Wednesday, March 31, 2010, on KKLA FM radio on the Frank Pastore Show there was a debate called “Thousands or Billions” between Drs. Hugh Ross and Jason Lisle.  Both claimed the Bible as inspired Word of God and both used passages in their two views of creation.  I listened closely to see what scriptures would be used.  My attention was drawn to what Jason Lisle did about the creation account.  He said there were no passages of the creation account in the bible other than in Genesis.  This was further emphasized by him saying that Psalms 90 was poetry and could not be used by Hugh Ross in explaining the Genesis creation account.  That to me was an incredible statement.

Let’s assume we can apply “Reductio ad absurdum” (a logical rebuttal that takes a proposition to its logical extremes and examines the veracity of the conclusions the proposition implies in those extremes) [1] to this logic.  Using that technique we will assume that Jason is correct and we are not allowed to use any other passage to explain creation and apply it to what happened in the beginning.  That would deny even Jesus himself from explaining creation by using Psalms.  That means we must throw out Job 38, Psalms 148:5; Isaiah 40:26; 42:5; 45:5-22, Colossians 1:15-17; Proverbs 8:22-31; John 17:24; Ephesians 1:4; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2 and 1 Peter 1:20.  We cannot speak of the heavens being “stretched out” as a singularity event by five different Bible authors penning such a statement in eleven different verses: Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:12; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1.  Now that is over the top of absurdum!

It’s hard to talk to some Christians who are not implicitly revitalizing their own conviction or beliefs about creation and its interface with Christianity.  We have a problem where we see a totally aggressive corruptive nature of Relativistic Culture in the Christian community that has so deeply socialized our people of the faith.   Young earth creationists speak with a sense of authority and with the forcefulness of their YEC view and become closed minded to any countering evidence that would challenge their belief.

The Bible presents a creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing) event and I apply the big bang to that only because of the verses above that I’m not allowed to use.  That’s my view of the creation event and I’m within my rights to do that.  Young earth creationists say I cannot apply any other verse outside of Genesis to that event.  Do you see how deceptive that is?  This is like talking about colors of paint.  I like purple and I have my purple truth of creation.  You cannot use any other color to see creation other than purple.  That’s my understanding of reality and that’s the way it is.

Question: If this is your reality, what do you mean by that?  What is meant is it’s your belief?  But of course, if your belief is not true, it’s not your reality but your falsehood.

But if your belief is true then you are in touch with reality and others who disagree with that are not in touch with reality and their contrary views are their falsehood.  I would be doing them a favor by getting them in touch with reality by applying all scripture as truth.

There is no room for this epistemical conservatism nonsense!  (def. Epistemic conservatism has the view that one is, to some degree, justified in believing something simply because one believes it.)  Having, “this is my reality” and you “having your reality” is saying this is my truth and others have their truth.  Wait a minute, what do you mean by truth?  Well, my belief.  Is there a difference between, belief and make believe?  Can believing something make it true?  If believing something can’t make something true, then belief isn’t always a truth, it’s a belief which is either true or false.

Now, if your belief is true, then good for you.  But if other people don’t believe this belief then their belief is false and not true.  Yours is true and theirs is false and that’s the way it is!  And there is no way out of this.  If it turns out that your belief is not true then it “ain’t” a truth, friend.  It’s a false!  Something else is the case instead.

Let me develop this further.  If there is a precondition to becoming a Christian, then we have a problem.   I used the color analogy in describing a sort of flavor or liking.  Truth is not like that and is not relative.  We cannot apply our flavor to the truth.  Our understanding of or interpretation of evidence could be totally wrong.  We must go to the evidence to see if what is presented true by comparing A with B.  Does our understanding of Genesis line up with other passages of the same Book of God?   If they are not equal then our understanding is grossly flawed.  God’s Word cannot be different in two separate places.  God’s general revelation (nature) cannot be different from His Word.  Presuppositions are not always the truth.  We get it wrong most of the time when we make this kind of application to our judgments.  We need to test the flavor to see if it is a truth.

Let me look at another side or corner to relativism and the creation issue.  Now let me ask the question.  I wonder if a person who thinks they are a Christian and believe that truth is relative, I wonder if they can actually be a Christian?  Because if that is so, then they aren’t “believers” (grammar mine) in Jesus in the way that Jesus requires belief in Him for salvation.  If we require something in addition to the side or we require something be removed from the Word, then salvation is with an addendum to its work.  There are many who don’t apply this baggage and are true Christians.  I’m not talking about them.  But if this addendum is applied then it’s another religion, not a faith, and is other then what Christianity was meant to be for our salvation.  This is what happens when one says you must believe in a young earth creation when you become a Christian.  Again, that is Religion and not a Faith, friend!  That is called a religion of legalism much like the religion (not belief) of the Pharisees when they added to the Mosaic Law.  That is what happens when seekers of the truth are told they must believe in purple (required understanding) and not the general revelation of God and the oneness of His Word!  See my last blog “Go and Make Disciples” on how that can be a pseudo-requirement to salvation and it’s done from the pulpit and many times not in writing.



[1]^ a b Nicholas Rescher. “Reductio ad absurdum”. The Internet Journal of Philosophy. Retrieved 21 July 09.

%d bloggers like this: