For Everything There is a Season

Posted by Clark Bates
January 18, 2020




I was asked last year how I got involved in apologetics, and to be honest, I hadn’t reflected on that for quite some time. In one form or another, I have been engaged in apologetic ministry for roughly a decade, and in all that time of reading, studying, speaking and writing, it becomes easy to lose sight of how everything began. One day you’re just an apologist. You don’t know when you went from studying to be an apologist to being one, but at some point, everything shifted.

As I reflect on it now, I have to say that I entered the world of apologetics a few years after coming to Christ. You see, prior to my being a follower of the Lord I was not a good man. My sins were many and some were illegal. While I had been justified a few years prior, the crimes I committed caught up with me and I had to face justice for them. While I was in prison, I was given a pair of headphones that were useful for two things: listening to AM/FM radio and the television in the common area. I wasn’t much for television, so I used them for radio. The only problem was that the prison house was cinderblock, as was my cell, which creates an excellent barrier to prevent radio signals from getting in. This meant that it was very difficult to find a radio station that I could receive in my cell, let alone a Christian one.

I was able to dial in one Christian radio station, but it only came in if I laid on my bed in my cell, pushed right next to the window. On Sunday afternoons, there was a program that broadcasted in San Diego right around lunch, for 1 hour. That radio program was called Stand to Reason. Yes, this is the same Stand to Reason operated by Greg Koukl, Amy Hall, and Alan Shlemon. For one hour, every Sunday Greg answered calls and dealt with the evidence for the Christian faith. In the darkest corner of my world, his voice was a beacon of light, reminding me that my faith was not vain. It strengthened me in ways that I can never express or repay.

After my release, I returned to my life, began working, and returned to serving my local church as I was able. I bought Josh McDowell’s book, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, and read it cover to cover. Before long, I was sharing in the adult Sunday Schools what I was learning. I read vociferously, digesting all four volumes of Norm Geisler’s Systematic Theology, Frank Turek’s I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, and everything from Ravi Zacharias. It wasn’t long before I was teaching regularly in the church and fighting a pull on my heart to serve the Lord in some form of teaching ministry. The effectual calling upon me was confirmed by the elders of my church and I approached the pastor to share what was on my heart. To be honest, I thought I was crazy, because there was no way a felon could serve the church (at least that’s what I thought). But my pastor encouraged me to pursue the calling and begin the degree process to receive an MDiv. Not having had any education prior, this meant 7 years of schooling, but I signed up and my journey began.

As the years, and my training progressed I grew in wisdom and stature (metaphorically) with the Lord and others. I began to preach and teach in my church and others. I visited gatherings that were

interested in answering objections to the faith and helped strengthen the Body as I was able. Several years in, I was gifted with a scholarship to attend Frank Turek’s Cross Examined Instructor’s Academy, and I can honestly say that it changed my life. I learned how to focus my time and work in apologetics and to become a master of just one topic, rather than mildly familiar with many. I was fortunate to attend two Academies at different years and build a strong working relationship with many fellow apologists. From then to now, I have operated this website, completed my Master’s degree and continued to speak at various events in the areas I’ve lived. I’ve seen apologetics ministry go from being something almost unheard of to existing in every corner of the internet. For good or bad, apologetics and apologists are everywhere, and the Christian faith, to one degree or another, is being defended. For that I thank God.

But now we come to where I am at today. As I sit at my keyboard, I am in the final stages of a Master’s Thesis for my second Master’s degree. I took on this second degree as I felt the call of God on my heart with more clarity and a call to academic study. To attain a PhD, I must have a Master’s of Theology, so here I am, at the end of that road. To reach this destination I was given the inexpressible gift of a Fellowship at Phoenix Seminary to work under the intellectual giants, Dr. Peter Gurry and Dr. John Meade. I have been blessed beyond measure to travel to Oxford, England and learn paleography; to work with the Museum of the Bible and the University of Birmingham as a transcriber of Greek manuscripts; I have held the oldest fragment of the Gospel of Matthew in my hands, and I have humbly sat under the teaching of great and godly men and women. The baby Christian in that San Diego prison cell could never have fathomed where his life was headed.


All of that to say this, Lord willing, I will be working toward a PhD next year, and it will demand all of my focus and time for several years. Assuming anyone regularly reads this blog, it has probably been noticeable that I have posted less and less in the last year. This is because the sheer demand on my time is already very heavy and as much as I love apologetics, I simply cannot keep up. I have taken a great deal of time delaying this decision. I have prayed about it. I have sought counsel about it. And I believe that it is the right thing to do. At the end of this month, I will shut down this website and close the social media platforms for ExeJesus ministries. If asked, I will gladly speak at any gathering that would have me, but my time as an apologist has come to an end. I will always be thankful for everyone who encouraged me, supported me, and challenged me along this journey. And I will always defend the faith with love and compassion whenever I am asked about the hope that rests within me.

