Psalm 139:13 finds David specifically stating that God knits us together in our mother's womb. This is clearly an statement against any theistic version of evolution. How can humans be knitted together in the womb is we evolved from lower life forms?
It isn't surprising though. The atheist knows without evolution they have no argument. So they will freely pervert science and ad hom the critics because they can't silence them any other way.
Also, evolution undermines the biblical teaching that humanity is ONE RACE because we are all descended from Adam...
Atheism... How unoriginal. How easy. One can believe in nothing or anything. Nothing to defend, everthing to defend. Backed into a logical corner - change your position or deny the laws of logic... They worship the scientific priest class and call themselves free thinkers. Free thinkers who are bound by cultural bias and their own uninformed and small world. Yet they rail against anything that does not conform to their small mindedness. No hope and nothing beyond the material. Yes the easiest world view ever invented by man,but also the saddest...
As long as evolutionists deny their theory is a theory and point out ID or whatever is bunk, people like me will pester them til they drop.
Lots of things are banned that people do in private and we aren't putting cameras in their homes to catch them, so that's just more leftist hyperbole. At the very least, an outright ban on homosexuality would force homosexuals to keep their sexuality to themselves instead of flaunting it in front of everyone and it would prevent them from using the captive audience of our public school systems to poison the minds of our children.
A common atheistic device is to list aberrant scholars that are so liberal that they don’t really believe the Bible (or know the Bible) and use their statements to help their cases.
President Bush is right to call for a Constitutional amendment... The Homosexuals are out of control and they should be put in jail for civil disobedience, along with the mayors and judges who have permitted this disgrace called Homosexual marriage to go on for the past few weeks. Fellow believers, please pray for our country. We have become Sodom and Gomorrah and I beg God to have mercy on us. Amen.
Many states in the early years of our country had requirements that anyone holding office had to be a Christian. It wasn't until the courts started reading into the Constitution things that it does not say that this changed, thus leaving us in the mess we are in today...
[When someone replies 'That's sick!']About as sick, I'll wager, as I feel everytime I see a couple of homos kissing. The truth is offensive to many. This comes as no surprise, particularly to a self-professed, bible-thumping, fundamentalist like myself.
[Re: whether homologous organs can be used as evidence of either evolution or ID, 'Why wouldn't he have designed eyes for his favorite species, as good as eagle's or squid's eyes?']
So you could understand the parallel when He says in a spiritual sense, blind man you are in danger of falling in the pit
I appreciate your recommendation, and it is intriguing, but as a pro-lifer, I cannot support an organization that is opposed to the death penalty.
But Gay Marriage is not a right Marriage itself is a religious ceremony... I doubt gay people could be religious anyway...
A couple weeks back, I was at the video store and considered renting the Muppets' (a kids' show) "Wizard of Oz" (a kids' story). I decided against it - actually, I now believe God put it on my heart to avoid it. Now I know why. The Disney Channel (a kids' channel) ran the movie tonight and I couldn't believe that they felt it necessary to dump some blatant sexuality into it! In the scene where the characters first meet the Wizard, they all go in individually and the Wizard uses his machines or whatever to appear as something different to each of them. To the Cowardly Lion (Fozzy), he appeared as a dragon to scare him. To the Scarecrow (Kermit), he appeared as a firey face that spit fireballs. Then we come to the Tinman (Gonzo). As with the plain Gonzo, the Tinman has a chicken as a girlfriend. So what do the people who made this movie have the Wizard appear as to him? Yes, a chicken... eventually. First, they had him appear as a scantily clad, curvaceous woman with a "sexy" demeanor and voice. What. The. Foosball? Exactly how is that appropriate content for kids? Rhetorical question - IT"S NOT! I am glad God pushed me away from that video at the store. I don't want my kids exposed to such garbage.
Oh, yes. Let the "you're overreacting" and "you're a prude" talk begin now. Five words I can say to those kinds of responses: take 'em and shovel 'em.
The tragedy is that marriage is a particular thing. It's not something that changes with differing cultures or ideologies.
God could have accelerated nuclear decay during the flood as a mechanism for generating tectonics. He could have accelerated decay just from his creative process on forming the earth. Also the curse could have effected nuclear decay. The are ways of explaining the same data within a literal Genesis framework without resorting to ad hoc theories void of scriptural support.
That's because you've been brainwashed by pro-homosexual propaganda to view any disagreement with homosexuality and the radical agenda of homosexuals to be 'anti-homosexual.'
Atheists Spread AIDS [...]
(2) Most people who have HIV (and therefore get AIDS) are homosexuals.
(3) Most homosexuals are atheists (whether "weak atheists," otherwise known as "agnostics:" who say they don't believe in God, or "strong atheists" who assert that there is no God; which is a silly distinction to spend a long time fussing over, as they often do).
(4) Therefore, the largest category of people who have HIV (and are therefore spreading it, since you can't spread it unless you first have it) are atheists.
(5) The second largest body of people who spread HIV are needle-sharing drug addicts.
(6) Most needle-sharing drug addicts are atheists.
(7) Therefore, the second largest group of people (other than homosexuals, although many homosexuals are needle-sharing drug addicts too) is also mostly made up of atheists. [...]
(11) Almost everyone who has AIDS is an atheist.
Not necessarily, because freshwater is less dense and is KNOWN to be able to float on saltwater for a long time.
Opposition to civil rights is a good thing though. Their only mistake is that they applied it to race rather than subcultures. Separate, uglier and dirtier drinking fountains for liberals instead of blacks would have done wonders for society.
Fox News is fair and balanced. It's fair to give the Republicans an alternative to the liberal run networks and the incredibly liberal CNN, and such an alternative balances things out to an extent (they need at least two more networks like that).
In my experience I find that most Atheists are very unpleasant and invariably Gay and I find Gays intolerable. They are vicious lewd and have no respect for the great majority of the worlds population. I also find Christain Gays very nasty selfish people. I also find that these Atheists who are in the majority insist that if a person is not Gay they cannot be an Atheist, But you have a lot more choice with Christians. they are not all Gay.
But for positive evidence [of a young earth], we have the best of all—a reliable Eye-witness to the event who has provided a written record, which overrules any circumstantial [scientific] evidence!
see the Older people Old=Wise the wise people are against gay marriage so is gay marriage wise?
Biblically, some men lived to be almost 1000 years old in the pre-Flood world indicating a huge difference from what we have today. For a Naturalist such things are difficult if not impossible to accept but that's not what matters. Some people don't accept that men set foot on the moon - the historical facts remain nonetheless.
[Arguing with a Jew] The Tanach still isn't Scripture - and note the little cross icon - I'm not Jewish, so why the heck would I reference - or care about a reference - to the Tanach [Old Testament, in Hebrew] when the case is supposed to be built biblically? I'm not seeing a need here... Got a Biblical reference you want to make your case from?
In fact, a lot of reputable creation scientists (YEC and OEC alike) will admit when they've made a mistake, unlike anti-theistic scientists...
The Bible doesn't say what happens to babies who die, whether born or unborn.... the fate of dead babies is not your concern. All we know is that God will act justly towards them.
mhm gay marriage is not a right marriage is a religious thing your yourself being a atheist should have no want for anything to do with marriage you being a atheist should know that homosexaulity makes those people not causing population so they should deserve no rights....
[Replying to a claim that God is never criticized for murder]
<p>God can justly kill anybody, sorry but such is the reality.
There is no possibility of salvation apart from Christ. I see no indication that God 'communicates' with certain people who haven't heard the gospel in order that they can be saved. All men are sinners against God--He owes them nothing. If they go to Hell, it is a result of their sin, so God is still just.
Normally it's only the Christians who are expected to keep their religious views out of politics, while atheist always bring in their own religious views.
good post...criticizing selectionist evolution can get people ridiculed and ostricized -- even fired. This is why many scientists are afraid to speak up. Science is a communist establishment where competing views get snuffed out. It's no different than medicine. If anyone comes along and provides evidence for curing cancer or any other disease without drugs or surgery he is labeled a quack -- or even murdered if the treatment is highly effective. (See Dr. Gerson.)
