[Paladin54]

Hello brothers and sisters, I just wanted to share something from a book our class read called "Total Truth". I don't know if you've read it at all, but the author made a very good point on how people receive the Gospel. For example, the reason that the "Fire and brimstone" preaching was so effective was because of the time period, since they had all grown up in Christian homes. Every person who heard these "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" sermons understood the Creation part of the Gospel (If broken down into 3 parts, the Gospel could be broken into: Creation, Fall, Redemption through Christ) . They realized that the Fall destroyed something very valuable (man), and that is why the Fall was so devastating.

Today, however, very few people are raised in a Christian background, so the Fall makes no sense to them since they know nothing of the Creation. If something of no value is corrupted, so what? However, if something of great value is perverted, then the magnitude of the fall makes sense to people. Do you think this may be why our reiterating these classic sermons has less effect than it did in the Revivals? I may be wrong altogether, I have seen little street preaching and have done none myself, but I don't see people understanding the message because we are jumping to the Fall instead of starting with the Creation. Isn't that the Gospel? "God made man in his Image, made perfect, man falls to temptation and sin enters the world, corrupting its seed. Then God incarnate, in his grief for the loss of his fellowship, pays the penalty for our sin so that we may become like Christ, and one day rule the world with Christ after Judgement. Isn't that the idea? If we leave out the first part, it makes little sense because they miss the idea "God loves you, he made you perfect (originally), but cannot look upon you because of your filth. Repent and come back to fellowship with God.

How can paradise be restored is paradise never existed in the first place?

Submitted for your review,
Paladin

I hope that I explained it well enough.

Originally Posted by Paladin54

Hello brothers and sisters, I just wanted to share something from a book our class read called "Total Truth". I don't know if you've read it at all, but the author made a very good point on how people receive the Gospel. For example, the reason that the "Fire and brimstone" preaching was so effective was because of the time period, since they had all grown up in Christian homes. Every person who heard these "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" sermons understood the Creation part of the Gospel (If broken down into 3 parts, the Gospel could be broken into: Creation, Fall, Redemption through Christ) . They realized that the Fall destroyed something very valuable (man), and that is why the Fall was so devastating.

Today, however, very few people are raised in a Christian background, so the Fall makes no sense to them since they know nothing of the Creation. If something of no value is corrupted, so what? However, if something of great value is perverted, then the magnitude of the fall makes sense to people. Do you think this may be why our reiterating these classic sermons has less effect than it did in the Revivals? I may be wrong altogether, I have seen little street preaching and have done none myself, but I don't see people understanding the message because we are jumping to the Fall instead of starting with the Creation. Isn't that the Gospel? "God made man in his Image, made perfect, man falls to temptation and sin enters the world, corrupting its seed. Then God incarnate, in his grief for the loss of his fellowship, pays the penalty for our sin so that we may become like Christ, and one day rule the world with Christ after Judgement. Isn't that the idea? If we leave out the first part, it makes little sense because they miss the idea "God loves you, he made you perfect (originally), but cannot look upon you because of your filth. Repent and come back to fellowship with God.

How can paradise be restored is paradise never existed in the first place?

Submitted for your review,
Paladin

I hope that I explained it well enough.

I have never read the book “Total Truth”, but I have heard of the idea before. In fact, I have often said “The belief in God makes all other beliefs easy to believe.” Why? Because, if we accept the belief of a supreme being existing that transcends time and space that possesses all-power, then why can we not accept something as simple as this being having the power to put on flesh in an incarnation? So I agree, that creation is an important part in our teaching and preaching. Here is a sermon I preach once. Enjoy!
__________________________________________________ ____________

Romans Chapter 1:18-21

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

God has chosen to reveal Himself in two main ways. One is called Natural or General revelation (revelatio realis) and the other Supernatural or Special revelation (revelatio verbalis). It is the former that I would like to discuss with you. The revelatio realis is that general revelation that is attained from the reality around us. It is the voice of nature itself, hence natural revelation. And what pray tell does that voice tell us? Two great truths are uttered by the creation.

The first is that it is dieing. The Scriptures inform us in (Romans 8:20-23) “For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” Are not things wearing away? Is not the world falling apart? Do not creatures die off? Yes, most certainly! Death is a reality of the world in which we live. It is the groaning of creation itself. Yet, creation does teach us one other great truth. A truth that is the foundation on which everything we as Christians believe rests. The principle upon which our world view is fixed and the acceptance such which makes all other beliefs not only probable but possible. What is that truth? That truth is that there is a God!

