Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Intelligent Design (ID) implies Young Earth Science (YES)

Harvard grad Phillip E. Johnson was the law clerk for Chief Justice Earl Warren and taught law for 30 years at UC Berkeley.  Johnson is most known for being the father of Intelligent Design (ID).  Access Research Network (ARN) was Phillip Johnson’s recommended site: [1]
The new Executive Director for ARN is Art Battson (as of 1-1-15).  Dennis Wagner was the prior leader.  Amazingly, Battson’s views support the stability of Essential Types of Life (ETL’s).
A snazzy new book YES – Young Earth Science has a whole chapter on the stasis of ETL’s.  Essentialism has a long history - Aristotle easily observed that wolves reproduce wolves and rabbits make more rabbits.  Given eon’s a sheep will never turn into a shepherd

Even is Darwin’s day all scientists were not convinced.  Sir Charles Wyville Thomson (FRS, d. 1882), chief scientist on the Challenger expedition which revolutionized oceanography, rejected the “theory which refers the evolution of species to extreme variation guided only by natural selection.” [2]

YES – Young Earth Science shows that stasis of ETL’s, Catastrophism and a Young Earth are connected.  Thus, Intelligent Design implies Young Earth Science (YES).  There are numerous data which favors YES.  Phillip Johnson is clearly YES friendly.

1)  Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds by Phillip Johnson (IVP, Downers Grove, IL, 1997), p. 11.
2)  quoted in “Counting Sheep Since Jacob’s Day” by Brian Thomas, Acts & Facts, Feb. 2014, p. 15.

Monday, December 22, 2014

THE INTERVIEW – Martian Edition

What does Kim Jong-un think about the age of the world?  Does Kim Jong-un know everything?  Consider this truth from Holy Writ:

Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.  Who is like me?  Let him proclaim it.  Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient peopleLet them declare what is to come, and what will happen. (Is. 44:6, 7, ESV)
Investigate the truth, study the powerful evidence for Young Earth Science (YES)‼  Search  YES Jay Hall  in Amazon to find this science packed exciting new book on the age of the Earth.  How old is your favorite planet?

              *** UPDATE ***
Here's our latest video: https://youtu.be/1vBfTnvRDh4
We tackle a potpourri of topics:  Thunder & C-14, Tree Rings & Ammonites,  Norman Macbeth (Darwin Retried), OMNI magazine & censorship ... #Rubio #NormanMacbeth #Darwin #AltMed #TreeRings Hotep = B @

 Martin, how old is your Favorite Planet? Why Tim, that’s a Hulk of a question! This is a Scientific Earth Time Holomnesicon invented by the great Martian physicist Dr. Rogen.  You got it, SETH – Rogen. These instructions are too abstruse, what does your device say about Deep Time? Deep Time is a myth, the earth is thousands of years old, we can iron out the details later. [Pr. 27:17] Wow!  What does Kim Jong-un think about the Age of the Earth? Super question!  I don’t know, but  I hope Kim Jong-un reads this new book on Earth’s age.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Adam’s Blog [stardate 23,234.316] - We’ll Make It Go!

Every decade my love for Eva [Eve] grows stronger and richer.  I think of her love, virtue and beauty day and night.  Two weeks ago during a soft breezy evening I was in a deep dream [Really Entertaining Movies] and I saw Eva’s wondrous eyes:

I imagined that they were spinning around like so:

The very next day a few of my grandchildren, Hugim, Yuren and Jiyanz came to me with a conundrum.  They had a large toy box and wanted to take it to the other side of Lake Noeg.  I promised them “We’ll make it go!”  I was inspired by my dream and Hugim, Yuren and Jiyanz made flat washer shapes from wood and I connected them with a bamboo pole.  We made two sets of these donut-like devices and attached a rope to the front of the box and my grandkids delivered the toys to their friends on the other side of the lake‼  Yuren shouted, “Ruu-Mei-Ow!” in a joyful manner.

I think I will name this device a WHEEL since this whole episode started off with “We’ll make it go!”  The next time you have a deep dream [REM], don’t take it lightly [Gen. 37:5-10].


In 2011 a small stone car was discovered in Turkey.  Archaeologist Mesut Alp said that the toy car is about 7,500 years old.

Monday, September 29, 2014

Creationism in the Mainstream – David Limbaugh

David Limbaugh (Rush’s bro) has a brand new book out – Jesus on Trial.  This is a well written and compelling work defending the truth of the Gospel. Sean Hannity recently talked with David about the book.  PJTV also has an interview.

