So the latest brick to fall in the self-made building of pride is apparently making headlines. ‘Scientists’ are publicly professing skepticism as to Charles Darwin’s ‘theories.’ Well now, what kind of ‘scientists’ must these be, to ‘now’ conclude that fraud is not a new thing?
And He made them after their kind.
What light bulb in their mind was suddenly turned on for them to see in the dark the error of their once alleged enlightened minds?
Newsflash: Darwin’s theories were always dark counsel, appealing only to the deviant of thought, they who only see themselves as the vaults of knowledge, they who cannot conceive of any One greater than themselves, ‘they’ who have bought and sold the useless idea of Darwin’s ‘species,’ not happy in knowing that old Chuck merely stole the copyrights for the ‘kinds’ as clearly demonstrated in the book of Genesis, compliments of the Creator who made them.
Hey Chuck and friends: The bee is still the bee, while you may have hives as you complain, the tiger is still the tiger, the lion the lion, and yep, the great whales are still the greatest guests of the oceans. It’s a btich seeing the ‘kinds’ faithfully proving every word of God is good.
So no surprise here with this article in WND, and I’m not impressed at people’s public statements that Darwin may have been out to lunch, for truth be told, there are far more people than you can imagine who know his theories are lies, but they are afraid to admit, lest they be thought idiots. Guess what? What kind of idiot would think that a whale once walked the earth………………………………………?
The Lions Den 
You’re using WND as source? There’s your problem; it’s for nutcases, idiots,and chronic droolers unable to think their way past a premise.
Evolution is the fundamental pillar of modern biology. There is no other scientific position; there is only scientific denialism in contrast. (And – granted – there’s lots of that. Scientific denialism is already a money making multi-billion dollar industry.) To believe otherwise is equivalent to believing gravity is an ideology and pretending there is some divided camp in physics between gravitationalists and those who deny its scientific validity and usefulness. It’s a delusion. And WND makes money selling the delusion. What does that make of those who buy into this denialism?
LikeLike
Hi tildeb-
Who cares what the source is? The FACT remains. For God’s sake even I can find morality in atheism, because God has hardwired right from wrong.
But you must have missed the point where I proved the theft by Darwin as he used the ‘species’ to circumvent the ‘kinds’ of Genesis.
Look real hard at the tiger above and my little notation. 😉
As you allege Darwin as a god, I prove God is God. Herein is the difference. Let God be true, and every man a liar. Old Chuck was a liar IF He denied the Creator His engineering feats of creation. It’s rather simple.
LikeLike
Not that it is needed, but the foundations of modern biology are actually, “cell theory, evolution, genetics, homeostasis, and energy.” Evolution in this context has dozen of complex and varied definitions, none of them actually related to Darwin’s theories. In fact, Darwin himself never actually used the term “evolution” until it was pressed upon him much later.
LikeLiked by 2 people
All you mentioned do have relations to Darwin’s theories, in fact evolutionary biology is so firmly integrated with the rest of biology that it is not possible to mark a boundary between them. The relationship between all life and evolutionary principles can not be separated as you have tried to do.
LikeLike
No, IB22, those are the founding principles. Modern biology is considered the modern synthesis, namely the seamless meshing of evolutionary theory with genetics. These are the pillars upon which the principles derive.
Of course, creationists have no answer to why this synthesis is seamless with genetics on the one hand and an indisputable scientific theory they must consider wrong on the other. The hypocrisy and blatant denialism needed for such creationists to accept genetics while pretending its handmaiden evolutionary theory is factually wrong is one of the seven modern wonders of the world and a source of deep amusement to those of us who actually respect the scientific method and the knowledge it regularly and consistently produces for everyone everywhere all the time. Creationism? A dead end for knowledge, derived as it from a superstitious belief in magical POOF!ism. Who could have predicted no knowledge would ever be produced from creationism… other than anyone who can think?
LikeLike
Vintage tildeb-
the pillars…..
Where is my laugh button, when you deny the greatest fact of all that the building called earth, has FOUNDATIONS, the true pillars that embarrass godless evolution, engineered by God Himself, needing no help from your accidental and therefore purposeless existence.
Would to God you had the decency to be so embarrassed at such blatant disrespect for life, especially humanity.
I will pause and defer any further mental punishment headed your way by the illustrious ib22.
LikeLike
Ah yes, the earth’s pillars. Where are they exactly, CS? What are they made of and how do they hold ‘up’ the earth you say is flat?
LikeLike
Maybe you can collect all your ‘life is an accident’ friends, go on a quest, and find them yourself.
Then again, if the ark of the covenant stared you in the face,
or Joshua’s trumpet, or even the ark of Noah, it would not be enough, so here’s a hint: they exist.
You just don’t get it-truth does not need your approval. As to an alleged 67,000 mph orbit- prove it.
I’ve never seen it- what great faith you must have because you have not seen it either.
Oh the dilemma of godlessness.
LikeLike
John, obviously Sources for information matter as to their reliability to be believed. You should agree to this. It’s not rocket science, you know. (Unless you distrust NASA)
LikeLike
Sources? You neglect the only source that matters. God’s word embarrasses every mouth against it.
Plain and simple, scripture is excellent in every way, including more true science than all libraries combined.
LikeLike
So… you DO believe the source of an information matters… good on you. There may yet be hope after all. Progress of a kind.
LikeLike
Your reading and interpretive skills need work. The SOURCE, as in SOURCE of all things, belongs to God and He proves it in His word.
Don’t pretend to be both deaf and blind.
LikeLike
Lol. The discovery institute. That place that promotes religion over science. Those aren’t scientists. Oh boy.
LikeLike
Right limes. Only an atheist can be a legitimate ‘scientist.’ lol
This little post is getting better and better.
LikeLike
That’s not what I said. Though misrepresenting is your star quality, well done.
LikeLike
Well this is what I said:
Any scientist who does not recognize the Creator is pretty much a lousy scientist. Period.
