Pastor Greg Boyd Owes AiG a Public Apology!

Published on September 9, 2012 in Around AiG and Current Issues in the World.

 

On my Facebook page recently, I responded to a blog post written by Pastor Greg Boyd, senior pastor of Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. You can read that Facebook post at this link.
Pastor Boyd specifically mentioned my name and that of our Answers in Genesis ministry as a whole in regard to our position on the book of Genesis. He said that he believed the impact AiG was having would be "disastrous for the church in America."

Now, Pastor Boyd can certainly have his opinions about what we believe at AiG and our impact, and I have commented on those things in the Facebook post. But in one sentence, Pastor Boyd clearly crossed the line and falsely accused us about what we teach regarding the gospel. Frankly, I believe this pastor owes us a public apology and needs to immediately retract this false statement. A Christian who bears false witness must do this.
Here is what Pastor Boyd wrote:

I instead just celebrate the fact that there are thoughtful Christians who embrace science and who wrestle with scientific and theological issues from the inside of the Christian faith instead of requiring people to declare war on science as a precondition to entering the kingdom.

Because he named me personally (and also Answers in Genesis) in his commentary, Pastor Boyd, in the context of his blog post, is leaving no doubt this his statement about the gospel refers to us. (I have asked several people to weigh in on this, and they all agree with my assessment.)
Also, I vehemently disagree with his implication that AiG is in a "war on science," and we've written many responses to such a false claim before (and I point out that we employ several staff with earned doctorates, and who practice and enjoy science). But here is where Pastor Boyd has really crossed the line, stating that "requiring people to declare a war on science [is] a precondition to entering the kingdom."

In the Christian world, "entering the kingdom" means becoming a Christian-eternal salvation.
Boyd's accusation that taking a certain approach to science is a "precondition to entering the kingdom" is accusing us of preaching a false gospel.

I checked the website of Woodland Hills Church and read its Statement of Faith. It seems to me that as far as the gospel is concerned, the church is orthodox. So I would never accuse Pastor Boyd, even though he disagrees with our stand on Genesis, of saying that people have to agree with his views on Genesis and science to enter the Kingdom of God! If he preaches the gospel as outlined in the church's Statement of Faith (regardless of any other areas we may disagree about), then I have no doubt people would be saved through his ministry as the salvation message is preached in his church.
Now, if Pastor Boyd were to check AiG's Statement of Faith and also read our blogs and articles on the AiG website, he would find that we preach the same gospel. Nowhere-I mean nowhere-have we ever tied anything related to science or one's views on Genesis as a "precondition to entering the kingdom." Salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. Certainly we take a very strong stand on a literal Genesis, but we never tie our stand on a young earth, six days, global Flood, etc. to a "precondition to entering the kingdom."

Let me be even more clear: We wholeheartedly embrace these passages of Scripture:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8; emphasis added).
"That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" (Romans 10:9).
In fact, here are some blog posts and articles we've written about this very issue:

• Is "Belief in a Young Earth the Only Way to Salvation"?
• Does the Gospel Depend on a Young Earth?
• Does the Gospel Rise or Fall on the Days of Creation?

Pastor Boyd's anti-AiG statement is clearly one that defames us in the Christian world. He has no evidence that we tie a view of science to entering the kingdom and receiving salvation.
Again, Pastor Boyd can disagree with us all he wants about Genesis-that's between him and the Lord! But he can't in good conscience falsely accuse us in regard to what we teach about the gospel.

CREATION versus EVOLUTION

“For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.” – 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

I am sure that many of you have heard rumblings of the latest coming out of the Vatican and Pope Benedict XVI. This is yet another example of the Catholic Church undermining the Bible and blurring the lines regarding what scripture teaches. Sadly, statements like these from the Catholic Church do nothing to uphold the sanctity of scripture or confirm its reliability. It is important that we understand the seriousness of the statement from Pope Benedict XVI and respond in a way that demonstrates truth, love, and biblical understanding.

On January 7th 2011, Pope Benedict XVI came out and stated that God was behind the Big Bang and the universe was no accident ... at first glance many believers might feel that this statement is positive, but I would say that the statement is tragic. Pope Benedict XVI was not making an argument for Creationism; rather he was asserting that God and evolution go hand in hand when it comes to explaining the origins of the universe. The article details that:

"Galileo was rehabilitated and the Church now also accepts evolution as a scientific theory and sees no reason why God could not have used a natural evolutionary process in the forming of the human species."

The article goes on to point out that:

“The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism -- the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- and says that the account in the book of Genesis is an allegory for the way God created the world.”


According to Webster’s 1828 definition; an allegory is a figurative description of real facts. So, according to Pope Benedict XVI, the words written in Genesis are an exaggeration of their original meaning. You, the reader, can interpret the meaning any way you see fit. Although this statement is disheartening, it should come as no surprise considering that the Catholic Church rejects the idea of utilizing Genesis as a scientific text.

It is important to underscore that this deception has not just infected the Catholic Church, but has spread across many "Evangelical" churches and seminaries. Case in point, the recent revision on August 9, 2010 by the Assemblies of God regarding the doctrine of creation. The revision attempted to “reconcile the Bible with theories and conclusions of contemporary scientists” and cautioned believers not to be “overly dogmatic about any particular creation theory.” You can read the revision for yourself by copying the following address into your browser: http://ag.org/top/beliefs/Position_Papers/pp_downloads/PP_The_Doctrine_of_Creation.pdf.

Lastly, please be warned about a new idea known as EVOLUTION EVANGELISM and/or EVOLUTIONARY CHRISTIANITY. This concept is gaining a tremendous amount of fanfare and is deceiving more and more believer’s everyday - especially our young adults. This phenomenon is a "fruit" of the Emerging Church and is being championed by a self professing evangelical and former United Church of Christ pastor Michael Dowd. Dowd is unapologetic regarding his position and offers this explanation on why he does what he does:

“So the reason I evangelize evolution is twofold. I want others who are now confused or feeling guilt, resentment, resignation, or fear, to have for themselves the joy, peace, love, trust, and gratitude that comes from growing in right relationship to Reality, or “getting right with God.” And I want to spread the good news that billions of years of patterned cosmic and biological evolution (and cultural evolution) are on our side: propelling our species to move through this crisis of adolescence into maturity.”

Dowd and his wife Connie Barlow, who is an atheist and science author, travel across the country promoting Dowd’s new book “Thank God for Evolution” and running an educational website known as “The Great Story”.

For more information regarding EVOLUTIONARY EVANGELISM and how to stand firm against it, please visit the links below:

1. Ken Silva / Apprising Ministries / Michael Dowd - http://apprising.org/?s=michael+dowd

2. Michael Dowd Website - http://thankgodforevolution.com/

3. Worldview Weekend / Brannon Howse / Dowd Speaking - http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=6763

4. Crosstalk Blog - http://www.crosstalkblog.com/2010/12/emergent-church-leaders-promote-evolutionary-spirituality/

For more information regarding the comments made by Pope Benedict XVI, the revision by the Assemblies of God, and to read commentary from Ken Ham regarding these subjects – please visit the links below:

1. Pope: God was Behind the Big Bang – http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/ts_nm/us_pope_bigbang

2. Ken Ham Commentary / The Pope on the Big Bang - http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2011/01/07/the-pope-on-the-big-bang/

3. Doctrine of Creation / AG – http://ag.org/top/beliefs/position_papers/pp_downloads/PP_The_Doctrine_of_Creation.pdf

4. Ken Ham Commentary / AG - http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/09/08/a-sad-day-for-the-assemblies-of-god-denomination/

UNDERMINING WORD of GOD by Catholic Church ... Again!

God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope
By Philip Pullella Philip Pullella – Thu Jan 6, 10:05 am ET

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – God's mind was behind complex scientific theories such as the Big Bang, and Christians should reject the idea that the universe came into being by accident, Pope Benedict said on Thursday.

"The universe is not the result of chance, as some would want to make us believe," Benedict said on the day Christians mark the Epiphany, the day the Bible says the three kings reached the site where Jesus was born by following a star.

"Contemplating it (the universe) we are invited to read something profound into it: the wisdom of the creator, the inexhaustible creativity of God," he said in a sermon to some 10,000 people in St Peter's Basilica on the feast day.

While the pope has spoken before about evolution, he has rarely delved back in time to discuss specific concepts such as the Big Bang, which scientists believe led to the formation of the universe some 13.7 billion years ago.

Researchers at CERN, the nuclear research center in Geneva, have been smashing protons together at near the speed of light to simulate conditions that they believe brought into existence the primordial universe from which stars, planets and life on earth -- and perhaps elsewhere -- eventually emerged.

Some atheists say science can prove that God does not exist, but Benedict said that some scientific theories were "mind limiting" because "they only arrive at a certain point ... and do not manage to explain the ultimate sense of reality ..."

He said scientific theories on the origin and development of the universe and humans, while not in conflict with faith, left many questions unanswered.

"In the beauty of the world, in its mystery, in its greatness and in its rationality ... we can only let ourselves be guided toward God, creator of heaven and earth," he said.

Benedict and his predecessor John Paul have been trying to shed the Church's image of being anti-science, a label that stuck when it condemned Galileo for teaching that the earth revolves around the sun, challenging the words of the Bible.

Galileo was rehabilitated and the Church now also accepts evolution as a scientific theory and sees no reason why God could not have used a natural evolutionary process in the forming of the human species.

The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism -- the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- and says that the account in the book of Genesis is an allegory for the way God created the world.

But it objects to using evolution to back an atheist philosophy that denies God's existence or any divine role in creation. It also objects to using Genesis as a scientific text.

(Editing by Tim Pearce)

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania vs. Casey, Governor of PA

POST-MODERNISM and the LAW

Last week our worldview course was continuing through "Put Your Beliefs to the Test" - developed by Brannon Howse and Worldview Weekend.  We were discussing evolution being applied to the law and how the Supreme Court of the United States is throwing out absolute truth with their decisions.  These liberal minded justice(s) are replacing truth with post-modern philosophies.  Long gone are the days of Natural Law (Blackstone) and here to stay is case law and one's own definition of truth, morality, and justice.

The case in question is that of Planned Parenthood PA versus Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania.  Background on the case is necessary to see how this court disregarded the quest for truth and injected their own post-modern philosophies into the ruling.  According to U.S. Supreme Court Media, The Pennsylvania legislature amended its abortion control law in 1988 and 1989. Among the new provisions, the law required informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period prior to the procedure. A minor seeking an abortion required the consent of one parent (the law allows for a judicial bypass procedure). A married woman seeking an abortion had to indicate that she notified her husband of her intention to abort the fetus. These provisions were challenged by several abortion clinics and physicians. A federal appeals court upheld all the provisions except for the husband notification requirement.

The question that the court had to consider was can a state require women who wants an abortion to obtain informed consent, wait 24 hours, and, if minors, obtain parental consent, without violating their right to abortions as guaranteed by Roe v. Wade?  The decision of Roe vs Wade was as follows: the Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters. As a result, the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling ... it was a 7-2 ruling with only White and Rehnquist dissenting.

In PP v Casey, the Court again affirmed the Roe decision and upheld most of the Pennsylvania provisions mentioned above.  Not only did the Court reaffirm Roe with a 5-4 decison, but for the first time the Court imposed a new standard to determine the validity of laws restricting abortions (that's right, the Court imposed a new standard).  The new standard asks whether a state abortion regulation has the purpose of imposing an "undue burden," which is defined as a "substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability."  Under this standard, the only provision to fail the undue-burden test was the husband notification requirement. 

Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Souter, and Kennedy stated in the majority opinion, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning of the universe and the mystery of human life."   This sentence has become known as the "mystery passage", you can learn more about it by clicking here.    Question - What about the part with the Declaration of Independence that reads, "All men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." - do we as a nation just ignore that part or throw it out altogether? 

So, what really happened with the Casey decision?  What happened is that man, not God, can now define reality.  Everything within our world is now subject to your own individual interpretation.  This is the very definition of post-modernism ... a world in which people refuse to acknowledge absolute truth.  The moral foundation of our country has shifted and not for the better ... will we continue to be silent under the banner of political correctness? Do you think that Darwin ever thought that his theories would have such catastrophic consequences on the affairs of men ... oh wait, he wrote about himself - chapter 5, The Descent of Man.