These people are no different than the communists regimes that controlled Russia and China in the past. They must have things their way or no way, and they must supress all opposing views.
I feel that if creation is true then all of the evidence available to date should be consistent with that event. But if evolution is true then all of the evidence should be consistent with that hypothesis. Since all of the evidence is not consistent with the evolutionary hypothesis I decided to investigate the creation hypothesis, and so far I have not found any evidence that is not consistent with it.
Marriage was invented by religion its roots are religious and the majority of americans are religious and Against Gay marriage they have tthe right to protest against it and to protect it from change. It is not a right and it is not phsyically hurting anybody to not allowed to be married....
For example, without Scripture you have no way of determining the nature of the universe.
Since there is no credible conventional explanation for the geological layers, it amazes me when people say there is no evidence for a global flood when they are probably standing on it right now. Wasn't there a classic novel about hiding things in plain sight?
God did not take the lives of the Egyptian firstborn unjustly and no one can argue that He didn't give them plenty of warning.
Atheism is a ferocious system that leaves nothing above us to excite awe, nor around us, to awaken tenderness.
Accepting same-sex marriage won't fix the problem of immoral lifestyles and behaviors. It's hard to solve that kind of problem by govenrment endorsing 'marriage' for them. Individuals who base their central identity on the kind of sex they have will not simply stop sleeping around because the U.S. govenrment recognizes their immoral relationship as marriage any more than cohabitors have solved any social problems by their immoral relationships. Face it, immoral relationships lead to problems not solutions.
They [Giordano Bruno, Michael Servetus] were not martyrs to science but outright stinking heretics, denying the Trinity. But don't bore us here -- there are threads on TWeb dealing with the Inquisition.
But strangely, compared with other A[ncient]N[ear]E[ast] literature, look how much [absurd stories] isn't in the Bible (pace Von Daniken!!). Only two animals speaking. Only once the sun standing still, and once going back. Only one flood. A rather muted Resurrection account.
The entire psychiatric profession is a fraud, and you are blind to it. God and His word were here first, so it is up to you to prove something that did not come to be until Freud! I make no assertions, but you dwell in them, because you love the world, and despise God.
The bible is full of evidence that God is the answer for the things that concern the mind & heart. There is however no evidence that there are other options. God is sufficient, and we have become a people who have been greatly deceived into trusting science in areas that are wholly worthy of God's provision [like psychiatry].
I've always wondered why a couple of bears mauling some kids is such a big deal with skeptics. I admit it is awful - the mindset that G_d isn't allow to judge people is incomprehesible to me.
Who gives a rip about your respect? The fact that my little silly question cause such outrage, while the killing of millions of innocent unborn causes no such rage in the secular world just proves my point. You guys are morally sick...
And yes Christian do believe in discrimination. As does Christ: [insert verses about casting non-Christians into fire]...
['My argument is the naturalist position that says that they did not morally deserve to have a hurricane come and wipe them out']
Why didn't they deserve to be wiped out by the hurricane, ilk?
They were in the hurricane zone.
Anyone, for any reason, who is in the path of the hurricane, deserves to be hit. Even if you don't have the means to leave the area, you still deserve to be hit by the hurricane.
The people who had the means to leave and didn't, made a moral decision to put themselves in danger, thus deserving what the hurricane delivered.
The people who didn't have the means to leave, still deserve to be hit by the hurricane.
Please tell me why the people in the hurricane's path didn't deserve what they received.
Atheists See No Problem With Human To Animal Sex... In response to a question about human to animal sex being illegal: Atheist one...: Q. Why have laws preventing men from bedding sheep? A. Because they smell bad. Atheist two [asked if it should be legalized]...: Who would be harmed?
If you can’t prove with 100% certainty that what you’re saying is true (and I don’t think you can), then we can’t blindly accept it.