I don’t care what his conclusions are, because science apart from the True Scientist, as in God Himself, is pathetic in the end.
I am jack the barbarian, and I approve of this observation.
LikeLike
And I think that’s dumb, but then, that’s what I expect from you so you’ve not disappointed.
LikeLike
Cs, you are not impressed by anything that counters or debunks what you believe. I’m neither surprised or impressed by your lack of ‘impression’. Keep those blinders tight.
LikeLike
Hey mike-
Where in your mind can you possibly conceive a tiger or lion, reproducing itself, as opposed to birthing a possum……and where pray tell did these animals devise a scheme apart From Intelligence?
Yet it is I who is delusional? Oh please; leaving Christianity should not mean giving up your brain to stupidity.
LikeLike
Arguments from personal Incredulity and scientific ignorance is all you have.
LikeLike
All I have? Yeah mike, fortunately the ALL has the approval of heaven, nature, scripture, the conscience, and of course true science, which is observable, testable, and repeatable, things obviously foreign to the likes of your godless hero Chuck Darwin.
So by your own words, you agree with lying science which is not testable, never repeatable, and of course your guesswork of accidental evolution is never observable.
Sorry mike, but it is clock cleaning time for you and every visitor who refuses to engage the brain, let alone common sense.
LikeLike
…except for the continual insulting those who disagree that is.
LikeLike
Insulting? It is insulting to deny the Creator mike. Deal with it.
But your own track record of guile trying to trap believers, while you refuse yo see the error of your ways……..per the discussion on the table,
That God created the tiger to reproduce itself and not a monkey; that God created humans to create children and not a rhino.
If you can’t see this………….then you deserve all the contempt you earn, and we are not even talking about the terms of redemption.
LikeLike
John, I’m insulting No One. Literally… No One that you can demonstrate to actually exist in reality. And all the rabbit trails and misdirections about evolution, morality and Flat (stationary) Earth are just non sequiturs so you can assert what you cannot demonstrate. Your responsibility is to Demonstrate the truth of what you believe to be true. Not just that a God exists, but that the God declared and promoted in the bible exists. No ‘general’ amorphous ‘god’ will suffice.
LikeLike
You have left mud trails 3 ft deep. Your new allies are enough proof.
Atheism is the religion of fools. Congrats.
LikeLike
Still not an atheist. Just not a Christian anymore
LikeLike
You may want to pick up a copy of the splendid book ‘the Buddha of Christendom’ by the incomparable Sir Robert Anderson, once a detective for Scotland Yard, who wrote with such clarity and without apology- just what I do! Ha!
Maybe a person of his spiritual mettle may interest you.
My fav of his is ‘the silence of God.’
LikeLike
I’ve read a couple of Anderson’s books back in the 90s. Not my cup of tea currently though. I do agree that the God of the Bible is very silent outside of the bible.
LikeLike
And therein lies the utmost credibility of God’s word.
The silence of God in the midst of universal depravity should actually get your attention.
No doubt as it was in the days of Noah. Too bad you refuse to see it mike.
LikeLike
John, have you ever stopped to consider why God needed a Word of God to communicate with mankind?
LikeLike
Apparently the ability to read separates us from jackals, then again, some people act like animals….
Scripture and nature all speak with the same voice of truth, man therefore has no excuse.
LikeLike
The problem you have John is that you can’t demonstrate that the Source or Origination of all there is that we call nature is the God of the bible. All you have is assertion that it’s the case. Nature itself doesn’t demonstrate a non natural or super (beyond) natural origin or originator.
LikeLike
Mike- wake up from drunken stupor. Nature itself is supernatural. Sheesh.
Yeah like you can make hailstones and drop them from the sky.
And no, I do not have the problem. My mind is not closed to to reality which is the playground of atheists which you are a frequent flyer- just admit it.
LikeLike
Nature itself is supernatural. That’s an interesting nonsensical statement.
LikeLike
Really? Then maybe you can gather up a few friends and concoct Mt Everest.
Life is supernatural. Period. Maybe learn the lesson from the natural flower bulb that springs into a gorgeous demonstration of the supernatural …..
One day you just may get it.
LikeLike
Wrong John. Everything in the Natural World is by definition Natural. Even life. What I think you are trying to say is that it has its origins in the supernatural. Correct me if I’m wrong. That may be true or it may not be. But the point I’m trying to help you with is that we have no evidence or even a way to trace back to the supernatural and definitively demonstrate that to be the case. All you give is assertion, bluster and bullying. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Mic dropped.
LikeLike
Evidence? Proof?
Life. Death. Scripture. God almighty. Truth.
Take it or leave it. What you call ‘bullying’ is simply confidence which the atheist cannot tolerate, but i find your excuses boring.
LikeLike
‘Confidence’? No, CS, what you exhibit is what is called unjustified certainty, meaning a certainty you import by way of faith-based belief (unjustified even if correct) versus a confidence (justified by compelling evidence from reality independent of one’s imported beliefs).
It’s fine to believe what you want using faith as the grounding for it but I think a modicum of honesty would help immensely building bridges of mutual respect and concern about what’s true by you understanding and accepting that you have confidence in your faith and not derived from the object(s) of your faith. Recognizing and admitting this difference matters because it speaks to one’s intellectual honesty and integrity regardless of any and all other considerations about what the faith-base belief involves: you believe as you based on faith and not deduced independently from reality. You cannot deduce something along the lines, “Therefore Jesus” from any of the natural examples – say the blooming of flower – you continue to raise. Every example you use is clearly a non sequitur.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tkx tildeb- but simply put, the seemingly ‘dead’ flower bulb screams resurrection when the flower erupts a year later.
Nature is the finest of teachers- so says logic and so says the apostle Paul, the stellar mind that he was – oh that Degrass and Hawkins has such sharp minds.
LikeLike
Confidence in what you don’t and cannot know to be actually true is not confidence. It’s self delusion.
LikeLike
For the love of God- read the Bible-
All your gripes are answered perfectly.
