WHERE WE STAND, AND WHY

by Brad T. Bromling

Brad T. Bromling graduated from the Memphis School

of Preaching, received his B.A. in Bible from Freed-

Hardeman College, and earned the M.A. in Religion

from the Alabama Christian School of Religion. He

serves as the Director of Biblical Research at

Apologetics Press.

Uncertainty! Modern man is drifting aimlessly upon the sea of

uncertainty. He is unsure about his origin, his purpose for existing,

and his destiny. In his bewilderment, he reaches for stability in

humanism, materialism, and scientism---not realizing that his efforts

are nothing more than a grasping for the wind. Sadly, many Christians

have failed to fortify their faith in this age of despair.

Consequently, the church has experienced the confusion of ignorance and

the damage of compromise. As a needed reaction, Apologetics Press was

begun, and continues to grow. Its purpose is to shine the beacon of

objective truth through the dense fog of spiritual chaos and guide

uncertain souls to the shore of true stability. For those who are

unfamiliar with our work, this article is designed to delineate where

we stand, and why.

APOLOGETICS

Apologetics Press has two major thrusts: apologetics and

creationism. These two are inextricably linked. Since creationism is

built upon the bedrock of apologetics, it is with this foundation that

we begin. Christian apologetics is the academic discipline concerned

with offering a reasoned defense of Christianity. The English word

"apology" is derived from the Greek `apologia,' which means to "defend"

or "make a defense." The New Testament employs the word in this way.

Two examples are noteworthy. Peter stressed the importance of a

rational foundation upon which to build saving faith when he exhorted

Christians:

But sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord: being ready

always to give answer (Greek---`apologian') to every man that

asketh you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, yet

with meekness and fear (I Peter 3:15).

Paul recognized this obligation and said he was "set for the

defense of the Gospel" (Philippians 1:16,17). His letters teem with

sound arguments which provide a rational undergirding for his readers'

faith.

The Christian Faith is not a vague, emotionally based belief-

structure designed for uncritical simpletons. It is a logical system of

thought which may be both defended and accepted by analytical minds.

This should not be taken to mean that one must be formally trained in

logic to understand the Gospel (for even children understand its basic

premises), but that Christianity is capable of rational defense. The

"case for Christianity" involves arguing for the existence of God, the

inspiration of the Bible, the deity of Jesus Christ, and the uniqueness

of Christianity as the one true religion of the one true God. Evidence

for each of these propositions may be briefly summarized as follows.

God Exists

First, belief in God's existence is warranted by a simple

acknowledgment of the principle of causation (i.e., every effect has an

adequate cause). The Universe is here---what is its cause? Since it is

a truism that no material thing can create itself , the Universe must

have a cause which is greater than, and prior to, it. An examination of

the world around man reveals intelligent and intricate design. Design

demands a designer, and the world's design demands the existence of a

Designer. Even the Bible argues from cause to effect: "For every house

is builded by someone; but he that built all things is God" (Hebrews

3:4). Nature's testimony alone is sufficient to lead one to belief in a

Creator (Psalm 19:1,2; 14:1). In fact, the evidence is so compelling

that man has no excuse for unbelief (Romans 1:19,20). Further, the

moral faculty of man is an effect which requires a cause. Since, among

Earth's life forms man alone is a moral creature, there must be a cause

which resides beyond the reach of this material world; hence God must

exist.

The Bible Is God's Word

Second, accepting that God exists leads one to inquire as to

whether or not God would communicate with man. If God has any

information which mankind needs, it stands to reason that He would

reveal it in the form of permanent human communication (i.e., through

the written word). This being true, it is appropriate to examine the

Bible to see if it qualifies as a book from God. There are several

things which we might reasonably expect of a divine volume. The Bible

not only meets such expectations (e.g., it claims divine authorship, it

exhibits miraculous harmony, it is absolutely flawless and timeless,

etc.), but actually exceeds them. The Bible is replete with examples

of fulfilled prophecy and scientific foreknowledge---factors which

elevate it far above any book of mere human invention. Paul said, "All

scripture is given by inspiration of God (literally, "God-breathed"---

BB), and is profitable..." (II Timothy 3:16); when investigated

honestly, the truth of this claim is obviated.

Jesus Is Divine

Third, belief in the deity of Jesus Christ is mandated by an

impressive battery of evidence. Some of this proof comes in the form of

fulfilled prophecies (over three hundred). Much of Christ's biography

was written by the prophets hundreds of years before He was born in

Bethlehem. This proves He was, and remains, all He claimed. The

miracles of Christ also confirm His deity. John wrote, "Many other

signs [miraculous works---<MS>BB'] therefore did Jesus in the presence

of the disciples...but these are written, that ye may believe that

Jesus is the Christ, the son of God..." (John 20:30,31). One of the

most impressive miracles involving Jesus was His resurrection. Not only

did it occur precisely as predicted by David (cf. Acts 2:22-36; Psalm

16:8-11), and Jesus Himself (e.g., Matthew 20:18,19), but His

resurrected form was seen by over five hundred witnesses (I Corinthians

15:4-8)! By this miracle Christ's deity was demonstrated with power

(Romans 1:4).

