Your session will end in  seconds due to inactivity. Click here to continue using this web page.
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 | Comments (19)

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1).

Darwin’s idea “is the most powerful and the most comprehensive idea that has ever arisen on earth. It helps us understand our origins…” (Sir Julian Huxley, “Education and Humanism,” in Essays of a Humanist, 1964).

The quotations above represent two competing worldviews—Christian theism and naturalistic evolution. One follows the biblical storyline, affirming the recent creation of the heavens and the earth thousands of years ago. The other adheres to philosophical materialism in which a cycle of life and death has been in motion for billions of years. This modern conflict—creation vs. evolution—represents a fundamental dividing line between faith and unbelief.

The Grace to You blog has engaged this controversy for the past several months with articles from John MacArthur, audio and video clips from his sermons, and interaction in the comment threads. Today’s article makes fifty posts in the series—a lot has been said—so I intend this as a summary and conclusion to the series. Throughout this article, you’ll find links to each post in the series. That’ll allow you to catch up on anything you’ve missed, study the issue in greater depth, and perhaps share the series with someone else.

Before I start summarizing, I’d like to recommend John’s entire sermon series, The Battle for the Beginning, along with the well-documented book of the same title. We’re obviously not able to accomplish in a series of blog posts what John did in his sermon series and book. You’d benefit by becoming better acquainted with his carefully reasoned, biblically consistent apologetic for the Christian perspective of origins.

Now, here’s the summary…

At the heart of John MacArthur’s perspective on origins is a commitment to the Bible; he reads all of life through the lens of Scripture. And that’s the difference between the two competing worldviews—Who do you choose to believe? God, or someone else? It’s a matter of ultimate authority.

After framing the argument in biblical terms, only one position is possible—young earth creation. The Bible teaches the recent creation by divine fiat of the heavens and the earth, plant life and animal life; the subsequent special creation of Adam and Eve; and the subsequent fall of Adam and Eve into sin, which introduced death into the world God created. Even the atheistic enemies of Scripture understand that. You either believe that, or you don’t.

Ultimately, Satan is the source of evolutionary theory. It’s a lie, an alternative reality, a replacement narrative for the unbeliever. Satan used that same strategy when he deceived Eve in the Garden of Eden, and it’s worked well for him ever since. Evolution is simply the latest in a long chain of lies to aid the rebels’ cause, waging war against their Creator.

Evolution is essentially an attempted murder—it helps people replace the triune God with a false trinity of matter, time, and chance. For those who embrace the lie that God is dead, there are massive implications and devastating consequences. If God didn’t create us, then He doesn’t own us, His law is irrelevant, and He has no right to judge us. Removing the troublesome yoke of divine sovereignty liberates people to create and define their own realities. Morals and ethics become matters of individual preference or social convention—universal, transcendent authority is relegated to the unenlightened past.

The consequences of that are severe and brutal. Without a universally-binding, transcendent authority, there is no basis for justice. And who needs justice? If there’s no such thing as the special creation of man, and man is nothing more than an animal with opposable thumbs and a more sophisticated, nuanced set of grunts, what’s the point of justice?

There’s no justice in the dog-eat-dog animal kingdom, and no protection from the strong. Brutality and sensuality reign. There’s no sense of loyalty to family or morality, no sense of purpose or meaning. Life in the evolutionary worldview is inherently nihilistic. The masses forage through life, like brute beasts, mindful only of gratifying sensual desires.

That preferred version of reality is all the evolutionist has to look forward to—a cold, hard dystopia. Huxley is right about evolution’s comprehensiveness and power, but the landscape in that world is utterly bleak and hopeless.