David recounts when Steve Springer witnessed to him:

Steve did not fit my perception at the time of the stereotypical young Christian – a judgmental holy roller who accepted Christianity uncritically.  He exhibited an extraordinary measure of grace.  He not only didn’t take offense at my skepticism, but he patiently retrieved his Bible … and began to walk me through a few fascinating verses. [1]

Josh McDowell, Ravi Zacharias and Paul Little were instrumental in leading David to Christ.  David says this about philosophy:  “I believe philosophy can be a worthy field of study, but I don’t think we can improve on the Bible’s revealed truths in conveying God’s nature and His plan of redemption and salvation for mankind.” [2]

After David had read the Gospel of John several times, he confesses:  “… I was on fire and began reading the Bible and everything about the Bible and theology I could get my hands on.” [3]
David references Ray Comfort in a positive light in his chapter “Science Makes the Case – for Christianity.”  Comfort apparently favors Young Earth Science (YES).
David references Kurt Wise’s Faith, Form and Time which defends YES.  David also quotes Nancy Pearcey who apparently affirms the young earth.  Pearcey was a contributing editor to Bible-Science News for a number of years.  This was published by the Bible-Science Association (founded by Walter Lang) whose motto included “A Young Earth.”
David points out that a large number of Christians,

… believe in a young earth, and of those who do, many are hardly science deniers; they don’t base their beliefs simply on blind faith.  They subscribe to different scientific theories, even if one might find those outside the mainstream of scientific consensus, or they question the unprovable assumptions used in dating techniques … [4]

Amen David‼

Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.  Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. (1 Cor. 1:20-24)

1)  Jesus on Trial by David Limbaugh (Regnery, Wash. DC, 2014), p. 6.
2)  Ibid., p. 14.
3)  Ibid., p. 15.
4)  Ibid., p. 290.

Saturday, August 30, 2014

Crevo – James Montgomery Boice

The host of the Bible Study Hour, James Montgomery Boice (d. 2000), produced a fascinating video series on Creation or Evolution?  Boice had one of the greatest radio preacher voices of all time.  Those who
don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.  This video series helps us understand why so many Christians tolerate progressive creation (God created over long ages).  Boice takes a strong stance against theistic evolution.  The Gap Theory is also discussed.

One wonders if Boice read Starlight and Time by Russell Humphreys which uses relativity to deal with the light travel issue (if stars are billions of light years away, how can Earth be young?).  Humphreys’ book came out in 1994.

Most traditional creationists place creation around 4000 BC (Ussher was close).  Boice says that creationists claim the world is between 12K to 20K years old.   

Boice brings up the topic of fossil order as a challenge to Flood Geology, specifically plant fossils.  The vertical arrangement of plant fossils does not necessarily teach us the story of evolution.  As Robert Spicer explains,

Both fluid and biological sorting of potential plant megafossils during transport and deposition processes produce a pattern that has previously been overlooked. ... Vertical differences in species composition need not necessarily reflect temporal changes in vegetation. [1]

The two-dimensional nature of plant materials (leaves, some seeds etc.), changes in density (e.g. waterlogging), fragmentation and bacterial decay are issues that models of depositional sorting must consider.  This is very consistent with a Global Flood.

Henry Morris provides 64 biblical reasons for the global nature of the Flood and 36 scientific, historical and cultural arguments. [2]  Boice, though not holding to all the tenets of Flood Geology, held that much geologic data “must be explained by a flood of worldwide dimensions.” [3]  He also said that, “a flood of that duration [377 days] is not a local flood!” [4]  Boice wrote a whole chapter on Flood Traditions and concluded that, “Hundreds of flood stories abound throughout the world in various cultures and are therefore evidence not merely of the historicity of the flood but of its universal extent.” [5]  John Byl rightly states, “… since animals were originally vegetarian, there was no animal death before Adam’s fall.  Thus all animal fossils must post-date Adam’s fall.”  Once one accepts a Global Flood, such as ID leader William Dembski, Young Earth Science (YES) is not far behind. 
We heard Dr. Boice in Oklahoma City just a few blocks away and a few days before the bombing of the Federal Building.  Boice’s legacy includes his influential work with Bible Study Fellowship.

