject Christian beliefs into politics. God's Word, however, makes it clear that there is no neutral position.
When it comes to biblical authority, the question of the age of the earth is just as vital as the question of whether evolution is true or not. The chronologies in the Bible and the length of the days of the Creation Week (they were 24 hours each) show that the earth is young. Why try to reinterpret the very clear teaching of Scripture to accommodate the fallible ideas of man that say the earth is old? Such reinterpretations undermine the authority of the Word of God.
I believe there is a gross misrepresentation in our culture. We're seeing people being indoctrinated to believe that Creationists can't be scientists. I believe it's all a part of secularists hijacking the word 'science'.
Creation is the only viable model of historical science confirmed by observational science in today's modern scientific era.
You don't observe the past directly, even when you think about the creation account. We can't observe God creating, we can't observe Adam and Eve: we admit that. We're willing to admit our beliefs about the past. But see, what you observe in the present is very different. Even some public school textbooks sort of acknowledge the difference between historical and observational science.