By contrast, the biblical worldview, predicated on the thoughtful creation by a loving God, paints an entirely different picture. Here is reality, and it is truly the most powerful and the most comprehensive idea on earth because it is what God revealed in His Word. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

The biblical account of creation is comprehensive because it explains everything. The Bible declares the origin of the heavens and earth, mankind, marriage, evil, language, government, culture, technology, nations, alternate religions, the six-day workweek; it explains where a large portion of the fossil record came from; and provides a chronology of the earth’s history. While there may be apparent conflicts, there is no evidence that truly contradicts what God told us in His Word. Gathering facts and investigating the evidence continues to vindicate the biblical record and devastate Darwinian evolution.

The Bible’s creation account is also powerful because it reveals the glory and the purpose of our Creator. From that very first day, God prepared an earth that would be useful for Adam and Eve. God made man in His image, as the pinnacle of His creation, and put him at the center of His plan to glorify Himself in creation and redemption. And Genesis explains why we need redemption at all—the Fall of man helps us understand why evil exists in the world, while providing hope in God’s salvation through Jesus Christ. That’s the biblical storyline, as told by the Creator, Judge, and Redeemer of the earth. What idea could be more powerful than that?

At the end of the day, you either look to God as the first cause, or you look to something else. You’re either a materialist, believing in the eternality of matter, or you are a supernaturalist, believing in the eternality of God. The choice you make at the beginning—your a priori set of presuppositions, the assumptions you choose to believe—will determine what you accept as your final authority, how you look at the evidence, and what conclusions you’re prepared to accept.

That’s why it’s so difficult to understand why professing Christians try to make peace with evolution.

Science studies what it can observe, what can be predictably repeated; so science is out of its depth when it tries to answer questions about metaphysics. The scientific method cannot be applied to a non-repeatable supernatural act, like the inception of the universe by divine fiat, or any subsequent miracle.

Evolutionary devotees sometimes seem more like cultists than rational scientists. Many act oblivious to the faith-based nature of their operating assumptions, and are therefore wholly uncritical about their starting point. Here are just a few examples:

In every field of study, evolutionists make massively consequential, determinative assumptions; and yet they act as if it’s all settled, proven science that is beyond question.

Even though the conclusions of science remain a moving target, there are many professing Christians—in fact, most Christian institutions—who have caved in to the pervasive, evolutionary viewpoint. Many of them hope to gain credibility with the scientific establishment, and they’re willing to sacrifice the Bible to get it.

Inserting long ages into the biblical account of creation, which is required if you’re going to make the Bible compatible with evolutionary theory, twists the text of Scripture, compromises inerrancy, and sometimes even undermines the gospel. Theistic evolution and the Framework Hypothesis are two disastrous attempts to reconcile the two mutually exclusive worldviews. Whenever you put literal death before a literal Adam and Eve, you disagree with the Lord Jesus Christ, the apostle Paul, and other New Testament writers who affirm the historicity of the creation account. Death before Adam, therefore, is an abandonment of any credible claim to biblical fidelity.

In His wisdom, God tied every aspect of redemption to real history, which He recorded and interpreted in His Word. And it all starts with a literal view of the creation account, the special creation of a literal Adam and Eve, and the Fall of mankind into sin. What you believe about creation affects primary doctrines of the Bible. It is a litmus test of biblical fidelity that reveals your commitment to Scripture as the final authority.

And here are some concluding thoughts…

“No wisdom, no understanding, no counsel can avail against the Lord” (Proverbs 21:30).

The prevailing philosophies of secular humanism, materialism, and naturalism inform and bias most scientific inquiry and conclusions in favor of evolutionary theory. Evolution is indeed a powerful narrative that presents a tremendous challenge to the church. And yet, John MacArthur, along with the cadre of professors at The Master’s College and The Master’s Seminary, the leadership of Grace Community Church, and the leadership of Grace to You, have all stood firm against the rising tide and dominant winds of evolution. God will honor all those who honor His Word; those who do not honor His Word will be put to shame.

Therefore, in the interest of glorifying God by holding fast to His Word, when there is a way that seems right to today’s men (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25), we’d like to offer a few short, concluding observations, in no particular order.