If I may pass on some parting words from ten years of observation, it is this: the best apologetic is the one that listens to the other person before speaking. It is the one that cares about the skeptic in the same way that it cares about the Christian. Apologetics is a part of evangelism, but it is not evangelism. Evangelism shares the beauty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with a lost and dying world. You can be an excellent apologist and have answers for every question, but never share the Gospel. My parting plea to the numerous young apologists out there is simply this: love your enemy, because they will know we are Christians by our love. There is no other way.

---

May the Lord Bless You

May He Keep You

       May He Make His Face to Shine Upon You

  And be Gracious to You

         May the Lord lift up His Countenance Upon You

And Give You Peace.

What do Pagan Creation Myths Say About the Genesis Story?

Posted by Clark Bates
September 29, 2017



Enuma Elish, Ptah, the stories of Atrahasis, tell Mardikh and Ebla.  No, I’m not speaking in tongues; actually, I’m listing various creation stories that have existed in cultures all over the world.  Many of which pre-date the nation of Israel and the very writing of the book of Genesis.  Since every culture has an ancient creation myth in their history, is the creation account in Genesis just a copycat of older myths?  Could it be that the Hebrew people merely adopted the myths that had already existed and only modified them to fit their particular view of God?  This is certainly the view of many in the academy, but since truth is not defined by a majority vote, we should still ask the question,

“What makes Genesis different than all the other stories?”

For a little background, those who engage in cultural investigation of the Ancient Near East often employ a methodology known as “comparative studies”.  Comparative studies is a branch of cultural studies that takes data from different segments of the culture under investigation and juxtaposes them, “in order to assess both similarities and differences in: behavior and belief; literary genre, traditions and texts; and use of metaphors, idioms and words.”[1]  The point of this method is to try to recreate the world surrounding the people, both in the Bible and also the surrounding nations.  When applied properly, it can illuminate a great deal about the world of the Old Testament Patriarchs, the Egyptian dynasties, and many other smaller kingdoms that existed very early in the lifetime of mankind.

However, it's also the use of this comparative model that leads many archaeologists to conclude that the religious worship of the nation of Israel was no different than that of the surrounding people.  As it applies to the creation account, the conclusion has been suggested above: Genesis 1-2 is nothing more than an appropriation of the other creation myths that came before.  In response, I’d like to offer two points to consider:

1. The Devil is in the details: consider the differences as well as the similarities
2. Similarities point to a common truth.

As the definition of comparative studies states, it should involve the study of similarities and differences between various segments of a culture.  The differences are often more important than the similarities.

The Devil is in the Details

Let’s take just a couple of the examples listed above and observe the stories they tell.  The Enuma Elish stories date to the 11^th century BCE and originated in the nation of Babylon.  It is said that the story compares to the biblical account in Genesis, portions of Exodus, and various Psalms.  According to their account, creation was ordered out of the chaos of water in Mesopotamia.  Divine beings governing salt water and fresh water are born, as well as a divine assembly of warriors.  Here is a sample of the comparative passage to Genesis:

“When on high, no heaven had been named,

When no earth had been called

When there were no divine elders…

When there was nothing…”

Clearly, there are some similarities in this writing to Genesis 1:1-2, but understanding that the larger story of Enuma Elish is one of divine formation out of existing water, changes the perception dramatically.

Let’s also look at the Egyptian creation story of the god Ptah.  Much writing on the subject lists Ptah as the creator-god par excellence.  He is said to be the god that existed before all other gods.  He created all things when there was nothing.  From his own thoughts he is said to have created everything.  With that basic summary, it seems rather daunting that the comparisons are very close to what we read of Yahweh in Genesis.  However, the use of common terms does not result in common meanings.

For the Egyptians (and almost all other Ancient Near Eastern cultures) creation out of nothing is not the same as Yahweh’s creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) in Genesis.  Why?  Because, much like it is for modern quantum physicists, “nothing” didn’t actually mean no-thing.  In Egyptian mythology, the “nothing” from which Ptah, and other gods, created was made up of a type of “pre-matter” that eternally existed.  Therefore, when the god Ptah created from his thoughts, those thoughts were actually existing matter.[2]  This is also the case for the creation myths of Atrahasis and the accounts recorded in the Ebla tablets.  Only in the Hebrew account of creation, do we find a supreme deity creating all that is, from absolutely nothing.

Similarities Point to Common Truth

A secondary, and often overlooked, conclusion when conducting comparative studies is the larger

truth that can be observed through the similarities in these accounts.  While it’s true that their differences rule out the possibility of them being reliant on one another, their similarities reveal one major commonality:  God created everything.  Whether it be through different means, or with pre-existing matter, the common themes in all creation myths are these:

1. Before there were many gods, there was one primary god.
2. Everything that we know of reality came into existence at a specific point in time.
3. The primary god/God is the creator of all reality.

When we discuss the reliability of documents or reports, it’s often stated that the most reliable evidence is that which can be confirmed by two or three, or more, separate witnesses.  The more witnesses to an event, the more reliable that event is considered to be.  I can’t think of anything more reliable than the attestation by every known culture across the entire planet recording the creation of all things by a singular, supreme God.

Conclusion

So, what do we do with all these alternate creation myths in ancient history?  Far from discrediting the reliability of the biblical narrative, they demonstrate the unique properties of the Genesis account.  As with the stories relating to a large-scale flood, it is the account of Scripture that stands above all others, both with its testable data and peculiar details.  What’s more, the multiple different creation stories, separated by generations, geography and genre, indicate one thing quite clearly:  There is a God and He is the creator of reality.



[1] John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 19.


[2] All discussion of these stories comes from Matthews and Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East.  

Book Review: Dr. Donald Arlo Jennings' "Genesis Revisited: The Creation"

Dr. Donald Arlo Jennings, Genesis Revisited: The Creation, Bloomington, IN: WestBow Press, 2013.

Review by Clark Bates M.Div.
                   Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

            Having authored many articles and contributed to multiple works on healthcare technology, Dr. Donald Arlo Jennings seeks to apply his knowledge and writing ability toward the biblical book of Genesis in his newest volume, Genesis Revisited: The Creation.  Consistently affirming his strong Christian faith and commitment to a literal rendering of the creation epic in Genesis 1 and 2, the author states that his main purpose is to present a new way to look at the creation.  In his own words, Dr. Jennings believes, "we are not alone in this vastness called space," and is convinced that this belief directly affects how one should interpret the Genesis narrative.[1]

            Heading each chapter with a particular Bible verse that the author feels was given to him during prayer for this writing, Dr. Jennings proceeds to approach the opening chapters of Genesis with an expository flair, opening with the order of creation and carefully moving to the building of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11.  As he moves through each section of Scripture, the author muses about various difficulties that the text presents.  Pondering on such dilemmas as Cain's wife, the creation of something from nothing, and the statistical difficulty of populating the earth, Jennings attempts to piqué the interest of his readers for his predetermined resolution, aliens.

            By the fifth chapter of his work, the author feels that he has presented enough textual dilemma to present his theory of alien colonization of the planet earth.  Dr. Jennings reaffirms that his belief in God as Creator of all things includes His creation of human-like alien beings  on other planets.  Seeing this as a desirable and plausible solution to the aforementioned difficulties of Cain's wife, and post-diluvian repopulation, he even suggests that the aliens in question were possibly criminals sent to earth, meaning that, "Earth might have been a penal colony, a forced encampment of criminals from other worlds."[2]  This postulation resolves, for the author, the source for sin and death in the world, citing Cain's murder of Abel in Genesis 4 as a key premise.

            Moving from this thesis, Dr. Jennings seeks to find evidence for alien encounters within other biblical texts, happily falling upon the first chapter of Ezekiel.  Citing Erich von Daniken's earlier work, Chariots of the Gods and recognizing that he is not alone in this interpretation, the author recites the prophet's encounter with the heavenly, mobile-throne chariot, as seen through the lens of a UFO occurrence.  Jennings finds great support through various internet resources on UFO sightings even seeing fit to reinterpret Psalms 79 and 146 as indicative of his alien penal colony theory.  He then closes his writing with a call to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, reaffirming his orthodox belief in Scripture, satisfied that his hypothesis has intrigued and challenged his readership. 

            It would seem that Dr. Jenning's writing style is an attempted homage to the introspective works of C.S. Lewis, but his grammatically challenged prose reads more like the ramblings of a community college student's wandering mind than of an accomplished, PhD-holding author.  There is no consistent, logical or thematic flow to each chapter.  Information affirmed in Chapter 1 regarding the potential survival of others outside the Ark during the flood of Genesis 6, is later contradicted by an affirmation that no one could have survived the flood  apart from the Ark in chapter 11.  The author expends an excessive amount of thought to conjectures admittedly developed from science fiction television rather than utilizing that time to engage in an educated manner with the existing cosmology surrounding his theory.