LikeLike
Professing themselves to be wise…… they became fools.
I love God’s word- has perfect answers because God is true.
LikeLike
Ah john… But you think professing yourself a fool (for Christ and the bible) makes you wise. Now THAT is foolish.
LikeLike
What matters is what God says- in this you are list as fog- sorry but it’s true.
Read Job or Jude lately? Case closed.
LikeLike
Problem being, you can’t demonstrate that God said anything, let alone that He is the origin and writer of anything written in the bible you call the Word of God.
LikeLike
I don’t have to demonstrate anything mike.
Life is enough demonstration to any body who is sincerely honest.
And scripture agrees. No other book on earth testifies to ALL things. Period. Case closed.
‘The entrance of thy word bringeth light.’
LikeLike
Unfortunate for you, the Muslim has the same defense for his holy book as you do for the bible, and as LDS have for the book of Mormon.
Simple faith by itself is not a reliable way to know that what you believe to be true actually is.
LikeLike
I do not care about the knock off comic books. Sincere people of good will instinctively know the difference.
God and His word have ZERO competitors, and your incessant complaints are boring mike.
LikeLike
Like I said before John, all you have is blind Faith and insults.
LikeLike
Insults coming from a pseudo/oncewas/imposter/ Christian?
Now that’s funny. And truly insulting to think that God is at fault for your deconnery.
I’ll add embarrassing too- as if scripture has defects.
LikeLike
As I have always said John, if you believe the Earth is flat, you will believe anything.
LikeLike
It is irrelevant what I believe. YOU are convinced the world orbits at 67,000 mph-and spins at 1,000mph- on paper only/ dizzying speeds which no man has seen- for not a man alive has seen this act of faith. Hilarious.
So who is GULLIBLE??? You prove it. I make no claim- as I have never seen the earth move one inch- even /x p. Agrees my point is made.
LikeLike
John I feel you have difficulty in understanding that the planet Earth is massive. Someone has done the maths from space dot com .
Earth’s mass is 6.6 sextillion tons (5.9722 x 1024 kilograms). It volume is about 260 billion cubic miles (1 trillion cubic kilometres). The total surface area of Earth is about 197 million square miles (510 million square km).
No wonder you cannot feel the Earth move, (unless of course you meet the woman of your dreams). Ever been an a really big aeroplane? If not you can happily walk around eat drink and do everything as normal without feeling the movement of 400 – 500 knots (460 – 575 mph / 740 – 930 kph) unless of course turbulence comes into play, the plane banks or descends.
LikeLike
Well at least you are attempting to stay on point. As to your hero guesswork friends- they are clueless as to the size, shape, and structural weight of what is NOT visible- rest assured that no man can measure or weigh.
Perhaps your buddies have seen Everest spin through space- when they were on LSD.
But the better question for you if you care to challenge assumptions- can you walk upside down on a basketball like an ant?
Common sense rules the day.
LikeLike
The world is round. Case closed.
LikeLike
No defects? Here’s one:
Rapist, murdering liar David gets to live but the God who is “prolife” pronounces a death sentence on the innocent newborn baby of bathsheba, and requires her to marry her rapist. Not cool. Not moral. Not reality. Fiction.
LikeLike
If it’s fiction then why are you so pissed about it? Just more proof that atheism is STUPID.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Still not atheist wally. Just not Christian anymore. Have a great day.
LikeLike
Good. Now adress the question. If you can.
LikeLike
As soon as you acknowledge and own the “defect” I pointed out for you and john.
LikeLike
There’s no defect other that your lack of spine . That should be your blog name. …getaspine
LikeLike
So then you agree the account occurred?
LikeLike
I don’t have to reconcile anything. Especially when you intentionally spin the story for your ends. Is that the way you taught the story preacher?
If it is then you were a really stupid preacher . You did not teach it that way then you know the answer to your demand for me to reconcile it.
If it’s false then your accusation is stupid. If it’s true the the story answers itself.
More proof atheism is stupid.
LikeLike
Wally, grabaspine was referring to the claim that scripture had no moral defect. So he gives the story about David as an example of a moral defect by this god. From scripture. He mitigates its immoral effect by also claiming it’s fictional. You should be thanking him.
But in your brain you think either the story in scripture has to be accepted as true FIRST in order for a non believer in your god to point out how it reveals an immoral god OR atheism is stupid because it has no moral foundation to make such a ruling. That’s called a non sequitur, Wally, meaning the latter point does not follow from the first one. You are free to criticize stories that are fiction on moral grounds because you do not pull your morality from these stories as you are trying and failing to do with scripture. You also have no grounds to claim that non believers in your god do not have the necessary moral foundation to make such judgments unless they first accept the scripture you (pretend to) use. Ark has pointed out quite rightly that you make stuff up that does not derive from scripture and then teach your fictional story to vulnerable children, which makes you a rather obvious hypocrite holding grabaspine to one moral standard requiring absolute trust in the historical veracity of your scripture while ignoring this requirement yourself to make your own fictional story regarding the consequences of immorality!
I mean, just Wow. You’re a real piece of work, Wally, and your thinking in this matter is broken. You and CS excuse your hypocritical thinking and immorality you claim comes from outside of the scripture you insist grounds it and then try to paint the people who point out this broken and immoral thinking you use as if immoral to criticize what they can clearly see!
So the interesting question is why? Why can’t you walk the walk? Why can’t CS talk the talk? Why do so many believers wave away such glaring thinking errors they make in their theology and think it’s somehow okay to be excused for committing such errors under the guise of piety? Why don’t you see that this undermines your theology you are trying so hard to advance as if true and reasonable when it is not?
LikeLike
Sorry tildeb- but you and mike combined have ZERO claim against scripture.
WHY?
Because of your oblivious nature to see that ‘in the beginning,’ God’s word regarding His own creation was VERY GOOD, you have forfeited every right to judge what followed after.
SIN. Deal with it. Equally repulsive today, and proven by your EVERY comment.
