Feed aggregator

There are many things in life that we believe in by faith. This is true of Christians and non-Christians, Creationists and Darwinian Evolutionists, those who believe in God and atheists alike. Some do not want to admit this is the case, but it is true nonetheless.

Some groups focus on what we might call the “how” and “why” questions and create the illusion that since we cannot give a precise explanation of the mechanics of how something happened, that means our belief or claim is untrue and their view is true by default.

Before I go too far, I should point out that faith is not a blind leap into the abyss of not knowingness. Proper faith is a belief based on verifiable evidence that the belief is true and either corresponds to reality or at least does not conflict with it.

Cults and false religious groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses use this type of argumentation to confound Christians. They may ask, “How can God exist as a Trinity?,” “How can Jesus be God since God cannot die?” They then take a Christian’s inability to precisely explain the mechanics of “how” and “why” as evidence that supports their claims. But this is folly for they too believe things they cannot explain. Is God infinite and eternal? They believe this. Can they explain how or why that is the case? No, they cannot.

Some years ago, our friend Jonathan Miles suggested I read Among the Creationists: Dispatches from the Anti-Evolutionist Front Line by Jason Rosenhouse. As I read the book I thought, “This is a guy I could have lunch with and a great conversation.” He is not a Christian but wanted to understand what Creationists think and believe. He wanted to see them in their own environments. Being a missionary to cults and new religious movements often takes me into the places where they congregate, affirm and exchange ideas so I was intrigued. Evolutionists were also intrigued. Jerry Coyne, Professor of Ecology & Evolution, University of Chicago, and author of Why Evolution is True wrote in his endorsement:

Those of us who battle creationism usually wage the war on the Internet, on paper, or in the courtroom. Rarely do we get to know our adversaries as people. Jason Rosenhouse is the rare exception. Equipped with remarkable empathy and a deep knowledge of evolutionary biology, he wades into creationist meetings, trying to understand the mindset that leads people to oppose one of the best-supported ideas in science.

In chapter 3 Jason gives his reasons for pursuing the subject in this way:

It is far more difficult to caricature and stereotype people you have actually met. Have a few conversations over lunch or during breaks at conferences, and suddenly they are no longer abstractions or types….There are a number of things in the book that would be worth commenting on but one of them just soars to the top for me and it focuses on the “how” and “why” questions. Jason relates an exchange he had with a teenager named Jane….I asked her, “If you think God explains how the universe came into being, then tell me how He did it.”

For Jason, Jane’s inability to articulate the mechanics of exactly how God created everything invalidated the idea that God was the creator. But then, as we read further, we find that Jason himself takes his belief in evolution just as much by faith as does Jane. Science tells us we are incidental by-products of a lengthy process of evolution by natural selection and that this process is wasteful, violent, and even cruel.

Notice, he does not provide the very thing which he insisted Jane produce to substantiate her claim, an articulation of the mechanics of exactly how everything sprang into existence from nothing, by nothing and for no apparent reason. Exactly how and why did the planets form and what was the exact mechanism for life to spring forth in the primordial soup? Or how and why … well you get the idea. Christians are accused of believing in “the God of the gaps.” That is, whenever they cannot explain something they simply assert “God did it.” The assertion isn’t necessarily false and evolutionists do the same thing, “evolution did it.” The inability to answer all of the how and why questions does not invalidate a claim but there should be good evidence and reason to support the core belief. Anything that came to be had a cause. God did not come to be but is eternally self-existing. On the other hand, the universe and all of its creatures had a beginning. So, the initial question is “what began it?” Both creationists and evolutionists have all of the same sets of evidence from which to work. This is a topic which very much intrigues us and we visited it a few years ago in Once Upon a Time … Plus Chance. In that article we noted:

There is clear evidence from creation of God’s existence. We know that from nothing, nothing comes. Anything that came to be, had a cause. On the evolutionary view, there is no first cause. In the beginning was nothing which exploded into everything.  Is this really rational science or is it faith?

“From nothing, nothing comes” is a self-validating argument. To assert otherwise is a blind leap into the abyss of not-knowingness.

[TBC: for full article and footnotes, pleas see: https://midwestoutreach.org/2025/03/13/the-how-and-why-questions/ .]

There couldn’t be something out of which everything came, because things are neither self-existent nor eternal. There had to be Someone, an eternal Being, without beginning or end and infinite in power, who created everything out of nothing. This One is not any of the pitiful, physical gods of idol-worshipers that men have made with their own hands. This is the God of the Bible. He revealed Himself to Moses with these words: “I AM THAT I AM [Yahweh-the self-existent One]” and through His prophets declared, “The Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” The Apostle Paul challenged the Greek philosophers on Mars Hill:

“God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things . . . for in him we live, and move, and have our being. . . . [He even gives breath and life to those who hate Him and reject Him, such as Richard Dawkins and the other New Atheists.] Forasmuch then as we are the offspring [creation] of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. . . .”

The men who co-founded Alcoholics Anonymous were Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob Smith. Although neither was a Christian, they were men who cared deeply about helping alcoholics.

It is this continued portrayal of Dr. Bob Smith, and now Bill Wilson, as Christians, that has confused and deceived so many.

Both Wilson and Smith approved of and used a book called ‘Sermon on the Mount.’ This was written by New Thought adherent Emmet Fox, and was used as a mainstay in Alcoholics Anonymous until the Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book was written.

It is not possible for men who follow and serve Christ to use this book. Why? The book denies that Christ is Savior, and in fact states that “Christ” is simply a title for Absolute Spiritual Truth.

And, of course, there was the spiritualism. Bill Wilson was immersed in it. Here is what early A.A. member Tom Powers says about the A.A. co-founders and their participation in this biblically forbidden activity:

“Now these people, Bill and Dr. Bob, believed vigorously and aggressively. They were working away at the spiritualism; it was not just a hobby.” (PASS IT ON, pg. 280) (emphasis mine)

Were these men Christians? No. Are the 12 Steps of Christ? No. Are the 12 Steps necessary for sobriety?

No.

It may be, however, that these Steps are necessary roadwork for the coming religious system.

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” (Galatians:1:8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
See All...).

https://thewordlikefire.wordpress.com/2023/08/27/how-involved-were-a-a-s-co-founders-in-spiritualism/

Acts:11:26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
See All...: And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

The word church here is "ekklesia" in the Greek, which means the “called out ones.” Now, you can tell immediately that church doesn’t mean a building. As you read through the book of Acts, it talks about people meeting in homes. When persecution breaks out, the last thing you do is build a big building on a street corner! Believers will typically meet underground. But are those gatherings still considered the church? Of course! They are the “called out ones.” They are the ones who have become a new creation. They are the ones who are born again. They are the ones who are separated unto Christ. They are the ones called out to live, speak, and behave differently from the world.

Through the years, we have shown you some of the foolishness that goes on inside the walls of the visible church. But if you really think it through, they wouldn’t pull those stunts if they were just in the business of growing and equipping saints. They perform those antics to entertain lost people and make them feel comfortable. But is that what church is really for?

Maybe the real key is that we are supposed to be going out to where lost folk are instead of asking them to join us at church. Outreach vs. invite. But if we view the church as the training ground for believers, then resolving this issue becomes simple. We are supposed to get equipped at church and then go out into the world to let our lights shine brightly before men!

—Mark Cahill (born March 16, 1962, American author, speaker, and evangelist).

Either the universe brought itself into existence from non-existence—or God is self-existent, always has been, and is the Creator of the universe. These are the only two alternatives: take your pick. It is beyond our finite capacity to comprehend an infinite Being without beginning or end, but it is not irrational. We are driven by logic and everything we have learned about the universe in which we find ourselves to admit the inescapable second conclusion. No matter how distasteful it is for atheists, who imagine they speak for today’s scientific and academic establishments, we are driven by all of the facts to believe in God as the Creator.

Most of the Arab countries are refusing to receive Palestinians released from Israeli prison as part of the US-brokered Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage deal. In the past few weeks, Israel released hundreds of Palestinian prisoners -- many of whom were imprisoned for acts of terrorism -- in return for Israeli hostages who kidnapped to the Gaza Strip during the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel. At least 1,200 Israelis were murdered and thousands wounded on that day. Another 251 were kidnapped by Hamas terrorists and "ordinary" Palestinians.

Some of the prisoners were released to the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and east Jerusalem. Many others were released to Egypt, with the hope that other Arab countries would host them. According to Palestinian sources, the Egyptians have agreed to allow only a handful of ex-prisoners to remain in Egypt, while dozens of others are searching for countries that will agree to receive them. With the exception of Qatar and Turkey (a non-Arab Muslim country), most of the Arab countries have reportedly refused to allow the released prisoners into their borders, the sources revealed.

The Jordanians and Lebanese, for their part, have not forgotten how Palestinians sparked civil wars in their countries in the 70s and 80s.

After the Palestinians tried to overthrow their host, King Hussein of Jordan, in 1970; then started a civil war in Lebanon right after that; then, when welcomed into Kuwait, took the side of Iraq's President Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait in 1990, it is hard to blame any regime.

Egyptian-American author Dr. Sam Yousef commented:

"Arabs are really a disgrace to humanity and Islam!

"Tunisia and Jordan refuse to receive any of the released deported prisoners stuck in Egypt, and Algeria has not responded yet, while Turkey, Malaysia and Pakistan will each receive 45 prisoners."

"The prisoners who were released and deported from Palestine and now stuck in hotels in Cairo. They are still wearing their prison clothes and have not changed them.

"There is no Arab country willing to accept them, not even those countries that were crying over the Gaza Strip, the Gazans and Palestine [during the Israel-Hamas war], and even keyboard heroes are unable to pressure their governments to accept the prisoners."

The Arab countries' refusal to receive the ex-prisoners should not come as a surprise to those familiar with the problematic relationship between the Palestinians and their Arab brethren. It is not uncommon to hear from many Palestinians how they have always felt betrayed by the Arab countries.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, an observant American Muslim, testified in 2018 before the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security:

"The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. Help us modern-minded, secular, liberal Muslims marginalize their influence by declaring what they are: a terrorist organization.

"Unfortunately, much of the conversation about the Brotherhood has been obstructed, muted, marginalized, deferred, minimized by the Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers or their allies here in the West....

"I ask my fellow Muslims: Will they be the side of freedom, liberty, and modernity, or will they be on the side of tyranny of the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey's AKP, the Iranian Khomeinists, or Pakistan's Jamaat e-Islami?

"Develop foreign policy mechanisms to disincentivize Qatari and Turkish Government facilitation of the Brotherhood and ultimately think about suspending Turkey from NATO....

"And please stop engaging Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in government, media, and NGOs, and recognize their Islamist terrorist sympathies."

Such a designation would also make it far more difficult for the countries that support the Muslim Brotherhood, especially Turkey and Qatar, to keep on doing so. The Muslim Brotherhood has already been declared a terrorist organization by the governments of Austria, Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Many of these Arabs understand that Hamas and many other Palestinians have no intention of abandoning the fight against Israel, a move that will result in more violence, bloodshed and destruction. That is also probably why no Arab country is going to invest one dollar in the Gaza Strip as long as Hamas remains in power and as long as Palestinian children are indoctrinated to murder Jews.

[TBC: For the full article, please see:]

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21442/palestinian-ex-prisoners

The fact that the cosmos exists, with life and intelligence resident on planet Earth, demands an explanation. Nothing cannot produce anything. Either something of infinite potential or Someone of infinite power always was, must still exist, and always will. There is no escaping this conclusion. Atheists choose to believe that something of infinite potential always existed and must still be hiding somewhere. They generally choose energy as that something. This is their god. Theists choose to believe that Someone always was, is, and forever will be. There are compelling reasons for believing the second alternative rather than the first.

Here again we see the importance of origins: as Templeton reasoned, if we cannot trust the Bible’s account of the origin of man, why should we believe what it says about the destiny of man? But we could turn that statement around. If we can’t believe what science says about the origin of man, why should we believe what it says about human destiny? As a matter of fact, science has nothing factual and verifiable to say about either man’s origin or destiny.

We know that Noah was described as a preacher (or herald) of righteousness (2 Peter:2:5And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
See All...), and that the act of preparing the ark was a witness in and of itself of coming judgment. Especially since Hebrews:11:7By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
See All... states: “By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.”

However, Scripture often indicates that even if no one repented, this would not have absolved Noah of warning people about the coming judgment. Think of Jeremiah who preached to Judah for 40 years and apparently only his scribe Baruch and a court eunuch Ebed-melech the Ethiopian (likely a title “the king’s eunuch” rather than a personal name, Jeremiah 38) listened to his call for repentance. Ebed-melech heard the Word of the Lord and repented and became a true believer/follower of God (Jeremiah:39:16Go and speak to Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring my words upon this city for evil, and not for good; and they shall be accomplished in that day before thee.
See All...–18). In this regard, Jeremiah and Noah are both alike—they were “preachers of righteousness” who ended up having a “ministry of condemnation.” Jeremiah even complained that he did not want to preach “disaster,” but God compelled him with anguish if he did not (Jeremiah:20:8For since I spake, I cried out, I cried violence and spoil; because the word of the LORD was made a reproach unto me, and a derision, daily.
See All...–9).