The Foundational Issue of Ultimate Authority
The nature of ultimate, transcendent authority is that it is self-attesting. That means, an ultimate authority answers to no one and nothing above itself, otherwise it ceases to be ultimate.

If I tell you, “A massive storm is coming to your part of the country.” Since I’m no meteorologist, you’d be right to challenge me and demand the source of my information. I might point you to your local newscast, and again, you could challenge their authority to make such a claim. If your local weather service predicts the weather as well as mine does, well… So, you look beyond me, your local weatherman, and try to find some authority figure you trust before stocking up for the big one or evacuating the area.

That’s especially the case when it comes to metaphysical narratives that attempt to answer the big questions—Where did we come from? Why are we here? Darwinian philosophy offers one narrative, Hindu philosophy offers another, Christian philosophy another, and there are others. But the question we must ask is, “Who says?”

Time, chance, and progress stand in the place of God for the evolutionist, promising an endless “ocean of facts [with] no bottom and no shore” (Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics, 80). It’s hard to pin down their ultimate authority because it’s mutable, ever-changing, and even contradicting itself.

God is the ultimate, immutable, self-attesting authority, as demonstrated in Hebrews 6:13: “For when God made a promise to Abraham, since He had no one greater by whom to swear, He swore by Himself.” Every Christian knows God to be the ultimate authority, and His Word to be the only reliable source of truth, but some act inconsistent with that, especially when it comes to evolutionism.

The dominant “isms” of our day seem so great, so insurmountable. But their splendor quickly fades and their edifices come crumbling down when you contrast them with the God of Scripture.

The Consistent Hermeneutics of Biblical Fidelity
If we claim that God is the only self-attesting, transcendent authority (and we do), and if we claim that the Holy Bible is God-breathed, inerrant, and sufficient (and we do), then how we interpret it becomes a matter of grave importance. People have obviously misinterpreted the Bible and used it to justify all manner of error and even wickedness. It’s important to get it right.

Time and space won’t allow me to go beyond a bare assertion at this point—we’ll have to blog about it one day—but the only consistent approach to interpreting the Bible is the grammatical-historical approach. You use the rules of grammar (lexical, syntactical study) and the facts of history (setting, background study) to determine the plain sense of the text in its context.

When you apply the grammatical-historical method of interpretation to Genesis, you come out the other side with a literal, six-day creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a literal Fall, the worldwide Flood, and a young earth based on the genealogical records. With other methods of interpretation, you have the luxury of predetermining your conclusions before you start. It may not be what God intended to say, but hey, you’ll find ready acceptance in the BioLogos comment threads.

The Scientific Method and Young-Earth Creationism
Young-earth creationists are a hearty bunch. They bear the scorn and disdain of the scientific community, can’t get positions at colleges and universities, and are denied funding because their research starts with “religious,” not scientific, presuppositions. I call that unfair.

Now, I’m no scientist; but here’s how I remember the scientific method (with a little recall help from the Internet): (1) observe, (2) ask a question, (3) form a hypothesis, (4) test your hypothesis, (5) analyze the data to either accept or reject your hypothesis, and (6) accept your hypothesis or revise it and test again.

Why can’t young-earth creationists conduct scientific inquiry, using the scientific method, but within the boundaries of Scripture? Old-earth creationists do the same thing, but remain within boundaries set for them by materialism, naturalism, and secular humanism. So, why must young-earth creationists play by the rules of a God-rejecting worldview? Shouldn’t Christians demand it be the other way around?

The Error of Evidentialist Apologetics
By observing the comment threads on our blog, Phil Johnson’s blog, and the BioLogos blog, I noticed a number of times that the motivation for a number of old-earth creationists is to maintain Christian credibility with the unbelieving world, particularly those within the scientific community. They believe we need to do science according to the evolutionary model, and win them to Christ by showing them what good thinkers we are.

That’s obviously a bit of an unfair caricature, an oversimplification (forgive me), but it helps me make a couple of points. Whenever you appeal to human reason to adjudicate metaphysical questions (like origins), you set it above God as the final arbiter of reality. But human reason faces natural, creaturely limitations (e.g., bound by space, time, finite capacity). Human reason is unable to be objective because it is hindered by noetic effects of sin, affecting the ability to think; it also suffers the effects of a sin nature, which affects the will to think in a godly way. Do you really think God and His Word will get a fair hearing?

Furthermore, 1 Peter 3:15, that classic apologetic text, tells us to “sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts,” and in that manner, “make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account.” If Christ is Lord, then His Word is the supreme authority for you as a Christian. And the same hermeneutic that upholds His humanity and deity, His death, burial, and resurrection, and all the other primary truths of Scripture, should be the same hermeneutic you employ to interpret Genesis 1 and 2. Young-earth creationism is consistent with the lordship of Christ; you must not compromise that when preaching the gospel to evolutionists.

How then do you deal with the evolutionist? Stick to what God has said, trust Him completely, and put Proverbs 26:4-5 into practice—“Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him. Answer a fool as his folly deserves, lest he be wise in his own eyes.”

First, “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him.” That is, don’t enter into the evolutionist’s foolish thinking, don’t accept his set of presuppositions, don’t leave his assumptions unchallenged. If you do, you’ll become like him. That’s the lesson of the BioLogos fiasco (here, here, and here; also, take a look at the excellent posts by Phil Johnson here, here, and here).

Second, “Answer a fool as his folly deserves, lest he be wise in his own eyes.” Don’t deny the data, and don’t deny that their conclusions have the appearance of validity—maybe you have something to learn. But take the time to demonstrate (1) the folly of his assumptions and presuppositions, and (2) that the creationist framework can give an answer for the evidence (even if it doesn’t satisfy the skeptic). The point isn’t to convince the unbeliever; the point is to please the Lord and leave the unbeliever without excuse (“lest he be wise in his own eyes”).

Doing science within a young-earth creationist framework may be lonely and difficult (especially because the funding isn’t there), but it’s worth it to maintain your credibility and integrity before God and men.

The True Tone of Compromise
I found it interesting to see the comment count rise when we called out the evangelical compromises with evolutionary theory. We had little disagreement about the threat of evolution, increased disagreement about the limitations of science to answer metaphysical questions, but outright hostility, even scoffing, when John exposed the inconsistency and compromise of those who deny the straightforward, literal reading of Genesis.

Hermeneutics is clearly ground-zero in the battle. As I said, we’ll have to come back to that.

But it was also instructive to see the different types of dissenting voices in the comment thread. I’ve labeled them the Bullies, the PoMos, and the Armchair Critics.

The Bullies led out with their education and experience—PhDs and decades in the field. Some would swagger into the comment thread like boisterous gunslingers, flipping over tables and trying to intimidate all the paying customers. I suppose they gained the advantage of shock and awe, but once the dust settled, they manifested insurmountable weakness in biblical fidelity, consistency, and presuppositions.

The PoMos entered the thread gently, just trying to learn. They seemed so genuinely conflicted about the controversy, even to the point of losing sleep. They just wanted to learn from their young-earth creationist brothers, but they couldn’t get over the nagging evidences they were confronted with in the universities. But peeling away the soft, fuzzy layers of superficial agreement, we found a bedrock layer of unbelieving presuppositions and biblical inconsistency. If only they would take Scripture as seriously as they take other fields of study…

The Armchair Critics are always among the most frustrating to deal with. They tend to be lazy and brash, always casting doubts into the mix, but never taking responsibility to put forth a consistent, much less superior, alternative viewpoint. I tend to think of them in the same light as the factious man of Titus 3:10, whom we’re to reject after the first and second warning. But that’s not easy to do in a blog setting; after all, this isn’t your local church.

Well, so much more could be said, but only one thing really needs to be said. Here’s the dividing line: Do you believe the Bible, or do you not?

