Why the Resurrection Must Be Argued Presuppositionally

Why The Resurrection Must Be Argued Presuppositionally

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 5, 2026 (Donate)

But the angel answered and said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. “He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. “And go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you.” (Matthew 28:5-7, NKJV)

Introduction

God is the absolute authority on all matters. God’s Word comes with the authority of God Himself. Thus, when we look at the resurrection of Christ, we must first start with what God says about it. The Bible—God’s Holy Word—repeatedly affirms that Jesus resurrected. The resurrection is therefore 100% factually true. Anyone who disagrees is wrong—per God. 

Yet we live in a culture that elevates man’s ideas as an attempt to supersede and usurp God’s authority. Like Satan (e.g., Isaiah 14:12-15), man’s attempts at putting themselves above God and His throne, are met with utter failure (e.g., Isaiah 2:22; Proverbs 14:12). Finite man cannot compete with the Almighty, who is the omnipotent (all-powerful) God.

But still, people resist and try to deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We see this in false religions like Islam and atheism—and so many more! But here’s what gets me. In some cases, there are Christians who, strangely, take the tact of man and try to argue for the resurrection.

What do I mean by this? Well, they take God’s Word and set it aside and try to argue for the resurrection all the while leaving the Bible out of it! If that sounds strange—it should!

In some cases, they try to calculate the odds of the resurrection (based on data they oddly enough draw from the Bible) for instance and when they arrive at numbers over 99%, they think did great job. Meanwhile, they went from 100% to 99% and now leave open the possibility that Christ didn’t resurrect! Did you notice that?

I would humbly suggest a tact like this, is not the best. Instead, we should stand on the authority of God’s Word and look at the resurrection from God’s perspective—never giving up the absolute authority of God’s Word in the discussion. From a presuppositional perspective, the resurrection of Jesus Christ must be argued beginning with God’s Word because all reasoning already rests on ultimate authorities.

Consider Cornelius Van Til

Theologian, pastor, and philosopher Dr. Cornelius Van Til argued that the resurrection must be viewed as a revelational and covenantal fact, not as a brute historical event waiting for neutral human interpretation. For him, all facts receive their meaning from God.

And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. (Mark 8:31, NKJV)

Therefore, the resurrection is authoritative and meaningful because God has interpreted it in Scripture. It is not something that gains authority by passing the tests of autonomous human reason (i.e., man’s fallible reason apart from God) or secular historical analysis.

Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987)

According to Van Til, there is no neutral ground that the believer and unbeliever can jointly evaluate the resurrection. You are either for Christ or against Him.

Any demand that the resurrection be proven according to allegedly neutral standards already assumes principles such as logic, causality, historical reliability, and the uniformity of nature. Van Til points out that these principles only make sense within the Christian worldview! When unbelievers appeal to them while rejecting God, they are borrowing ground from Christianity while denying its foundation (often called common ground, not neutral ground).

So why would Christians move away from God’s Word to use these errant human methods?

Van Til taught that the resurrection should not be presented as a mere probability or hypothesis. Christianity does not rest on likelihoods but on divine certainty. The resurrection is part of God’s redemptive plan of history, not an isolated anomaly. To treat it as a bare fact detached from God’s revelation is to strip it of its true meaning—sadly, that is how many try to look at the resurrection today.

Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:27-29, NKJV)

Even so, Van Til further says that unbelief is not primarily an intellectual problem but a moral and spiritual one. People may acknowledge the historical data surrounding the resurrection and still reject its significance because they suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Consider that Thomas himself doubted until he touched the hands of Christ. Some of the other disciples doubted even when Christ ascended in to heaven.

Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. (Matthew 28:16-17, NKJV)

The resurrection should get every person to realize that it is not merely with evidence but with the risen Christ Himself, who has the absolute authority and calls all people to repentance and the Holy Spirit who convert them. These disciples had a heart change when the Holy Spirit came upon them not long after this. 

Van Til puts the resurrection directly connected to the self-attesting authority of Christ. One can appeal to no higher authority than God! To accept the resurrection rightly is to receive Christ as Lord. Any apologetic method that seeks to argue for the resurrection while neglecting that Christ is stated to have resurrected in the Bible has already compromised the biblical position.