1)  "The Importance of Depostional Sorting to the Biostratigraphy of Plant Megafossils" by Robert Spicer in Biostratigraphy of Fossil Plants ed. by David Dilcher and Thomas Taylor (Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA, 1980), pp. 171, 181, emphasis added.
2)  The Genesis Record by Henry Morris, (Baker Book House, 1976, Grand Rapids, MI), pp. 199-205, pp. 683-686. 
3)  Genesis: An Expositional Commentary (Vol. 1) by James M. Boice, (Baker Books, 1998, Grand Rapids, MI), p. 366. 
4)  Ibid., p. 349, emphasis in original. 
5)  Ibid., pp. 354, 355.  

Thursday, August 28, 2014

God, Adam & You

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals has a very helpful audio resource – In the Beginning:  God, Adam and You.  This is an excellent defense of the historicity of Adam.  The speakers include Joel Beeke, Kevin DeYoung, Liam Goligher, Richard Phillips and Derek Thomas.  The Lord Jesus Christ is "the last Adam" (1 Cor. 15:45) so this topic is important.  Dr. Beeke has a video describing his talk.

One speaker is confused on the toledoths (“these are the generations of”) in Genesis.  P.J. Wiseman has provided strong evidence that these appear at the end of a section.  Thus, Adam, Noah and Shem provided eyewitness accounts and Moses compiled these.  Adam is mentioned in the genealogies so he is a real historical figure (1 Chr. 1:1, Lk. 3:38 etc.). 

It is often said that Genesis tells us why God created but not how.  One presenter counters that view (Heb. 11:3, Ps. 33:6, Gen. 1:3,6,9 etc.).  One speaker misses the mark on the dinosaur and large aquatic reptile mentioned in Job 40 and 41.  The fact that Adam was prophet and priest is detailed.

The views of Tim Keller and BioLogos are confronted.  Theistic evolution goes against what we read in Psalm 8:

What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
    human beings that you care for them?
You have made them a little lower than the angels
    and crowned them with glory and honor.
You made them rulers over the works of your hands;
    you put everything under their feet (Ps. 8:4-6, NIV).
One of Rich Mullins' (Ragamuffin) songs is even referenced:

Well, they said, "Boy you just follow your heart"
But my heart just led me into my chest
They said, "Follow your nose"
But the direction changed every time
I went and turned my head

And they said, "Boy you just follow your dreams"
But my dreams were only misty notions
But the Father of hearts and the Maker of noses
And the Giver of dreams, He's the one I have chosen
And I will follow Him
The moral of this song is that we should not fall to the pressure from academic elites who want us to deny a real Adam.  Jesus believed in an historical Adam so should we (Mt. 19:4,5; Mk. 10:6-8).  I saw Mullins twice and was deeply moved.  Mullins was part of an event where creationist leader Paul Ackerman (It's a Young World After All) spoke at.

We can’t go back to Eden; the Flood destroyed it, but if we could would there be a sign there saying “Former Home of Adam & Eve”?

Saturday, July 5, 2014

Darwin and Racism

George William Hunter Wrote A Civic Biology in 1914 and said the following [1]:

If you doubt the power of Darwin and racism, consider the last time you received an Amber Alert on your phone regarding a young African-American girl?  Why is it that a pretty 10 year old white girl from a middle-class family from Utah gets more attention that a lost Black child in Detroit?

Hollywood often portrays African-Americans in a negative light.  Will Smith's The Pursuit of Happyness is a breath of fresh air in this respect.  This film is based on Chris Gardner's one-year struggle with homelessness.

For more on Darwin and racism read Denyse O'Leary's excellent piece.  We are ALL Noachians now.  Special thanks to Richard Hollerman for the Hunter reference.

1) A Civic Biology by George William Hunter (American Book Company, NYC, 1914), p. 196.

Friday, June 6, 2014

Did Adam Support Gay Marriage?

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”  Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them.  And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.  The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field.  But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.  So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh.  And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. (Gen. 2:18-22 ESV).

Male and female are complementary to each other.  Only the male/female pair reproduce.  A masculine man brings certain qualities to a marriage (1 man + 1 woman 4 LIFE) and a feminine woman brings other characteristics that make a marriage work.  When Adam named the animals he noticed the male-female pairing.  Where was Adam’s compatible and complementary female counterpart?  Adam believed in complementarianism, not gay marriage.       

Genesis continues, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh (Gen. 2:24).

