Is Genesis History? – A Review

Raising unanswered questions, offering alternative scientific interpretations, and the exposing of censored views should always be invited.  Science professors and science public schoolteachers have lost their jobs for doing this. (See Ben Stein’s Expelled, no Intelligence Allowed.) The movie Is Genesis History? may have struck a sensitive public nerve.  It will be showed again on Thursday, March 2 and Tuesday, March 7, 2017.  Go to IsGenesisHistory.com to find a theater near you.

Unfortunately, this documentary’s implied narrative, that the universe is not millions of years old, could cause unnecessary conflict in our origins debate.  The end result – the rejection of the main narrative these producers skillfully designed – that God was involved.   A careful historical review of the Creation/Evolution conflict shows mistakes made on both sides of this debate with the unfortunate results – polarized alliances that exist to this day.

As an example let’s look at just the first two verses in Genesis.  1: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”  2: “And the earth was without form, and void: and darkness was upon the face of the deep.  And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”  (KJV)

Question – Does this describe all of God’s creative acts of Day One or does this describe the initial conditions for Day One?  In other words…How long was the earth without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep after heaven was created and just before the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters?

A biblical literalist could honestly say, no one knows and this implies that a biblical literalist could easily accept the universe and earth be millions of years old.

Big Bang cosmology is another point of confusion and unnecessary rejection by some traditional believers and seemingly again because of the time issue.  Hubble’s Law – that the outermost galaxies are accelerating away from us and the farther out one goes the faster the velocity, strongly implies the universe is expanding.   Isaiah, 700 years before Christ, seems to have been inspired first to reveal this to us.   He writes, “He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.” Isaiah 40:22b (NIV)  No one else seems to have had the idea about the heavens stretching and spreading out until it was scientifically discovered early in the 20th century.  The agnostic astronomer, Robert Jastrow in his God and the Astronomers, confessed that the atheistic scientists rejected this because it implied that the universe had a beginning and a beginner – God.  So why did this documentary prompt us to listen to the atheistic scientists that are rejecting Big Bang cosmology now?

This documentary just begins this discussion and should prompt us to carefully revisit our origins stories.  It does all this by offering some very interesting geology and paleontology evidences that strongly implies Genesis is true history.

 

One Reason for Ineffective Christians

Since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.   For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Taken from the apostle Paul’s opening letter to the Romans (Romans 1:19, 20 – NIV), many Christians think Paul teaches the following themes:
1)   God has already revealed himself to everyone.
2)   The rejection of God is solely a heart (will) process and not a mind-problem issue.
The final result is the death of Christian apologetics as a meaningful ministry in the minds of many Christians.   Now really – why should anyone ever attempt to give evidence for God if God has already showed himself to everyone?  And if the rejection of God does not involve the mind – why should anyone even attempt to answer the critic if the real gatekeeper to belief is the heart and not the mind?
These are real questions and reasons why many Christians are not involved with apologetics, despite the fact Paul’s ministry is full of examples that he stood for the defense of the gospel (Phil 1:17; Acts 17:1-4).   Yet even with Paul’s example to the Greek intellectuals on Mars Hill (Acts 17:16-34), some ministers have been so publically bold to claim that Paul wasted his time there.  But did he?  Since Paul was Holy-Spirit inspired to write most of the New Testament and be led by the Spirit in his missionary journeys (Acts 16:9), could he had been so mistaken in Athens?  There was a church started there after his Athens discourse (Acts 17:32-34).  Some did come to faith from Paul’s intellectual arguments.
If Satan used scriptures to tempt Christ (Matt 4:6), could he also use scriptures to confuse followers of Christ today?  Satan is the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).  Now before I proceed with a commentary I have never read or heard from a Christian pulpit, let me emphasize that many Christians believe that Romans 1:19 and 20 accurately describe our world today and simultaneously deny the applicability of other scriptures involving the works of the Holy Spirit for our time.  Why not consider flipping this?  Could not the Holy Spirit be just as active today as He was in Acts, while instead Romans 1:19 and 20 may not completely and accurately describe our present situation?  Could it be possible that from the creation of the world up to Paul’s time and following for two thousand years Romans 1:19 and 20 was absolutely true, but is not exactly today?  This does not imply that God’s Word is now faulty and no longer true today.  It does suggest that something about us has changed that Romans 1:19 and 20 does not accurately describe.  Let us now investigate what that could be.

 

Continue Reading →

A Millstone Necktie & Swimsuit Combo

Dear Mrs. Parshall,

I caught a little of your program involving the “Rising Tide of Hostility” against Christianity and Christians on Friday while driving home from work. While this is troubling enough, the response from one Christian, that called your program, makes the situation worse because it expresses the typical evangelical response and explains not only why we are losing influence in our culture and political systems, but why we struggle with Christian evangelism without results. His supposedly comforting thesis… “God’s in control.”   The anti-Christian hostilities should drive us to our knees. It did the early Church. However, the “God’s in control” response says that whatever will be, will be, so why should we pray for God’s will to be on Earth as it is in Heaven? Too many mistakenly think, despite how bad it is, that God’s will is being implemented anyway. We don’t say anything like this when it comes to our career or business building, financial or vacation planning. We give this our full attention and dedication despite any resistance or sacrifice it may involve. Why don’t we say, “God’s in control” for these life-issues as well and let God do all our responsibilities to make these happen for us too?

Anti-Christian hostility is simply the reaping what we have sowed – specifically and primarily because of a godless public education policy most Christians have ignored. When are we going to see our own sins here? Like many of our “Christian” forefathers that had no sensitivities against the once public policy of slavery, we fail to have the passion of Christ against anyone that causes a child to reject him. (Jesus said to give him a millstone necktie along with his swimsuit. (Matthew 18:6, Mark 9:42, Luke 17:2) Do we realize that Jesus’ passionate advice ends with the same results as that of a firing squid – death? So what would the modern translation be for us today? Would Jesus really invite the NEA to a special swimming party or recommend they be shot?  The real questions are: How much do we want to be like Christ again? And do we really share His passion of evil influence on children?) Unfortunately, our schools are evangelizing children in humanism by the classrooms while we focus on “one heart at a time,” but in reality pursue our own careers and personal responsibilities.  If Christians everywhere would become as passionate for school choice as most humanists are against it, we could see a rebirth of traditional belief in this country.   Real school choice means that all parents could send their child to any school – public or private.

If the scientific evidence of Intelligent Design convinced the famous British atheist Antony Flew to believe in God, it will cause children as well. The humanists know this. Many evangelicals don’t and are as ignorant about the spirituality of school choice as many of our forefathers where on the spirituality surrounding the public policy of slavery.  (See “Menstealers in 1 Timothy 1:10 KFV)  Without this the secularist, atheist, and agnostic will continue to impose their religion on the children in this country without any choice. Consequently, we are seeing exactly what Abraham Lincoln said would happen… The philosophy in the classroom in one generation will become the philosophy in Government in the next. Why shouldn’t we reap the evil results if we don’t have the passion of Christ?

And Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone where hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. Jesus the Christ in Mark 9:42

Without a proper view of God, and His passion we cannot even begin to solve our social, political, and economical problems and things will get worse. Before we can repent (2 Chronicles 7:14), we need to know that it is our fault first. Until we repent our evangelism will never be as effective as it could.

Please help spread the word about… www.ourfault.org.

Thank you, and God Bless your program – In the Market with Janet Parshall!

How can we keep our kids safe?

And why are the changes in America happening that we are witnessing?

The first step is to understand secularism’s effect on society from the warnings of leading secularists.

“There is no significant example in history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion. Moreover, we shall find it no easy task to mold a natural ethic strong enough to maintain moral restraint and social order without the support of supernatural consolations, hopes, and fears.”  Will and Ariel Durant both received the 1976 Humanist Pioneer Award for their work, The Story of Civilization.

“Morality [is] the great antidote against practical and theoretical nihilism.”  Friedrich Nietzsche – the originator of the phrase, “God is dead.”

“We know of no society anywhere that has managed to build a culture devoid of religion. No society has yet been successful in teaching morality without religion… for morality cannot be created.”  Guenter Lewy –  a secular humanist social scientist.

We’ve had our warnings from our nation’s Founding Fathers as well.  “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports… In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens… Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” (Excerpts from George Washington’s Farewell Address, September 19, 1796 Source: America’s God and Country, pg. 661, by William J. Federer)

Our Founding Fathers knew this principle well and had the Northwest Ordinance, Article III include: “Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

 

Continue Reading →

On Stopping Gun Violence

A secular (godless) society indirectly promotes those on the fringe to response as though they will never be judged by God.  Before the secular-left object, they should listen to their own authorities regarding secularization’s effect on society.

“There is no significant example in history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.  Moreover, we shall find it no easy task to mold a natural ethic strong enough to maintain moral restraint and social order without the support of supernatural consolations, hopes, and fears.” Will and Ariel Durant both received the 1976 Humanist Pioneer Award for their work, The Story of Civilization.

“Morality [is] the great antidote against practical and theoretical nihilism.” Friedrich Nietzsche

“We know of no society anywhere that has managed to build a culture devoid of religion.  No society has yet been successful in teaching morality without religion… for morality cannot be created.” Guenter Lewy, Secular Humanist Social Scientist

An excellent reference is sociologist James Davison Hunter‘s book, The Death of Character. “We want character but without unyielding conviction; we want virtue but without particular moral justifications that invariably offend; we want good without having to name evil; we want decency without the authority to insist upon it; we want moral community without any limitations to personal freedom.  In short, we want what we cannot possibly have on the terms that we want it.”

We carry this same carnal secular baggage into public school policies. Why? It’s time we return to our founding principles and fight hard for school choice so children may have real reasons for civil responsibility.  Evidence that points to a loving God that will also be our Judge is the foundation needed for morality. (Our churches have also failed at times to give us this evidence for God and of God’s judgment.) This kind of morality has always been a life preserving deterrent around all who hold such values from the very simple to the most sophisticated.

This nation’s Founding Fathers knew this principle well. “Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.” Northwest Ordinance, Article III

All gunmen were impressionable children once.

Open Email to Bill O’Reilly of Fox News

Bill,

Please don’t refer to atheists as nonbelievers. They are believers in the nontraditional religion(1) of atheism and many are angry their religion does not have the cultural momentum that tradition religion has. Thank you for reminding us that this is changing.  They are gaining secular converts among our youth, as your random survey shows the youth favoring of “Holiday Tree” over the “Christmas Tree.” What will their next secular evangelism attack?

Jerry Kelley
Colorado Springs, CO

Note 1: Our Founding Fathers used the word “religion” both to denote a denomination (See Constitution, First Amendment) and a philosophy (Northwest Ordinance, Article III). This means that our Founding Fathers wanted Christian principles/philosophy in government, but not the favoring of any denomination by Congress.  Atheists rightly understand that someone’s philosophy will be favored by the government.  We are seeing their secular transformation in government and society today. We need to be honest and admit that Christianity has been our nation’s history and that a religious philosophy of some type will always be in government.  There are no philosophical vacuums.  We need to educate Americans before the “progressives” completely reprogram us all.

Northwest Ordinance, Article III

Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

Do Americans remember what religion (philosophy) our Founding Fathers favored?

Unfortunately, the secularists have programmed Americans to think that the Constitution’s First Amendment refers to the elimination of governmental or public expression of any traditional belief.  The phrase “Separation of Church and State” is used to promote such error.  This phrase is not in our Constitution, nor is the modern day secular interpretation.  In light of the Northwest Ordinance, Article III and any unbiased review of our history, is it clear that this is a serious mistake.   Our Constitution’s Framers wanted to prohibit the government favoring a religious denomination not the Christian philosophy.  They knew it was hopeless to inspire youth in moral teaching without the Christian God as the foundation.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports.

In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens.

Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Excerpts from George Washington’s Farewell Address, September 19, 1796  Source: America’s God and Country, pg. 661, by William J. Federer

Note 2: The First Amendment only prohibits Congress.  Yet even with this, the Senate has a paid chaplain to this day because of Benjamin Franklin.   The Constitutional Convention was about to breakup and Franklin suggested that prayers be offered each day before each session began.  Why may the senators pray, but the children are prohibited?