Furthermore, even though we do not know whether God ever directly communicated a need to Noah to warn the people of his day about the coming flood, it would be consistent with other biblical examples. Think of Ezekiel who was told by God that he was required to warn people of divine judgment.

“So, you, son of man, I have made a watchman for the house of Israel. Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. If I say to the wicked, O wicked one, you shall surely die, and you do not speak to warn the wicked to turn from his way, that wicked person shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked to turn from his way, and he does not turn from his way, that person shall die in his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul” (Ezekiel:33:7So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.
See All...–9).

Therefore, the pattern in Scripture of someone blessed with divine forewarnings of judgment is that they felt burdened (or directly commanded) by the Lord to share that message and were told they would suffer (or suffer blame) if they did not. It is entirely consistent then to believe Noah was under the same burden to warn people of coming judgment. However, since we are not directly told one way or the other, we can only make biblically based hypotheses on this subject and not dogmatic proclamations. 

Hypothetically, if the whole world believed Noah and repented, God would not have needed to send the flood as a judgment against the world’s wickedness. We see similar instances of God relenting from promised punishment in that he would have spared Sodom for as few as 10 righteous men, and he did not destroy Nineveh when they repented. Additionally, the ark had plenty of extra room if only a few had repented. However, whenever we deal with hypotheticals, especially when we have limited data, we are on shaky ground. What we do know is that the ark had plenty of room for many who would have believed and all the animals Noah was commanded to bring on board.

It appears that there is a twofold answer to this question of others outside of Noah’s family boarding the ark. The size of the ark was such that it could have accommodated thousands more people.

However, we need to recall that based on the prophecy given in Genesis:6:13And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
See All...–22 (specifically verse 18) obviously given to Noah before the ark was built, God had said that Noah and his family only would be saved: “But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.” Since God is omniscient, he knew that mankind would continue in their wickedness and refuse to board (or even acknowledge) the ark. God also knew that the few righteous people (like Methuselah) would die before the flood came.

It appears from the size of the ark and its excess capacity that God may have wanted Noah to prepare for and see how many more could have been on the ark, but God knew that the space would not be used for that purpose. However, we cannot know this for sure based on Scripture alone….But in any event, Noah knew that it was not “lack of space” that kept people off the ark—it was their own love of sin and unbelief in God (and God’s holiness in judging his creatures). So, the answer to this question is that it appears that God did not directly invite anyone but Noah and his family aboard the ark. And as far as Noah knew, he and his immediate family members would be the only humans on board (per Genesis:6:18But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.
See All...). Had someone repented and believed Noah though, God could have extended the invitation to them; however, God already knew this would not happen. I know this thought process seems antithetical, yet man’s responsibility and God’s sovereignty and omniscience are not mutually exclusive. God is sovereign, and yet, man is responsible. Had there been someone who repented, God could have told Noah that his family and others would board the ark with Noah’s family.

Noah knew that it was not “lack of space” that kept people off the ark—it was their own love of sin and unbelief in God (and God’s holiness in judging his creatures).

Some have objected to this based on Genesis:6:13And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
See All... and 17 where God promises to destroy all flesh on the earth. But it is possible that this also would have served a dual purpose; divine condemnation for those who ignored the warning but perhaps also repentance for those who may have been older and died before the flood came or for those who repented at the time of the flood. God can certainly relent from punishing repentant sinners, as seen with Nineveh in Jonah’s time.

But also consider Numbers:14:11And the LORD said unto Moses, How long will this people provoke me? and how long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among them?
See All...–12 (recounted by Moses in Deuteronomy 9) where God tells Moses that he will destroy the Israelites because of their continued rebellion, yet Moses pleaded with God on this occasion (and several others), and God lessened his punishment only to immediately punish the 10 unbelieving spies and eventually all the Israelites over 40 years old (Numbers:14:20And the LORD said, I have pardoned according to thy word:
See All...–38). God can and does change the parameters of his just punishments when he wishes to extend mercy. There is no greater example of this in Scripture than Christ’s death on the cross, the just for the unjust (Romans:5:6For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
See All...–10; Ephesians:2:12That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
See All...–13; 1 Peter:3:18For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
See All...).

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/did-noah-warn-people-about-coming-flood/