Jim Brenneman (additional info in profile, and at floodfilm.com
Hello everybody,
My name is Joseph, and I am a writer for 'Pluto' newspaper, a part of the University of Central Lancashire.
Every issue, we have a section called 'In Ideas'. In that, we interview a different section/sub-culture of society, in an attempt to get people to learn about this they might otherwise learn about or understand.
This issue, we will be focusing on Creationists, as we feel it is a subject not approached very often.
If you are worried about being mis-represented, then don't be. There is no outside influence on this article. The only words printed will be both my questions and your answers.
If you could leave your name at the top of the post, it would be very helpful. The best set of answers will be printed. For those who do answer and get printed, if you'd like a copy of the issue then please do not hesitate to ask.
Questions are below.
Thank you very much in advance.
Regards,
Joseph.
- What is the basis of the belief of Creationism?
Creationism, I think means the belief in literal creation out of nothing, as opposed to evolution. This is what the Bible plainly states. Christians believe the Bible is given by the breath of God, and that as such it is inerrant in all that it affirms. I believe in Creation because it is what the Bible declares. It is found in Genesis, Exodus, Job, throughout the Psalms, in Proverbs, the prophets, and in the New Testament, where we find that it is affirmed by Jesus Christ, for whom the truth of Creation is fundamental and foundational to many of his teachings. Furthermore in the writings of Paul and Peter, as well as in the writing of John, and in the revelation given to John by Jesus, Creation is represented as foundational to not a few Christian Doctrines.
I also believe in Creation because the alternatives are so ludicrous. It is difficult for me to accept an infinite universe, or a universe that just popped out of nothing one day about 13 billion years ago, or 18 billion years ago, depending on which secularist view you prefer.
I find the evidence for Evolution weak, and the search for the "missing link" appears to me to be more a case of a "MISSING CHAIN."
I believe in Creation because of the grandeur, the wonder, the awe and majesty of the world of nature from the minute world of atoms and a microscope slide, to the the wildly large world of the universe and the Hubble images. I believe in Creation because of the fact that my mind ponders the universe and its meaning. My mind and the trove of thoughts, wrong and right that fill it, the conflicts and battles, tells me that I am not just a meaningless mass of chemicals that has made good and responds to stimulii well. I am a human with dignity and I am among those who are the crown of God's creation, of far greater significance than an amoeba or a garden slug.
- Who would you regard as the modern pioneer of Creationism? What have they done to publicise your beliefs?
Authors Whitcomb and Morris in the classic Genesis Flood are easily considered the key pioneers, but lately other writers like Woodmorappe, and the whole staff of Answers in Genesis are doing a great job. AiG has a great website, and they have an excellent selection of literature, they have conferences and speakers with busy itineraries, as well as the Creation Museum under construction at their headquarters near Cincinnati, Ohio in the USA.
Why do you follow such a belief?
This question was already answered in my lengthy response to the first question. But again, I follow the belief in Creation because it is the Truth, and it is what Jesus believed, and it is what the Bible teaches.
- Was your belief introduced to you by parents/anybody else or did you garner the information for yourself?
My parents taught me to believe the Bible. The influence of creationist writers was there also, but I read non-creationist Christians, and studied evolution in School. I tried to believe in evolution AND the Bible, and felt there was no conflict at one time. But when I began to challange secularistic evolution to solve the infinite regression of Cause issue they came up empty. Then I began to see the repeated problem with missing links for all the species, and at the same time I saw that the Bible in its plainest sense teaches Creation. Nobody ever anywhere at any time ever garners information on their own. It is always from sources.
- One argument of those keen to disprove Creationism is ‘What about fossils/dinosaurs/evolution?’ How do you respond to such questions?
Fossils are proof of the truth of the biblical account of the Flood. People say, "Where is the evidence for the Flood?"
And I say, "What evidence would you expect? I would expect millions of dead things buried in hundreds of sedimentary layers all over the planet, and I would expect fossils to extend through multiple layers." The fossils, far from being any DISPROOF, are in fact solid evidence in stone of the account as presented in the Bible. Dinosaurs were created in the last two days of the creation work week, and lived contemperaneously with man. They were taken on the ark in smaller juvenile forms, and survived after the flood for a few years, but new climate conditions and possible hunting pressure by humans and other predators brought them for the most part to extinction.
- Does Creationism only allow for the word of The Bible or can other outside elements be incorporated into the faith?
The Bible is our starting point and basis for understanding all things, including the natural world. The natural world is a declaration of the glory of God when that natural world is rightly viewed according to the Scriptures. But our faith is based on the word of God.
- Do you find your views are opposed more so than other beliefs?
The whole world lies in the power of hte wicked one according to John (First Epistle of John, chapter five), so it seems reasonable for that world to oppose the truth of God's Word, for them to oppose the truth that is God, the Creator. If God is the Creator, then all men are responsible to Him. But they make up the silly notion of evolution in a lame effort to evade their duty of due reverence to the Creator. Whatever I stand for the most boldy is what is opposed. I don't think Creationism is any weaker because of the almost universal oppostion it faces. It is opposed because it stands in the face of the foundation of Secularist idolatry to HUMANITY, that foundation of evolution.
- Why do you feel many are quick to discount Creationism?
I think my answer to the previous question treats this question adequately. Peter says that men are willingly ignorant of the Flood, that is they choose not to believe in it, and this is hand in hand with Creation. The flood is about geological evidence, evidence that points to a young earth created relatively recently by the Word of God out of nothing. They don't want to believe in this Creator to who we are answerable. In addition, publically funded propoganda campaigns and censoring of Creation Science as "Forbidden Religion" as resulted in a glut of Evolutionist PR that has flooded the public forum.
- Do you feel Creationism can offer a solution to the world's ills or do you see it as more of an individual guide?
The world's ills are a result of the actual FALL of our first parents, Adam and Eve in to sin. The world is now subject to all manner of ills, evils, corruption, and decay as a result of their sin. That sin has been passed on to all humans, so human cruelty and evil is also a result of the fall. Understanding the problem correctly is essential to finding the correct solution. That is you must know the bad news in order to receive the GOOD NEWS of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who is the solution to the world's ills. Creation is not some mere private belief. It is the truth, and it is more real than gravity Gravity may pass away, but the Creator is the same: yesterday, and today, and forever.
- Are you keen to spread your message to others or do you let people decide for themselves if it is right for them?
Now that is a nice friendly loaded question. Like there is a dichotomy here? Either I don't spread the message, or people can't decide? So if I spread the message people are not deciding for themselves? So, people who believe the barrage of propoganda, from BBC "Science" programs, to NPR and PBS in the USA, as well as NOVA and DISCOVERY and the evolutionist line that is promulgated in all kinds of nature and animal shows, to an underlying theme in secular films and literature, from Science Fiction to Soap Operas, whew!, people who believe all this influence are making up their own minds, "deciding for themselves what is right for them." This question in and of itself is an example of the propoganda of the pro-evolutionist, anti-Creation forces.
People who believe in evolution, we are to assume, have all decided for themselve? Oh please. From Grammar School, in TV for tots, to teen age bubble gum programs, it is constant Evolutionist propoganda.
And then you present the alternative as either A. Spread the Creationist Message, or B. Let People Decide for themselves. Of course I believe people should decide for themselves, but Creationists should be busily presenting the alternative to Evolutionist hogwash so people have a choice.