McGee, J. V. (1997, c1981). Thru the Bible commentary. Based on the Thru the Bible radio program. (electronic ed.) (5:491-492). Nashville: Thomas Nelson

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "Were you in a "Special Education " class when you went to school?"

Did you see your name remains on this list? 

"I have asked him to put in in capital letters so everyone can see it...I want all to know that Jesus is my Lord but his father is my God.  I have the same God that Jesus has.  Do you?"

You do not have the Father because you do not have the Son (1 Jn 2:23).  You have the spirit of antichrist denying the deity of Jesus (1 Jn 4:3).  You have no right to claim that you are a child of God because you have not received the Son (Jn 1:12).  You are not born of God (Jn 1:13) because you reject the word of God.  When you stop rejecting the word of God [Jesus is Lord (Jn 1:1)], then the spirit of God will have something else to say to you.  It would take a repentant heart (Mt 6:33).

Response to comment [from other]:  "[T]hat "list" is about as useful as a grandma's grocery list."

The word has been loosed to you (Mt 18:18). 

"There is no need to deify Jesus beyond his own claims..."

He claimed to be God (John 8:57, 58).

 "Worshipping the man Jesus as God is idolatry."

Pot calling kettle black.

McGee, J. V. (1997, c1981). Thru the Bible commentary. Based on the Thru the Bible radio program. (electronic ed.) (5:154). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

"Planning another "crusade"?"

I'm not a Catholic.  But they may have something brewing (Rev. 3:14–22).  The saints of the Lord are murdered when they go on killing sprees by the way. 

See:

Reformation Time Line

One World Government/Religion

Response to comment [from PB]: [Re:  Elohiym]  "Serpentduh"

"Add Elohiym who states: "Jesus is the chief messenger (archangel). Michael is just one the 100+ different titles given to Christ Jesus throughout scripture." [Michael the Arch Angel is Jesus Christ January 18th, 2009, 11:48 AM link]

PB you claim to be a Christian.  Do you have a problem with this statement from Elohiym?  ""Jesus is the chief messenger (archangel). Michael is just one the 100+ different titles given to Christ Jesus throughout scripture." [Michael the Arch Angel is Jesus Christ January 18th, 2009, 11:48 AM link]

...Crickets chirping, right?  Always on the wrong side (Eccl 10:2). 

Response to comment [from Freelight]:  "I don't worship light silly,...we've been thru this. God is Light, - Jesus taught this according to John. Hear of a "metaphor"?  Light refers to Consciousness, Intelligence, Glory, Knowledge, Pure Energy."

Hi Freelight.  I'm glad you do not worship light.  That would be silly.  What do you think about Jn 1:1-3?  God is a person.  Lights, forces and energy are not.  God walked and talked with Adam.  When Jesus came in the flesh, he took on a new nature--God and man.  Jesus is 100% God/100% man. 

Since he died and rose again, he will forever be God and man.  The Bible describes God as light.  It is a good description.  We won't need the sun in heaven, for example because his glory will fill up the sky.  God is holy.  Man is not.  Men must receive Christ as their savior.

God is:  living, personal, relational, good, and loving. 

What is Christian Gnosticism?

What are the Gnostic gospels?

Hierarchy of 16 Hermeneutics

"[T]here are many paths to the all-supreme since there is no space empty of Him."

No.  There is one path, Jesus (Jn 14:6).

"I'm a free spirit and you have a ways to go before getting a handle on what I'm about."

You are a prisoner (Ro 6:16).  Get a new master.  

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  "...[T]he obvious evidence for an old earth goes away."

Evidence points to a young earth.  The real issue is one of worldviews.

See:

War of the Worldviews

"Literalism is associated with stupidity because it so often makes its followers blind to the deeper, traditional symbolic meanings of scriptures."

When do you start believing the Bible?  When Rome tells you to?  The gospel is the Bible (66 books) from cover to cover (including Galatians).  Ac 20:27.

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  "Do you find being rude actually helps you win arguments? I doubt it."

Do you know what I find beyond rude?  Keeping the Bible from the common man as the Roman Catholic Church has done throughout history.