Van Til taught that the resurrection must be viewed presuppositionally because there are no uninterpreted facts, God alone provides the correct interpretation of history. This framework later shaped and informed the more explicit resurrection apologetics developed by Greg Bahnsen.

Consider Greg Bahnsen

Theologian, pastor, and philosopher Dr. Greg Bahnsen also repeatedly pointed out that there is no neutral intellectual ground between belief and unbelief. Every person interprets facts through foundational presuppositions about reality, knowledge, logic, truth, and morality. To argue the resurrection as though human autonomy or neutral historical standards are ultimate is to concede the very point at issue, namely the authority of God over human reasoning.

Greg Bahnsen (1948-1995)

Bahnsen argued that Christianity is not one hypothesis among many, but the "precondition of intelligibility" itself. Facts do not interpret themselves; they require a worldview framework that we use to look at facts and evidence. The resurrection, therefore, cannot be treated as a brute historical suggestion that needs to be evaluated by autonomous human reason (man’s ideas).

Instead, the resurrection must be understood as a divinely revealed in Scripture. The 66 books of the Bible do not wait for man’s permission to be authoritative; it speaks as God’s self-attesting revelation—from the highest authority.

But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1:19-21, NKJV)

As a point of note, a presuppositional argument does not deny historical evidence. Rather, it insists that historical evidence can only be properly interpreted within God’s revelation. Bahnsen pointed out that unbelievers routinely borrow Christian presuppositions such as the uniformity of nature, the reliability of testimony, and the laws of logic, while denying the God who makes those things meaningful in the first place. 

When skeptics demand proof of the resurrection according to autonomous standards, they assume the very rational and moral order that only the Christian worldview can justify!

“No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.” (John 10:18, NKJV)

Like Van Til, Bahnsen did not write a single stand-alone apologetic book devoted exclusively to the resurrection—however, Bahnsen did write a paper on the subject here.

Consider Charles Buck

Theologian and pastor Rev. Charles Buck’s theological dictionary (1802) reflects this presuppositional conviction by defining the resurrection of Christ not merely as a historical claim but as a foundational article of faith upon which Christianity stands. Though the systemic approach to the presuppositional view had not been fully articulated in theological circles yet, Christians often and readily stood on the Bible as the supreme authority on the subject of the resurrection in the past. Buck was no different in this case. 

Charles Buck (1771-1815)

Buck consistently treats Scripture as the final court of appeal in doctrinal matters, not ecclesiastical tradition or human philosophy when dealing with the resurrection. In this framework, the resurrection is known with certainty because God has spoken concerning it, and God cannot lie. Thus, the authority of the resurrection is inseparable from the authority of the Word that declares it.

Saying, “The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!” (Luke 24:34, NKJV)

Scripture itself presents the resurrection as a matter of truth, not suggestion. The apostles did not argue as neutral historians appealing to shared assumptions with unbelievers; they proclaimed what God had done and called all people everywhere to repent. 

Christ’s resurrection is presented as God’s public vindication of His Son, interpreted authoritatively by inspired witnesses who recorded the inspired text by the power of the Holy Spirit. The presuppositional approach follows this biblical pattern by submitting human reason to divine revelation rather than placing revelation on trial before human reason.

Moreover, the resurrection is not an isolated miracle but the climax of redemptive history. Buck’s theological understanding showed that doctrines must be understood in their interconnected biblical and theological context. In other words, they were not subject to man’s fallible opinions on the subject.

Conclusion

The resurrection fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. It also proved Christ’s claims of who He was and what He could do. He also proved that He was going to be the final judge. These theological meanings cannot be derived from mere human historical analysis alone—but is predicated on God’s Word.

Bahnsen said that to argue the resurrection apart from Scripture’s authority is to strip it of its true meaning and reduce it to a mere anomaly. The resurrection is not simply an event that we, as fallible being, are in charge of validating; it is a divine act that is to be interpreted through God’s Word—no our imperfect and arbitrary opinions. To receive the resurrection rightly is to submit to the risen Christ as Lord, not merely to acknowledge a curious historical anomaly.

Arguing for the resurrection presuppositionally honors God as the ultimate authority, treats Scripture as self-authenticating absolute revelation. Following the insights of Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen and the theological foundations reflected in Charles Buck, the resurrection must be proclaimed and defended beginning with God’s Word, because only God’s Word provides the necessary preconditions for truth, meaning, and knowledge itself.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.

 

Aren’t You Ashamed?

Feedback: Aren’t You Ashamed?

Absolute disgrace to the progress of man?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 4, 2026 (Donate)

Letter, unedited:

You're business is an aboslute disgrace and abomination to the progression of man. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for wanting to teach kids such fallacies you have no evidence for as 'facts'. Though a complete picture of how the world was derived hasn't been totally identified, the evidence is so far stacked toward evolution that I pity how heavily you must have been brainwashed and how much you have to ignore and reject to maintain your selfish beliefs. I am truely embarrassed to be on the same planet as you backward idiots! I challenge you to spend a few months to IMPARTIALLY research opposing theories and the possiblilty your 'God' does not exist. If you dont think your faith can withstand this examination, then I guess ignorance is bliss!

Who needs logic rationale and reason anyway. If you can believe a genocidal malevolant tyrant wants you to ignore science, then you better do it!

Response:

Thank you for contacting us. My comments are below and I really hope you consider these. Also note, they are said with sincerity and respect, though I am being direct in places.  

To whom it may concern, You're business 

It is actually a ministry and a non-profit. 

is an aboslute disgrace 

First, I’m glad you believe in absolutes; and second, I’m glad you believe there are such moral things as respect, honor, and subsequently shame, hence, where disgrace stems. Most evolutionists would disagree about these things.[1] They say “there are no absolutes or shame or honor, etc.” They argue that everything is material and all things happen—even one's own thoughts—as mere chemical reactions that ultimately have no meaning, because there is nothing immaterial. 

Of course, many evolutionists are being illogical when they claim there are no absolutes, as they just used an absolute! All this is to say that I’m glad you disagree with leading evolutionists about absolutes and morality. These are very Christian of you. However, by the email it seems the Bible is not a high priority (which where morality comes from) so why think there are absolutes and disgrace without the Bible being true?  

The battle is actually how an infallible God views things versus how fallible man does—God is always right; Image from Presentation Library

and abomination to the progression of man. 

But from an evolutionary perspective, why care about the progress of man? “Eat, pass on your genes, and die”; that is really the evolutionist’s motto. Why would the evolutionist care about the next generation—let the offspring fend for themselves before they die? Why care about anything? Really? 

When someone care about people or society that is Christian attribute (people are made in the image of God[2], Genesis 1:26-27; 9:5-6) and I’m glad you do, but that must be borrowed from the Bible to make sense of it.  

You should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for wanting to teach kids such fallacies you have no evidence for as 'facts'. 

We are not ashamed since we are teaching the truth, but evolutionists should be ashamed that they teach kids lies about God, morality, truth, science, and justice…and even kill them in “abortion factories” like “weeding the garden” (recall that it is the evolutionists that teach that children are just animals that can be disposed). 

But let me ask…what fallacies? And furthermore, in an evolutionary worldview where everything is material, why would truth and logic even exist? These things are NOT material, they are abstract. It is a Christian worldview based on the Bible from which we can have a basis for knowledge, logic, reasoning, morality, and so on. The non-Christian must borrow from the Bible just to try to argue against it. 

Though a complete picture of how the world was derived hasn't been totally identified, 

Then why believe it is “absolute” enough to argue against other worldviews as the absolute standard? 

the evidence is so far stacked toward evolution 

Such as? We have the same evidence as the evolutionists and God disagrees with the evolutionists who make such claims. He says all of it is stacked His way: 

“The earth is the LORD’S, and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein (Psalm 24:1, NKJV).” 

So what is the best evidence that evolution is true (even though evolutionists say there is no such thing as truth)? 

that I pity 

Why “pity” if people are just chemicals? Chemical don’t “pity”?  Again, pity is a Christian thing, and I’m glad you have pity, even though it is misguided, because it refutes the position that that evolutionists are arguing for (that pity and other immaterial things do not exist) and verifies that you are indeed made in the image of God. 