The fact that we believe in a God makes all other beliefs easy to accept. Take the parting of the red sea, or the virgin birth, or even the resurrection of Christ from the dead. All these things and more become very simple to believe when one has already accepted a belief in a supreme being of infinite power whom is not subject to time and space. The Scriptures write, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.” (Ps. 19:1-3). Permit me tonight to share with you why I believe there is a God. I have eight argumentums of evidence.

Argumentum #1: The Cosmological Argument – This is also known as the argument from Cause and Effect. Within the world in which we live there is a law called cause and effect. This law is seen in just about every area of life. If an insurance claim inspector is examining a car accident, he knows that something caused the wreck. It just did not happen on its own. Bare bones common sense tells a man, that every effect he sees must have a cause. No effect can be without a cause that caused it. Every effect that exists in the universe must have an adequate cause. When men gaze out into creation they see marvelous effects, the greatest of which is the universe in which we live. Since, the universe is the greatest effect we can literally see, it too must have an adequate cause.

There are only three possible answers to account for the origin of the universe.
1. The Universe created it self. Yet, this is a logical absurdity. For how could the universe exist before it existed in order to bring its self into existence? Pure poppycock!
2. The Universe is eternal. However, this defies known laws of physics. In particular the laws of thermodynamics and more precisely the second law known as Entropy. This law states that all expendable energy is converting into no reusable heat. Hence, the universe, if uninterrupted by some greater force outside its self, is on a crash course with heat death. If the universe was eternal it would have reached this point already.
3. The Universe was created. Seeing as the first two options are incorrect, the only other viable option is that it was created by some superior being outside of itself.

Argumentum #2 The Teleological Argument – Or other wise the argument from design. If I were to ask anyone of you here to give me evidence that this meeting house had a builder, many of you would give me that “duh” look and say, “the evidence is in the fact that the building exist.” Why, because design implies a designer! It goes back the old Paisley argument that a watch cannot exist without a watchmaker. Paul Ricci, a skeptical professor of philosophy and logic, has written in Fundamentals of Critical Thinking,

Everything designed has a designer’ is an analytically true statement. (1986, p. 190).

From the microscopic cell to the enormous celestial bodies, design is seen every where. Take for example what you have been hearing in the news about Global Warming. Now, I by no means am a firm believer in it, although what they argue is right to mention. They are claiming that our ecosystem is so delicate that if it were to change ever so slightly life would parish. Therefore, by their own mouths, we can easily conclude that this earth is so fine tuned that someone went through a lot of trouble to make it that way. In fact, the November 29th edition 2004 of the Time magazine is an article entitled Cosmic Conundrum that states,

The universe seems uncannily well sited to the existence of life. Could that really be an accident?

Hebrews chapter 3 verse 4, “For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

Argumentum #3 The Anthropological Argument – The scriptures declare, “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.” (Ps. 139:14) Science is not to far behind this, for Alma E. Guinness says, in ABC’s of The Human Body,

When you come right down to it, the most incredible creation in the universe is you-- with your fantastic senses and strengths, your ingenious defense systems, and mental capabilities so great you can never use them to the fullest. Your body is a structural masterpiece more amazing than science fiction.(Pleasantville, NY: Reader’s Digest Association. 1987, p. 5).

Mankind has the ability to love or hate. Where did these emotions come from? He has the ability to think and has intellect and reason. Where did these come from? Man’s abilities go even so far as to include creativity. Where did this come from? Does not creativity imply the existence of some greater creativity and that a Creator must exist? Does not intelligence imply that a greater intelligence must exist? Is not personality predicated on some greater personality? Indubitably it is!

Argumentum #4 The ontological Argument – Or the intuition on man. This is an argument that states, “because man has the idea of an absolutely perfect being, therefore an absolutely perfect being MUST exist.” Where did man get the idea of a God? Some would say, “From the preachers!” But where did they get it from? From the Bible which was written by men. Yet, where did they get it from? This idea had to come from somewhere.

John Calvin, in his Institutes of The Christian Religion, Chapter 3 entitled The Knowledge of God Naturally Implanted in The Human Mind, writes,

That there exists in the human minds and indeed by natural instinct, some sense of Deity, we hold to be beyond dispute, since God himself, to prevent any man from pretending ignorance, has endued all men with some idea of his Godhead, the memory of which he constantly renews and occasionally enlarges, that all to a man being aware that there is a God, and that he is their Maker, may be condemned by their own conscience when they neither worship him nor consecrate their lives to his service... Nay, even idolatry is ample evidence of this fact. For we know how reluctant man is to lower himself, in order to set other creatures above him. Therefore, when he chooses to worship wood and stone rather than be thought to have no God, it is evident how very strong this impression of a Deity must be; since it is more difficult to obliterate it from the mind of man, than to break down the feelings of his nature,—these certainly being broken down, when, in opposition to his natural haughtiness, he spontaneously humbles himself before the meanest object as an act of reverence to God.