See:

Pro-gospel.org

"There are other types of dating that go back as far... Also there is Uranium series dating which can date in the rangbe 500,000-50,000 years..."

See:

Radiometric Dating: Back to Basics: Wrong Assumptions Wrong Dates

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "If I am a heretic for believing Michael is one of those names for Christ, then whoever believes that Immanuel, Son of David, or Son of Man are names and titles for Christ is also a heretic by your insane measure...And again...I am not a Jehovah's Witness!"

Easton, M. (1996, c1897). Easton's Bible dictionary. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

McGee, J. V. (1997, c1981). Thru the Bible commentary. Based on the Thru the Bible radio program. (electronic ed.) (4:121-122). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Morris, H. M. (1976). The Genesis record : A scientific and devotional commentary on the book of beginnings. Includes indexes. (345). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "When scripture makes comments about the world around us, then our interpretation of that should match the evidence we see around us. If it does not, then our interpretation of scripture is inaccurate."

Morris, H. M. (1976). The Genesis record : A scientific and devotional commentary on the book of beginnings. Includes indexes. (347). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "Still babbling, Pharisee?"

The Pharisees hated the truth.  Like you.  I see you recognized yourself in the former statement:  "[I]t is fundamentally nothing but evolutionary naturalism and humanism. No matter how impressive may be its scientific and philosophic trappings, underneath it is rebellion against the Creator, and it always leads sooner or later to gross moral depravity." 

Still pitching your tent toward Sodom?

"...that's just the kind of oversimplified nonsense we've come to expect from you."

New morality is just old sin.  You are a:  pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist.    You stand for everything God stands against.  You are a mocker (Jude 18).  Hopefully people see that you are a fraud.

"A non-literal reading of Genesis doesn't mean you can't be sure what any passage means..."

Pray tell, what reason does the Bible give for not believing in a literal six-day creation?  You conveniently never answer that one; nor do you ever answer exactly when you start believing the Bible.  

Repent (Eze 18:30-32; Ac 17:30). Jesus loves you (Jn 3:16).  Jesus is willing to save you (2 Pe 3:9). 

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "What reason does it give for not using your own reason and the evidence around you to understand scripture as it relates to the material world..."

Evidence in the natural world points to young earth creation. 

"...and instead relying on what websites like AiG to tell you what to think..."

There are plenty of reputable young earth creationists who write papers for Answers in Genesis.  You attempted to argue that scientists who differ with your naturalistic evolutionary theories are not qualified at all to be scientists at all.  I think we've poked enough holes into that absurdity. 

So, who is your God?  Science or the creator of the heavens and the earth?  

"Men study science as God not the God of science." ~ Adrian Rogers 

"...about things that are physically testable."

There is overwhelming evidence for young earth creation for those willing to take and honest look.

"Grow a brainstem, dullard."

Ad hominem

"For someone who keeps saying, whenever pressed on the matter, that a literal interpretation of Genesis and a six-day creation aren't salvation issues you sure are stuck on them, aren't you?"

When you speak with disdain of those who interpret the Bible "literally", what do you mean?  Does that mean is it a fairy tale?  No, the Bible is not a fairy tale. 

We do not go to heaven or hell based on our belief in young earth creation (though it is true).  We go to heaven or hell based on a right relationship with Jesus. 

You do not have a biblical worldview (e.g. pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist). 

Jesus loves you (Jn 3:16).  Jesus is willing to save you (2 Pe 3:9).  Repent (Eze 18:30-32; Ac 17:30).

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "Believe me I've tried. Serpentduh has no facts, just links..."

What facts are incorrect at the Answers in Genesis sites that I linked to? Is it the links or is it the possibility that Ken Ham and the many scientists at Answers in Genesis and other creation websites might be right?

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  "Links to some of the most embarrassingly badly designed sites in the world, at that."Embarrassing like your slutty, bloody avatar?  Kinda weird.  You fit right in, in the brothel.  Your religion is all about outward appearance, isn't it (Mt 23:27)?  Forget the content. 

Just the facts, slutty ma'am, just the facts.   

Response to comment [from other]:  "That's right Spitfire. Your avatar is evil! EVIL I tells ya! Repent!"

