Piltdown Superman

How do biblical creationists explain some of the things we see in nature? After all, the Bible clearly teaches that everything was created vegetarian in the beginning, and God said his creation was "very good". I suspicion that "very good" supports the contention that living creatures, נפש חיה, did not experience death for a short time because death was not a part of God's creation. freeimages.com / mexikids Indeed, death entered through sin (Romans 8.19-23a), and death is an enemy (1 Cor. 15.26) — do you reckon that death will be a part of the new creation at the end of it all? Not hardly! So, back to the big questions: From a biblical creationist perspective, where did death, pointy teeth, venom, poison and all that stuff enter into the picture, and can this be addressed without compromising on scriptural truth? There are answers that are theologically sound, and also have scientific support. One of the most common questions asked of Christians is so

— Cowboy Bob Sorensen A frequent complaint that atheists and evolutionist have against the Bible pertains to free will, a subject that has been debated for a long, long time. Some of them complain from prejudicial conjecture (presenting an uninformed, biased opinion), incomplete information or simple ignorance. The problem is compounded because different theologians have varying explanations for free will. Most Christians agree, however, that God did not create us to be robots. Someone made a comment on Facebook demanding scientific proof for the existence of the soul. Right. That is a logical fallacy called the category error — you cannot use material methods to test for the non-material. It is just as futile to require empirical evidence for the existence of God, who is spirit and outside the confines of time and space. You may as well ask for a bushel basket of patriotism. If evolution were true, then free will is impossible. Think about it. We are all star stuff, ultimate

Review of Refuting Compromise written by Dr. Jonathan D. Sarfati by Cowboy Bob Sorensen The title of this article was inspired by a someone's post. It said to take the title of a book you had read and add, "...with a chainsaw". I was just finishing up Refuting Compromise and realized that this addition fit quite well. Perhaps Dr. Sarfati will forgive me for adding to his words and not rebuke me, making me a liar ( Proverbs 30.6 ). But enough of my strange sense of humor. Refuting Compromise was written to deal with the bad apologetics of Dr. Hugh Ross, a "progressive creationist" (who also calls himself by the odd title of "day-age creationist"), and unfortunately, many people look up to Ross and his "Reasons to Believe" organization. When I purchased this book, it was because I felt that I needed it for reference, even though I had not dealt all that much with Rossites or spent time with Ross' teachings. It turns out that

We expect secularists to promote the view that the earth is millions of years old. Unfortunately, many Christians are willing to go along with that view as well. Some of these Christians are active compromisers, accepting the dubious science and bad theology of people like "progressive creationist" Hugh Ross (among others). What is worse is that many of them actively oppose those of us who hold to a biblical creationist view. There are others who just agree with the scientists and liberal theologians because they simply have not bothered to investigate. Oh, we can explain things, but we cannot make people understand them or accept the explanations; their inability (or unwillingness) to understand is not our fault. freeimages.com / "Mini Rock Landscape" / teslacoils Many will consider the age of the earth as a fact, even though this "fact" has changed several times. At The Question Evolution Project on Facebook , we receive comments like, "...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Creationists expect to be ridiculed, lied to (and lied about) by atheists and anti-creationists. That goes with the territory. But what happens when someone wants to gain information about creation science and theology but may not realize that the site or social media location has a more insidious goal? Recent experiences prompted me to seek counsel from Christian friends, and this article is the result. It is going to be different from most of the material here; I want to caution people who are looking for good creation science and theological material. That sounds strange, but stay with me on this as it can be very important for your spiritual well-being. Background I choose from a variety of sources for the featured articles and to include in the Creation Links section. Sometimes the individual article is acceptable, but I do not want to risk sending someone to a site that may lur

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen In the debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye the Evolutionary Dogma Guy, Nye decided it would be a good idea to ridicule Noah's ark and the Genesis Flood. In his prepackaged-sounding objections to creation science and the Flood, he engaged in numerous logical fallacies. One was asserting uninformed opinions that would have a negative influence on listeners (prejudicial conjecture). One of these was that some shipbuilders designed a ship that sank, therefore, Noah's ark could not have worked. Like so many others of his nature, he did not do his homework, embarrassing himself and other evolution propagandists. Both Bill Nye and Ken Ham managed to get people thinking and asking questions. Don't Miss the Boat — Facts to Keep Your Faith Afloat by Paul Taylor answers some questions and will prompt further investigation. The Genesis Flood is a biblical event, and Paul gives us a clear biblical viewpoint as well as the science of the Flood, draw

When I was younger, I accepted Theistic Evolution ("TE"): Just go along with the evolutionist crowd and slap God's name on it as a kind of blessing. That way, I had everything covered. But I had no real knowledge of science nor theology. Once I started learning, it did not take me long to realize that TE meant doing violence to the teachings of the Bible. Today, I notice compromisers getting praise and support from atheists. And why not? Atheists necessarily believe in evolution , and both agree that the Bible is not authoritative and does not mean what it says, just that TEs agree with this a bit less than atheists. I have seen positions held by biblical compromisers like Biologos , James McGrath ,  David Montgomery and others applauded by atheists. Let's face it, placing current science trends and philosophies above God's Word just brings these people closer to atheism. In fact, people have left the faith because of evolution and lack of grounding in Scri

Also posted at "Stormbringer's Thunder". This is a different kind of article for me, because it was a new experience. I pestered Chris Date to let me be on his " Theopologetics " podcast to talk about creation science. He was interested, and said he had someone else in mind so that all three of us could do the podcast. This would be great in the lead-up to "Question Evolution Day". It was scheduled several weeks away. We got the outline of questions he was going to ask, and shared it online to create our responses. Finally, the evening of February 7, 2012 arrived. This was my first conference call on Skype, and only about the fifth time I've used it at all, so I was a bit awkward with it. Chris is experienced not only with technological things, but able to develop the interview questions to bring out the strengths of his guests. He is also serious about theology itself, and takes the Bible very seriously (I recall asking him if he tends