A man leaves his Father and Mother.  Neither father & father nor mother & mother constitute parents.  Same sex couples do not become one flesh.  Only the male/female pair can do this.
Robert Reilly has written a fascinating book on the morality of same-sex relationships, Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything.  Reilly has shown that a reasonable man or woman can understand that same-sex couples are ethically incorrect.

In 2009, President Barack Obama held a meeting to celebrate the gay rights movement.  Obama said this about alternative lifestyle activist Franklin Kameny, “We are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership.” [1]  Kameny said the following in 2008:

Let us have more and better enjoyment of the more and better sexual perversions, by whatever definition, by more and more consenting adults…  If bestiality with consenting animals provides happiness to some people, let them pursue their happiness.  That is Americanism in action. [2]

In Plato’s Laws, the Athenian states his position:
…our citizens must not be worse than fowls and many other animals which are produced in large broods, and which live chaste and celibate lives without sexual intercourse until they arrive at the age for breeding; and when they reach this age they pair off, as instinct moves them, male with female and female with male; and thereafter they live in a way that is holy and just, remaining constant to their first contracts of love: surely our citizens should at least be better than these animals.

In Book 1 of Plato’s Laws, the Athenian affirms,
…I think that the pleasure is to be deemed natural which arises out of the intercourse between men and women; but that the intercourse of men with men, or of women with women, is contrary to nature, and that the bold attempt was originally due to unbridled lust. The Cretans are always accused of having invented the story of Ganymede and Zeus because they wanted to justify themselves in the enjoyment of unnatural pleasures

Philosopher Immanuel Kant proposed his Categorical Imperative:  If it’s right, it’s right for all.  If gay is good and all practiced that maxim, then there would be no more babies.  Kant rejected homosexual conduct. 

Pleasure is indeed part of marriage (Song of Solomon).  But worshipping pleasure is a vain pursuit.  The Pleasure Principle can lead to destruction.   Consider the parable of Sam & Dave.  Sam and Dave are very good friends.  Sam loves to hit Dave in the head with a baseball bat.  Dave loves to hit Sam in the head with a baseball bat.  They practice this habitual pleasure for many years.  Sam & Dave never become one flesh (1 Cor. 6:16).

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” (Eph. 6:1-3 ESV)

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor. 6:9-11 ESV)

Special thanks to Francis Hall for the first graphic.  You may contact us through the email in our profile.  Please follow us on Twitter. 

1)  Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything by Robert Reilly (Ignatius Press, 2014), p. 3.
2)  Ibid., p. 4.

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

The Adam Quest - Tim Stafford

Tim Stafford is senior writer for Christianity Today and has written The Adam Quest (Thomas Nelson, 2013).  This book highlights the life, work and views of eleven scientists who are believers.  Thankfully, the first three are creationists (Creation In Six Days = CISD, YES = Young Earth Science, Global Flood).  Chapters 1-3 cover the stories of Kurt Wise, Todd Wood and Georgia Purdom.

Stafford is misinformed in that not all geologists buy into OEF’s – Old Earth Fallacies (p. 2).  Some YES supporters don’t want to be outed (as in Expelled with Ben Stein).  Geologist Steven Austin has superb credentials. Austin’s research on nautiloids in the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon and its catastrophic origin is unassailable.  A recent survey of 312 leaders of Christian colleges and universities showed that 57% of Science Dept. chairs support Young Earth Science (YES)‼
Stafford’s parents were open to the view that Noah’s Flood was local (p. 3).  In contrast,Sacred Cows in Science, edited by Norbert Smith (Ph.D. Zoology, Texas Tech), who appeared in a BBC documentary, has one chapter that defends the Global Flood.  Dr. Smith’s book covers many worldview issues (climate change, ID, gay marriage etc.).  Smith recently appeared on Today’s Issues (AFR radio), it starts at the 32:00 minute mark.

Tim’s parents were “not dogmatic about details of God’s creation” (p. 3), but Jesus was:

“from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female” (Mk 10:6).  Adam and Eve did not arrive billions of years after the start (Ge 1:1). 

"These are going to be hard days - nothing like it from the time God made the world right up to the present … (Mk 13:19, Msg).  Human suffering & the beginning both map to the start (no gap of billions of years).

“The blood of all the prophets shed from the foundation of the earth, from Abel to Zachariah…” (Lk 11:50,51, Philips).  Prophets and the Beginning are not separated by billions of years.

