The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his065/carrot.arj/CARROT.TXT

Text File | 1991-05-22 | 9KB | 194 lines

Psalm  119:89 "Forever, O Lord, Thy Word is settled in heaven"

May 1990

"WHY DOES THE CARROT MOVE?"

by Ken Ham

My young son, Jeremy, startled me with a strange question one
night at the supper table.  "Why does the carrot move, Daddy?" he
asked.  I had just come back from speaking at a major "Back to
Genesis" seminar.  While there, I had had an interesting
interaction with a marriage and family counselor from a large
church concerning what God's Word says about the role of men and
women in marriage.  I was deep in thought about these vital
matters when I was confronted with this perplexing problem from my
five-year-old son-"Why does the carrot move?.'

     It took some time to figure it out, but we finally solved the
problem.  Usually, my wife prepares strips of raw carrot with our
meals.  My son, Jeremy, loves to eat these strips after dipping
them in ranch dressing.  However, this time, the carrot was
cooked.  Jeremy was holding a drooping carrot, unable to dip it in
the dressing and wondering why it "moved!" Children are certainly
a source of inspiration.

     Jeremy's problem reminded me of the problem many Christians-
including the counselor mentioned above-have with the Word of God.
If Christians would only take God at His Word,they would have the
foundation necessary for their lives.

Instead, like the cooked carrot, they do things to God's
Word which warp it and change it so that it is not the same as was
originally intended.  So many people want to change God's Word to
suit their own ideas.

"Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path"
                    Psalm 119:105

     Actually, a good rule of thumb, which solves a lot of
supposed difficulties with interpretation, is as follows: "If the
plain sense makes good sense, then seek no other sense." But some
theologians think this is too simplistic an approach and they try
to "interpret" God's Word to find the "deeper meaning" or make it
relevant to today's theories.

For instance, this family counselor
told me he totally disagreed with my saying that the man is to be
the head of the house.  He said there is no such thing as a
specific role for a man or a woman in marriage anymore, because
Christ had risen from the dead.

"The entrance of Thy Words giveth light: It giveth understanding
unto the simple.  Psalm 119:130

I asked him to show me, from God's Word, that this was so.
He simply went on to say that we are no longer under the
consequences of sin and the curse, and these roles of headship
and submission were only given because of sin, until Jesus came,
and died, and rose.  Now, he insisted, these roles no longer
apply.

     "If we are no longer under the curse," I asserted, "we should
not die." I then quoted from Ephesians 5:23: "For the husband is
the head of the wife, even as Christ is the Head of the Church:
and He is the Savior of the body."

     "If man is not head of the wife, then Christ is not Head of
the Church," I said.  He answered by saying that head means
"source," and has nothing to do with roles.  This definitely is
incorrect, because, in Ephesians, the word "head" means "author-
ity," and not "source."

     I quoted 1 Timothy 2:11-15, where we are told that a woman's
role is related to the fact that Adam was formed first, and then
Eve, and that Eve was deceived, not Adam.  Again, this man said
that we are no longer under the curse, so this does not apply.
But I pointed out that the statement, "Adam was first formed,"
related to an event before sin.  He answered by saying, "Adam was
not formed first, the animals were."

     He went on to say that a man and a woman, in marriage, have
to be led by the Spirit to determine what they should do in their
relationship.  I asked how these people could determine the
difference between the "Spirit's leading" and their "feelings," if
there was no absolute (Word of God) to test these by.

This was an important question to ask him,because
he had stated that the roles for husband and wife given in
Scripture no longer applied, and thus there was no absolute (Word)
to be trusted.  This man, who has a degree from a well known
Christian college, will destroy families and marriages with this
kind of theology.

"Is not My Word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer
that breaketh the rock in pieces?"

                    Jeremiah 23:29

     It was fruitless to continue the conversation, as people can
justify anything, using (or misusing) the Bible, if they really
want to, by taking verses out of context and applying their own
interpretation, etc.  That is what the cults do.  And, sadly, it
is what a lot of Christians do.  When you consider the compromise
positions (such as theistic evolution, progressive creation, the
gap theory, etc.) that are taught at many Christian colleges and
seminaries-all "justified" by Scripture-one can't help but be dis-
mayed at the way in which the word of God is being undermined in the
Church.

"As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye
may grow thereby" 1 Peter 2:2

     Recently, at another seminar, a theologian told me that
Genesis 1 -1 1 was not to be taken literally, as it was only
written for the "primitive Hebrews who did not understand sci-
ence." However, we are told that "the Word of our God shall stand
forever' (Isaiah 40:8); and "the Word of the Lord endureth
forever" (1 Peter 1:25); "Forever, 0 Lord, Thy Word is settled in
heaven" (Psalm 119:89).  If God's Word,in Genesis, is not
relevant for us now, then why is it going to stand forever?

We are told, in Matthew 24:35, that "heaven and earth
shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

     The Bible is the Book of the ages.  It is the Holy Word of
the Creator God.  Oh, how we need to get back to giving God's Word
the respect, the reverence, and the honor it is due.  Instead of
letting God's Word speak to us and tell us what we need to know,
we often tend to sit in judgment on God's Word.

     The great Christian writer, C.S. Lewis (a distinguished
scholar of history and the classics), once said that "ancient man
approached God (or even the gods) as the accused person
approaches his judge.  For the modern man, the roles are reversed.
He is the judge: God is in the dock."

"The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: But the Word of our God
shall stand forever" Isaiah 40:8

     This generation that puts the words of finite men above the
Word of the infinite God should take heed of Isaiah 30:9: "That
this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will
not hear the law of the LORD." As Hosea says, "My people are de-
stroyed for lack of knowledge: Because thou hast rejected
knowledge" (Hosea 4:6).  Surely this applies today to those who
claim that the scientific theories of finite man are above the
Word of God.

     Let us be a people who say, "Thy Word is very pure: Therefore
thy servant loveth it" (Psalm 119:140).

     In Psalm 138:2, we are told, "For thou hast magnified thy
Word above all thy name." If God says His Word is above His name,
then how much should we-sinful finite humans love this mighty,
divinely inspired food for the soul?

     Who would have ever thought a question about a cooked carrot
could focus our attention on the Word of God? Maybe the next time
you partake of this "created vegetable" you will be reminded of
the authority of the Creator's Word.

"How sweet are Thy Words unto my taste! Yea, sweeter than honey
to my mouth!" Psalm 119:103

QUOTABLE QUOTES:

Speaking of Big Bang Theory, and the fact that so many recent
observations have been contrary to what was expected, science
writer John Maddox comments: ". . it is exceedingly improbable
that the succeeding decade will allow the persistence of present
views of how the Universe is constructed.  The Big Bang itself is
the pinnacle of a chain of inference which provides no explanation
at present for quasars and the source of the known hidden mass in
the Universe.  It will be a surprise if it somehow survives the
Hubble telescope.

"Down with the Big Bang" by John Maddox Nature Vol 34, 10 August
1989.

     Likewise, astronomer Fred Hoyle writes:

     "As a result of all this, the main efforts of investigators
have been . in paper . ing over holes in the Big Bang theory, to
build up an idea that has become ever more complex and cumbersome
. . . I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now
hangs over the Big Bang theory.  When a pattern of facts become
set against a theory" experience .  shows that the theory rarely
recovers."

Fred Hoyle, "The Big Bang Under Attack," Science Digest, Vol. 92
(May 1984), p. 84 (emphasis added).