Dawkins & Krauss's Greatest Hits: The "Something" Of "Nothing".

It seems that this is what modern atheism has been reduced to...a rambling potpourri of "NOTHING"-LOL

Blessed!

Read more!

In The Matrix With Stephen Hawking

The one thing that we are sure of is if people want to make up excuses to not believe in God, they will go to the limits of craziness and strange assertions and "pretend" that they are being rational. One of the modern atheist "heroes" is no different. Here is a part of Frank Turek's examination of Stephen Hawking's book, "The Grand Design" and the philosophical metaphysical naturalist conclusions and presuppositions that he makes. 

If you liked that you may also like these articles I did on the philosophy of science and other modern novel speculations as it pertains to science.

Does Science Presuppose Atheism?

Is Evolution Science?

Unnaturally Selected, 150 Years Of Deception

Blessed!

Read more!

Was Death A Part Of The Good Creation Of God?

Genesis 1:27-31 ~ 27-So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 

28-And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29- And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which [is] the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30-And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein [there is] life, [I have given] every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31-And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day

Did God create and earth where death was a part of the natural and physical world?

Did God create anything and everything that he created to suffer death and die? 

Unfortunately, some Christians think so.

Ranging from theistic evolutionists to progressive creationists, some modern Christians feel a need to try to balance certain modern scientific discoveries with the very creation story itself as found in Genesis ch's 1 and 2. The problem is that today's argument has moved beyond asking about creation parallels from other literature, which are almost a dime a dozen and not significant to the biblical narrative, into discovery of just what God created when he created. One should be mindful that even though some aspects of early Genesis are poetic in nature and highly filled with symbolism, those things do not overturn or compromise the integrity of the actual events found within the narrative, neither do they minimize the importance of what God did and communicated to man and mankind. 

Section I: The Beginning

The Command

Genesis 2:15-17 ~ "15-And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. 16-And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17- But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

This was the command of God toward man. This was also outlined the result of man's rebellion. In that day tat he would he, he would die. Now some claim that Adam could not have known what death was without having witnessed it or having had the ability to witness it. That speaks nothing of the fact that if we are to

Read more!

The Rottweiler Who Lost His Teeth & His Mind

Genesis 2:7 ~ "And the LORD GOD FORMED MAN [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

"This is not an anti-religious book"..."God, to repeat this point, which ought to be obvious, but isn't, never made a tiny wing in his eternal life."

Young Earth creationists are, he writes, "deluded to the point of perversity"..."all but the woefully uninformed are forced to accept the fact of evolution".

Atheist and evolutionary evangelist Dr. Richard Dawkins recently sought to advance evolution and do his part to stamp out creationism with the presentation of what he calls the "facts of evolution" in his new book 'The Greatest Show On Earth'. The author of several books, the most recent being "The God Delusion" in which he claimed that all Christians were deluded for believing in God.

In this book, though leveling insults at Christians, especially those who believe in the Old Testament and the creation narratives, in almost every chapter, Dr. Dawkins has supposedly "evolved" to believe that belief in evolution and belief in God are incompatible relationships. He recently said this to Newsweek.com:

"No, I don't think they're incompatible (belief in God & evolution) if only because there are many intelligent evolutionary scientists who also believe in God—to name only Francis Collins [the geneticist and Christian believer recently chosen to head the National Institutes of Health] as an outstanding example. So it clearly is possible to be both. This book more or less begins by accepting that there is that compatibility. The God Delusion did make a case against that compatibility in my own mind."

Two things are for sure, similar to his predecessor, Charles Darwin, Dr. Dawkins does not deal with 'first life' (how life first began) within any of his theories. In fact he would rather claim that we came from 'aliens' than attribute life on this planet to God. Secondly Dr. Dawkins is frustrated that large numbers of the general populous doubt whether evolution actually does what it claims. The  problem is that more and more scientists  are realizing that the human  genome and the universe and life in general is far too complex to simply have arisen by the process of time, environmental conditions and random chance as the "theory" of evolution holds. 

When combined with the fact that there is no modern archaeological evidence of any transitional form between humans, apes or chimps and their supposed common ancestor, (which Dr. Dawkins says really isn't necessary for evolution to be true-wouldn't ya know it?) the theory of evolution is being quickly reconsidered, repackaged and rethought on almost every front.

The Beginnings

What began 150 years ago in approximately 1859 with naturalist scientist Charles Darwin (2/12/1809- 4/19/1882) quickly became the 'rational man's' way to think of his origins and relive himself of any connection or responsibility to or with God or a creator.  Probably developed with many of the underpinnings of his Grandfather Erasmus Darwin, who was an materialist evolutionist, the theory of evolution, would change the approach to understanding the world that we live in. The backbone of his theory was to repudiate the idea that divine assistance was necessary for any apparent design in the origin of the species or humankind. Please keep this in mind: Darwin’s claim was that all species are modified descendants of a common ancestor. This is called the theory of Common Descent.  Important note: The theory of evolution as set forth by Darwin does not deal with first life (how life came to be) it merely deals with how existing life changes into new species and manifests itself. This is a point often misunderstood by most creationists or those who hold to a biblical worldview of the origin of life. This proves to be the most fatal self-inflicted wound of evolutionary theory as we will see in this writing.

Read more!

Women, Mathematics & Evolution

Recently on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams there was a story about how new discoveries have disproved the myth that women were less intelligent mathematicians and less able to perform mathematically than their male counterparts. Evidently for years the comparative ability and intelligence of women have been called into question. This continues even in modern academic circles.