If man is nothing but mere chemicals, they have no ultimate or eternal value; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

how heavily you must have been brainwashed and how much you have to ignore and reject 

I was brainwashed by public education that taught me that I was just a chemical and a “waste of space” in a “billions of years” universe where nothing matters and when you’re dead…you’re dead. But then, I actually studied the subject. And I found out who was doing the brainwashing. 

I thank the Lord God for saving me from the secular humanist religion (evolution and millions of years are aspects of this religion) that I was taught in school and university. It sounds like this religion was forced on you without question too. I want to encourage you to question it.[3]  

to maintain your selfish beliefs. 

How is being loving and caring to others selfish? How is teaching people the truth selfish? How is taking a stand to save lives of children selfish? How is loving and being obedient to the God that died to save us from sin and death selfish? How? 

But in an evolutionary worldview where it is “free for all” evolutionary world…why not be selfish? 

I am truely embarrassed 

Again, consistent evolutionists have no basis for truth, so why maintain this belief; if you want to be consistent, then either give up on truth and logic or give up on an evolutionary worldview.  

But what I don’t get is…why not be embarrassed of fellow evolutionists like Hitler or Stalin who killed many kids and adults or that maniac evolutionist Anders Behring Breivik who killed all those little kids in Norway…and yet email us to saying we who preach righteousness should be the ones embarrassed? 

to be on the same planet as you backward idiots! 

How are we backwards and how are we ignorant? Such a claim is merely a question begging epithet fallacy.  

I challenge you to spend a few months to IMPARTIALLY research opposing theories and 

Like this “impartial” email? The fact is no one is impartial. There is no such thing as impartial research.  This email and others we have received like it is evidence that those who criticize the biblical position clearly haven’t “lifted a finger” to honestly research what the Bible teaches about creation, truth, knowledge, science and so on.  

Furthermore, I have searched hosts of religious beliefs including the six differing views of evolution (Epicurean, Lamarckian, Traditional Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, Punctuated Equilibrium, and Hopeful Monster).[4]  Since you’ve professed a belief in evolution, out of curiosity, which of these do you believe right now and why are the others wrong? 

As a matter of note, what Lamarck and Darwin did in trying to find a mechanism for evolution was really just a rehash of trying to make some Greek Mythology work.  The Epicurean Greeks proposed the myth of evolution; it was one popular form of Greek mythology – even Paul refuted it thousands of years ago in Acts 17. 

But with aspects added by Lamarck and Darwin, they simply made variations in this mythology. Rightly, it is still Greek mythology, but their new aspects can also be dubbed French mythology (Lamarck was from France) or English mythology (Darwin was from England).  Sadly, WWII in Europe was instigated by Adolf Hitler, who bought into English mythology of evolution…[5] 

the possiblilty your 'God' does not exist. If you dont think your faith can withstand this examination, then I guess ignorance is bliss! 

When it comes to the existence of God, I have searched the subject as well; be it the classical arguments which are still found wanting or the Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG) which is foundational to the others.[6] How have you disproved the Transcendental Argument for the existence of the God of Christian Theism?[7] 

Who needs logic rationale and reason anyway. 

Evolutionists don’t consistently believe in such a thing since they are not material. 

If you can believe a genocidal malevolant tyrant 

Well this is clearly not the God of the Bible as anyone could tell who has actually read the Bible. This is straw man fallacy that God-haters like Dr. Richard Dawkins have set up. Keep in mind that the last few genocidal, malevolent tyrants have been evolutionists like Hitler and Stalin. 

wants you to ignore science, then you better do it! 

I love science and have Master’s Degree in it. It is sad to see when evolutionists can’t tell the difference between evolution and science. It is a common equivocation fallacy on their part. 

Mr. M., I would like to encourage you though. You have expressed a belief in evolution (with its atheism, since evolution comes out of an atheistic worldview) and yet you are living your life borrowing from the Bible that morality, logic, truth, and science exists. 

I even suspect that you wear clothes—which come directly from a literal Genesis 3. Let’s face it frogs don’t wake up in the morning and put their clothes on. The point is, you are living a life that is a contradiction—you follow the Bible in some areas (perhaps unknowingly) and yet you argue against its truthfulness.  

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened (Romans 1:18-22, NKJV). 