            The author continues to affirm his premise alongside opposing factual hypotheses on the basis of it being "two separate opinions," leaving the reader to assume that the author is unaware that all opinions are not created equal.  Dr. Jennings uses the word "probably" 75 times in this writing in relation to his own suggestions, while also using the  word "assume" 125 times, even in relation to biblical texts in which clear positions are stated without room for assumption.  This, coupled with the author's reliance on wikipedia and answers.com as bibliographic sources for his position leave very little reason for any reader to take this work seriously.

            His desire to demonstrate a reasonable comingling of cosmology and faith is respectable, as is his desire to deliver the gospel at the close of his book, however even these moments of positivity cannot substantiate the poor scholarship fraught throughout this text.  Citing the dilemma of Cain's wife, which has persisted for generations, the author foregoes any discussion on possible solutions in the hope that his "alien seeding" theory will become more believable.  In regards to this dilemma, a common response is Adam's 930 year lifespan and the potential for multiple offspring as a result.[3]  Regardless, of the validity of even this response, an author writing under the auspices of a PhD should avail himself of contemporary research before forming and presenting a position.

            A similar biblical slip comes in chapter 11 in which the author, speaking of God meting out divine punishment, states that Sarah was Lot's wife, infamously turned into a pillar of salt for looking back at the wicked city of Sodom and Gomorrah.[4]  Given that the following chapter of Genesis details the account of Abraham and Sarah with Abimilech, one is left awestruck as to how such a mistake could be made initially as well as make it to print.  While many other gaffs in Scriptural citation and cosmological speculation abound within this volume, there is not adequate space to dissect them all.  It is unfortunate that so little of value exists within this work when such a wealth of scholarship is available for engaging and educational discussion regarding the biblical creation account.

            The orthodox interpretations of the opening chapters of the book of Genesis are diverse.  Whether one approaches the epic from a young earth perspective, the day-age view, the Schofield restoration view or a literary framework view, an abundance of literature awaits for those seeking a deeper study on the matter.[5]  It is always difficult to critique the writing of a fellow believer in such a negative manner, but it is equally important that writing such as this, long on speculation and short on verification, be revealed as they are.  Dr. Jennings work leaves the reader feeling as though they sat through a discussion with a new believer postulating every fanciful theory that came to mind.  What makes this even more difficult to embrace is the author's ambivalence to the Scriptures he cites and the scholarship available outside of an internet search engine.  Because of these egregious errors this book cannot be recommended for any reader, or for any purpose.  It serves as a lesson of the dangers of open speculation without clear biblical foundation, and the worst of what is available on the writings of the book of Genesis.

Clark Bates is a graduate of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary and manages an apologetics and theology blog at http://www.exejesushermeneutics.blogspot.com.

I received this book free from WestBow Publishers as part of their BookLookBloggers.com book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

---

[1] Donald Arlo Jennings, Genesis Revisited: The Creation, (Bloomington, IN: WestBow Press, 2013), Section 162.

[2] Jennings, Genesis, 1225.

[3] Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe, When Critics Ask? (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 37.

[4] Jennings, Genesis, 2325.

[5] For a summary of each view it is recommended that you seek out works like Gregory Boyd and Paul Eddy's Across the Spectrum, Hugh Ross' Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy, and J.P. Moreland's Three Views on Creation and Evolution.

The Philosophy of Science and Young Earth Creationism

For those who have followed me for some time, you know that I take a strong stance on the importance of defending the Christian worldview in its specific claims about reality, as opposed to only defending general claims. For those who are not familiar with my reasons for this position, please see my posts here and here. One of the theological debates that I defend specifically is a particular view on creation. I take the old-earth creation (OEC) position that holds to the literal historicity of the records of Genesis 1-11. I came from a position of young-earth creationism (YEC) but changed due to the lack of scientific evidence supporting the view and the complete compatibility of OEC with Christianity. A couple years ago, a prominent YEC leader (Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis) debated Bill Nye on the scientific status on YECism. Ham constantly drew a distinction between "observational/operational science" and "historical science" to say that what happened in the past cannot be known...
Philosophy of Science and Creationism

Common Old Earth Creationism Myths

Being an old earth creationist myself, I hear a lot of these:

https://reflectionsbyken.wordpress.com/2016/01/26/7-common-myths-about-old-earth-creationism/

God Is the Best Explanation For Why Anything At All Exists

Dr. Craig giving a brief defense of the God's Necessary  Nature, as discussed in the first broadcast.