While you’re welcome to interact with any of the points above, we’d really like to hear from you about the impact this series has had on you. Let us know.

Thanks again for the robust commenting, and for sticking with us through the past few months—you’ve been a great group! We’ll see you in a couple of days in a brand new series.

Travis Allen

Managing Director


You have 3000 characters remaining for your comment. Note: All comments must be approved before being posted.

Submit

#1  Posted by Rudi Jensen  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 3:54 AM

Thanks John MacArthur and Travis Allen and all of you blog writers.

What a lot I have learned from you great guys. It will take me months to sort the data. Then I have a nation to reach.

#2  Posted by Matt Tocco  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 6:49 AM

I guess I would fit more into your PoMos category than the other two when I was interacting throughout this series. That said I take every word I read from the Bible very seriously and literally as well. My interest involved the fact that I know that others I interact with on a daily basis are exposed to a relentless attack of the "theory of evolution", including and especially my kids in the public schools. I personally wasn't taking more seriously other fields of study than I was taking seriously the facts within the Bible. I did consider the comments of other writers that responded, but more for strengthening my own ability to respond when faced with questions face to face as I go through my day. I'm sure there were more like me that may not have commented or asked questions (could be a whole new category). I got what I needed and more.

Thank you for this series. My understanding and my ability to communicate my belief of the literal interpretation of the Bible (God's creation / young earth) has been strengthen immensely.

#3  Posted by Paul Tucker  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 9:12 AM

Dear JM & TA:

Thanks for the blog, several times I thought that all the good stuff had been said, but I was drawn back again and again to find different issues had arisen as well as some rehashing. I have found myself studying more because of it, and trusting God more due to the refocus on the real issues being debated. Admitting that I had "fuzzed" some over the years is hard but true and the blog helped me to once again clarify my mind on what the real debate is about. Each of the websites was helpful all around. Some of them seemed to be made for the debate, and I was amazed at how unprepared some of the sites were, spouting doctrine without proof. Others were cogent (even though I did not agree with them), and it was a delight to re-connect with YEC groups like AIG and CRS. And some of the things I read from sometime ago were dusted off and hopefully made somewhat useful to others, (although not really sure about that- all of us to one extent or another see ourselves as "merchant-philosophers", to bad if it turns out that we are simply "merchant-windbags" or even worse "merchant-airheads"- just a thought:).

At any rate I wanted to express my gratitude for the discussion and for all the other resources your website provides. Keep your eyes on the prize, your brother in Christ, PT (Phil 3:7-14)

#4  Posted by Janet Young  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 10:21 AM

I listened to John's sermon series "The Battle for the Beginning" last summer and have since been a YEC. This blog series has helped me to grow (vastly) in the knowledge of what I just became convinced of a year ago. Thank You so much!!!!

#5  Posted by Elaine Bittencourt  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 2:13 PM

Thank you John MacArthur, Gabriel, Travis and others, as well as all the people who have interacted through this series. I've learned a lot.

I've always belived in the 6day/24hour creation, but I didn't know why. Thank you for helping me with answering that. I also understand why creation is so important in shaping our worldview.

God bless you all. I am looking forward to the next series.

E.

#6  Posted by Dan Wilson  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 2:32 PM

Everyone on this blog, Thank you and I learned how to have the right

attitude that Jesus want me to respond and it helped me to have a better relationship to Him. I appreciate it.

Out there is a mission field, Jesus is our shepherd, and will lead us.

God bless.

#7  Posted by Jorge Alvarado  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 3:43 PM

Thank you, GTY for a great job. The battle for the beginning series really equipped me to be able to defend what I believe about what God can do (and actually did).

#8  Posted by Mary Kidwell  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 6:22 PM

I want to add my thanks to John MacArthur and the GTY staff involved in this blog. I am thankful for your commitment to the authority of God’s Word, and your careful exegesis of God’s Word in order to rightly divide it and to preach it, in season and out of season. I believe the battle for the beginning is a battle worth fighting because I agree that Satan is behind the theory of evolution and is using it to cause many to doubt God’s Word, and to attempt to rob God of His glory by denying God’s sovereignty and authority over all of His creation. As people are blinded to their accountability to God, their creator, they are also blinded to their need for a savior.

While it has been encouraging to read the blog postings of the GTY staff and many others who share their (and my) belief in a miraculous six day creation by God approximately six thousand years ago, it has also been disheartening to read the zealous attempts by some to refute this belief. It has made me aware of the intensity of this battle and the need to pray. I pray that those who attempt to refute the plain reading of scripture would have their hearts and minds open to the truth of God’s Word, and I pray for John MacArthur, the GTY staff, and all who know the truth of God’s Word that they would remain standing strong and proclaim it.

#9  Posted by Chad Smith  |  Wednesday, August 04, 2010at 8:54 PM

I think of one of my favorite verses in scripture is 1 Thessalonians 5:17...pray with out ceasing . That is the greatest thing we can do for all those evolutionist and lost people, pray ,pray ,pray. Thanks so much GTY for this blog I didn't post much because I just don't understand all that evolution stuff and praise the Lord that I don't because it seems like a bunch of crazy stuff. I have learned a lot through this blog and will continue to learn through this site . Praise The Lord Jesus Christ

For his glory

Chad

P.S. I have been praying for you guys daily hope all is going well, keep fighting the good fight

#10  Posted by Rick White  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 3:22 AM

Comment deleted by user.
#11  Posted by Orlando Delgado  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 6:17 AM

Travis,

Thank you for the series, truly I count it as one of my most treasured blessings from the Lord in this tough walk where there is so much inundating, convoluted efforts against the word of God. I did not comment on every blog but did read a great percentage (80-85) of them. But I did not have to read all of them to come to the final question “do you believe the Bible, or do you not?”

I have believed the written word of God for about five years now, when in repentance of my prideful and filthy heart, and confronted with the righteousness of Jesus, and the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, I begged to be accepted by the Lord and a change of my heart. By the grace of God, and discernment He has place in my heart, I have come to a better understanding of His Word thru GTY (and affiliate ministries). I did learn a great deal where the evolutionists come from; even the evolutionist-Christians ‘wanna be’s’.

Again, thanks for the series, and please keep those with a different view of Scriptures in your prayers, more importantly those that auto proclaim themselves as Christians but denied it through a lie, the Word of God.

Orlando

#12  Posted by Alex Soriano  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 8:49 AM

This whole blog series widened my perspective and informed me a lot and gave me new categories I can pull up to depend my faith. I tried to comment sometimes but I didn’t measure-up with those thinkers out there so often times I just simply read and think. Thanks anyway; at least I’m thinking harder now. Thanks Pastor John MacArthur and Travis Allen. It’s been a blessing to be here.

#13  Posted by Mary Elizabeth Palshan  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 11:13 AM

Thanks to all the Moderators, Fred, Travis, and Gabriel for making this such an interesting topic. Also, thanks to Dr. MacArthur for standing firm in a YEC, six literal days, position.

When this subject started, I had mentioned that I never had studied this subject very much, ONLY because I have always taken God at His Word. I now see the importance of knowing this subject even better. I do not live on an island and I may be able to convince some young college student of the errors of evolution. Now that I have followed this blog and Phil Johnson's, I feel a bit more equipped to help others see Genesis as God intended it to be.

Once again, this has been so informative. Thanks to all you young fellows for being so faithful to God's Word.

#14  Posted by Mike Sexton  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 11:18 AM

To Pastor John and the admins, thanks a lot for this blog series. At the beginning of it, I was OEC because it just seemed to make good sense. After reading everything here and at Pyromaniacs, I was inspired enough to work a full day's visit to the Creation Museum into my vacation plans. All my foundations cracked and now I am firmly a believer in the 6, 24-hour day, literal creation, as the Bible clearly teaches. A while back, a question occurred to me, "If I could find scientifically verifiable evidence that everything the Bible says is false, would I still accept it as truth?" I thought long and hard about that question before I answered yes. The issue is the undoubtedly the authority of scripture as it clearly speaks. Though many others may think me a fool to ignore what seems to be reasonable, and clear, I cannot help but to accept God's word on faith, without seeing...even to the point of denying what I do see when it contradicts the word. I have no doubt that others can dispute my position...and that's fine, but I can't be swayed from it...not by men. So thanks again for this series...it has truly been a blessing!

1 Corinthians 1:25

#15  Posted by Carol Gayheart  |  Thursday, August 05, 2010at 9:05 PM

Wow! What a ride! I've lost so much sleep, searched Scriptures, prayed for discernment & for those who struggle to accept God's word as being litterally & historically accurate; but mostly I've been challenged to clarify & declare my own beliefs (which were already rooted in Scripture but are now strengthened by reinforcing arguments presented here) through my postings and debates & which I feel has emboldened me & prepared me to take this debate out into my surroundings as I've discussed this topic with others. Thanks to all, & to GTY staff especially, for keeping me on my toes! May God continue to bless Pastor MacArthur & all of the GTY ministries! Bring on the next topic! Can't wait to learn more! :)

#16  Posted by Millard Lightfoot  |  Friday, August 06, 2010at 7:59 AM

I too would like give thanks to John MacArthur and GTY for this series of ‘the beginning’ as our God has described in His Bible. My educational background took me to the brink of the scientific ream of theoretical knowledge of its day and I must say that those influences did in fact burr my vision for many years. It wasn’t ‘The battle for the beginning’ series that solidified my belief in a six day creation week but a lengthy meditation period of answered prayers that did. I will say that ‘The battle for the beginning’ series certainly helped and may have actually been the final answered prayer that helped me clear my vision. I praise glory to God alone for that.

This blog has helped me to understand how some that I think of as the Christian left are attempting to redefine or reinterpret the Bible to fit any possible mutations they want just to “tickle their ears”. I pray for if it is our Lords will that their vision will also be cleared and their understanding that there is only one interpretation of Gods word which is Literal in all respects without contradiction.

Thanks again and may God Bless

#17  Posted by Elizabeth Offer  |  Friday, August 06, 2010at 9:42 AM

I appreciate all I have learned from GTY on how important it is for

a believer in the Gospel to believe that Genesis is the true story

of creation. I was once a biology major then switched to nursing

many years ago. Now I have a daughter who was being taught in freshman biology class that evolution was a theory, and many

of her friends were telling her she can be christian and believe

in evolution. The creation series really helped me discuss evolution with her as totally against what the Bible teaches. I am happy to say she started questioning evolution and decided on her own that it is untrue. Thanks Gty.

#18  Posted by Rick White  |  Saturday, August 07, 2010at 5:21 AM

One thing this series has taught us is now we can add Theistic Evolutionists and Old Earth Creationists to the list of adhererents to the false notion that the Bible is ambiguous.Unlike the Roman Catholic and the Gnostic we don't need a special interpreter or special knowledge in order to understand the Bible or at least certain parts of it. I can't believe they can't see how dangerous that premise is. History has shown us that many who start down that path end up as apostates. My sincere prayer is that they come to see their error and return to the belief in the perspecuity of the scriptures and see that we don't need extra-biblical sources to interpret them for us.

#20  Posted by Ken Wolgemuth  |  Tuesday, August 10, 2010at 8:33 PM

I have appreciated connecting with this blog to understand more clearly the teaching of John MacArthur about the Creation. I read his book on The Battle for the Beginning a few years ago, and this provided a refresher, from a teacher whom I respect for his commitment to the authority of Scripture and his passion for the gospel message. This is also demonstrated by his teaching at "Together for the Gospel." Thank you for that passion to communicate the message of our Lord Jesus Christ.