But it is time to stop and repent (Luke 13:3). It is time to change your life and start on the path of truth and righteousness. M., I would love to see you get saved. It seems you have a passion for standing up to things you feel is wrong, and that is a good Christian attribute.   That is something I would hope you continue to do. But you need to understand what is right and wrong and have a basis for it—the Bible. 

I want to encourage you to begin the journey. A good book to get you a good overview of who God is and what he Bible is all about with selected Scriptures in the Bible is simply entitled “Begin” compiled by myself and Ken Ham (by Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2011).  

At the very least, it would help teach you who God is, and what the Bible teaches on a number of subjects.  With kindness in Christ, 

Recommended Resources: Defending God’s Existence

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission. 

---

[1] Evolution is an atheistic worldview and one of the popular forms of Secular Humanism. Sadly some Christians try to mix this religion with biblical Christianity. This is no different from what many Israelites did mixing their religion with Baal worship and God was not happy with them. Is God happy with mixing evolution and Christianity?  

[2] See also: Bodie Hodge, The Fall of Satan, Master Books, Green Forests, AK,

[3] Please don’t me wrong – there are many great Christian teachers in the secular system and they need your prayers, but the system is now set up to oppose Christianity and promote the religion of secular humanism. 

[4] For a concise review of some of these positions see: New Answers Book 3, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2010, pp. 271-282.

[5] Hitler was purely an evolutionist and gave up any thoughts of God. For more on this, see Hitler’s Second Book, The Unpublished Sequel of Mein Kampf, dictated in 1928. It can be purchased offsite: http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Second-Book-Unpublished-Sequel/dp/1929631162.

[6] See also, New Answers Book 3, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2010, pp.263-270.

[7] Being in the vein of Van Til in philosophy, I’ve tried to follow this debate. For good summary of people’s failed attempts to refute TAG, please see: The Transcendental Argument for God's Existence, Michael R. Butler, http://www.butler-harris.org/tag/; See also Defending God’s Existence, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2025, .

Could Adam Eat from Any Tree?

Could Adam Eat from Any Tree?

Did God contradict Himself concerning what He said Adam could eat?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 3, 2026 (Donate) 

The “Problem” 

God said that Adam and Eve may eat from any tree in Genesis 1, but in Genesis 2 He said that they may not eat from one tree.

And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.” (Genesis 1:29, NKJV)

 

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; “but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” (Genesis 2:16-17, NKJV) 

This seems to be a rather straightforward alleged contradiction. God said to eat and not to eat; but is this in the same relationship? 

The Solution

There are several possible solutions that easily reveal this is not a contradiction. But there are other potential solutions that could eliminate this alleged contradiction. 

Seedless?

One possibility is revealed by reading these verses more carefully. There are qualifying terms in Genesis 1:29 that show the herbs and fruit must produce seeds. So potentially, there were trees and herbs that did not produce seed and were off-limits.  

The fruit could have been seedless. Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Consider for a moment that some plants reproduce by other means—shoots, sprouts, and so on. Even some “fruited” vegetation use these other means of spreading in addition to seeds. Raspberries, for example, lean over and strike the ground, and roots develop for the next year’s plants. Strawberries send out shoots that also take root. But they still reproduce via fruit and seed, so they would have been allowed.  

The fruit of figs have seeds, so they too would be included as edible food per Genesis 1:29, and indeed, figs were found in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:7). So, consider for a moment how this alleged contradiction “bears no fruit” if the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil had no seed in it. This would resolve the proposed contradiction. It might also explain why the tree of the knowledge of good and evil may not have thrived and reproduced but remained as a unique one-off plant. 

Speaking of Broad vs. Specific Places

The Lord could have been speaking of the fruit on the face of the whole earth beyond the special and unique Garden of Eden. This would make sense considering there were special instructions given to Adam regarding what was edible in the Garden and what was not. In other words, they may have been complementary commands given for two different places (i.e., different relationship). 

This information would prove rather useful had they traveled beyond the borders of the Garden for expedition of potential living space for their descendants. Remember, they were commanded to be fruitful and fill the earth in Genesis 1:28. So knowing that edible food was ready for them beyond the Garden would only make filling the earth that much easier. 

Exception Clause 

Probably the simplest explanation is that the command about not eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was given first and served as an exception clause. Although it appears in the Bible in Genesis 2:17, this instruction was delivered prior to the creation of Eve. In Genesis 1, God’s instruction about food occurred after the creation of Eve, so Adam was already fully aware of the exception. 

These types of exceptions appear elsewhere in Scripture. For example, Jesus gave an exception in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9 regarding divorce. So, assuming that giving an exception clause is without warrant would be inaccurate. The exception clause simply shows that God revealed more information about a particular subject at the necessary time.  

Conclusion 

Any of these possibilities indicate that this alleged contradiction can be “pruned from the tree.” Once again, the Bible easily withstands the attack of the skeptic. 

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission.

 

Presuppositions The Evidence Doesn’t Speak For Itself

Feedback on Presuppositions: The Evidence Doesn’t Speak For Itself

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 2, 2026 (Donate)

Letter, unedited:

Evolution does not PRESUPPOSE no God. It merely attempts to discern the mechanisms of God’s universe. What you are saying is that you find it believable that God created a universe filled with evidence to teach us about how the world works. But that evidence shouldn’t be believed. Instead, we should believe a book written by primitive people with one foot still in a cave dwelling, rather than everything our God-given human abilities can see in God’s universe around us every day.

First of all, evolution is simply a collection of observations. If you prefer, you can see the hand of God in action within evolution. I do. I don’t see your problem.

S., USA

Response (in point-by-point style):

It is nice to hear from you and I’m glad that you are willing to make conversation about presuppositions and evolutionary thoughts. My comments below are said with sincerity and kindness.

Evolution does not PRESUPPOSE no God.

First of all, evolution doesn’t “think”, “presuppose”, or otherwise have human qualities—that is called the fallacy of reification. It is a worldview based on human thought. It would be better to say “evolutionists do not…”

Darwin rejected the God of the Bible and placed his faith in errant ideas of man; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Strangely, Darwin, the father of the modern evolutionary models, disagrees with you in his book The Descent of Man. He makes it clear that man invented the concept of a God/spiritual realm. He even said:

“The same high mental faculties which first led man to believe in unseen spiritual agencies, then in fetishism, polytheism, and ultimately in monotheism, would infallibly lead him, as long as his reasoning powers remained poorly developed, to various strange superstitions and customs.”^[1]

Also saying:

“The idea of a universal and beneficent Creator does not seem to arise in the mind of man, until he has been elevated by long-continued culture.”^[2]

Claiming that man invented God makes this a godless philosophy from the start and clarifies what Darwin’s position was. It was essentially a rehash of Epicureanism [which was a Greek mythology that was evolutionary by nature with no God(s)] or the more recent version of Lamarckian evolution.

It merely attempts to discern the mechanisms of God’s universe.

Actually, that is what experimental science does (as opposed to historical science). Most fields of experimental science were developed by Bible-believing Christians, like us, to understand the laws of science God created.^[3]

What you are saying is that you find it believable that God created a universe filled with evidence to teach us about how the world works. But that evidence shouldn’t be believed.

Not so. We believe the evidence. We all have the same evidence but it doesn’t speak for itself.^[4] All evidence must be interpreted based on a belief system. As a Christian, I use the Bible to explain the evidence.

It would be illogical to think that God, who is perfect and who eye witnessed His creation, wouldn’t know how to explain it and that imperfect men who weren’t there would know more than God.

So when it comes to evidence, one’s faith needs to be in a perfect God or errantly in imperfect men to interpret it. I simply don’t have the “faith” in fallible men that some do.

Arguing against God and His Word never works out in the end; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Instead, we should believe a book written by primitive people

Primitive? I don’t accept your presupposition that man was originally primitive. The Bible is the proper presupposition, and it makes Adam out to be very intelligent. Adam had perfect DNA (“very good” in Genesis 1:31) and God programmed him with perfect knowledge (not infinite knowledge) so as to communicate with him right from the start. For more on Adam’s characteristics please see here.^[5]

Even looking into the past, there is evidence to confirm the biblical account that man has always been intelligent, not primitive, having ancient batteries, incredible ship building technology, and let’s not forget the pyramids!^[6]

with one foot still in a cave dwelling,

Again, I don’t accept your presupposition that man was primitive but as you probably know there are still people today living in caves and that doesn’t make them primitive—some have wifi and cable TV!

rather than everything our God-given human abilities can see in God’s universe around us every day.

I agree with the observations. In fact, Romans 1:20 makes it clear that God’s attributes can be seen in what is made so we are without excuse.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20, NASB).

In essence, it is enough to condemn, but not enough to save. We all still need Jesus Christ.

First of all, evolution is simply a collection of observations.

Then why haven’t we observed these:

1. No one has been able to make life from nonlife (matter giving rise to life which is foundational to pond scum-to-people evolution).
2. No one has been able to change a single-celled life-form like an ameba into a cow or goat, etc.
3. No one has been able to observe and repeat the big bang (which is foundational to pond scum-to-people evolution).
4. We haven’t observed the billions of information-gaining mutations required to build the DNA strand to give rise to new kinds of life-forms.
5. Matter has never been observed to give rise to new information.

Evolution is clearly a worldview and more specifically it is a subset of the religion of Secular Humanism, in the same way creation is a subset of Christianity.

If you prefer, you can see the hand of God in action within evolution. I do.

You are confusing natural selection with evolution. Natural selection is good, observable science. In fact, natural selection was developed by Ed Blyth, a creationist, about 25 years before Darwin and is an excellent confirmation of God’s created kinds in Genesis.

Natural selection clearly shows dogs making dogs, cats making cats, weasels making weasels, etc. This is biblical. However, we don’t observe dogs giving rise to horses or mice giving rise to cats. Natural selection is not goo-to-you evolution.

I don’t see your problem.

Steve
USA

The issue is simple—you can either trust God’s Word or trust man’s ideas about the past. In whom will your faith be placed. God says:

And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him (Hebrews 11:6, NASB).

It is better to take refuge in the LORD Than to trust in man. (Psalm 118:8 NASB).

Our goal here isn’t to win or lose an argument, but to get people thinking, point people in the direction of Christ and His salvation and then disciple them as Jesus commanded in Matthew 28. I’m sure you’ve heard the “good news” of Jesus Christ before, but I’m not sure if you understand what this means.

The “good news” of being saved goes back to the “bad news” in Genesis. God originally created a perfect world (Genesis 1:31); there was no death and suffering (Genesis 1:29–30). Then man sinned against a perfect and holy God (Genesis 3).

God cursed the animals and the ground because of man and sentenced them to die (Genesis 3). It is due to man’s actions that sin and death entered the world. Now we are all sinners as a result and in need of a Savior (Romans 5:12).

When man sinned, God sacrificed animals (Genesis 3:21—coats of skins) to cover their sin because God commanded that sin is punishable by death (Genesis 2:17). This covering could only cover, not forgive and take away sins (Hebrews 9:22).

But God loved us enough to take that punishment upon Himself. He stepped into His creation as a perfect man (remaining fully God), Jesus Christ, to live and suffer and die a painful death—to be the final sacrifice to cover our sins for good and offer forgiveness (John 3:16).

For those who receive Jesus Christ, there will be salvation and a new heaven and new earth (Isaiah 65:17; Revelation 21:1). They will one day see a perfect world again with no pain and sorrow (Revelation 21:4)—the curse will be removed (Revelation 22:3). When you remove the reason for the gospel and replace it with goo-to-you evolution, it undermines the reason for Christ.

I want to encourage you to consider this. Kind regards in Christ,

Bodie

A sinner saved by greace

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission.

 

---

[1] Darwin, C., The Descent of Man,  Chapter 3, www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-descent-of-man/chapter-03.html

[2] Darwin, C., The Descent of Man,  Chapter 21, www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-descent-of-man/chapter-21.html

[3] Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator? Answers in Genesis website,  http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp#pastsci.

[4] Creation: Where’s the “proof?”, Ken Ham, December 1, 1999, Answers in Genesis website, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n1/creation-proof.

[5] See also: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v13/n4/adam and is by Ken Ham.

[6] See: Ancient Civilizations and Modern Man, David Criswell, March 1, 1995, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v17/n2/ancient-civilizations, The large ships of antiquity, Larry Pierce, Answers in Genesis website, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n3/ships, The Pyramids of Ancient Egypt, David Down, September 1, 2004, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v26/n4/pyramids-of-ancient-egypt.