Stafford should follow the example of Intelligent Design (ID) pioneer Phillip Johnson (pp. 3, 70-72) who went to the Creation Museum (KY), accepts the possible change of fundamental constants (just like the RATE team) and went on a speaking tour with Flood Geologist Andrew Snelling in the UK.  How many of the scholars in Adam Quest (other than the first 3) have gone to the Creation Museum?  ID leader William Dembski now accepts the Global Flood!

I’m glad Stafford has decided to “pay closer attention” to origins (p. 3).  I would recommend the following:
1) read Coming to Grips with Genesis – Mortenson and Ury
2) read Earth’s Catastrophic Past – Snelling (~1100 pages)
3) watch the Ken Ham v. Bill Nye debate.

Additionally, I hope Stafford reads Persuaded by the Evidence which contain the testimonies of 37 scientists and scholars who became convinced of the traditional creation WorldView.

Microbiologist Bob Messing (p. 3), who is struggling with crevo, should contact Nathan Jeanson (Ph.D. Cell & Dev. Biol., Harvard) and Jeffrey Tomkins (Ph.D. Genetics, Clemson).  They are currently doing research at the Institute for Creation Research (icr) that supports the fixity of kinds.

Kurt Wise had a discussion with Stephen Jay Gould (d. 2002) who made an astonishing admission, “If what you are saying is true, then the Bible’s story about a Flood may be true, and that God who punished sin is likely still alive” (p. 18, emphasis added).  If only Gould had investigated the Scripture more deeply.

Stafford claims that “Conventional geologists and paleontologists have shown no detectable interest in the theory [Flood Geology], except to heap it with scorn” (p. 22).  In contrast, Stokes and Lee state in their Geology text Introduction to Geology (pub. by Prentice-Hall), that, "A catastrophist might contend that the twisting and breaking of strata, the transportation of huge blocks of rock, the violent cutting of canyons, and the wholesale destruction of life is within the power of a great universal flood - and he would be right." [1]  Stafford’s objection regarding fossil order has been dealt with in an earlier post (Dec. 2010).

Here are some Ph.D. scientists in Geology (or Earth Sciences) who hold to the Global Flood:
Of course, this list could be extended if we include Geophysics and Paleontology.  Terry Mortenson has a Ph.D. in the History of Geology from Coventry University (UK).

Stafford, who favors “Theo Evo” - theistic evolution (p. 205), should have spoken with professors of History of Science and Philosophy of Science.  Many of them freely confess that evolution is not proven.  Consider the words of David B. Kitts (d. 2010)who was a Professor of History of Science (and Geology) at the University of Oklahoma:

Evolutionary theory compels us to see the fossil record as evidence of evolution. The paleontological record supports evolutionary theory if you presuppose evolutionary theory. It is consistent with evolutionary theory, but it does not compel us to accept evolutionary theory. The fossil record is consistent with an astronomical number of theories [including traditional creation]. The fossil record does not prove evolution; nothing proves evolution. Evolution is a scientific hypothesis.

Kitts was no creationist and in fact debated Duane Gish and Henry Morris in 1973.[2]  Furthermore, hundreds of scientists have signed the Dissent from Darwin list.  It is likely that thousands of scientists reject evolution, but only a portion of those are willing to admit this publicly.  Slaughter of the Dissidents documents the tragic consequences of those who have.

Stafford seems to think that baraminology is a new thing (p. 23).  Frank Marsh (Ph.D. Plant Ecology, Univ. of Nebraska) actually coined the term baramin in 1941.  Marsh corresponded with leading evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky (d. 1975) in 1945 defining the limits of the Genesis kinds. [3]

Stafford breaks down the major views on origins as follows (p. 7):

1)  Young Earth Creationist.  We prefer OPGHN (“opgane”)- Orthodox Protestants who take Genesis as Historical Narrative.  This term was inspired by Harold Lindsell who said, “Believers in the view that Scripture and the Word of God are synonymous can always use an alternate label such as Orthodox Protestant …” [4]
2)  Intelligent Design Creationist.  ID also includes atheists who doubt or deny evolution.  The term creationist should be dropped.  Even Clinton Richard Dawkins admitted that ID is possible (in the film Expelled).