Your own words condemn your ignorance.
LikeLike
I simply mean ‘ignorance’ in the purest manner; as in unknowing, and not stupid.
You CANNOT know, if you have no context. Believing there is NO God above all, proves you lack correct context.
Let me repeat: God’s creation WAS very good. The results of sin speak for itself. Watched the news lately?
The comments of anybody who posts here are enough proof as well, but Tkx for the visits.
LikeLike
Oh, I’ve found the subject of a divine being and our human ability to know anything about it so interesting that I have spent a very great deal of time studying the claim… not only on my own but from many scholars over many years (as well as spending a great deal of money to have access to these people and their profound subject expertise).
I’ve studied the Torah (from which you like to select bits and pieces but ignore and reject most of it… or you’d be Jewish, obviously!) as well as various Bibles and gnostic texts. I’ve studied the Koran and the qudsi and sharif hadiths. I’ve studied the Bhagavad Gita and the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and have written quite a lot about the scholarship regarding the Book of Job specifically. Really quite interesting. I wrote my major thesis on mythology and its deep link with psychology (and the large body of sacred writings linking the two) and probably know a vast body of various scriptures to the extent that I feel confident enough to be able to compare and contrast all kinds of religious issues as they relate to the various scriptures that address them.
I will freely admit that I did not come at any of these works with any preconceived notion about privileging one over another but have relied as much as possible with source materials… taking into account my significant lack of languages so I’ve tried to compensate by using many translations. I suspect few people have the wide ranging body of scriptural knowledge I have because most scholars become expert in depth over a small area than I have width over a large. I have very intentionally withheld awarding unearned confidence in any one in order to allow these scriptures to speak for themselves and provide the merit they must have to be held in confidential privilege.
You know and I know that what you mean by ‘context’ is the a priori awarding to one scripture unquestioning loyalty. You may assume this kind of ‘faith’ to be a virtue because this is what fuels your piety and overshadows your utter lack of humility in the face of so much conflicting and incompatible scripture but it is, in fact, always a vice because – put simply – you’ve already assumed the conclusion that your interpretation and the confidence you hold in it is correct. Yet you seem unconcerned in the slightest that you have no means after taking this certainty plunge to honestly question your rendition, your understanding, you interpretation for any independent truth merit. This is a guaranteed way to fool yourself, CS, in any other area of knowledge. You assume you already know. And you can prove this assumption to yourself by substituting any of the other scriptures but supply exactly the same confidence approach to yield exactly opposite beliefs with identical certainty. That’s how you can use the Torah here but not there, use the Gospels here but not there, insert Paul’s letters here but not there, and so on. Not only will you never know this is what you must do to try to create the right ‘context’ you yourself have brought to this scriptural mishmash you use but you will spend a great deal of effort trying to fool others to go along with your narrative by claiming it’s God’s narrative and not your own.
And this is problem for you to which you really should pay attention: there’s actually a term for doing what you’re doing: it’s called idolatry (of course, the Jews would call your worship of Jesus idolatry). You’re just too close to one set of scripture and too confused to see why this is a problem of your own making and so correct criticism of your method is categorized by you as atheistic and therefore garbage. But that doesn’t change the fact that you have supplanted scripture with your own badly skewed version to the extent that you know practice idolatry. You are worshiping yourself and call this object ‘God’.
(sorry tildeb- no offense intended- just saw this now)
LikeLike
Compared to others learning tildeb, well might we all say regarding ourselves, (and in the spirit of this posts title) ‘I’m not impressed.’
While you may berate another’s lack of ‘context,’ this is due to your very admission that all books are equal of merit and truth. They are not. Only the bible itself has been proven, demonstrated, and accurately defined all other attempts as fraudulent- they which presume to be on equal ground with God’s word. It began with Cain and HIS way. It resulted in murder. Murder which was foreign to humanity- but murder which revealed what ONLY God’s word expressed perfectly and eloquently, like it or not, that ‘the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked, who can know it?’
A question which ‘religious’ people avoid, because they, like you, assume all religions are equal in trying to explain the life and times of man. The scriptures, are alone, head and shoulders above all, as one would expect if the origin is divine. Of course it is divine, how else would we know the purpose of the sun and moon as being FOR the earth, being perfect in size and distance, as only a great Engineer could design, so please do not assume my very own ‘context’ lacks in the least.
As to my being Jewish if I believed the scriptures, rest assured there is a nationality and there is a spiritual pedigree, one in which Paul the apostle paid greatly. He was both, and to prove this, one need not look further than Acts 7 in entirely, to see Stephens masterpiece of historical accuracy of Israel’s favor and stubbornness, rebellion which pride blinded their very eyes to see David’s greater son, He of whom at the time Paul agreed Stephen was meshumed. Oh what a difference a day makes, hence the following grace of God as explained in the book of Romans.
It is not my intention to embarrass anyone tildeb, but rest assured, God and His word have no competitors.
LikeLike
Tildeb I will type slow. In the context of what Mike claims to be his past life experience my question is perfectly valid. My reasoning in context is quite valid. You don’t get that nor can you. He won’t answer it because the instant he does he reveals his level of stupid clearly. Also your insistence that every single thing any person says must pass through your personal reality filter is also stupid. You just say lots of words that fool a lot of people. They don’t fool me.
LikeLike
Sigh. No defect in God’s Word. The defect is in your brain. Like the rest of atheist evangelists, you are mentally defecient.
LikeLike
So did David have Uriah killed?
LikeLike
So when you were super Christian how did you teach the story?
LikeLike
Just answer the question. You’re dodgig
LikeLike
Still dodging. Have a great evening. I’m out with the wife for a late Valentine’s
LikeLike
Lol. Run away. No sweat preacher
LikeLike
Btw you claim mutually exclusive defects. First it’s immoral then it’s not true. Can’t be both that’s stupid
LikeLike
That’s what I say W.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Because people such as you believe it to be fact, and thus,moral and teach it to kids and other vulnerable people.
