Fish and Spontaneous Generation

Posted on June 4, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

A land-owner digs a pond on his land.  He does not stock the pond with fish.  Yet, somehow, fish appear.  Is this spontaneous generation?

The answer is no.  Fish eggs are carried on the bodies of aquatic birds and other animals that move between bodies of water.  Yahoo Answers says, “Think about the feathers on a duck (or any of dozens of different species of aquatic birds like geese, osprey, kingfishers, herons, loons, etc.).  These birds spend most of their days swimming and diving in the murky shallows of lakes and ponds filled with fish eggs and frog eggs.  Their feathers will be laced with eggs.  If these birds then fly off and later take a dip in your pond (birds do like to preen themselves in clean water… which is why we build bird baths), you now have a pond seeded with frog or fish eggs.  It can take a couple of years of many birds doing this before the fish take hold.  But if there is enough food from the algae in the water, the fish with start to thrive.”  If the new water-hole were indoors, covered, or in some way kept completely separated from animal life, fish would not appear.

Here is a point to ponder – think of God’s amazing creation.  He created things in such a way that new bodies of water could soon be naturally stocked with fish and frogs.  “O LORD, our Lord, How excellent is Your name in all the earth!” (Psalm 8:1, 9).  “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2).  The more we study His creation, the more in awe we should be.  “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork” (Psalm 19:1).

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, life, science | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Questions About Creation

Posted on June 2, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

“In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11).

“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them make and female,’ and said ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-5).

“Man is not from woman, but woman from man.  Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man” (1 Corinthians 11:8-9). 

“Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman deceived fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:13-14).

“Through one man sin entered the world” (Romans 5:12).

The book of Genesis is foundational to understanding the rest of the Bible.  Henry Morris remarked, “If the Bible were somehow expurgated of the book of Genesis… the rest of the Bible would be incomprehensible.  It would be like a building without a ground floor, or a bridge with no support” (The Genesis Record, p. 17).  He lists 77 important Biblical words which first appear in Genesis (ibid, p. 687).  Genesis tells us of the origin of man, woman, and the home (Genesis 1 2). Genesis tells us about sin and how God views sin (Genesis 3, 6).  It tells us of God’s preserving a seedline through Abram in order to bless humanity (Genesis 12:1-3).

There are common questions which are asked about the Genesis account of creation.  This writing will  provide concise answers to some of these common questions.

1.  Is Genesis Myth?

All of the New Testament writers quote or reference the book of Genesis.  There are 200 specific references to Genesis in the New Testament (for the list, see – creationstudies.org).  Half of the 200 references are from Genesis 1-11, and 63 are from Genesis 1-3.  All of the New Testament writers make reference to Genesis. All of the New Testament books contain allusions to Genesis except the books of Philemon, 2 John, and 3 John.  Only 7 of the 50 chapters of Genesis are not quoted in the New Testament (20, 24, 34, 36, 40, 43, 44).  There are 14 references to the flood in the New Testament (stats from Dave Miller, Fundamentals II Class Notes, Brown Trail School of Preaching).  Not one New Testament writer presents characters or events in Genesis as myths.

The Bible presents the people as historical characters.  Abel is presented as being as historically real as Zachariah (Matthew 23:35).  Noah and Job are presented as being as historically real as Daniel (Ezekiel 14:14, 20).  Never are the characters of Genesis depicted as myths by Biblical writers.

Certain teachings are based upon Genesis.  Jesus’ teaching about marriage is grounded in creation (Matthew 19:4-6).  Paul’s teaching about women’s roles is grounded in creation (1 Corinthians 11:8-9; 1 Timothy 2:13-14).  Israel’s work week was based on creation (Exodus 20:9-11).  There is no hint that these were taken as myths or fables.

2.  Is there a gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2?

Some have theorized that the heavens and the earth were created in Genesis 1:1, but that it became “without form and void” in Genesis 1:2.  Moreover, it is theorized that between these verses there lived plants, animals, and even a pre-Adamic race of men.  However, God destroyed all life and started over in Genesis 1:2.  This theory is popular with some because, it allows for an old earth.

Some common arguments to support this view are: (a) It is argued that the term “was” could be rendered “became.”  (b) It is argued that Adam and Eve were told to “replenish” the earth (Genesis 1:28 KJV).  (c) God did not create the earth in “vain” (Isaiah 45:18).  This is the same original word translated “without form.”  (d) A distinction between “created” (bara) and “made” (asah) is made.

Let us briefly answer these arguments.  (a) Should “was” be rendered “became”?  Henry Morris has written, “The verb is the regular Hebrew verb of being (hayetha), not the word normally used to denote a change of state (haphak).  Although hayetha can also, if the context warrants, be used to introduce a change of state, it simply means “was” in 98% of its occurrences” (The Genesis Record, p. 49).  Harold Stiger has commented, “When the verb ‘to be’ (hayah) is to be constructed as ‘became,’ the addition of the prepositional lamedh is required with the following word to provide this meaning, and this preposition is absent here” (Bert Thompson and Gary Workman, p. 6).  John Whitcomb remarked, “If it had to be translated ‘became,’ then we would have to say that Adam and Eve ‘became’ naked (Genesis 2:25)…” (The Early Earth, p. 146).  (b) What about the word “replenish”?  Henry Morris has written, “This does not suggest the idea of refilling… The Hebrew word is male, and means simply ‘fill’… of the more than three hundred times it is used, it is translated (in the KJV) by ‘replenish’ only seven times; and even these could have been rendered ‘fill'” (The Genesis Record, p. 76).  The NKJV, NASB, and ESV render it ‘fill.’  The New Brown-Drivers-Briggs-Gegenius Lexicon renders it “fill.”  Wayne Jackson commented, “The word, ‘replenish,’ at the time the King James Version was translated simply meant ‘fill'” (Notes From the Margin of My Bible, Vol. 1, p. 3).   (c) What about Isaiah 45:18?  “The immediate context… has to do with Israel and God’s promises to His people.  Isaiah reminds his listeners that just as God had a purpose in creating the Earth, so He had a purpose for Israel.  …God created the earth ‘to be inhabited'” (Bert Thompson, Popular Compromises of Creation – The Gap Theory).  Wayne Jackson commented, “The earth was not created to remain empty; rather it was designed to be inhabited” (God’s Prophet of Doom and Deliverance; Isaiah, p. 91).

What about Genesis 1:2?  John Whitcomb wrote, “It was simply empty of living things and without the features it later possessed, such as oceans, continents, hills and valleys – features that would be essential for man’s well-being” (Bert Thompson, Popular Compromises of Creation – The Gap Theory).

The words “without form” and “void” do not mean destruction.  A concordance will demonstrate this point. Furthermore, John Whitcomb has written, “To be sure the only passages besides Genesis 1:2 where tohu and bohu appear together – Isaiah 34:11 and Jeremiah 4:23 – are placed in context which emphasize divine judgment.  But even here the basic meaning of empty or uninhabited fits well” (The Early Earth, p. 148).  (d) What about “created” (bara) and “made” (asah)?  It is argued that God in Genesis 1:1 “created” (bara) the heavens and the earth.  However, the six days refers to what he “made” (asah) (Genesis 1:31).  The first word it is claimed refers to original creation, and the second to a remaking.  However, such distinction is not there.  The words are used interchangeably (Genesis 1:26 cf. 1:27).

The Biblical writers do not speak of a pre-Adamic human race.  Adam is called “the first man” (1 Corinthians 15:45).  Sin is said to have entered the world through Adam (Romans 5:12-ff).

3.  Are the days of creation long periods of time?

This theory is popular with many.  It allows for an old earth.

There are problems with this view.  (a) A “day” is defined in context as “an evening and a morning” (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31).  (b) If a “day” refers to a long period of time, then what is an “evening” and a “morning”?  (c) If a “day” refers to a long period of time, then what are “seasons” and “years” (Genesis 1:14)?  (d) Bert Thompson has written, “Whenever the Hebrew word ‘yom’ (day – B.H.) is preceded by a numeral, it always carries the meaning of a 24-hour day” (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 8).  The record speaks of “the first day,” “the second day,” etc.  (e) Henry Morris has written, “When the words ‘days’ appears in the plural (Hebrew – yamin) as it does over 700 times in the Old Testament, it always refers to literal day” (Bert Thompson and Gary Workman, Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 8).  Exodus 20:11 reads, “in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them.”  (f) “The  Hebrew phrase translated ‘evening and morning’ is used over 100 times in the Old Testament with the word ‘yom’.  Each time it refers to a literal 24-hour day” (ibid, pp. 8-9).  (g) If God had intended to covey a literal day, wouldn’t He had used the language He did?  (h) Jesus asked, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female'” (Matthew 19:4).  Does this sound like one can fit billions of years between day one and day six?  (i) Paul wrote, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made… so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).  Does this sound like man arrived billions of years after the creation of the world?

4.  Could there be gaps in genealogy after creation?

It is thought by some that billions of years can be fit into gaps in genealogy.  This allows them to believe in an old earth.

It is true that some of the genealogy lists do contain gaps.  For example: Ezra 7:3 lists Azariah as the son of Meraioth.  However, there are six descendants between them (1 Chronicles 6:7-9).  Also: Matthew 1:8 lists Uzziah as the son of Joram.  However, he was not the immediate son (2 Chronicles 21:1 cf. 22:1 cf. 22:11; 24:1 cf. 24:27 cf. 26:1).  The later record is often abbreviated.  Matthew groups his list of names into three sections of fourteen generations (Matthew 1:17).  The ESV Study Bible commented, “Perhaps for ease of memorization, or perhaps for literary or symbolic symmetry, Matthew structures the genealogy to count 14 generations from each major section.”

However, this argument is weak.  (a) The reason that we know of such gaps is because the Bible fills in details in other lists.  This does not suggest billions of years of history unlisted anywhere in the Bible.  (b) There is a great difference between gaps in names listed and gaps in chronology.  For example: The Bible lists 10 generations from Adam to Noah and 1056 years (Genesis 5).  Even if there were 50 generations there remains 1056 years of chronology.  (c) Can you fit billions of years into 13 generations?  Let me explain – How many years are there between us and Jesus?  A bit over 2,000 years.  How much time between Jesus and Abraham?  About 2,000 years.  The billions of years need to be fit into the time between Abraham and Adam.  How many generations existed according to the Bible between these two men?  The answer is twenty (Genesis 5 and Genesis 11).  Enoch is confirmed to be the seventh from Adam (Jude 14 cf. Genesis 5).  This leaves 13 generations in which to find these great gaps in genealogy into which one can insert billions of years.  However, remember that there is a huge difference between gaps in genealogy and gaps in chronology!  Chronologically there are 2,008 years between Adam and Abraham (this is based on Noah being 502 when Shem was born, and Terah being 130 when Abraham was born).

5.  How was there light on day one (Genesis 1:3), yet the sun, moon and stars were not created until day four (Genesis 1:14-18)?

Some have suggested that the sun, moon and stars were created on day one, but were not visible upon earth until day four, due to the shroud of thick vapor.  However, the words, “Let there be…” are the same words that appear throughout this chapter (1:3; 1:6; 1:14).  This sound like creation.

Bert Thompson and Gary Workman have written, “On the first day God said, ‘Let there be light’ (Hebrew or) whereas on the fourth day God said, ‘Let there be lights (ma-or, light-bearers).  Therefore, God’s first recorded statement created independent light without a light-bearer.  And since God instructed the light-darkness cycle on that day, we must conclude that the light came from a fixed direction and that the earth rotated on its axis.  In eternity there will again be light without the sun  – Revelation 21:23″ (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 14).

There are other examples of light without the light bearing of the sun and moon. God provided a “pillar of fire” by night for the children of Israel (Exodus 13:21-22; 14:24; Numbers 14:14; Nehemiah 9:12). One day the saints will live in a city illuminated by God and the lamb, but it will not have a sun or moon.

6.  What is the firmament (Genesis 1:6-8; 1:17)?

The original word (raqia) refers to an “expanse” or “something stretched, spread or beaten out” (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 15).  The ESV reads, “an expanse.” The firmament refers to the atmosphere (Genesis 1:6-8).  The firmament refers to outer space (Genesis 1:14-17).  God “stretches out the heavens like a curtain” (Isaiah 40:22).

7.  Why are there two different creation accounts (Genesis 1:1-2:4 and Genesis 2:4b – 2:25)?

There is a different emphasis the first present creation in a straight forward chronological order.  The second puts man’s role in the created order, man’s warning from God, and the creation of the first family unit as the focus.  Billy Bland has written, “One brother likened it to a ‘instant replay, isolated camera,’ where the cameraman allows the viewer to go back and see an event in greater detail” (The Memphis School of Preaching Lectureship, The Book of Genesis, p. 79.  Bland is quoting Bob Winton’s outlined Commentary on Genesis).

The book of Genesis is divided into nine sections: (1) The generations of the heavens and earth (Genesis 1:1-2:4).  (2) The generations of Adam (Genesis 2:4b-5:1).  (3) The generations of Noah (Genesis 5:1b-6:9).  (4) The generations of the sons of Noah (Genesis 6:9-10:1).  (5) The generations of Shem (Genesis 10:1b-11:10).  (6) The generations of Terah (Genesis 11:10b-11:27).  (7) The generations of Isaac (Genesis 11:27b-25:19).  (8) The generations of Jacob (Genesis 25:19b-37:2).  (9) The generations of the sons of Jacob (Genesis 37:2b-50:26).  The focus in each section is different.

8.  Isn’t there too much activity in Genesis 2:18-25 for a 24-hour day?

Eric Lyons has answered this point in an Apologetics Press article entitled, “Too Much Activity on Day Six?”  In this article he makes the following points: (a) Adam did not have to search for all of the creatures.  God brought them to him (Genesis 2:19).  (b) Adam did not name all of the animals on earth.  He named all cattle, birds of the air, and beasts of the field (Genesis 2:20).  Excluded are sea creatures, and creeping things.  (c) It is possible that the animals brought to him and name by him were limited to the animals which resided in Eden.  God was trying to send a message to Adam. There was no helper comparable to him to be found. He was unique, and he needed a mate. (d) It does not say that he named every species of animals that now exists (for example today there are hundreds of different varieties of dogs, cats, cattle, etc.), or might have then existed.  Likely, he was giving names to “kinds”.

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, Stats | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marrying “Only in the Lord”

Posted on May 31, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

These words are found in 1 Corinthians 7:39. In that passage; we are told:  (a) that a widow may marry again;  (b) that she may marry “whom she wishes”;  (c) But, if she marries, she should marry “only in the Lord.”

Now, I have heard brethren try to explain this passage in different ways. (a) Some have suggested that what is being taught in the restrictive phrase, “only in the Lord,” is that the widow must make sure that she is marrying consistent with God’s will – i.e. not violating passages such as Matthew 19:9, 1 Corinthians 7:11a, etc. (b) Others have repunctuated the sentence structure, putting the phrase with verse 40; Thus, making the words “only in the Lord” mean in essence – “As a Christian (only in the Lord) however, I believe (after my judgment) that she will have a happier existence if she remains unmarried (if she so abide) … due to the present distresses faced by the early church at this time” (cf. v. 26-27). But, (c) the most common explanation is that this passage teaches that a widow may, indeed, marry. However, if she does, she must marry a Christian.

Now, with all of those explanations it is easy to get confused; However, if we could soberly consider an Old Testament passage, and compare it to 1 Corinthians 7:39, I believe that the actual meaning will be clear. Consider Numbers 36:5-6.

Watch the parallel:

  1.   Numbers 36:5-6                daughters of Zelophehad                                                                 1 Corinthians 7:39                      widow
  2.  let them marry                                                                                                                              she is at liberty to be married
  3. to whom they think best                                                                                                                 to whom she wishes
  4. they may marry only within the family of the their father’s tribe                                     only in the Lord.

Watch the following facts: (1) The language of Numbers 36:6 and 1 Corinthians 7:39 are very similar in wording; (2) The restive clause of the Numbers 36:6 passage clearly concerns instruction as to whom one should marry. Doesn’t it make sense then, that must be what 1 Corinthians  7:39 is referring to as well?

The wording “In the Lord” may be used in different ways Biblically. However, it seems clear to me that 1 Corinthians 7:39 does teach that a Christian widow woman should marry an eligible Christian man, if she is going to marry.

Posted in Dating, Marriage, Phrase Study, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Marry A Strong Christian

Posted on May 29, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

I firmly believe that who one marries is one of the most important decisions one will ever spiritually make, it may determine where you spend eternity.  Marry someone who will help you to heaven.  Do not marry anyone who would hinder you from making it to heaven.  It may determine where your children, and even grandchildren will spend eternity. Marry someone who will help them to heaven.  Do not marry anyone who would hinder them from making it to heaven.

1.  Old Testament

Israel was warned against entering into religiously mixed – marriages (Exodus 34:11-16; Dueteronomy 7:1-4).  They were told – “You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor make their daughter for your son.  For they will turn your sons away from following me, to serve other gods” (Deuteronomy 7:4).  They did not listen (cf. Judge 3:5-6).  “King Solomon loved many foreign women. . .  his wives turned his heart after other gods and his heart was not loyal to the Lord his God, as was the heart of his father David” (1 Kings 11:1-4).  “Ahab . . . sold himself to do wickedness in the sight of the Lord, because Jezebel his wife stirred him up“ (1 Kings 21:25).  “Ahab . . . took as wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians; and he went and served Baal and worshipped him” (1 Kings 16:29-31).

God-fearing parents of old were greatly concerned over whom their children married. Abraham was (Genesis 24:1-4).  Rebekah and Isaac were (Genesis 27:46-28:2; 26:34-35 cf 28:8-9).  Manoah and his wife were (Judges 14:2-3).

2. New Testament

Paul, if he married, would select a Christian for a wife.  He wrote, “Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5).

It is true that one reads about Christians who were married to non-Christians (1 Corinthians 7:12-16; 1 Peter 3:1-6).  However, this does not mean that such was being encouraged. Johnny Ramsey commented on 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 “Marriages between Christians and unbelievers, a situation which arose, not from Christians marrying unbelievers, but from conversion of one out of an unbelieving (or pagan) couple” (Bruce Curd, Marry Only In The Lord, p.125).  This may be correct, never does one read about a Christian marrying or contemplating marrying and unbeliever.

3. Statistics

(a) “Divorce occurs three times as often in mixed marriages as in marriages between members of the same religious convictions” (Curd, p. 1).

(b)“Of every 100 Christians marrying, out of the church, it is estimated that 20 convert their companions, 24 live a divided life, and 56 quit the church” (ibid, p.103).

(c) A congregation in Oklahoma studied the lives of 143 of their young people.  79 of them married outside the church, of this number 57 left the church, only 22 were still faithful, just 14 had converted their mates (ibid, p.214).

4. Danger to Self

“Olivia Langdon was a believer who married Mark Twain, an unbeliever. She thought that her sweet spirit and devout faith would soon win her husband. During the first few months of their marriage they had thanks before each meal and read a chapter in the Bible every day. Such was soon stopped as Twain complained about the formality of it. They ceased going to worship . . .  Olivia gave up some of her religious conviction, having her faith in the providence and promises of God shaken through her husband’s philosophy. When she came to face the dark valley of the shadow of death, and knowing that her life was short Twain said to her ‘Livey, if it comforts you to lean on the Christian faith do so.’ She answered, ‘I can’t . . . I haven’t any’” (Warren, Your Marriage Can Be Great, p. 268).

Hugo McCord remarked “A wise Christian will offer a ring to no unconverted girl no matter how promising the union appears and an informed Christian girl will resolve to accept the ring of no unconverted man regardless of what he promises. If one cannot convert a person in the days of courtship, he deludes himself that it will be possible later.  If reforming of any kind is needed, religious or otherwise, experience has shown it had better be done before marriage” (Curd, p.105).

5. Danger to Children

Likely, children will come. Do you want a non-Christian teaching them and influencing them? What if you died young? Would you be comfortable with the non-Christian providing their religious training?

6. Illustration

“Imagine that a young man living in Atlanta is going to fly to Los Angeles. At the airport he meets an attractive young lady, and he gets into a conversation with her. He asks her where she going and she replies ‘to Chicago.’ ‘Well,’ he says, ‘that’s marvelous, I’m going to Los Angeles – let’s travel together so we can enjoy each other’s company!’ . . . They cannot travel together in opposite directions. What no intelligent man or woman would do in travel, many attempt to do in marriage.” (Curd, p. 28).

7. What if I am married to a non-Christian?

Do not compromise. Be faithful in attendance and in principles. Make it your practice to regularly read the Bible and pray. Never forsake the assembling of the saints to attend a denomination. If you are not serious about things, why should your spouse ever be? Live the Christian life and try to win them over by your conduct (1 Peter 3:1-6). It is important that you do not provide a reason for your spouse not to respect and take seriously Christianity.

Posted in Dating, Marriage, Stats | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Spontaneous Generation

Posted on May 27, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

At one point in the not too distant past, many intellectuals believed in a doctrine called “spontaneous generation” or “A-biogenesis.” That is, it was thought that life could spontaneously arise from non-living or inanimate matter. Prominent men believed this: Men such as William Harvey (English Physician), Francis Bacon (English Philosopher), Rene Descartes (French Mathematician/Philosopher), and Aristotle (Greek Philosopher/Educator/Scientist).

In the book, The History of Evolutionary Thought by Bert Thompson, this is told, “Jon Baptista van Helmont (1577-1644 A.D.) an outstanding Belgium scientist, physician and chemist brought forth experimental evidence to support his view that mice could develop from wheat kernels. He performed an experiment in which he wrapped some wheat kernels and cheese tidbits in a sweat-soaked shirt and stuffed the whole mass into an open container. He left the container, and when he examined it some 20 days later, he noted that due to some mysterious influence of human sweat, the kernels had ‘spontaneously generated’ into baby mice!” (Bert Thompson, The History of Evolutionary Thought, p. 95)

Let’s move now to some efforts against this ignorance. Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) was born in Dole, Jura, France on December 27, 1822. In 1854, Pasteur was appointed professor and Dean of Science at the University of Lille. He is sometimes called the “Father of bacteriology.” The word “pasteurize” comes down to us from his name and refers to the process of heating milk to kill off harmful microorganisms. But, let us begin in the 1850’s. The wine industry in France was troubled financially due to souring wine.  They thought “spontaneous generation” was to blame. Pasteur determined that these organisms had not “spontaneously generated” but were present in the air, and that as these organisms come in contact with the wine, souring occurred … He then showed how by heating the wine the organisms could be killed. Bert Thompson records Pasteur’s words, “Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment … can matter organize itself? In other words, are there beings that can come into the world without parents, without ancestors? … No, today there is no circumstance known under which one could affirm that microscopial beings have come into the world without germs, without parents resembling them.” (ibid, p. 98)

Another, an Italian physician by the name of Francesco Redi also did experimentation in this area in the year 1668. He took three jars and placed in them meat and fish. One jar he left open. One jar he covered with a mesh net. The third jar he sealed airtight. Only in the open jar (where female flies could land to deposit her eggs on the meat and fish did maggot develop. Maggots did not “spontaneously generate.” In the book, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, Andrew White wrote, “by researches which could not be gainsaid, he showed that every one of these animals come from an egg …” (Andrew D. White,  A History Of The Warfare Of Science With Theology In Christendom, p. 42)

Two other men also contributed in understanding. John Needham (1713-1781) put some gravy in a corked sealed vessel. He left it for a period of time and returned, finding microorganisms. He concluded “spontaneous generation.” An Italian, Lazzaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) did the same experiment. He, however, boiled the contents for a long period, and sealed the vessel airtight. The results: no microorganism contamination.

Yes, people really did believe in such, and some do today. No one has ever demonstrated “spontaneous generation.” But, you see if one does not want to believe in God, one needs explain life in some way.

Conclusion

Folks, something does not come from nothing. Life does not come from non-life. Never is such seen today. “Spontaneous generation” has never been demonstrated, in fact the evidence speaks powerfully against it. Those who claim that life naturally can so arise from non-living matter should be put to the test, and pressed to prove it (1 Thessalonians. 5:21), or at least made to acknowledge that such a theory is beyond science. Dr. Paul Weisz, in his book, Elements of Biology, has well said, “All science begins with observation … something that cannot be observed cannot be investigated by science.”(Wayne Jackson and Bert Thompson, A Study Course In Christian Evidence, p. 50). Dr. F. J. Ayala said, “A hypothesis is … scientific only if it can be tested by experience … a hypothesis or theory which cannot be … does not belong to the realm of science” (ibid).

God says that things reproduce after their kind (Genesis 1). We know that this occurs.

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, life, science | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“When… Without Strength”

Posted on May 22, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

In Romans 4:12, 16-17a, we are told that we need to have the faith of Abraham.  Without such faith is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6).

Paul, then provides an illustration of Abraham’s faith (Romans 4:17-22).  When Abraham’s having a child through Sarah, by strictly natural means was impossible (Genesis 17:17; 18:11) – when Sarah was barren, dead in the womb (Romans 4:19), ceased after the manner of women (Genesis 18:11) – he (after the initial shock) trusted God in this matter.  Moreover, ultimately he gave God the glory (For he knew that such was not possible without God).  M.C. Moser  remarked, “It is easy to miss the chief points in Abraham’s faith. His faith was the result of two factors, namely Abraham`s deep awareness of his and Sarah`s physical impotence, and the power of God to fulfill His promise to give them a son… If they had been blessed with normal bodies, having a son would have required neither divine intervention, nor such faith as Abraham had” ( The Gist Of Romans, p. 36).

Question: Since this child (Isaac) came miraculously as a gift, by the grace of God, does this mean that there was no human activity necessary to secure this promise?  No, it does not.  There is no evidence that Isaac was conceived without Abraham’s “knowing” his wife.  To the contrary, this child was of Abraham (Genesis 12:7; 15:3-4; 26:1-4; Romans 4:18; cf. Hebrews 11:12).  This was not a “virgin birth.”

What’s the point?  I believe that Paul wanted them (the saints to whom he wrote), and us to appreciate the fact that, though there may be human conditions to be met, the basis of salvation  – is like that of Abraham and Sarah’s having a child in old age – both rest as a possibility in God, not man.  Man is as much without strength to save himself without God’s help, as Abraham and Sarah were to bring forth a child!  K.C. Moser has written, “Now, note the sinner.  He too is ‘dead.’ But in sin.  He is as helpless and hopeless as Abraham was…This both happened and was written ‘for our sake'” ( The Gist Of Romans, pp.38-39).

Now turn to Romans 5:6.  We were without strength (helpless – NASB).  I believe this connects back with Romans 4:18-20.  but in due time (Galatians 4:4; Ephesians 1:10; cf. Romans 5:6) – Christ died for us!

Human conditions?  Certainly, there are human conditions for salvation.  However, such is not even under consideration here.  Instead, the point is to show us that without God’s intervention, our salvation would have been just as impossible as Abraham and Sarah having a child in the state in which they are described.

Posted in God's Providence, Plan of salvation, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Questions About The Flood

Posted on May 20, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

“But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriages, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left.” (Matthew 24:37-41)

“A few, that is, eight souls were saved through water” (1 Peter 3:20).

“God . . . .   did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly (2 Peter 2:4-5).

“The world that then exist perished, being flooded with water” (2 Peter 3:6).

The flood fascinates Bible students. It serves as a type of end of the world and judgment to come. It has been the topic of multitude of books, including: The Genesis Flood by John Whitcomb, Jr and Henry Morris; Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study by John Woodmorappe; The World That Perished by John Whitcomb. The Noahic Flood by Curtis Cates; A Study of The Biblical Flood by Marion Fox. The Global Flood of Noah by Bert Thompson.

There are common questions which are asked about the flood. These questions are sometimes asked by skeptics, but many times by sincere Bible students. The writing will provide concise answers to some of these common questions.

1.  Was the flood a global or local flood?

(a) It must be admitted that the language sounds like a global flood. (Genesis 6:13; 7:4; 7:19; 7:21-23; 8:9. 2 Peter 2:5; 3:3-7). If one wanted to describe a global flood, this is the language one would use.

(b) If the flood was not global, why was an ark needed? Noah and his family could have migrated to another place. God could have directed the animals to higher ground.

(c) What flood ever lasted one year and ten days (Genesis 7:7-11 cf 8:13-19)?

(d) If the flood was not global, then what meaning would the rainbow promise have (Genesis 9:8-17)?

Great local floods still occur: (1) In 1931, the Yellow River of China flooded killing an estimated one million.  (2) In 1887, the Yellow River flooded an area larger than Great Britain killing 900,000. (3) In 1938, the Yellow River flooded killing 500,000. (4) In 1642, the Yellow River flooded killing 300,000. (5) In 2004 a tsunami in the India Ocean killed at least 230,000 in fourteen countries. (6) In 2011, a tsunami: killed 15,884 in Japan. (7) In 1900 a storm-surge swept Galveston Island, TX. killing perhaps as many as 8,000. (8) In 1889, the Johnstown, PA. flood killed 2,209. (9) In 2005, hurricane Katrina killed 1,836 in New Orleans, LA.

2. Could the Ark really hold all those animals?

(a) Not all of the animals had to be on the Ark. The animals brought on board included those “in whose nostrils was the breath of life” (Genesis 6:17; 7:22).  Fish would not need to be on the Ark. Aquatic mammals would not need to be on the ark. Insects would not need to be on the ark. They do not breathe through the nostrils but by diffusion and some could survive upon debris. Some reptiles and amphibians may not have been on board the ark. Worms would not have needed to be no board the ark. It is possible that some seabirds were not boarded on the ark.

(b) Not every “species” of animal was boarded but every “kind” (Genesis 6:19-10; 7:14). “kind” refers to animals that can reproduce, or are the results of normal reproduction, syngameons (cf Genesis 1). For example: Dog is a kind (not every variety a different find). The genetic potential for future variety of species is within the kind.

(c) Nothing requires that the animals had to be adults. For example: A 4 or 5 pound Komodo dragon could have been aboard instead of a 200-300 pound adult.

(d) The ark was large, John Whitcomb has written “Its capacity was equivalent to 520 modern railroad stock cars” (The World That Perished, p. 231). Brad Harrub has written “in 1980, Ernst Mayr, a very famous evolutionary taxonomist, published a book titled Principles of Systematic Zoology. In his book he outlined every creature we knew of that was alive on the earth. According to Mayr’s own numbers, Noah would have provided protection for: 3,700 Mammals, 8,600 Birds; 6,300 Reptiles, 2,500 Amphibians . . . Thus 21,000 different species. . . If we use the ‘species’ definition, the total number of individual animals that would need protection on the ark would be approximately 50,000. If we average these 50,000 to the size of a sheep . . . then we can ask the question: Can we get 50,000 sheep-size animals on thee ark? Well consider that one boxcar is capable of holding 240 ‘sheep-sized’ animals. Thus, we could place 125,000 sheep-sized animals into 520 boxcars – and yet we only had to get 50,000! That would have left plenty of room for Noah, his family, and all of the food necessary” (Convicted, p 262). Remember that not every “species” but every “kind” was on board. John Woodmorappe’s book claims,  “If …the created kind was the equivalent to the family (at least in the case of mammals and birds), then there were only about 2,000 animals on the Ark” (Noah`s Ark: A Feasibility Study, p. 7).

3. How did Noah gather all the animals?

He did not have to gather them. They came to him (Genesis 6:20; 7:9 cf 2:19).

4. How could all the various animals journey from the various continents? And what about the climatic differences.

The world then was radically different. The continents may have been joined (Pangaea). The species may not have been as isolated and thus so genetically diverse. The climate would not have been so extreme across the earth. Professor Alfred Wallace said, “There is but one climate known to the ancient fossil world as revealed by the plants and animals entombed in the rocks, and the climate was a mantle of spring – like loveliness which seemed to have prevailed continuously over the whole globe” (Wayne Jackson, The Book of Job, p. 118).

5. How could the animals enter in one day (Genesis 7:13-15)?

“Keil Delitzson State: Verse 13 . . . pluperfect ‘had come’ . . . The idea is not that Noah, with his family and all the animals, entered the ark on the very day on which the rain began, but that on that day he had entered, had completed the entering, which occupied the seven days between the giving of the command (v. 4) and the commencement of the flood (v. 10.) (p. 145)” (Marion Fox, pp 267-268). John Woodmorappe’s book reasons, “Let us assume that the larger animals entered the Ark no faster than do animals of comparable size when killed in and processed in slaughterhouses (i.e., 1000 hogs per hour…) smaller animals, of course, must have boarded the Ark at a rate of several times that of larger ones. It is easy to see that 16,000 animals could have boarded the Ark in, at most, five hours. Of course this assumes single-file entry, but there is no why several lines of animals could not have entered simultaneously, especially the many small to medium animals. Scripture, of corse does not inform us about the width of the Ark door” (Noah`s Ark: A Feasibility Study, p. 63).

6. How did Noah and his family care for so many animals.

(a) The short answer is not that we do not know the Bible does not tell us.

(b) John Woodmorappe goes into great detail about how the feeding, watering and waste management could have been accomplished without supernatural intervention. His book Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study is reasonably thought out.

(c) We are told that God “remembered” Noah and his family (Genesis 8:1). The Hebrew word zakar, translated “remember,” suggests God’s continued watchful care over all the occupants of the ark” (Bert Thompson and Brad Harrub, An Examination of Noah’s Ark and the Global Flood).

Some theorize that God could have put the animals into hibernation, and slowed their metabolism and stopped their reproductive abilities. This is possible. However, the Bible is silent on this subject.

(d) We know that there were “rooms” on the ark (Genesis 6:14). Marion Fox writes “The Hebrew word translated “rooms” (Genesis 6:14) is found 13 times in the Bible and is translated ‘nest(s)’ in the other 12 times it is found. It seems evident that this refers to cages into which the animals entered and stayed during the flood” (A Study of The Biblical Flood, p. 260).

7. Where did the water go?

Psalm 104:6-9: “Thou didst cover it with deep as a garment; the waters were standing above the mountains. At Thy rebuke, they fled; at the sound of Thy thunder they hurried away. The mountains rose; the valleys sank down to the place which thou didst established for them. Thou didst set boundary that they may not pass over that they may not return to cover the earth” (NASB). I believe that the earth was shaped differently. The oceans were not so deep and the mountains were not so high.

8. Why were the unclean animals saved in pairs, but the clean animals saved in sevens (Gen 7:2-3, 8-9)?

The Bible does not tell us some have suggested that it was for ecological balance. Animals to be eaten by man (cf Genesis 9:3), used in sacrifice by man (cf Genesis 8:20), and common prey for other animals would be in large measure clean animals. Keep in mind that the unclean animals would also have carrion (dead carcasses) for feed. We do know that Noah sacrificed one of each kind of clean animal to the Lord  (Genesis 8:20).

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, Judgment, Stats | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Assembling and Evangelism

Posted on May 18, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

A common but faulty view exists concerning the purpose of the worship assembly.  Some have thought that the church’s worship assemblies should primarily be geared toward the non-Christian.  Some have thought that the best place for evangelism is the worship assembly.

There are two primary functions of the worship assembly.  The worship assembly is first and foremost about worshipping God (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:26-29).  The worship assembly also serves the function of encouraging and edifying and comforting the saints (Hebrews 10:24-25; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 14:19, 26b, 31).

Evidently, the early church did have non-members visit the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:20-23).  Our worship assemblies should be considerate of non-members (1 Corinthians 14:20-23).  However, brother Dan Owen has remarked, “While 1 Corinthians 14:20-23 certainly indicates that what is done in our worship services should be plain and understandable to those who are visiting, it is not a fair reading of the text to say that the main goal of New Testament worship was the winning of outsiders…”

As one reads the book of Acts, one finds evangelism occurring outside of the worship assemblies.  Evangelism was done in homes and private settings (e.g., Saul, Cornelius, Philippian jailer), public places of various kinds [(e.g. in synagogues, on public roads (e.g. the Ethiopian), by a river side (e.g. Lydia) in market places, on Mars’ Hill] and even in meetings  with rulers (e.g, Felix, Festus, Agrippa).  But how many do you recall being converted, in the book of Acts, from attending a church’s worship assembly?  I can’t think of one.

Brethren, if the church is going to grow we must not limit evangelism to the worship assembly.  Those that attend are good prospects. However, evangelism must occur outside the church assembly if we are going to grow.  Furthermore, it is essential if we are going to follow the New Testament pattern.

  “Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields, for they are white already to harvest!” (John 4:35).

Posted in Christian Influence, Chruch, Meaning and Purpose, Soul Winning, worship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Is God Egotistical?

Posted on May 16, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

BACK GROUND: The following is a letter that I wrote some years ago to a man who called in on a talk radio program which I hosted. He was related to one of the local church members who attended with me. He wanted to know if it was egotistical of God to want us to worship Him. I briefly answered his question on air. I also followed up with a letter. Here is a summary of the letter.

Dear John (not real name),

I am excited about your inquiry.  It demonstrates a desire on your part to know and understand God better.

You ask why God would demand worship from humanity.  Is He an egotist?  Is He vain?  Is He self-absorbed?

Nothing could be farther from the truth!  Acts 17:24-25 says, “God who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. Nor is He worshipped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything (Emphasis mine), since He gives to all life, breath, and all things.”  None of us really add glory (beauty) or honor (weight) to His essence.  He does not depend on man. He needs nothing from man (read 2 Samuel 7; 1 Chronicles 17; Acts 7:47-50; and Acts 17:22-28).

Yes, He does receive joy and pleasure from man’s doing what is right (read Psalm 149:4; Luke 15:7, 10,32; 2 Corinthians 2:15; Philippians 4:18).  Yes, He wants to spend eternity with us (see Matthew 25:34; John 17:24).  But, God needs nothing from man.  It is man who needs God.

It is not that He needs our praise.  It is we who need to praise Him.  One man, Leroy Brownlow, observed, “No man can be truly happy who regards himself alone.  The unhappiest person and the most self-centered person I know are one in the same person.”  Again, he wrote, “As the little flower seed never becomes beautiful and fragrant until it breaks out of itself, and grows up and blossoms, so it is with man.”

Now God is certainly worthy of praise and honor for all that He’s done; But it is really we who need to give praise.  It gives man something bigger than self to live for each day.  Consider Romans 15:5-7.  God brought Jew and Gentile together.  He brought men of different backgrounds and nationalities together.  How did He do this?  He got man to look to Him and focus upon Him instead of self and local pride.

Read also 1 Corinthians 1.  Division and strife were a great problem at Corinth.  If my count is right, Jesus is mentioned by name (Jesus), title (Christ, Lord), and personal pronoun (Him, His) 13 times in the first 13 verses.  It is as if Paul is telling them that if they take their eyes off of Him, and place them on man, that division will be the result.  He said, “Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no division among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment… Is Christ divided?  Was Paul crucified for you?  Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Corinthians 1:10, 13).  Man needs something to focus on larger than himself.  In 1 Corinthians 10:17 Paul writes, “For we, though many, are one bread, and one body; for we are all partake of that one bread.”

I hope this brief letter helps.  I am available for anything I can help you with in understanding His will.

May God bless you.

[signed]

Bryan Hodge

Posted in God, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

We Have An Advocate

Posted on May 14, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

1 John 2:1, “My little children, these things write I unto you, so that you may not sin.  And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”

John refers to them as “little children” (1 John 2:1,12,13,18,28; 3:7,18; 4:4; 5:21), John is an aged man at this point (2 John 1; 3 John 1) and he cares for them the way a father would his children (cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:11; 2 Corinthians 12:14).

He wrote unto them that they “may not sin.”  The word is aorist tense; That is, John did not want them to sin at all.  He wanted to help them keep clear of sin.  Inspired instruction certainly helps in keeping men from sin (Psalm 119:11). A christian should strive to live a holy life, free from sin.

However, we do sin. What happens when we do sin?  Are we without hope?  John says, “And (Kai – the word may be rendered ‘but’ depending upon the context and most likely should be in this context, see ESV) if (at times this word approaches the meaning of whenever, or when cf. 1 John 2:28) anyone sins (aorist tense, denoting an instance of sin, it is in the singular in the KJV) we have (present tense; the force of which is ‘we keep on having’ even after baptism!) an Advocate (a defense attorney) with (pros – the word lit. means before or facing) the Father…”  This Advocate is said to be Jesus Christ.

How does this advocate defend us?  By arguing that the law is unjust and thus should not be enforced? No! With some fancy legal maneuvers?  No!  By looking for loopholes in the law?  No!  By appealing to the emotions of the Judge and jury?  Certainly not!

How then?  1 John 2:2 reads, “And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins.”  I have heard it expressed this way: This lawyer’s methods are highly unusual – (1) He admits his client’s guilt; (2) He pays the price with his own blood (1 John 2:2).

Does this deny human conditions for the Christian’s forgiveness?  No, no more than it does for the alien sinner.  Watch the words, “and not for ours only but also for the whole world” (1 John 2:2b).  Certainly, there are conditions to be met for the child of God to be forgiven ( see 1 John 1:9; also Acts 8:22). However, these conditions are not being emphasized at this point. What is being emphasized is that we have an Advocate. We are not without hope.

Wayne Jackson wisely observed, “While many Bible students are aware of the fact that the blood of Jesus is applied to their souls in their initial obedience to the gospel … some do not realize that the Lord’s cleansing blood continues to function on their behalf as they struggle with sin in their christian lives” (Notes From the Margin of My Bible, vol. 2, pp. 163-164).  Yes, even after baptism one could not be forgiven without the great propitiation  of Christ; without the blood of Christ all the repentance and confession in the world would not avail.

Posted in Jesus, Plan of salvation, Sin, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment