132 Slices
Medium 9780890515792

1. Where Was the Garden of Eden Located?

Ken Ham Master Books ePub


Where Was the Garden of Eden Located?

Ken Ham

Most Bible commentaries state that the site of the Garden of Eden was in the Middle East, situated somewhere near where the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers are today. This is based on the description given in Genesis 2:814:

The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden. ... Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads. The name of the first is Pishon. ... The name of the second river is Gihon. ... The name of the third river is Hiddekel [Tigris]. ... The fourth river is the Euphrates.

Even the great theologian John Calvin struggled over the exact location of the Garden of Eden. In his commentary on Genesis he states:

Moses says that one river flowed to water the garden, which afterwards would divide itself into four heads. It is sufficiently agreed among all, that two of these heads are the Euphrates and the Tigris; for no one disputes that ... (Hiddekel) is the Tigris. But there is a great controversy respecting the other two. Many think, that Pison and Gihon are the Ganges and the Nile; the error, however, of these men is abundantly refuted by the distance of the positions of these rivers. Persons are not wanting who fly across even to the Danube; as if indeed the habitation of one man stretched itself from the most remote part of Asia to the extremity of Europe. But since many other celebrated rivers flow by the region of which we are speaking, there is greater probability in the opinion of those who believe that two of these rivers are pointed out, although their names are now obsolete. Be this as it may, the difficulty is not yet solved. For Moses divides the one river which flowed by the garden into four heads. Yet it appears, that the fountains of the Euphrates and the Tigris were far distant from each other.[1]

See All Chapters
Medium 9780890515792

26. Why Is Mount St. Helens Important to the Origins Controversy?

Ken Ham Master Books ePub


Why Is Mount St. Helens Important to the Origins Controversy?

Dr. Steven A. Austin

On May 18, 1980, a catastrophic geologic event occurred that not only shocked the world because of its explosive power, but challenged the foundation of evolutionary theory. That event was the eruption of Mount St. Helens in the state of Washington. The eruption of Mount St. Helens is regarded by many as the most significant geologic event of the 20th century, excelling all others in its extraordinary documentation and scientific study. Undeniable facts confront us. Although not the most powerful explosion of the last century, Mount St. Helens provided a significant learning experience within a natural laboratory for the understanding of catastrophic geologic processes.

On May 18, and also during later eruptions, certain critical energy thresholds were exceeded by potent geologic processes. These were able to accomplish significant changes in short order to the landscape (figure 1), providing us a rare, user-friendly opportunity to observe and understand the effects of catastrophic geologic processes.

See All Chapters
Medium 9780890515792

15. How Old Does the Earth Look?

Ken Ham Master Books ePub


How Old Does the Earth Look?

Dr. Andrew A. Snelling

Insisting that the earth and the universe are young, only 6,000 years old or so, does not make the biblical view popular in today’s enlightened "scientific" culture. It would be so easy just to go along with the view believed and followed by the overwhelming majority of scientists — and taught in nearly all universities and museums around the world — that the universe is 1314 billion years old and the earth 4.5 billion years old.

After all, many Christians and most scientists who are Christians believe in such a vast antiquity for the earth and universe. Consequently, they even insist the days in Genesis 1 were not literal days, but were countless millions of years long. Also, they claim the Genesis account of creation by God is just poetic and/or figurative, so it is not meant to be read as history.

Why a Young Age for the Earth?

Of course, the reason for insisting on a young earth and universe is because other biblical authors took Genesis as literal history and an eyewitness account provided and guaranteed accurate by the Creator Himself (2 Timothy 3:16a; 2 Peter 1:21). Jesus also took Genesis as literal history (Mark 10:69; Matthew 19:45; Luke 17:27). So, the outcome of letting Scripture interpret Scripture is a young earth and universe.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781614580164

3. Couldn't God Have Used Evolution?

Master Books ePub


Couldnt God Have Used Evolution?

Ken Ham

During the Scopes Trial in 1925, ACLU attorney Clarence Darrow placed William Jennings Bryan (seen as the man representing Christianity) on the stand and questioned him about his faith. In his questioning, Darrow pitted Bryans faith in the Bible against his belief in modern scientific thinking. Darrow questioned Bryan about the meaning of the word day in Genesis. Bryans answer rejected the clear teaching of Scripture, which indicates that the days of Genesis 1 are six actual days of approximately 24 hours. Bryan accepted modern evolutionary thinking instead when he said, I think it would be just as easy for the kind of God we believe in to make the earth in six days as in six years or in six million years or in 600 million years. I do not think it important whether we believe one or the other.[1] This is not the first time a Christian has rejected the intended meaning of Gods Word, and it certainly will not be the last.

Many Christians today claim that millions of years of earth history fit with the Bible and that God could have used evolutionary processes to create. This idea is not a recent invention. For over 200 years, many theologians have attempted such harmonizations in response to the work of people like Charles Darwin and Scottish geologist Charles Lyell, who helped popularize the idea of millions of years of earth history and slow geological processes.

See All Chapters
Medium 9780890515372

27. Isn't the Bible Full of Contradictions?

Ken Ham Master Books ePub


Isn’t the Bible Full of Contradictions?

Paul F. Taylor

A Christian talk radio show in America frequently broadcasts an advertisement for a product. In this ad, a young lady explains her take on Scripture: "The Bible was written a long time ago, and there wasn’t a lot of knowledge back then. I think that if you read between the lines, it kinda contradicts itself." The show’s host replies, "Oh no, it doesn’t!" but nevertheless her view is a common view among many people.

Some years ago, I was participating in an Internet forum discussion on this topic. Another participant kept insisting that the Bible couldn’t be true because it contradicts itself. Eventually, I challenged him to post two or three contradictions, and I would answer them for him. He posted over 40 alleged contradictions. I spent four hours researching each one of those points and then posted a reply to every single one. Within 30 seconds, he had replied that my answers were nonsense. Obviously, he had not read my answers. He was not interested in the answers. He already had an a priori commitment to believing the Bible was false and full of contradictions. It is instructive to note that after a quick Google search, I discovered that his list of supposed Bible contradictions had been copied and pasted directly from a website.

See All Chapters

See All Slices