Where did the idea of God come from? Why does man seek to worship some from of deity above himself? The answer! God placed that idea in man!

Argumentum #5 The Ethnological Argument – or the argument from history. It’s also been called the consensus genetum. There have always existed unbelieving men that have denied the existence of a God. However, they have also been in the minority. They have been in the minority to such an existent that it can be said that in general that the belief in a supreme being has exited among all nations in all ages, no mater what their status or location.

Again, John Calvin, in his Institutes of The Christian Religion, Chapter 3 entitled The Knowledge of God Naturally Implanted in The Human Mind, stated,

Certainly, if there is any quarter where it may be supposed that God is unknown, the most likely for such an instance to exist is among the dullest tribes farthest removed from civilization. But, as a heathen tells us, there is no nation so barbarous, no race so brutish, as not to be imbued with the conviction that there is a God. Even those who, in other respects, seem to differ least from the lower animals, constantly retain some sense of religion; so thoroughly has this common conviction possessed the mind, so firmly is it stamped on the breasts of all men. Since, then, there never has been, from the very first, any quarter of the globe, any city, any household even, without religion, this amounts to a tacit confession, that a sense of Deity is inscribed on every heart.

Argumentum #6 The Moral-logical Argument – How do we account for the presents of evil? Have you ever thought of that? Take for example, what happened on September 11th 2001, when terrorist flew plains into the World Trade Centers. And yes, it was the Jehadists not Bush that was behind it. I have seen just about every video for and against what happened on 9/11 and I am convinced beyond doubt, that jehadists were the ones behind it. If you do not believe me, please see me after service and I will debunk every major conspiracy behind the 9/11 myths.

This date was a tragedy for Americans. But wait! How can we say that it was a tragedy? What standard are we using to label this event as a tragedy? The jehadists believed that they were doing right or good. Though we say that what was done was wrong and evil. You must under stand that evil is not the opposite of good, any more than a hole in my pant leg is the opposite of my jeans. No, the hole in my pant leg is the absents of jean material. So, likewise, evil is the absents of good. The hole in my jean pant leg exist and yet is not made of anything. However, that hole in my pant leg COULD NOT exist if at first my jeans do not exist. Hence, evil’s existence is predicated first on the existence of good. And good can only come from some ominous absolute good. A good that can only come from God! In the December 15th, 2006 issue of the international Herald Tribune Columist Jeff Jacoby put-forth,

without God the difference between good and evil becomes purely subjective.

Argumentum #7 The Biological Argument – man has observed for some 6,000 years what is known as the Law of Biogenesis. This law states that life comes from life. To believe that there is no God is to accept the concept of spontaneous generation; that life came from non-life. Yet, life is far too complex for this to happen. Life: an Introduction to Biology by Simpson, Pittendright, and Tiffany states,

A modern building is certainly a complex and highly ordered structure, but its complexity cannot begin to compare with that of the living system. And for precisely the same reasons that make us reject the idea of a building coming into existence spontaneously, we are forced to reject the idea that anything as complex as an organism could arise spontaneously from the materials of the nonliving world.

If there is no God then life had to come about by chance. But this is something that could not have happened. Sir Fred Hoyle, one of Great Britain’s prominent scientist and one of the greatest authorities on statistical probability, worked on the mathematical probability that live could have arose from chance. What was his conclusion? Hoyle writes, in regards to life forming by chance,

life could not have originated here on Earth.” (The Intelligent Universe p. 242).

In fact, even a diehard evolutionist like Richard Dawkins agrees. He writes,

…the essence of life is statistically improbability on a colossal scale. Whatever is the explanation for life, therefore, it cannot be chance. The true explanation for the existence of life must embody the very antithesis of chance.(The Blind Watchmaker, p. 317).

Martin Rees, president of Britain’s Royal Society, stated,

The per-eminent mystery is why anything exist at all. What breathes life into the equations, and actualized them in a real cosmos. Such questions lie beyond science, however, they are the province of philosophers and theologians. (The Sunday Times December 24th, 2006).

