John Nelson Darby, the Scofield Reference Bible, and the rise of old-earth creationism
How did they help promote old earth creationism?
Bible
Back to Topics
‘Soft’ gap sophistry
Soft gappers claim Gen. 1:1–2 refers to creation of stars, galaxies and the matter of the earth, and v. 3–31 to forming and filling of earth billions of years later.
Should Genesis be taken literally?
How would the original readers have understood it?
More false claims by Hugh Ross
Hugh Ross makes excuses for ignoring Refuting Compromise, and claims that YECs have ignored A Matter of Days.
Is Jesus Christ the Creator God?
Jesus’ miracles showed His power over creation—no need for evolution.
The confusion of liberalism
Conversational approaches to studying Scripture can lead to liberalism, where truth and values become relative.
The marring of creation and some implications for ecosystem functioning
How might ecosystem functioning have differed before the Fall?
AI replacing pastors and rewriting God’s Word?
Vegans using ChatGPT to re-write Scripture and an AI church preachers. Are there dangers as people are more inclined to rely on robots?
The Conundrum of Compromise
Compromising on Genesis has far reaching consequences, even for the cross.
Five first instances of biblical words
Quibbles over semantics can be irritating, but knowing the true meaning of the words of Scripture is enlightening.
The Genesis 5 and 11 fluidity question
Many modern scholars believe that the Genesis genealogies contain gaps and cite fluidity as the reason. What is fluidity and why is it wrong?
Genesis: Bible authors believed it to be history
Those who insist that Biblical creationists are being divisive over ‘small details’, need to reconsider what Jesus said about Genesis.