It has a similar effect as indoctrinating such people with the idea that dinosaurs and humans co-existed and that is an actual place of eternal torment and torture called Hell.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is true. And atheism is stupid. You prove that daily. Oddly I can respect the fact that you stand by it. Mike the testosterone deficient faux preacher won’t.
Odd though you judge what you call fiction to be immoral. By itself that is stupid. When you add the fact that atheism has no moral foundation then it’s double extra stupid.
Hey Mike, find some guts and answer your own question.
LikeLike
You have no evidence to demonstrate it is true. And paleontology has demonstrated through evidence that humans and dinosaurs did not co-exist.
And there is no evidence that a place of eternal torture and torment – Hell – exists either – yet you believe it and teach it as fact.
So, when the evidence of the above perfectly demonstrates the fallacious nature of your argument, this make you what, exactly, Wally?
Willfully ignorant, somewhat disingenuous or a blatant liar?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The ‘Evidence’ that you demand is the evidence you refuse. Period.
All alleged evidence outside of scripture is irrelevant. Period.
God’s word answers all fools- and gladdens the hearts of the honest. Key word: honest.
LikeLike
Who cares about dinosaurs when you don’t even believe that the bear that stares you in the face pulverizes evolution and proves the glory of God.
Don’t even get me started about Daniel in the DEN.
LikeLike
If Wally is prepared to lie about one thing – archaeological and fossil evidence – then how can he be trusted to teach children , even if only at Sunday School?
Also, how can he be allowed to teach the Doctrine of Hell when it is a blatant corruption of Scripture?
LikeLike
Yeah Doug- like u have archaeological ‘evidence’ the universe is 14 bazillion years old. Pure guesswork. Period.
Please stop the godless lying on this site.
LikeLike
I have no evidence , correct. I am not a cosmologist.
However, there is actual physical evidence to demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs never co-existed, yet Wally teaches they did.
How is this anything but telling lies?
And Wally does have evidence that the biblical character did not teach the Christian Doctrine of Hell – right there in the bible – yet he insists that Hell is real and the doctrine is truth, and he teaches it to kids!
As I said, this is a flagrant corruption of the biblical teachings of Jesus
LikeLike
Doug- you are speaking to people who know what the scriptures teach.
I don’t know how many times you need to hear- I don’t care about alleged dinosaurs.
If you want to discuss them, please do so elsewhere.
LikeLike
Teaching ”… about alleged dinosaurs.” is simply to illustrate how far people such as Wally – Young Earth Creationists – are prepared to lie in the face of irrefutable evidence.
And as you know what Scripture teaches then why are you not reprimanding Wally for teaching the Christian Doctrine of Hell, when Jesus never ever taught it?
To do so is a flagrant corruption of the Scripture you swear by.
LikeLike
If there is a heaven, there is a hell. There is a heaven.
Currently there are three, in the which, birds fly in one.
The heart is a great indicator of which drives a man. Hell does not interest me so much- yet I fear it not. Far more pressing matters, like how to open a ketchup bottle.
LikeLike
Hell does not interest me so much- yet I fear it not
Of course not.
But the fact remains, the Christian version of Hell that is taught, and especially to kids who have not developed the intellectual skills to offer any sort of defense – is a flagrant corruption of scripture.
And you know this to be the true yet say nothing to rebuke someone like Wally who you know corrupts kids with this doctrine.
LikeLike
I’ve made no claims. You quotin a man you deny even exists to support your argument is stupid. Answer the question. Or maybe Mike can if he finds his testerosterone supplements
LikeLike
Really?
Fair enough. Then please state right here that you acknowledge that the evidence revealed by paleontology is correct ( they did not co-exist) and I will gladly retract and apologise.
And could you also acknowledge that on the bible Jesus never taught the Christian Doctrine of Hell.
Thanks.
LikeLike
For the last time- stop accusing W of lying- you may neither not appreciate nor believe something- for God’s sake yelling the truth is not lying- now stop the nonsense.
The light of day is truthful even though you prefer darkness.
LikeLike
Now that is very funny coming from a man who refuses to ”Own His Beliefs” and is forced to resort to idiotic insults.
How much more spineless is that?
Seriously, you really come across as rather silly.
LikeLike
Corrupt children with the command to :
-love thy neighbor
-obey thy parents
-submit to authorities
-don’t steal
-don’t lie
– remember the Creator in the days of thy youth.
So you see- the idiotic commentary of foolishness is exposed.
LikeLike
My point? To point out to you and your kind the absurd and myopic refusal to see the exact and reliable history of scripture,
words written that perfectly incriminate all men, and shut mouths that try to open up issues long been settled, SUCH AS YOURS, and that further point out the lying hearts of all men who try to fault the only God of heaven, and further who dare argue God’s word, a word which has long been proven to be the ONLY reliable source of life’s origin and mans destiny- and history which has been raped by godless goons.
That’s the point.
LikeLike
Five sighs and a dozen yawns.
LikeLike
Yawn all you like … the narrative is a work of fiction – as the geologic record demonstrates.
This is what you have to deal with or produce scientific evidence that demonstrates the veracity of the biblical tale.
All I can say is best of luck!
LikeLike
You ate killing me with laughter!!!!
The geologic record handled by fools denies the history which presents the modern ‘record’ as a simple narrative of bastard children:
The world that then was is simply not the world that is; you are completely clueless as ti the effects if sin.
CLUELESS, as are all your lying so called scholars and pretended scientists.
LikeLike
Young? Old? I am not so foolish to pretend i know. I have said as much countless times-
And the fair person that i am, i say with equal disdain that any Christian who sides with godless atheists and scientists and their alleged ‘evidence,’ are equally suspect.
LikeLike
EVIDENCE supports the facts of provable history. This is why you despise scripture. It is all provable evidence.
And this is why i despise the guesswork of pseudo scientists- denying true evidence and creating a Frankenstein of monstrous illusion.
Any man who denies scripture will accept any thing as fact- as long as God is denied His very existence.
This is an argument you can never win- God and His word have never lost a battle to fools.
LikeLike
Evidence? Prove to me it snowed 300 years ago! I want evidence!!!
You CANNOT produce it, therefore you are a fool if you believe it snowed 300 years ago.
Are you beginning to see the utterly stupid position of atheism?
There was a flood. A worldwide flood. God is most excellent in all His ways, and all men are liars, UNLESS of course a man agrees with Him.
LikeLike
Learn to pay attention Doug- I never said there was a GLOBAL flood- I said worldwide, where according to the scriptures, that is, God’s own account, every high mountain was covered.
Ever considered the depths of the oceans? This should just about shut every mouth- then there are the waters above- which waters the clouds and rain are daily proofs.
You want more evidence? You can’t handle the evidence already presented. I swear Godless evolutionists and atheists refuse to put the brain in first gear.
LikeLike
No. You are a careless reader. GLOBAL means ballular- something foreign to my logical mind- I happen to be of the kind who relies on the observational skills of things testable, repeatable, observable.
I have said on countless occasions, that the Creator in His genius, has not given humans the gifts given to insects whereby we can traverse a basketball- upside down like an ant.
Once more does nature agree with scripture, but don’t confuse my words with yours, as any sober minded judge would throw you out of his courtroom for your insulting of the dictionary.
LikeLike
Here you go:
In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened-
That’s plenty of evidence. Down to the day. A historical fact per God Himself, the obvious Creator of water-
Your argument will never be with me Doug/
LikeLike
No ark- once more you reveal your willful ignorance.
The testimony of God Almighty is enough. The affirmation of Christ Himself thousands of years later is enough. The account and reminder of Peter himself is enough.
All truthful reporting by truthtellers- so unlike they today who lie with ease and abundance.
God’s word is enough evidence. Deal with it.
LikeLike
And yet here you are trying to gain some kind of traction- against such a deluded one as myself;
Unless of course you already know that I speak with consistent candor and easily bring God’s word to bear on every topic under the moving sun.
So you may want to at least consider Doug, what this says of you rather, as if you could turn me one quarter of an inch away from God’s most excellent revelation.
By the way, He created science, whereby all men may know the difference between man and jackal.
And water never lies- it is the most precise of witnesses to the truth.
LikeLike
Me insane? Have I made the claim of seeing an INSANE alleged orbit of a supposedly spinning ball- feats which NO MAN HAS SEEN?
And somehow it is I who is on trial for accusing the still and quiet earth of the most preposterous offenses?
I however, hold no man in disdain for not thinking critically about the matter. I fully understand the clutches of tradition, in the which true science stands like Everest above all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That book is a nice story, but I would hardly call it “evidence”. (If we’re going by the dictionary definition of evidence).
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You poor old lion CS. 1000 or even 10,000 scientists is only a mere drop in the ocean, and it does not matter how many letters you have behind your name you can still be deluded, after all most of them will also believe the dead can rise from the grave.
LikeLike
Perhaps Steve you should study the life and times of a simple flower bulb- how it appears ‘dead’ but arises a year later to the most wondrous of flowers.
So what’s a few years in the grave as man but resembles the useless and lifeless bulb.
Btw, I don’t care how many people believe something- what makes it right is whether it is true.
In this Chuck Darwin is the greatest of failures. Go ahead and follow him while a simple flower laughs at your ignorance.
LikeLike
I appreciated this post, Colorstorm.
Poor Darwin. Seriously, the man set out to study orchids…. and love. He never even used the word “evolution” nor did he speak of monkeys until much later. It wasn’t until political pressure began to bear down on him and some of his ideas were taken over by philosophy, theology, politics, that things got all convoluted.
I cringe every time I see his name offered up as a “evidence” of atheism or “science,” since he was a Christian, an Anglican, actually went to Cambridge to become a clergyman,and did not doubt the literalism of the bible. His faith may have waffled around a bit at the end, but he never claimed to be an atheist and you can sometimes hear his roots in his very words, “life having been breathed into them” or “most beautiful, most wonderful, most fearfully made.”
Truthfully, I think Darwin himself would be most pleased by this WND link and by your post. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
He was pressured by political, religious and even family pressures to drop his theories. Thankfully he did not, and millions of people have benefited health wise, lived longer and mankind will continue to benefit for ever. Humans who take any sort of medication should never forget this.
Nov. 24 1880
Dear Sir, I am sorry to have to inform you that I do not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation & therefore not in Jesus Christ as the son of God.
Yours faithfully
Ch. Darwin
(Read more: (smithsonian mag)
LikeLiked by 1 person
It takes a fairer-minded person to see beyond the fog- to find the silver lining in the obscure.
While I am not sure as to the attributes men have heaped upon him, (and much is hearsay) I am sure that God is responsible for the ‘kinds,’ and any subsequent species that recognizes the Creator is fine by me- no doubt like all the quotes attributed to Einstein were inaccurate, probably men got Darwin all twisted up too.
I always thought he was the hero of the atheist. Lol
LikeLike
Ha! He is often the hero of the atheist, but that didn’t really happen until long after the poor man died and couldn’t even defend himself.
As to your pseudo scientists or atheist fundamentalists above, still trying to proclaim evolution is the foundation of biology, they fail to understand that “evolution” in a scientific context and definition, does not mean the theories of Charles Darwin.
Kind of an interesting factoid, but “evolutionary biology” didn’t even come into existence until the 1940’s and it wasn’t even in our universities until the 1980’s.
LikeLiked by 2 people
And when did Young Earth Creationism raise it’s rather silly head, IB? Do you know?
Certainly a very, very long time after your own Church Fathers left this earth.
They might not have been as scientifically aware as those in this day and age but they weren’t as dumb as soup as YEC proponents either.
LikeLike
@ColorStorm
Whenever an Atheist tells me Atheism is not a religion, all I have to is mention the “Theory” of Evolution and watch the fervor with which they defend this theory as a proven fact.