Thank you.  I think she likes arguing on that level.

But while we're on the subject. Some people think they're sexy, when--they're just not.
This moronic picture is an example of that. Nice choice.  

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "It is a question about the nature of truth..."

Truth is found in the pages of scripture.  Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ (Ro 10:17).  We believe God and have faith or we do not.

[What facts are incorrect at the Answers in Genesis sites that I linked to?]  "I've already explained that. Repeatedly.  Strangely enough you seem to respond to that kind of challenge by tossing out accusations heresy."

I think your case was weak and Answers in Genesis makes a far stronger case.  Fair enough.  Let the reader decide.  But the point remains, you do not have a biblical worldview.  You are a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist.  Christians believe Jesus was who he said he was and that the Bible is true. 

You oppose God's word in favor of your own opinion on a number of given topics.  Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ (Ro 10:17).  We believe God and his message or we reject it.  You are free to reject Christ and his authoritative word, but you are not free to choose the consequences of that choice. 

You cannot make the Bible say what it does not say.

"[Y]ou don't have the scientific understanding to put their claims into perspective..."

Ad hominem. 

Belief and unbelief are choices.  I choose to believe God.  Do I have to be a scientist to recognize the truth?  Can a man have an opinion about killing babies if he's never had a baby?  Can a woman have an opinion about war if she's never gone to war?  Of course I understand the claims of evolution.  They are absurd. 

Torrey, R. (1995, c1897). The new topical text book : A scriptural text book for the use of ministers, teachers, and all Christian workers. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos research Systems, Inc.

See:

Inspired Scripture

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  [Do you believe in absolute truth] "Not one absolute Truth that can be understood and communicated in such a way that it reveals everything about the material universe."

Absolutely? Jn 14:6

"Those are very important Truths- and as far as spiritual Truth goes I can't think of any more important- but again you are confusing the spiritual and the material."

Do you think you know everything there is to know about everything?

"The material world is a testaments to the Will of God and subject to our scrutiny and reason."

Do you trust only what you can perceive with your senses or do you believe there are things that you cannot perceive and know?  Do you trust your senses over God's word? 

"It is our responsibility to study them with the best tools at our disposal. Science."

Does science trump the Bible or does the Bible trump science?    

"I can't believe things that are demonstratably not true."

How can you say you have faith?  (Heb 11:1, Jn 20:29).

"You have no idea what is inside me."

We have a glimpse into your wicked heart.  Bad roots bad fruits (Mt 7:16).  We are fruit inspectors. 

You are a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist.  You are lying to yourself or you are lying to us. 

Who told you that you are a Christian?  They did you a great disservice (Heb 6:4-6). 

"Your vision is as shallow as your mind, Pharisee."

The Pharisees were offended by Christ's doctrine like you (Mt 15:12; 21:45; Lu 16:14).

"Maybe if you stopped worrying about whitewash you would be able to look past the superficial and have an actual dialogue instead of these repetitious, cut-and-paste "sermons"."

Check to be sure that you are not dead inside (2 Cor 13:5, Mt 23:27).

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "[M]aterial truth...[Y]ou don't even know what you are talking about...in complete ignorance...[B]est tools at our disposal [is]...[s]cience...You keep throwing up the same garbage...[P]ro-gay (what does that even mean?), pro-abortion (I am most certainly not)..."

You support the use of chemical weapons against unborn children. 

You said:

"Religious freedom doesn't cover the "freedom" not to do your job [nurses giving the morning after pill/RU486]...If the law requires that this service be offered to rape victims than you can bet it most certainly is a conflict."

"[R]eligious freedom doesn't include the freedom not to the job you agreed to do when you were hired."

"When they signed up for the job they agreed to do those things which the job requires- in this case dispensing emergency contraception to rape victims.  Don't like the terms of employment- work somewhere else...The law trumps the religious affiliation of the hospital providing services."

"...and a humanist (my view is much more complex than that)."

It's not complex--new morality is old sin.

When you believe, you obey.  This is a key concept in the Bible.  One who has truly been born again has a change of heart and mind.  His is not a gainsayer (Ro 10:21).  That is what you are [ἀντιλέγω (antilegō)].  You are not obedient to the word of God.  Being the pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist that you are, you debate.  You don't obey.  Rather, you:  speak against, talk back, and contradict the word of God (Lk 2:34; 20:27; 21:15; Jn 19:12; Ac 4:14; Ro 10:21; Tit 1:9; 2:9).  Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.) (GGK515). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Saying that you do not have a biblical worldview is obvious.  But you also mock others that do (Gen. 39:14, 17).  We are all stupid to take the Bible literally --but Jesus did.  Isn't that what you are really saying?  Jesus must be stupid too?  You only reveal your unbelief (2 Chr. 36:16). 

Jesus believed in a six-day creation (Ex 20:11; 31:17).  He affirmed the scriptures.  Jesus believed in a literal Adam and Eve--so much so that they defined marriage (Mt 19:4-6).  

Scripture says that the objects of mocking by the wicked will be Christ (Luke 23:11, 36) and believers (Heb. 11:36).  So, laugh yourself to hell if you like?  We know truth is on our side.  You do the devil's work when you seek to undermine that truth.   

Response to comment [from other]:  "Why are you lying about PB's position on abortion?"

Excellent.  I hope I'm wrong.  Maybe PB can further clarify his/her comments.  It sure sounded like he/she promoted the use of chemical weapons on children.  The discussion was about Catholic hospitals being forced to compel their nurses to distribute the morning after pill/RU486 for rape victims. 

I would be happy to be proven wrong.  I hope he/she would not agree with such a wicked stance.

"PB is speaking on job duties and requirements..."

No man can compel another to use chemical weapons on children.  Laws come from God not man (Ac 5:29). 

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "If these people knowingly took a job that requires them to perform functions that conflict with their faith they need to make arrangements with their employer beforehand. Knowing what is expected of you and being able to comply is pretty standard."

There you go.  PB maintains the position that we obey man not God (Ac 5:29)--opposite of what the Bible tells us.  Yet again.  PB attempts to undermine the word of God. 

A Christian is yielded to God's word and will not his own opinion.  With "Christians" like this, who needs demons?

"I don't consider myself "pro-choice"."

Not for the baby's choice to live, that's for sure (Prov 8:36). 

PB you are a wicked child-killer (Pr 23:7).  Bad roots, bad fruits (Mt 7:16). 

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "[P]eople who won't dispense emergency contraception shouldn't take jobs..."

Let's disqualify people who won't own a black or kill a Jew, too.  Let's put PB in charge of all moral decisions.  Do we get brownshirts, too? 

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "I am far too strong a believer in equality to sanction anything that would lead to that kind of blatant disenfranchisement."

Equality is a European value.  Liberty is an American value.  Liberals cherish the former.  Conservatives cherish the latter. 

Everyone can get a job in an emergency room so long as they agree with liberals and are willing to use chemical weapons on children?  What about that "religious freedom" you claim to love so much?  People are free to exercise their religious freedom--until they disagree with you and other child-killing liberals, right?

Response to comment [from other]:  "Clearly this has to do with doing one's job duties..."

You conveniently forgot about that use-of-chemical-weapons-against-children portion of this argument? 

"Why would anyone take a job where one of their duties *might be* something they are morally opposed to doing?"

Roman Catholics should be disqualified from all jobs because they will not murder babies. 

Rusha, you identify yourself as "other".   We don't expect you to have values.  PB identifies him/herself as "Christian" and promotes child-killing.  Even you, "other", cannot see a problem with that?  If one claims to be a Christian, do you think it is unreasonable to expect him/her to act as such?  PB loves the world and all of the things in it ( 1 Jn 2:15).  Has he/she ever come down on the right side of an issue?

Why don't we proceed from that direction.  It will make our job easier.  What will PB stand for?  

Maybe he/she will answer the following:  I think throwing puppies off bridges is ok?  Prov 12:10. 

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  [Let's disqualify people who won't own a black or kill a Jew, too. Let's put PB in charge of all moral decisions. Do we get brownshirts, too?]

"Shame on you.  You are out of line with that statement. bybee."

Are you back from tea, