My Thoughts for Japan

After any tragedy like the one we've seen in Japan, people ordinarily set aside their differences and work together to give aid to all those affected. Certainly, the differences of opinion regarding our origins seems inconsequential at a time like this. However, it is also at times like this that people ask the question, “why would God allow something like this to happen?” And in such a time, our view of origins bears directly on how we would answer.

The Bible says that when God created the world, He saw that it was all very good (Genesis 1:31). There were no earthquakes, floods, or disasters of any sort. There was no death. It was not until after Adam sinned that death entered into the world (Romans 5:12). The Bible tells us that it was at the Fall that God cursed the ground for the sake of Adam (Genesis 3:17) and the creation groans under the Curse even until now (Romans 8:22). The earthquakes and floods we see now are the result of the Curse. They are not God's perfect will but are His judgment for Adam's sin and our continued rebellion against Him. In this world, we will continue to have tribulation (John 16:33) until God restores His creation to the paradise He intended it to be (Revelation 21:1-6). To that end, He sent His Son so that whoever should believe in Him would have eternal life (John 3:16).

On the other hand, there are some Christians who believe in an “old” creation and theistic evolution. How exactly do they answer questions like this? If God used evolution to create us, then death and tragedy are intentional. If the earth is billions of years old, then this earthquake is rather ordinary. Earthquakes, volcanoes, and flooding are how God shapes the earth. Over the supposed billions of years the earth has existed, there should have been millions of earthquakes. Why then should we consider this one a tragedy? It's just another tink of God's hammer as He continues shaping the earth just as He's always done. And what about the thousands who died? I suppose they're just another step in the evolutionary ladder who have gone the way of Homo ergaster or Australopithecus.

To say that it doesn't matter what we believe about origins is to say that it doesn't matter what we believe about the character of God. Do we believe in a Holy God who is the Judge of His creation and who sent His Son to redeem us from our bondage of sin? Or do we believe in a capricious god who, for billions of years, has sent disaster upon disaster to clear the way for his next-best species of animal on his way to humans?

Let me close by saying this: I'm not exploiting this tragedy to promote my views on Genesis. Rather, I'm using it as an opportunity to show that our beliefs have consequences. If we are to be witnesses to the world, we must share the good news. And what is the good news? It is that there is life in Jesus and everyone who believes in Him will not die (John 11:25-26). There is no hope in the god of evolution. We cannot turn to him for comfort at a time like this. Death and suffering are his plan for us.

Further reading

Christianity and Evolution: Mutually Exclusive

Why I Say Evolution is Not Compatible with the Bible

Strange Bedfellows

Thus Saith the Lord

Here's a Bible quiz. See if you can identify who is being discussed in this verse:

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. (Mic 5:2)

OK. That was an easy one but how about this:

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. (Isa 53:5)

Still too easy? Here's one more:

For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. (Psa 22:16-18)

Not stumped yet? Wow, you must be a Bible scholar!

I know. I'm playing it up a little. It's not really hard to identify that it's Jesus who is being discussed in these verses. However, there's something very interesting about these verses that critics of the Bible don't stop to consider. All of these passages are taken from the Old Testament. These passages that so clearly discuss accurate details of His birth, His passion, and His death, were written hundreds of years before the events actually occurred. Furthermore, these are but a few of the hundreds of Old Testament passages that I could have cited.

This is what we sometimes describe as “prophecy.” Before we had the revelation of Scripture, God would give His word to prophets who would proclaim it to the world. Of course, anyone could claim to be speaking God's word. The difference is that whatever was spoken by God would come to pass. If someone claimed to speak in the name of the Lord, but the thing he speaks does not come to pass, he is exposed as a false prophet (see Deuteronomy 18:18, 21-22).

Once the thing that God had proclaimed would come to pass, it revealed the sovereignty and authority of God. When Jesus came and fulfilled the prophecies spoken about Him centuries earlier, it established His status as the Messiah. It proved that God is the sovereign Lord of the universe. It proved the things spoken by the prophets were true. It proved the Bible is the word of God.

Consider the following passage from Isaiah:

Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: (Isa 46:9-10)

To all the critics who read my blog, let me ask you something: do you deny that the Bible is the word of God? You probably do – otherwise you'd likely be a believer. Even still, you have to admit that what the Lord spoke about Jesus centuries in advance, came to pass in exactly in the same way He spoke it. It's proof that He is God and that the Bible is His word. If you're still not convinced, then let me ask you this: when you read the above passages, didn't you think they were talking about Jesus? You can deny it if you'd like but I know you did.

Reporters Don't Have a Clue About Religion

On this Ash Wednesday, I can't help but post this gem from Ash Wednesdays past. I know that most reporters are completely clueless about all things religious and, since these reporters are British, they're likely more secular than most. Even so, since they are reporters, you'd think they'd at least have heard about Ash Wednesday on the news before they embarrassed themselves.

It was Ash Wednesday, for crying out loud. Didn't their network even announce the day? I've mentioned before that I'm not Catholic but even I'm aware of this observance. I'm not asking them to observe the practice but, again, since they are reporters, do you think they at least might be aware of a practice observed by hundreds of millions of people all over the world? I can only assume they didn't think it was important enough to be mentioned on their network.

Can you imagine something like this happening at Christmas? Would the reporters have said something like, "I wonder why that tree behind the Vice President has lights on it?" Of course, nothing like that could ever happen. Christmas has become secular enough to catch the notice of the liberal media (though they still refuse to call it, "Christmas" but prefer the more benign sounding, "holiday"). Ash Wednesday is still far too religious for them to be interested in actually learning something about it.

Oh well. At least their antics provide a never ending supply of humor for bloggers like me. Enjoy!!

A Stegosaurus in Angkor? It's not a Magic Bullet

Sometimes, we want to believe something so much that we fail to look at it objectively. Other times, we are overly trusting of the source and also fail to consider things objectively. If we believe things too easily, we set ourselves up for disappointment. At the very least, we risk looking foolish. No matter how exciting something sounds and no matter how much we trust the source, we need to be skeptical about anything we see or hear. Remember, only God is perfect. Everything else is suspect.

Such is the case for a carving found among some temple ruins in jungles of Angkor, Cambodia. Here is a photo taken of one of the carvings. What do you think it looks like? I admit, it looks a lot like a stegosaurus. I showed the photo to my 8 year old son who also immediately identified it as a dinosaur. If it is a dinosaur, the implications are significant. How could there be such an accurate depiction of a dinosaur unless the carvers had actually seen one? If they had seen a living stegosaurus, it would mean that humans would have been contemporaries of dinosaurs just as is predicted by young-earth creationists.

Such a find is extremely exciting. It's almost like a silver bullet that immediately dispels the notion that dinos lived millions of years before humans even existed. After seeing this glyph, many sincere creationists have accepted the most obvious interpretation (that it's a stegosaurus) without question. They haven't stopped to consider any other explanations. They aren't skeptical.

Now, like I said, I admit it looks like a stegosaurus. I'm not sure what else it could be. It doesn't look like any other creature that I recognize. Even so, I'm not entirely sure it's a stegosaurus. It could be a rather mundane creature, like a hornless rhino as some have suggested. Note the short neck and large head; these are not typical of a stegosaurus. The plates that seem to be on the back of the creature could actually be simple decoration or even a tree behind the beast.

Several inches below the suspect carving, there is another carving which I've also included here. What exactly is this other creature? I think it resembles a satyr (as in the Greek god, Pan). Does that mean these people once saw a satyr? Of course it doesn't. Some people believe it's a monkey but, if so, it's a very loose resemblance. More likely, it's either a mythical creature or a much elaborated upon depiction of a real creature.

Furthermore, look at the decoration around the head of the creature. I think it resembles the “plates” on the back of the suspect carving. It could be something like a mask or head-dress. It could also be just a fancy decoration these ancient monks liked to add to their carvings.

Obviously, then, not every carving on the temples walls was meant to be of a real creature. The "stegosaurus" could likewise be "dressed up" ordinary animal or even a mythical creature that just happens to look like a stegosaurus. Of course, don't get me wrong; I think it could be a stegosaurus. I'm just not sure. I know that dinosaurs were contemporaries of humans and I don't need this carving to prove that. The Bible says that God made all the land animals on the sixth day of creation – the same day He created man (Genesis 1:24-31). They did not live millions of years ago because the Scriptures tell us that the earth is only a few thousand years old. The Bible is really all the evidence that we need. If this carving is indeed a stegosaurus, it's nice that it reaffirms what I already know to be true. However, the Bible is true with or without this carving.

So I say again that we must be skeptical. Don't trust anything at first hearing no matter how exciting it might seem. Science is a useful tool but our understanding is limited and flawed. Things we think are true today are soon shown to be wrong. Only the Bible is without error. If we base our faith on the latest scientific discoveries, we are certain to be disappointed. If we put our trust in the Bible, it will never be wrong. If you wed your faith to science today, you will find yourself a widow tomorrow.