Christianity: The One True Religion

Fourth, Christianity's distinctive position (as the only religion

approved by God) is substantiated overwhelmingly by the New Testament.

Since Jesus truly possesses all authority (Matthew 28:18), it stands to

reason that His religion is the only one divinely authorized. Jesus

spoke of building His church (Matthew 16:18), that church is His body

(Ephesians 1:22,23), and there is only one body (Ephesians 4:4). The

suggestion that man is free to "choose his own way" to God is an insult

to the One who died for the sins of the whole world (John 1:29; 3:16;

14:6).

Although these propositions are important individually, their

significance is strongest when taken collectively. This is seen when

they are viewed negatively. Namely, if God does not exist, the Bible

cannot be His Word. If the Bible is not God's Word , Jesus' identity

and mission is a mystery, and Christianity is no more essential than

any man-made system of thought.

CREATIONISM

It is only upon the foundation of apologetics that a viable case

for creationism may be built. Without this base, creationism cannot

stand. "Creationism" may be defined as the school of thought which

takes the biblical account of creation seriously, and at face value. It

views the early chapters of Genesis as the reliable record of the

origin of the material universe, and of the life it contains. There are

at least three primary tenets of creationism:(1)the universe was

created by Divine fiat;(2)the Earth is relatively young; and(3)the

Flood described in Genesis 6-8 was global in extent. These items are

not nonessential, negotiable doctrines which one may accept or reject

at will. They are either true or false---it matters which.

Creation vs. Evolution

There are basically two views of origins: (1) God created

everything; or (2) life evolved from non-living matter and continues to

evolve into varied life forms. These views are locked in an eternal

struggle, and illustrate the dichotomy between theism (belief in God)

and atheism (rejection of belief in God). Granted, a compromise is

often attempted, but the hybrid belief (theistic evolution) is an

illegitimate child rejected by both parents. Evolution knows nothing of

God, and Christians cannot accept a theory which only calls upon God to

temporarily fill gaps until they can be filled with data gained by

empirical inquiry. Further, God told us that He created everything

("In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"--Genesis 1:1)

how He did it ("he spoke and it was done; he commanded and it stood

fast"---Psalm 33:9), and when He did it (the biblical evidence for a

young Earth is both obvious and overwhelming). To accept evolution, or

the compromise of theistic evolution, is to reject God's testimony and

count His Word as untrue. If a man cannot believe God's Word concerning

creation, how can he be sure it has the truth on salvation?

The Young Earth

Views regarding the age of the Earth are shaped by essentially two

factors: philosophy and interpretation. The evolutionist approaches the

world with a belief that evolution has occurred (his philosophy), and

interprets the data in accordance with that belief. He accepts two

things: (1) evolution requires vast amounts of time to work; and (2)

evolution has occurred. One would not measure the ocean with a

micrometer, nor would the evolutionist attempt to measure what he is

"positive" is an ancient Earth with dating methods which produce a

young age (e.g., a few thousand years). The creationist approaches the

same data with a belief in recent creation (his philosophy), and

interprets the data accordingly. The difference between these two

approaches is that the latter has a rational foundation, while the

former does not. It defies logic to view the obvious design of the

universe and reject belief in a Designer; and it is irrational to

reject the only written record of creation (authored by the Creator

Himself), in favor of a theory of origins based upon atheism. That

record leaves no doubt about the time and duration of Creation. "For

in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in

them is..." (Exodus 20:11).

The Global Flood

The Flood of Genesis 6-8 has been attacked repeatedly, and rejected

as impossible by those who view miracles as superstition. But, the

global Flood is important to creationism for two reasons. First, its

universal extent is taught plainly in Scripture---and that must be

respected. Second, it answers a great many questions regarding the

Earth's geologic history. Much of what evolutionists believe about the

age of the Earth is based upon the assumption that current processes

(e.g., erosion from wind and rain) have remained relatively constant

throughout time. However, since a global Flood (of the magnitude

described in Genesis 7,8) could accomplish more in one year than could

countless seasons of wind and rain, calculations of the Earth's age

would be wholly meaningless if they failed to factor-in such a

catastrophe.

CONCLUSION

Each of these tenets is important because it is mandated by Scripture,

and confirmed by reason. While it is unpopular in many circles to

affirm creationism, it is irrational to do otherwise. Apologetics

Press, standing upon the solid bedrock of Christian apologetics and

affirming the tenets of creationism, is seeking to provide a logical

defense of Christianity. In this age of increasing atheism and

uncertainty, it is a work which is needed now more than ever!

 

 

 

 

 

AN INTRODUCTION TO APOLOGETICS PRESS

[Editors' Note: With this issue, Apologetics Press

celebrates ten years of publishing Reason & Revelation.

On this occasion we are departing from our normal format

to produce a special issue. Next month we will return to

the regular format of four pages. The articles which

follow are intended to introduce you to the work of

Apologetics Press, and those associated with it. We hope

you enjoy this tenth anniversary edition.]

Bert Thompson earned the Ph.D. in microbiology from Texas

A&M University. He is a former professor in the College

of Veterinary Medicine at Texas A&M, where he also served

as Coordinator of the Cooperative Education Program in

Biomedical Science. He is Professor of Bible and Science

at the Alabama Christian School of Religion.

BEGINNING---A DECADE AGO

The idea for the work in which we are now involved dates to the

late 1970's, when Wayne Jackson and Bert Thompson met and discovered

their mutual interest in the field of Christian apologetics. As a

strong friendship developed, it became evident to both of them that

there was a vital need for sound, scholarly materials in this area---

materials which could be used both to strengthen the faith of the

Christian and to convert the non-Christian. A distinct void existed

among the churches of Christ in regard to the availability of

scripturally sound, scientifically accurate materials on apologetics.

Accordingly, plans were laid which would result ultimately in the work

known as Apologetics Press. In late 1979 the necessary legal steps were

begun which would allow the work to be recognized as strictly non-

profit by both State and Federal governments. Then, in 1980-81 the

Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) recognized the work as a non-profit,

tax-exempt entity.

REASON & REVELATION

There were many among the churches of Christ who shared our dream,

and who wanted to assist in the production of materials in apologetics.

With their support, and a shoestring budget, we began preparing and

publishing materials in this much-neglected field. In January, 1981 the

premier issue of our monthly journal on Christian evidences, Reason &

Revelation, was mailed. This paper has always served as our "flagship"

publication. Originally the paper was produced in a 7 x 8" inch format

with four pages of text, and cost $2.00 for a year's subscription. In

1983 the format was changed to 8" x 11 inches, making for better

readability. The cost was then set at $3.00 per year, and has remained

at that rate ever since. Over time, the mailing list grew to almost

4,000 in number. In 1988 it was suggested that we somehow provide (in

addition to our regular-length, fully-documented articles) shorter,

strictly Bible-related articles on apologetics which could be

reproduced in church bulletins, printed in newspapers, and used in

other similar projects. We believed this was an excellent idea, and in

January, 1989 `Reasoning from Revelation' was born. This smaller

journal now accompanies each issue of `Reason & Revelation'---at no

extra cost. It has always been our intention to produce a journal which

is scholarly (biblically and scientifically), inexpensive, and aimed at

the "man on the street." As we enter our tenth year of publication, we

hold fast to that concept.

Because of the relevance and timeliness of the issues discussed in

the pages of `Reason & Revelation', it was decided that every two years

those articles would be placed in a more permanent form under the title

of `Essays in Apologetics'. To date, we have produced four such books

(1981/82; 1983/84; 1985/86; 1987/88). Others will be added every two

years.

OTHER PUBLICATIONS

As time passed, the growth of Apologetics Press was nothing short

of phenomenal. We introduced our "Manuscript Referral Service," which

provides monographs on a variety of topics in apologetics. Today there

are over 60 titles available. In 1983 we introduced our new `Study

Course in Christian Evidences,' a series of 13 written lessons suitable

for use either in Bible classes or as a correspondence course.

Simultaneously, we began to publish tracts on a variety of topics such

as God's existence, the Bible's inspiration, the deity of Christ, and

creation/evolution. We now publish over 50 tracts, and have many more

in preparation. By 1984 we were heavily involved in producing audio

tapes as well. Today we have over 80 titles covering such topics as

genetic engineering, current issues in evolution, situation ethics,

scientific foreknowledge of the Bible, and many others. In mid-1988 we

produced an entire `Study Course in Christian Evidences' on video tape,

complete with 33 lessons of 38-minutes each, suitable for use both in

Bible class settings and personal study. In addition, we also have

available the "That You May Believe... series. Each of these books is

24-48 pages in length, and covers a single topic. Currently there are

six titles available; others are in various stages of production.

Another project resulting from readers' comments is our new offering of

`Reason & Revelation' on audio tape for the sight-impaired. Effective

January, 1989 all issues of the journal are professionally read onto

audio tapes, which are made available at cost.

As we begin the tenth year of `Reason & Revelation', we are now

pleased to introduce another new journal. One of the most neglected

areas in the field of apologetics has been in regard to materials for

young children. We, however, purposed not just to "curse the darkness"

but to "light a lamp," as the old saying goes. January, 1990 marks the

publication of the premier issue of our new paper of Bible and science

for kids---"Discovery". Each day our children must face the onslaught

of an unbelieving world as it presents its views through public

schools, news media, and other influential sources. We believe our

children need to see "the rest of the story."`Discovery' intends to

present just that---and in a format designed to reach our children

through the use of larger print, eye-catching colors, beautiful

illustrations, etc. We believe this is not just an idea whose time has

come; we believe it is an idea whose time is long overdue.

ANNUAL SUMMER SEMINAR

In addition to our published materials, we also felt that it would

be wise to provide personal instruction in apologetics for those

desiring additional "meat" in this area. In July, 1987 we held our

first annual summer seminar on Christian evidences. Each year's program

has been a four-day, intense period of study; each has been filled to

capacity; and each has been a resounding success.

BEAUTIFUL PHYSICAL PLANT

As the years passed, and as growth occurred in what seemed

geometric progression, many changes occurred in the work. Surely one of

the most important came in 1985. From 1979-1983 the work of Apologetics

Press was housed (literally) in our living rooms. In the summer of

1983, we rented office space. Then, in 1985 Apologetics Press moved

into its own new, 11,000 square foot, two-story building in Montgomery,

Alabama. Because of the dedication of so many people who assisted this

work financially in such a faithful and sacrificial way, the new

building was built without having to borrow any funds from lending

institutions, or having to pay a single penny in interest. There is no

mortgage on the building, which was built at a total cost of $264,881

(or $24.08 per square foot). Those who have seen it firsthand will

readily tell you that it is a beautiful facility, built for many years

of service.

OUR FINANCES---AN OPEN BOOK

From the very beginning, we have tried to be extremely diligent

about being good stewards of monies entrusted to us. All funds received

are used for the publication and distribution of additional materials.

The only salaries that have ever been paid from incoming funds have

been for secretarial staff. Professional staff members have never taken

salaries from funds given to Apologetics Press. Since our inception we

have published public financial statements (at first quarterly, and now

semi-annually), which are distributed through the pages of `Reason &

Revelation'. Our financial books are overseen on a yearly basis by a

professional firm of certified public accountants, which also submits

to the I.R.S. all necessary forms, as required by law. It is of vital

importance to us that our supporters know how their funds are being

spent.

ADDITIONAL STAFF

In June of 1986, it was with great pleasure that we announced the

addition to our staff of Trevor J. Major, who had just arrived from New

Zealand after completing degrees in geology. Trevor was originally

designated as our Director of Research, a position which he occupied

for two years. The work load, however, necessitated the addition of yet

another man only two years later. Since Trevor's training was in

science, we felt it wise to add someone with training in religion so as

to "even out" the staff. We believe such balance is essential to the

well-being of the work as a whole. In June of 1988, we announced the

addition of Brad T. Bromling, who came to us from Lindale, Georgia.

Brad has six years of preaching experience and holds degrees in Bible.

He was employed as Director of Biblical Research. Trevor was then

reassigned as Director of Scientific Research, and handles

correspondence and other duties associated with the scientific aspects

of our work. Brad handles correspondence and other duties which relate

directly to biblical matters, and is serving as the editor of both

`Reasoning from Revelation' and `Discovery'.

CONCLUSION

The future looks especially bright for the work of Apologetics

Press. But let us give credit where credit is due. First, we are

grateful to the Lord Who, through His providence, has richly blessed us

in so many ways. Second, of course, we are grateful to those who have

sacrificed financially down through the years so that this work could

flourish and succeed. Third, we are grateful to those who have assisted

us in ways other than financially, through their volunteer work, their

recommendation of the work to others, or their prayers.

We hope you will enjoy this special double issue of `Reason &

Revelation'. We invite your attention to the articles which follow. If

we may assist you in any way, please call on us. We are here to serve.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE MODERN CREATION SCIENCE MOVEMENT

Trevor J. Major received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees

in Earth Sciences from the University of Waikato in

New Zealand. He also earned an M.A. degree in

religion from the Alabama Christian School of Religion,

and serves as the Director of Scientific Research at

Apologetics Press.

Apologetics Press is a relative newcomer to the worldwide

creationism movement, which itself has fairly recent origins. What,

then, makes the modern creationism movement so special? There are,

perhaps, two important differences between modern creationism, and

creationism of old. First, modern creationism draws extensively on

knowledge from many scientific disciplines. This was not necessary,

say, in the eighteenth century, when the majority in academia saw no

conflict between science and a belief in God. However, attitudes

changed dramatically as a result of the Age of Enlightenment and the

Industrial Revolution. The natural and the supernatural became

irreconcilably detached, and science and technology were seen as man's

salvation.

By the beginning of the twentieth century, evolution had attained

preeminence in intellectual circles; meanwhile, "mainline"

denominations openly compromised the Genesis record. As a result, many

outspoken "creationists" in this period were proponent s of either the

gap or day-age theories. One exception was George McCready Price---a

self-taught geologist, Seventh-Day Adventist, and literal creationist.

From 1902 to 1956, Price published numerous works attacking evolution

through criticism of prevailing geological theories (McIver, 1988, pp

215-221). By the early 1940's, Price and his contemporaries had

assembled the majority of arguments used in creationism today.

In this milieu of religious change came the famous trial of John

Thomas Scopes in 1925. The Scopes trial was really a struggle over the

right of devout Bible-believers to safeguard the spiritual education of

their children in state schools. Thanks to the media's portrayal of the

trial, creationism became an unacceptable alternative to evolutionism.

By default, neo-Darwinism was made the official curriculum of origins

education in the public education system. Following the Scopes trial,

creationism went largely underground, retreating into the homes and

churches of conservative Bible believers.

This situation changed with the Second World War, and the space

race of the fifties and sixties. These events elevated the status of

science, underscored the need for better science education, and led to

greater involvement by the government in major science activities. One

agency, the National Science Foundation, helped to sponsor the

Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS). Beginning in 1960, the

BSCS produced a series of comprehensive high school textbooks on

biology. These books played a strategic role in making organic

evolution the central theme of biological science. They also awakened

many people from their apathy toward the Creation, and emphasized the

need for increased scientific content in creationism.

Committed creationists found themselves increasingly at odds with

the scientific, educational, and governmental establishments. They

needed a way to disseminate information, and present a unified front

against evolutionism. This was achieved through the formation of

creationist organizations---thus creating the second distinction

between creationism of today and of yesteryear. While a few groups

existed in the first half of the century, the most influential

organizations have been formed in the last thirty years (e.g., Creation

Research Society, 1963; Bible-Science Association, 1964; and Institute

for Creation Research, 1972).

Other organizations have since proliferated, as have the number of

books and periodicals on the subject. Of all these writings, perhaps

the most influential has been `The Genesis Flood' (Whitcomb and Morris,

1961). The book arrived in the early sixties---a critical time in

creationism---and allowed Bible-believers to read a full, well-written,

accessible defense of the Creation, the Flood, and a young Earth.

Creationism's low profile soon changed as outspoken religious

people were provoked into action by the increasing dominance of

evolutionism. As in the Scopes case, the issue centered on the right

of these concerned individuals to determine the spiritual welfare of

children entrusted to the care of state schools. What followed was an

attempt to legislate either creationism into the classroom, or

evolutionism out of the classroom. The Louisiana and Arkansas Balanced

Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Acts (both 1981),

were two noteworthy attempts. Eventually, all such acts were struck

down as unconstitutional.

In the wake of the court battles, many creationists remain adamant

that creationism should be taught alongside evolutionism in public

schools. However, a growing number of creationists question the wisdom

of this "two-model" approach which, despite its good intentions,

downplays belief in God, and naively expects all teachers to present

both sides fairly (Jackson, 1988). Still others are advocating home

schooling, thus bypassing the issue of teaching origins in public

school classrooms altogether. Whatever the outcome of efforts in public

schools, the ultimate responsibility for teaching about the Creator

will reside, as always, with the family and with the church.

The increased prominence of creationism has created a backlash

among evolutionists and humanists. Their main thrust is to keep

creationism out of public schools, and to diminish its impact on

society in general. Like modern creationists, committed evolutionists

form vociferous special interest groups, and publish many periodicals

and books advocating their cause.

The primary tactic of evolutionists is to deprive creationism of

any scientific basis. They suggest that the term "creation science" is

an oxymoron---a contradiction in terms. Creationism, they object, uses

religious concepts, is not empirically testable, is a dogmatic biblical

doctrine and thus not subject to rejection as part of the scientific

method, and critiques evolution while having no positive evidence in

its favor. These complaints have been addressed elsewhere (e.g.,

Moreland, 1989, pp 221-234). The point is, creationism uses science and

the Bible in discovering the origins of life and the world.

Evolutionism also uses science to build an origins framework but,

unlike creationism, restricts itself to purely natural causes (Geisler

and Anderson, 1987, p 128).

Further, evolutionists do not want creationists involved in

evolutionary debates. If fellow evolutionists want to discuss the

substance of evolution, then this is acceptable. However, if

creationists intrude on this debate and "steal" some of the dialogue to

attack the fact of evolution, then this is not acceptable. For example,

Stephen Jay Gould often critiques various doctrines of neo-Darwinian

evolution in the process of promoting punctuated equilibrium. Not

surprisingly, these discussions provide plenty of fodder for the

creationists' assault on evolution. It is no less wonder that Gould is

quite caustic in his treatment of creationists, often prefacing any

critical remarks on evolution with a cursory swipe at creationism.

Another favorite tactic is to undermine the credibility of

creationists, many of whom have respectable scientific degrees and

qualifications. Such credentials have greatly influenced the acceptance

of creationism. But anti-creationists wish to downplay any connection

between scientific ability and reliability. For example, Lewis Jones

tries to separate "Science-2" specialists (those who operate with the

"nuts and bolts" of science), and "Science-1" thinkers (those who are

capable of rational problem-solving). In his view, rocket scientist

Wernher von Braun was a great Science-2 person, but his belief in

Special Creation excludes him from Science-1 ranking (Jones, 1989, p

60). In response, it must simply be recognized that a search for the

truth transcends such arbitrary distinctions.

Not all criticisms of creationists by evolutionists are unfounded.

It would be foolish to insist that `The Genesis Flood' should remain

unchanged and unchallenged forever. There is a dire need for

creationists to expand their empirical basis, and to update and refine

their scientific arguments. Fortunately, rigorous scientists like

Charles Thaxton are restating the philosophical approach. Others are

contributing solid scientific research, like John Woodmorappe's work on

fossils, and John Baumgardner's simulations of geological changes

during the Flood.

As Director of Scientific Research at Apologetics Press, the

preceding issues are of special interest to me. Yet there are other

problems of a more immediate and practical concern. First, there is the

increasing complexity of scientific discussions. If all arguments

could use the same body of knowledge familiar to George McCready Price,

then teaching on origins would be far less difficult. As it is, the

face of science has changed radically in the last fifty years or so. On

average, scientific information becomes outdated every six months.

Thus, there is the potential to invalidate an argument by ignoring

recent scientific discoveries and changes in evolutionary thinking.

Anyone who desires to teach on this subject must be prepared to handle

e new information and, more especially, be prepared to revise his

material, discarding some of it if necessary.

Second, there is the tendency of zealous creationists to leap

prematurely on bits of information which seem to support their beliefs.

Paul Bartz expressed the idea well when he wrote, "many Christians

grasp, with more eagerness than critical evaluation, any straw which

seems to be offered in favor [of] the biblical history. As a result,

Christians have not been as critical as they might have been about

certain lines of evidence" (1990, p 3).

The goal of Apologetics Press for the nineties, as it has been for

the last decade, is to disseminate the best information possible on

creation science, and apologetics in general. In so doing, the

literature will be scoured, and the origins controversy will be

monitored. This work will make every attempt to defend Christianity

till the year 2000 and beyond. We invite you to join us in our efforts

to proclaim the name of the Creator.

 

REFERENCES

Bartz, Paul A. (1990), "Origins is a Religious Issue," `Bible-Science

Newsletter', 28[1]:3.

Geisler, Norman L. and J. Kirby Anderson (1987), `Origin Science'

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House).

Jackson, Wayne (1988), "Reflections on the Recent Supreme Court

Decision," `Reason & Revelation', 7:31,32.

Jones, Lewis (1989), "The Two Cultures: A Resurrection," `The

Skeptical Inquirer', 14[1]:57-64.

McIver, Tom (1988), `Anti-Evolution: An Annotated Bibliography'

(Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company).

Moreland, J.P. (1989), `Christianity and the Nature of Science' (Grand

Rapids, MI: Baker Book House).

Whitcomb, John C. and Henry M. Morris (1961), `The Genesis Flood'

(Grand Rapids, MI: Presbyterian & Reformed).

 

 

 

 

 

 

APOLOGETICS AND CREATIONISM---THEIR IMPORTANCE

Wayne Jackson, who earned the M.A. in Religion from the

Alabama Christian School of Religion, is the minister

for the East Main Church of Christ in Stockton, California.

He serves with Bert Thompson as co-editor of `Reason &

Revelation', and has edited the `Christian Courier' for

twenty-five years.

More than 3,000 years ago, Moses, armed with divine credentials,

walked into the stately presence of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and

demanded: "Thus saith Jehovah, the God of Israel, let my people go...."

Amazingly, the monarch replied: "Who is Jehovah, that I should hearken

unto his voice to let Israel go? I know not Jehovah..." (Exodus 5:1,2).

There are numerous souls of this age who proudly boast of being the

spiritual descendants of that ancient pagan king. To some, unbelief is

a mark of intellectual sophistication in a world enamored by philosophy

and science. Some boldly proclaim that faith in an Almighty God should

be relegated to the realm of superstition---it makes for nice fairy

tales, but is good for little else. In our day of ever-increasing

animosity toward God specifically, and religion in general, it is

deemed in some circles as poor judgment at best, and outright

foolishness at worst, to proclaim---much less defend---a belief in the

God of the Bible. Two questions obviously arise: (1) Why is this the

case; and (2) What, if anything, can be done about it?

CAUSES OF UNBELIEF

No doubt there are numerous reasons for the seemingly widespread

disbelief in, and antagonism toward, God. Some have a deep-seated

disdain for any kind of authority figure. One of the most dangerous

contributions a parent can make toward the spiritual delinquency of his

child is a failure to instill within him a wholesome respect for

authority. If the parent neglects to set the proper example as an

authority figure, or refuses to exercise discipline with love, he may

be rejected as an authority figure by the child, and thus by

transference the child may eventually come to disdain all authority,

including the supreme Authority, God. Disbelief in the goodness of

life, skepticism about humanity in general, and the denial of God all

sink their roots in the soil of emotion long before exposure to courses

in philosophy and science.

Another attitude which facilitates disbelief is an unhealthy lust

for power wrapped in a cloak of pride. German philosopher Friedrich

Nietzsche, who eventually went insane, once exclaimed: "If there were

gods, how could I endure it to be no god?" Faith in Jehovah simply

cannot abide in a heart so saturated with inordinate pride. A third

motivation for the rejection of God is the desire to be free of any and

all moral restraints. Aldous Huxley, the famed author and atheist, once

openly admitted that he rejected belief in God because it interfered

with his sexual freedom! Unbelievers speciously reason: If there is a

God, I must be morally responsible to Him. I will not be so restrained.

Thus, there is no God! The wickedness of man causes him to try to

rationalize his situation. King David pinpointed the problem centuries

ago when he exclaimed, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no

God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works; There is none

that doeth good" (Psalm 14:1). Dr. Wilbur M. Smith, in his classic

work, `Therefore Stand!', has noted: "One of the reasons why men refuse

to accept the Christian Faith is because the very principles of their

lives are in every way contradictory to the ethical principles of the

Bible, and, determined to remain in the lawlessness of their own

sensuality, they could not possibly embrace a holy religion nor walk

with a holy God, nor look for salvation to His holy Son, nor have any

love for His holy Word" (Smith, 1974, p 170).

Occasionally one may turn to atheism because his faith in someone

who professes to be a devotee of God has been shattered. Truly,

"confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken

tooth, and a foot out of joint" (Proverbs 25:19). While we may

certainly recognize the pain of witnessing the failure of someone in

whom we have trusted, we must also recognize that it is sheer folly to

blame Deity for the blunders of humanity. "It is better to take refuge

in Jehovah than to put confidence in man" (Psalm 118:8). Human

suffering has also been used as an excuse by man not to believe in God.

The atheist sees undeniable suffering, and assumes that no loving, kind

God such as the Bible depicts could ever allow this to occur. All the

while the atheist fails to examine the reason(s) behind the suffering,

or the purposes which suffering can have. We have dealt at length with

this elsewhere (Jackson, 1982), and do not have the space here to

provide an extensive rebuttal. But Scripture provides an answer to the

problems of evil, pain, and suffering and in so doing shows us that

God's existence is not impugned by such.

Undoubtedly one of the greatest obstacles to a modern-day faith in

God is the view that "science" has made such a faith obsolete. Science

has become a sacred cow and the laboratory a "holy of holies." While we

would not denigrate for a moment the great strides which science has

made (and continues to make), and while we gratefully acknowledge all

that we owe to science, it is likewise right and proper to admit that

science owes everything to God! But in an era when science has sent men

to the moon, eradicated smallpox, and unraveled the very mystery of

DNA as the "stuff of life," it is easy for man to feel smug and self-

sufficient in his scientific knowledge. Add to that self-sufficiency

the ever-increasing popularity of evolutionary thought---which says

that there is no God and that man has no master but himself---and it

becomes clear that one of the greatest obstacles to belief in God is

the pseudoscience of evolution as it is so masterfully foisted upon the

minds of men in this age.

THE TASK BEFORE US

But what can be done about all of this? Is it time to quietly

throw up our hands in despair? Must we simply sit idly by and allow the

"god of this world" (II Corinthians 4:4) to win the day? Hardly! There

is something that each of us can do. Paul, in Philippians 1:16,17,

specifically stated that he was "set for the defense of the gospel"---

which certainly implies that the gospel can be defended! And we must

defend it, for it is most assuredly under attack. Of primary

importance in this battle are these facts: (1) We are God's people. If

we do not proclaim and defend His Word, who will? (2) God has given us

the tools for this defense. Those tools reside both in His Word (II

Timothy 3:16,17) and in His creation (Romans 1:20,21). Proper use of

these tools, however, is ultimately our responsibility. (3) If we do

not adequately employ the various evidences which provide proof of

God's existence as Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Genesis

1:1ff), men will continue in their unbelief, and as a result will

reject His Son and the salvation He came to offer (Romans 6:23).