Since the evidence was so overwhelming against the notion that women were less intelligent, the question was asked "where did these thoughts and speculations originally come from?" Quite interestingly enough, none of the professionals interviewed could give an answer or even reference a particular study as to how and when the myth that women were less intelligent than men in math began. Well, of course in my many debates with atheists and in reading many blogs regarding evolutionary and naturalistic thought, it didn't take me long to find the answer that many of these "supposed" professors missed, overlooked and I believe intentionally minimized to further promote their naturalistic agenda.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

Darwinian Evolution, taught in every public school science class as simply the Theory Of Evolution, out of all possible explanations and conduits for all of these horrible presuppositions was the answer that the scientist in the NBC story were afraid to render as the exact birthplace of theories that women were less intelligent and could not preform mathematically on the same scale as men. Now most people when confronted with this information say,

"NO, that couldn't be? Why would educators allow such a biased view of natural order to be taught in our classrooms?"

Individuals who say this haven't been introduced to the reality of naturalism and non-theistic teachings regarding origins of man and current conditions. When I say that there is a CESSPOOL of garbage being passed off as educational material, I'm being generous. It's much worse than I could state here. Look at this for example:

"[Man] attains a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, history, painting, sculpture, music (inclusive of both composition and performance), history, science, and philosophy, the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages... [that] the average mental power in man must be above that of women." ~ Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man in Relation to Sex" (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1896), 564.

A "higher eminence", "average mental power above women"? Now to all the women reading this, this is the basis of what our children are being taught in school today when it comes to evolutionary theory. Also, please keep in mind that these ideals and "theories" were valued by Communist founders Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels.

Engels wrote to Marx, "Darwin, whom I am just now reading, is splendid." ~ Conway Zirkle, "Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959, pp.85-87

Marx wrote back to Engels on December 19, 1860, saying, "This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view."~ Conway Zirkle, Evolution, "Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959, pp.85-87

There's more. Darwin spoke the following concerning women's abilities:

"powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilisation." ~ Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man, The Modern Library", New York, p. 873.

One of the leading proponents of naturalism and evolutionary theory was psychologist Gustav LeBon. He stated the following based on his understanding of naturalism:

"[Even in] the most intelligent races [there] are large numbers of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment; only its degree is worth discussion." ~ Stephen Jay Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man" (New York: Norton, 1981), 104-105.

In the world of Darwinian Evolution SIZE really does matter, but common sense doesn't.

According to Charles Darwin and most modern evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins who continue to hold to evolutionary theory as a viable science, the size of the brain indicates intelligence. A woman's brain being smaller (closer to the size of a Gorilla's brain) makes her less intelligent. In fact Mr. Dawkins himself has said that new atheists in particular must push harder to make their naturalistic agenda heard and respected.

OK. Women still don't believe me, let Mr.LeBon finish his own thoughts regarding this:

"Women represent the most inferior forms of human evolution and...are closer to children and savages than to an adult, civilized man. They excel in fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason. Without a doubt, there exists some distinguished women, very superior to the average man, but they are as exceptional as the birth of any monstrosity, as for example, of a gorilla with two heads. Consequently, we may neglect them entirely." ~ Stephen Jay Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man" (New York: Norton, 1981), 104-105.

David N. Menton, Ph.D., The Religion of Nature: Social Darwinism, St. Louis MetroVoice, September 1994, Vol. 4, No. 9, said that based on Darwin's tenets and beliefs many anthropologists bought into the "brain size" issue even falsifying the evidence to make it fit their presuppositional thinking and racial and gender biases and discrimination.

Who's the culprit? Darwinian Evolutionary Theory that taught and continues to teach that women were less intelligent, less capable and less important to society than men.

This is big business and there are major implications for professors and individuals willing to step out and expose the many lies of evolution. As preachers and ministers, we have a mandate to "be instant in season, out of season;" (2 Tim. 4:2) This topic usually genders much debate from supporters of evolution and naturalism. Opponents usually use the bible as an emotion tool to suggest that God despises women throughout scripture but the opposite is actually true.

The fight is on against creationism as Professor Dawkins outlines. However creationism when it comes to the place of women is much superior on all fronts than evolutionary theory. Example:

• Women are created from the same "stuff" as men. In other words man was made in the "Image" and "Likeness" of God, therefore women share those same attributes, not the attributes of an animal or Gorilla or Ape as evolutionists love to point out. (Gen. 1:27 ~ "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.")

• In God's system women are called to be leaders, used by God to deliver Israel. (Deborah, Ruth, Esther etc.)

• In the Old Testament, women are very instrumental in the survival of both the family and the nation.

• In the Old Testament, the critic is hard pressed to find ONE instance where God endorses the rape, molestation or abuse of women.

• In the Old Testament women were able to approach and receive from God without a male intermediary, indicating that women had every ability as an equal with men to access God.

• Women are valued and honored throughout the biblical narrative and considered to be smart both spiritually and naturally. (Pr. 12:4, 31:10)

• In the New Testament the blood of Jesus levels the playing field of traditions even within a patriarchal society by calling women and men equal in Christ Jesus. (Gal. 3:28 ~ "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.")

I thought it interesting to see how vehemently and avvid some individuals are in stating that evolution is a valid system. As we can see Darwainian evolution is the worst possible mix of confusion for anyone to adopt and accept. Theistic evolution is an even worse proposition no matter how badly many of us want to find a scientific ground or basis by which to defeat the criticisms of the enemy.

Why not simply just believe God and HIS WORD? After all the criticism it still stands the test.

Nex time I'll discuss the rank racism of Darwainian Evolution. Stay tuned.

Blessed!

Resources:

The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution ~ Hank Hanegraaff

The Case For A Creator ~ Lee Strobel

Handbook Of Biblical Evidences ~ John Ankerberg & John Weldon

Center For Creation Science ~ Walt Brown Ph.D.

Read more!