Argumentum #8 The experienceological Argument – I had an encounter with God. Yes, I had a personal encounter with Him! In fact, that encounter was so great that it changed my life completely. Since that encounter I have never been the same. In the debate over weather there is a God or not, experience will always win out over evidence. In other words, even if you could produce evidence that God does not exist. I know that he does because I have met Him. Therefore, any evidence you bring proving God is not real is simply your misguided bias application of the evidence. Why? Because, I met God! Indeed, He speaks to me even now! Why is it, that if I speak to God I am praying, but if God speaks to me I am a nut case? No, God is real! Have you meet him yet? Do you know what I know?

My friends, one of the biggest reasons people do not put faith in God is because we as Christians don’t live like we believe in God. We are nothing more than practical atheist! We say we believe in God, but then live our lives as through He did not exist. James Chapter 2 Verses 19 &20, “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” Do not the devils believe that there is a God? Most certainly, as the text tells us! Do they not believe in miracles? Then why are they trying to counterfeit them? Do they not believe that Jesus was the Son of God. O, yes! Might I remind you that mention of Christ Jesus as the Son of God (in the gospels) was also by devil possessed people (Matt. 8:29; Mark 5:7). O, yes, the devils believe and do tremble. The problem is this, atheists disobey a God they do not believe exist, but devils disobey a God they KNOW exist!

As our primary text has stated: “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.” (Roman 1:21). Do you know God and are you thankful?
__________________________________

- “One accurate measurement is worth more than a thousand expert opinions”

- “...this is the Word of God; come, search, ye critics, and find a flaw; examine it, from its Genesis to its Revelation, and find an error... This is the book untainted by any error; but is pure, unalloyed, perfect truth. Why? Because God wrote it. Ah! charge God with error if you please; tell him that his book is not what it ought to be. I have heard men, with prudish and mock-modesty, who would like to alter the Bible; and (I almost blush to say it) I have heard ministers alter God's Bible, because they were afraid of it... Pity they were not born when God lived far—far back that they might have taught God how to write.” Charles Haddon Spurgeon (Spurgeon's Sermons Volume 1: Sermon II p. 31)

- “If, therefore, any do complain that I have sometimes hit my opponents rather hard, I take leave to point out that 'to everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the sun' : 'a time to embrace, and a time to be far from embracing' : a time for speaking smoothly, and a time for speaking sharply. And that when the words of Inspiration are seriously imperilled, as now they are, it is scarcely possible for one who is determined effectually to preserve the Deposit in its integrity, to hit either too straight or too hard.” Dean John William Burgon (The Revision Revised. pp. vii-viii)

[Easy E]

Good stuff T4T, thanks Brother.

One thing is that creation arguments tend to bog down quickly. Witnessing would, without a doubt, be easier if it were not for the heinous influence of evolution on our culture. But sometimes if you only talk about creationism vs. evolutionism then you can never get to the resurrection and the New Birth. I know, because that has happened to me.

A person just has to be aware of the situation and not forget that sometimes people just need to hear "Ye must be born again" as opposed to "I think that archeaopterix (sp) is truly a bird and not a transitional species between a dinosaur and a bird."

[Luke]

Streetpreaching about Evolution has one of two responses.

1) You get hecklers, and you get them in droves. People will stand there and debate you on evolution for as long as you will preach, and more often than not, they will have the crowd on their side. Unless you know how to direct a debate away from psuedo-science, and from endless debate where one person gives their evidence, and then the other gives theirs, and neither rebuts each other, then you are best to avoid it altogether.

2) You will have people completely ignore you. Having people ignore you is not the aim of streetpreaching. You want people to react. You want them to either get mad, and heckle you, and draw a crowd, or you want them to stop and listen.

If you can get the hecklers, you will more often than not get the crowd. But you need to be able to control the hecklers.

One time, when my Brother (In Christ), Damien and I were streetpreaching in sydney, there was this one devil possessed guy who had answers to everything we said, and could actually scream louder than our megaphone (which was pretty powerful). We started to fear for our safety, and other peoples too, as he started to get quite aggressive, so we just swallowed "pride" and left.

Everyone clapped. Oh well. At least they did hear the gospel

[Paladin54]

I think you misunderstand what I am trying to say, I never suggested arguing against evolution. The idea of giving the Creation side of the story a chance is to get the idea "We were meant to live for more than this. This is not the way man was meant to live" The idea is on every human's hearts. It is something that we crave for, and I can't find the words of Ezekiel that say that. When I talk to non-believers, they say "Well, evolution has been proven true, so..." All I have to do is respond with "There is zero evidence that supports evolution, just ask any scientist" and then they're ready to listen.
Perhaps, however, I've been talking to a more open crowd (certainly, I have yet to talk to a demon advocating evolution) {!}