Suddenly, then, our defense (Greek, `apologia') of creation and of

Christianity becomes inseparable. One can hardly defend the Gospel

system without acknowledging (and defending) God's sovereignty in

creation. One cannot effectively proclaim that man fell from a covenant

relationship with his Creator, and is therefore desperately in need of

salvation from sin, until the fact is first established that there was

a Creation and a Fall.

The importance of the Creator/creation concept cannot be

overemphasized. In fact, the Lord Himself made that point clear in His

discussion in Matthew 19 (cf. Mark 10). In the context of responding to

the hypocritical Pharisees of His generation, Jesus pointedly asked:

"...Have ye not read [citing from Genesis 1:27---WJ] that he who made

them from the beginning made them male and female?"(vs. 4). Here Christ

plainly affirmed that: (1) there was a beginning; (2) the first couple

was made; (3) they were male and female. When Christ spoke of Adam and

Eve being "made," He used the aorist Greek verb `epoiesen', stressing

the fact that this pair was made by single acts of creation. Had the

Lord subscribed to the notion that the first humans evolved over vast

ages of time, He would have employed the Greek imperfect tense, which

is designed to emphasize progressive action at some time in the past.

Thus Christ actually verbally refuted the concept of evolutionary

development. And He was certainly in a position to know what took place

in the beginning, for He was there (John 1:1ff) and was the active

agent in creation (Colossians 1:16). When men attempt to dismiss Adam

as merely a fictional character, they place Jesus in an exceedingly

unfavorable light. Indeed, Adam and Christ stand or fall together, for

the Lord said: "If ye believed Moses, ye would believe me; for he wrote

of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my

words?" (John 5:46,47).

Additionally, inspired writers of the New Testament made doctrinal

arguments which depended upon the historical validity of the Genesis

account. Paul acknowledged that woman is of (`ek'---a Greek preposition

meaning "out of") man (I Corinthians 11:8,12). He called Adam and Eve

by name in I Timothy 2:13. The apostle considered Adam as historical as

Moses (Romans 5:14), and clearly stated that "...the serpent deceived

Eve by his craftiness" (II Corinthians 11:3). In Romans 1:20 Paul

wrote: "For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world

are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made,

even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without

excuse...." The point could hardly be any clearer. The power and deity

of the Creator have been perceived and observed since the creation of

the world! Interestingly, the Greek word Paul employed for "perceived"

is the word `noeo', which is used in the New Testament for rational,

human perception. Thus, someone (human) had been perceiving the things

that were made "since the creation of the world." This flies in the

face of everything evolution teaches. The Lord and His inspired writers

affirmed that man has been here "since the beginning of the creation."

Evolutionists affirm that man is a "Johnny-come-lately" who has been

here only 3-4 million years out of an alleged Earth history of 4.6

billion years. A choice must be made: do we accept and defend the

Creator and His narrative of what He did, or do we accept and defend

the man-made theory of evolution, which has as its ultimate purpose a

repudiation of God's existence?

Who could ever even begin to imagine the numbers of people who have

either lost their faith in God, or who have been prevented from coming

to Him in humble obedience in the first place, because of the seeds of

unbelief planted at a tender young age, watered by the fountains of

infidelity, and fertilized by the false theories of a disillusioned

generation? Would we have ever believed that in America, where 60 years

ago the teaching of evolution was forbidden in public schools, the

teaching of creation would be prohibited? Would we have ever believed

that we would lose 60-80% of our young people after they leave for

college? Would we have ever believed that this so-called "Christian

nation" would be murdering by abortion well over 1.5 million innocent,

unborn children every year? Yet all of this, and much more, has come to

be.

"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do

nothing." Will we "do nothing"? Or will we rise to the challenge? If we

are as unashamed of biblical truth as Paul was (Romans 1:16), and if we

believe that it is "the power of God unto salvation to all them that

believe," then our defense and proclamation of it must be as fervent,

and as effectual, as that presented in the Scriptures. That is the aim

of our work at Apologetics Press. We are diligently attempting to

proclaim, and defend, the Holy Scriptures. We are "set for the defense"

of that soul-saving message. Won't you join hands with us in this

defense? History is waiting on us!

 

REFERENCES

Jackson, Wayne (1982), "Does Human Suffering Disprove the Existence of

a Benevolent God?," `Reason & Revelation,' 2[4]:13-15.

Smith, Wilbur M. (1974), `Therefore Stand!' (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker

Book House).

 

 

 

 

This file may be copied, but is distributed on the understanding that

it will not be modified or edited, and will not be used for commercial

purposes. Further, it may not be copied without due reference to the

original publication source, author, year, and name and address of the

publisher.

 

Apologetics Press

230 Landmark Drive

Mongomery, AL 36117-2752

 

 

Downloaded from:

The Christian Connection of Palm Beach

300/1200/2400 bps

407/533/5216