Apologia I (Why Origen?)

One of the fastest-growing threats to Christian faith today is deconstructionism. It’s not a tightly organized movement, which makes it hard to confront directly. It’s multifaceted, and some of the questions it raises are valid. I believe our enemy, the devil, has taken advantage of real, unresolved questions within modern Christianity and used them—combined with some Christians’ dismissive or defensive posture— to undermine the faith of millions.

Gary Pollard

Now that we’re several sections into Origen’s On first principles, I want to explain why I’m taking on this project. Why Origen? Why devote time to a writer who isn’t considered “inspired”? Aren’t there enough lost and dying souls as it is? Why focus on something like this? Shouldn’t I be spending my energy elsewhere? And if Origen sometimes says things that seem strange or uncomfortable to modern Christian ears, why publish them at all?

One of the fastest-growing threats to Christian faith today is deconstructionism. It’s not a tightly organized movement, which makes it hard to confront directly. It’s multifaceted, and some of the questions it raises are valid. I believe our enemy, the devil, has taken advantage of real, unresolved questions within modern Christianity and used them—combined with some Christians’ dismissive or defensive posture— to undermine the faith of millions. I won’t go into specific details here, but this movement deserves serious attention.

We’ve inherited a bit of theological and traditional baggage over the centuries—not enough to undermine the legitimacy of our faith, but enough to create some distance between us and the beliefs of first-century Christians. Much of this divergence can be traced to the fourth-century ecumenical councils. These councils took unsettled questions—once considered open for discussion and not barriers to fellowship—and hardened them into dogma. Today there are over 45,000 Christian denominations worldwide. Deconstruction is one of Satan’s most effective weapons in this decade.

I’ve spent the past couple of years “behind the lines” of this movement—reading their writings, listening to their podcasts, joining their forums and servers. Here’s what I’ve noticed:

  • A widespread rejection of materialism and the wealth-driven mindset of previous generations. While not universal, this pattern appears frequently.
  • A growing disdain for shallow, mindless entertainment. Most are searching for deeper meaning, esoteric knowledge, and truth. They seek intellectual stimulation, not dilute copium. Jordan Peterson may have played a key role— his unabridged deep dives into philosophy, psychology, and biblical themes deepen hunger for significance and intellectual engagement. Not a bad thing! But as we’ll see, many (especially our own) are looking for depth, meaning, and truth elsewhere. 
  • This hunger often leads to other similar podcasts, YouTube channels, and alternative history theories. Again, not bad things. These sources rarely align with the mainstream historical or scientific views, but they seem to resonate with reality far better. The problem is that this skepticism extends to religion. Many consider themselves spiritual, so they reject Christianity for universalism, neo-paganism, or other alternatives. The consistent thread is that they don’t trust religious leaders to be honest or unbiased. Many cited the church’s inability—or unwillingness—to address difficult questions as being what drove them away.

The outcome is usually one or more of the following: pantheism, paganism, gnosticism, universalism, agnosticism, Epicureanism, occultism, even nihilism. I know this reads like something from an 80s church pamphlet warning about Led Zeppelin and pinball machines— but this is actually real, and it’s happening by the millions. You can see its symptoms for yourself: search YouTube for “Gnosticism,” “esotericism,” or “alternative history.” Most of the top videos have millions of views. Even obscure channels discussing niche topics may have hundreds of thousands of views. Do some research on the growth of all of the groups listed above. 

So, why am I dragging both of my readers through Origen’s writings? Because millions of people (again, many of our own) are searching for truth—and they don’t trust the modern Christian’s interpretation of ancient texts. Origen was probably the first Christian to organize the church’s teachings into a coherent theological system. He did this before the government-sponsored councils of the fourth century began enforcing orthodoxy. His work offers powerful responses to many of the questions fueling deconstructionism. It also gives us a glimpse of what Christians believed before AD 325—and that’s exactly what many of these seekers are hungry for. 

My goal is simple: to make On first principles accessible to the average truth-seeker or questioner. Origen provides the most complete early summary of Christian theology. He’s not considered canonical by any denomination, and his work may irritate some Christians. That’s why I think these seekers and questioning believers will be willing to read it. If it also encourages the faithful, even better. But I’m doing this primarily for the seekers and questioners, not the saved.

This project is my attempt to patch a breach in the dam and help pull at least some of these wandering souls back toward the light. Many of us have watched friends or loved ones fall victim to this movement. Origen’s work—especially when stripped of later editorial influence—may be one of the most effective tools we have right now. 

Dozen Thousand

Gary Pollard

It’s so encouraging that many public figures (by extension, many of their audiences) have rejected outright atheism and godless evolution! Even those who would never consider themselves believers have rejected some of the main pillars of evolution. Among them are people like Joe Rogan, Randall Carlson, Graham Hancock, Jordan Peterson (who does describe himself as a believer in some capacity), Ben Van Kerkwyk, and many others. 

What have they rejected (minus Peterson)? Gradualism/Uniformitarianism — a belief (it is a belief) that current processes are sufficient to explain how things were in the past. Uniformitarianism is the foundation supporting a belief that our earth is billions of years old, that geological processes take millions of years, and it serves as the bias behind radiocarbon/radioisotope dating. 

So what’s the problem? These same proponents of catastrophism (the belief that geological processes are best explained through natural disasters rather than gradual changes over long periods of time) still view the earth as being billions of years old. They still have an evolutionary view of our timeline. Progress is progress, so I don’t want to be harsh in discussing these people! 

But I would like to remind myself (and whoever may read this) of why I don’t believe the earth is any more than (at most) 12-15,000 years old: 

  1. Population of earth — We double in population every couple of decades. Allowing for disasters, if humans (or humans-ish, as evolutionists say) came onto the scene 1,000,000 years ago, we’d have something like 1×105000 people on earth today. The known universe couldn’t hold anywhere near that many people, much less our one planet. Since the current population of earth is around 8.02 billion (according to commerce.gov), we can safely assume that we’re no older than 12-15,000 years. 
  2. Sediment layers across our ocean floors are far too “thin” to support an age of hundreds of millions of years. Sediment should be “choking the oceans” if the oceans were that old. The salinity (saltiness) of the oceans is another problem for old-earth proponents — it has been convincingly proven that our oceans are getting saltier with time (rather than remaining constant). Based on current salinity, our earth is no more than several thousand years old. 

Many other brilliant authors have written much more than can be contained here. I recommend perusing the Institute for Creation Research’s website, as well as Apologetics Press and Answers in Genesis for more proofs. While the secular world is still off on quite a few things, we shouldn’t overlook the fact that progress is being made

At least for right now, there does seem to be a positive trend in society’s thirst for meaning! Let’s make the most of this by showing God’s love even more. Let’s prove to the world that there’s no better life than a Christian life! Our God is coming back — when he does, the entire world will see him. Let’s show them that we believe in him enough to love like Jesus!  

1  Butt, K. (2001). Fighting the crowd over a young earth. ApologeticsPress.org. https://apologeticspress.org/fighting-the-crowd-over-a-young-earth-882/

2  Tomkins, J.P. & Clarey, T. (2021). The oceans point to a young earth. Institute for Creation Research. https://www.icr.org/article/oceans-young-earth

What’s Next?

Gary Pollard

There has been some controversy in recent years over what the Bible teaches about our new life. While I don’t believe these are disagreements worth splitting over, some aspects — particularly the ones most commonly known — have done some damage. In popular culture (esp. various forms of entertainment media) and within the church, we commonly refer to the next life as “heaven”. The purpose of this article is not to discuss or debunk or promote any particular viewpoint necessarily, but to hopefully change the way we look at this subject in general.

I watched a discussion between Dr. Jordan Peterson and Dr. Niall Ferguson yesterday (12.11.2023), and Dr. Ferguson said out loud what I’ve often heard whispered up to this point. I’m paraphrasing, but he said, “We are drawn to catastrophe and end-of-the-world fantasies because it makes us feel better [about our own mortality]. And, if we’re honest, the idea of heavenly bliss as it’s been taught seems rather dull” [emphasis mine]. He is not alone in his assessment. 

This article can be summarized with the following points: 

  • We were saved to have a hope of the next life (Rom 8.24; I Pt 1.3, 9; I Thess 4.13-18). 
  • God has been very specific in what he communicated to us about our new life (Mt 19.28; II Pt 3.13; Rom 8.22-25; Is 65.17; Rev 21.1-2).  
  • We need to honestly and sincerely sift through our beliefs to determine which of them come from God’s word, and which come from men (I Jn 4.1). 
  • We must not let our respect for family or for those we perceive as spiritual giants override our trust in God’s word (cf. Gal 1.8). 
  • Shouldn’t we be willing to test any teaching by God’s Word?  
  • Whatever the teaching is, whatever the subject is, we should be concerned about how God will perceive us when we meet him (Js 3.1), and not about how some will react to our teaching (cf. Ac 5.29). 

Thank You, Dr. Jordan Peterson

Tuesday’s Column: Dale Mail

Dale Pollard

According to an article written on The Public Discourse in 2018, Dr. Jordan Peterson is said to be “the most influential Biblical interpreter in the world today.” By almost all accounts, his insight and commentary on the Scriptures are held in high regard. On several occasions, Dr. Peterson has been asked about his belief in God to which he responds, “I don’t like that question.” One of his most popular YouTube series covers, “The Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories.” 

There have been millions of people who have spent hours watching these videos, but most of them are still wondering what Dr. Jordan believes concerning the existence of God. He says, “I act as if God exists and I am terrified that He might.” Some in his audience have taken this, and other similar comments made by him, to be deliberately vague. After one particular lecture, Dr. Peterson gave those in attendance the opportunity to ask him questions. One attendee asked Jordan to give his insight on the apostle Paul’s statement, “…and if Christ has not been raised, then all of our preaching is useless” (I Cor. 15.14). To this, Dr. Peterson put his hand to his chin and pondered this for a minute. Afterwards, he looked up and said, “I don’t have a good answer to that. I haven’t gotten to the New Testament yet, but I plan to find out what he meant.” 

This response deserves our appreciation. Jordan Peterson is a serious thinker and a great philosopher who takes his quest for truth seriously. He has acknowledged the importance of seeking out the answer to life’s most important question. He has made the realization that a personal discovery of God’s existence would carry with it life-changing implications. 

While his current beliefs do not mesh with the teachings found in His Word, he exemplifies the seriousness that we may sometimes lack. If we profess to believe in a supreme and eternal Creator who will one day judge mankind, our lives should reflect this down to our core. Our daily decisions should exhibit the devotion of our lips.