3)  Evolutionary Creationist.  A better term would be “Theo Evo.”  Sadly, theistic evolution is still popular among Christian academics.Francis Schaeffer said Theo Evo is not an option,

… I will now mention two limits that seem to me to be absolute. … The Bible gives a specific limitation:  Adam was created by God, and then Eve was made from Adam by God. … I have never heard anyone holding any form of theistic evolution who follows these two limitations [the 1st was that bara means original creation]. …even if I were still an agnostic, as once I was, I would not accept the concept of evolution from the molecule to man in an unbroken line. …this concept is weak and certainly has not been proven … [5]

Is rejecting the traditional creation view going down the “path of ungodliness” (p. 2)?  Charles Templeton worked with Billy Graham in the 1950’s and preached to thousands (up to 30K).  Both Templeton and sociobiologist E.O. Wilson credit evolution for their walking away from the Lord.  Look at Princeton Seminary, look at Davis A. Young (DAY=yom) – the slippery slope is real.  Young once held to a Global Flood (a tranquil flood).

As a clear and present example of the Slippery Slope Syndrome, let’s examine Fuller Seminary.  At the beginning, Fuller was influenced by these scholars:  Carl F. H. Henry, Harold Lindsell (The Battle for the Bible), Gleason Archer (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties) and Charles Woodbridge, to name a few. [6]

Does taking a weak stand on the authority of Genesis lead to other errors?  Consider this bold stance from Harold Lindsell:

The simplest reading of Genesis and the rest of the Bible makes it plain that Adam and Eve are regarded as historic personages and the first parents of the human race.  The genealogical tables include them, and their sons and grandsons are named as though they too were real persons.  When critics declare that the biblical accounts here are myth or saga and not real history, they are allowing extrabiblical data and personal opinions or hermeneutical dodges to sit in judgment on the Bible. [7]

Gleason Archer said, “… The Battle for the Bible has put its finger upon the most urgent issue facing evangelicals today [inerrancy] …” [8]  Gleason Archer supports a global flood!

Lindsell’s prediction from the 1970’s still holds:

I asserted that once an institution surrenders biblical inerrancy it will sooner or later scrap other basic doctrines of the Christian faith.  I asserted in the 1976 book [The Battle for the Bible] that it has already happened at Fuller.  … I also said that down the road, Fuller Seminary will make further concessions and allow for other more marked departures from historic orthodoxy. [9]

Is the slippery slope a reality at Fuller?  Richard Mouw, former President of Fuller Seminary, spoke this shocker,“While I am not prepared to reclassify Mormonism as possessing undeniably Christian theology, I do accept many of my Mormon friends as genuine followers of the Jesus whom I worship as the divine Savior.”  Recently, Fuller officially sanctioned an openly homosexual student group (OneTable)!  What’s next in the slide downward?
If Genesis fails to teach us the truth about origins, then where else has the Bible deceived us?  Give careful thought to this wisdom from Francis Schaeffer:

… from Barth onward they [theological liberals] tried to say that you could have a Bible with mistakes in it, and yet a religious word broke through.  The older theological liberals pressed this; so they went from Barth to Brunner, to Niebuhr to Tillich to the “God is Dead” theology.  Just when it was proven bankrupt on the side of the liberals, some evangelicals seem to think that they’ve found something new, which is a bit curious. [10]

How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the Lord,”
when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?
The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped.
Since they have rejected the word of the Lord, what kind of wisdom do they have? (Jer. 8:8, 9, NIV)

You may contact us through the email in our profile.  Please follow us on twitter.  Will Tim Stafford go from The Adam Quest to Adam’s Lost Dream?

1) Introduction to Geology: Physical and Historical by William Lee Stokes and Sheldon Judson (Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1968),p.296.
2)  Creation:  Acts, Facts, Impacts ed. by Henry Morris et al (Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, CA, 1974), pp. 1, 40, 41.
3)  Variation and Fixity in Nature by Frank Marsh (Pacific Press, Mountain View, CA, 1976), pp. 36, 37.
4)  The Bible in the Balance by Harold Lindsell (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 1979), p. 321, emphasis in original.
5)  The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer, Vol. 2, 2e (Crossway, 1996), pp. 136, 137.
6)  Reforming Fundamentalism: Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalismby George M. Marsden (Eerdmans, 1987), p. 1.
7)  Lindsell, p. 285.
8)  “The Right Battle” by Gleason Archer in Lindsell, p. 356.
9)  Lindsell, p. 184.
10)  Francis Schaeffer:  An Authentic Life by Colin Duriez (Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 2008), p. 206, from an interview in 1980.