Atheists need to think about the meaning of the word “heuristic”. The Theory of Evolution is not testable. If we cannot test the theory, we cannot prove it.
What have Atheists done instead? They have assumed, based upon the preponderance of the evidence that the Theory of Evolution is true. That’s an awful big assumption. It is really far easier to believe in God and that Jesus rose from the dead. God is here now. We have historical evidence that Jesus rose from the dead. All we have for the Theory of Evolution are fossil records that are millions of years old and some speculation based upon gene “theories”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Tkx tom- I too have been saying that for ages. There is zero proof of those theories being based in reality because they are NOT observable, testable, and certainly not repeatable.
And yes, the big ‘A’ is a religion much to the chagrin of its devotees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From National Center for Science Education: “The scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence.”
Your contrary assertion about created ‘kinds’ possesses zero scientific merit. But it is full to the brim with religiously inspired incompatible belief with reality. Sorry, CS: that’s just the way it is.
Although you can sometimes find religion without creationism, you will never find creationism without religion. That is its sole promulgator. Not reality; contrary religious belief. And this anti-scientific creationist belief you and many others hold does not align with what reality shows us is the case. Of course, reality could have aligned with independent ‘kinds’ as you believe and genetics could have demonstrated this to be the case, but alas it seamlessly supports evolutionary theory of common decent as Darwin proposed. That’s the brute fact reality reveals. Not creationism. Not intelligent design. Not ‘kinds’. Common decent. That fits all the evidence. From reality. Everywhere we look. Consistently. Reliably. All the rest of the creationist hand waving about atheists and non belief in anti-scientific religious ideas as another kind of religious belief and Darwin was a religious believer and so on does not address the brute fact that reality does not support the creationist belief in kinds but does align with the evolutionary model. And reality demonstrates the evolutionary model’s usefulness by producing what belief in creationism does not, namely, new knowledge and insight into how life changes over time and by what mechanisms as a well as all kinds of applications, therapies, and technologies based on the evolutionary explanation that just so happen to work for everyone everywhere all the time. Reality demonstrates your religiously inspired belief in creationism to be factually wrong.
LikeLike
Of course there is no merit in anything I say tildeb- I answer to God whereas you answer to alleged popularity.
You just don’t get it. I don’t care how many men put forth their theories and assumptions; without recognizing the ‘kinds’ of Genesis, all science is but agreed guesswork with ZERO evidence. Zero.
Must be a bitch for you to ignore and pretend to be blind to the FACT that monkeys birth monkeys and not weasels; that lions birth lions and not hyenas.
The ‘kinds’ of Genesis lay to waste ALL godless so called science, the little god which you in fact have erected in your own image.
And this is the killer. Not that you think scripture does not present correct science, but that the science of scripture is true, therefore meaning ALL of God’s word is true.
Of course it’s all true, but your greater concern should be the perfections of the sun, moon, and stars, those orbs of perfection which further embarrass lying evolution.
LikeLike
Jonathan Swift said, “Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired.” Belief in creationism is exactly this, an ill Opinion which by reasoning was never acquired. What you are using, CS, is opinion by authority that has no merit adduced from reality.
And you put your utter lack of knowledge on display by saying, “Must be a bitch for you to ignore and pretend to be blind to the FACT that monkeys birth monkeys and not weasels.” This not only indicates no understanding of what common decent means but fails to account for the shared genetic damage you and I and every other simian inherits from our common ancestry. Yes, CS, your genetic code demonstrates the validity of common descent as a scientific explanation between you and the monkeys you say are a different ‘kind’ created by a magical POOF! Master. That’s why your belief in creationism is anti-scientific; you not only deny fundamental science but your substitute explanation explains nothing.
LikeLike
And the great poet Gibran said: ‘I know his father, how can I not know him.’ So what tildeb, we can quote mine all day long, but at the end of the day, you simply rely on the guesswork of they with the cleverest imagination.
I rely on He who created the brain that allows us such imagination. You mistakenly ASSUME I do not understand your ‘species’ argument, when I reference the ‘kinds,’ and the fact that a tiger births a tiger no doubt escapes you for it is the SEED which I address, and the SEED plot that you conveniently ignore. But don’t mistake my lack of interest in your dialog with ignorance, maybe I am just too bored to continue an argument that has long been adjudicated.
Apart from God tilteb, you have NOTHING. NO THING, at all, ever. Instead of fighting Him, why don’t you get to know the one who created you, and knows your doubts, fears, desires, and is well aware of your smokescreen sideshows pretending to be ‘science.’
Let me repeat: there is more true science in Genesis…………………….aw nevermind, I cant talk to you while your fingers are in your ears.
LikeLike
So does this mean you will not be celebrating Darwin’s birthday today?
LikeLiked by 2 people
As obviously accomplished as he was, I can assure you that if alive today, and after another go round, he would tell the ‘scientific community’ that his small mistakes of calculations regarding finches were responsible for conclusions that he could not possibly endorse.
And that the cult of Darwinism is something he could not approve of, since he really is no more wiser than a single finch, UNLESS, he gave courtesy to the Creator.
But what about you? Are you of more value than a single finch? Why? Why not? Careful how you answer.
LikeLike
If evolution is not true how do you explain something such as bugs which ”change” over time and become resistant to antibiotics?
LikeLike
Sorry- didn’t see it-
LikeLike
No problem.
Feel free to offer your explanation.
LikeLike
Why do I have to explain that? I don’t claim to know the answer?
How can you prove that the Theory of Evolution explains it?
If some lunatic government killed all the five year olds that lacked blue eyes, after a couple centuries, everyone almost all the babies would have blue eyes, and that would prove what?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t say you had to explains it I asked what explanation you had for it.
I would say the simplest most obvious answer is because the bugs evolve.
Thus, we have evolution.
Why is this so scary for you to consider?
LikeLike
The fact that people make assertions without proof isn’t scary. It is pitiful.
LikeLike
Do you consider there is no evidence that bugs have not evolved to become resistant to certain antibiotics?
LikeLike
I’m not surprised Doug that Tom finds it pretty much pointless to engage a topic that has long been settled.
Your greater concern should be why there are still bats, bees, frogs, and rats.
Sin and death kinda changes things- but don’t be fooled thinking cell phones are indicative of evo-
And, while a blue jay may adapt to your feeder, he will never be an eagle, a turkey, or a heron.
LikeLike
Settled? By whom?
This is the delusional perspective of Creationists as science is unraveling that silly ball of thread ever moment of every day.
Stay tuned , and maybe it’s best if you donpt blink much either
LikeLike
Settled by the most careful sleuth as in Sir Robert Anderson of Scotland Yard, whose scriptural investigative skills have no equal, to the simple schoolboy who use the God given brain.
And oh there is this. ‘ settled in heaven,’ regardless what fools on earth think.
Don’t be a fool.
LikeLike
Think! Think blue eyes.
Do the bugs that already have the trait required to survive survive? Then what evolution are we talking about? Do the survivors have multiple characteristics which promoted survival and share those those characteristics? That would tend to increase survivability, but it still would not involve evolution.
I don’t know the answer. We don’t have the capacity to either prove or disprove whether life evolved. Since Jesus affirmed the Old Testament, I go with Genesis. It lacks a lot details, but it has the important one.
You don’t want to believe that? Well, the Bible records eyewitness testimony. The New Testament was written by Jesus’ contemporaries.
Starting shortly after Jesus rose from the dead, the authorities tried to suppress Christianity. They killed people, and still the apostles spread Gospel. Then those the apostles had taught did the same.
There is nothing else like the Gospel. Every other religion requires us to do something to be saved. Jesus just requires us to repent of our slavery to sin and believe in Him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, basically what you are saying is: Yes I acknowledge that bugs change to resist antibiotics but I will not accept evolution.
No it wasn’t and you have no evidence to show otherwise. And this is not the consensus view of scholars, biblical or otherwise.,
Faith statement. You have no evidence to demonstrate the veracity of this assertion.
BONUS FOOTAGE BY HOST: Evidence? If God’s word is not enough, surely the dry and crusty attempts by fools will not suffice.
The Bible is the only evidence needed, and this is exactly WHY ignorant people spend a lifetime trying to discredit it.
The Bible alone defines what love us.
The Bible alone presents the context for knowledge and wisdom.
The Bible alone tells of the grace of God.
And the Bible alone tells of scoffers and mockers of all ages. No wonder this commenter cries for evidence, as the evidence itself incriminates.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, at least our host’s bonus footage makes sense.
It is a strange thing. With our words we actually do have considerable power. The Bible says that we do. Still, there are limits, and those limits are difficult to accept.
I know I cannot lift a car. So I don’t waste time trying. Yet from time to time I still try — still spend words — on someone who refuses to be persuaded. I wonder why that is. Even when I know it is God who saves, I wonder why that is.
Think! I did not use the word mutate. I just pointed out how environmental factors can encourage the manifestation of preexisting genetic characteristics. How stubborn do you have to be not to see that? God only knows.😞
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like I said. You will accept change but not evolution.
Indoctrination and willful ignorance on full display.
What next? Are you going to say that the global flood and Noah’s ark were historical events?
I suppose CS’s blog needs some humour from time to time, so go for it.
MORE BONUS THOUGHTS FROM OUR QUIET HOST, AND MORE LAUGHTER FROM ALL SIDES:
First a man would have to prove, (there exists no such man) either by first hand knowledge, no hearsay, and by direct visual proof, (silly CGI does not count) that there exists such a thing as the globe. (there goes global warming down the drain. lol
But rest assured, regardless of a mans opinions, the FACT remains: there was a world wide flood, just as the good book asserts. Whether one believes it or not is irrelevant to the history; prove to me it snowed 3 thousand years ago………………. HA! The melted flakes cry in hilarity at the ignorance of the proud.
God’s word is GOOD. Our words? Eh, not so much. Thank God for the foundation of intelligence, something apparently lacking in the disconnected wires of godless evo.
LikeLike
Sweet answer Tom
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is a patently false statement. There is no such evidence at all.
LikeLike
David. Solomon. Esther. Mordecai. Daniel. Ezra. Nehemiah. Joshua. Agag. Abraham. Moses. Cain. Adam. Methuselah. Noah. Seth. Paul. Timothy. Herod. Pilate. The Lord Jesus Christ.
All verifiable. All provable. All historical certainties. You have our deepest sympathies if you have erased truth from your mind.
Let God be true, and every man a liar. Congratulations for joining the ranks of the mentally challenged.
LikeLike
And where in that rather odd reply is the historical evidence for the supposed resurrection of the character Jesus of Nazareth?
LikeLike
This is not an invitation to extend your stubbornness.
You just refuse to see. The reliability of scripture proves the current existence of Christ.
Every word of God is good and true. Were you not supposed to waste your time at Waters?
LikeLike
You are, quite simply a complete and utter******* (EDIT REMOVAL- unnecessary and inappropriate, lacking decency, and a slur not appreciated on this blog)
LikeLike
LOL, just read Tom’s words, “I know I cannot lift a car. So I don’t waste time trying.”
Right?? And yet we’ve all heard the tales of superhero feats of strength, of people who actually did lift cars to save others. Truth really can be stranger than fiction. Cultivating a bit of intellectual curiousity and having an open mind about our world, is kind of what Colorstorm offers.
And of course, the Little Stone Head is always at the ready to show us why those things are so important and will help to add to the richness of our lives and our understanding. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah msb, the adrenaline rush of Superman every so often, good reminder there.
I’m thinking of that appropriate truth: ‘there is a friend who sticketh closer than a brother.’ Of course the Lord first and always, but we too are beneficiaries of His emolument too, and it’s wonderful to know there are some who always seem to have your back. As it should be that all men might know the depths and range of fellowship. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person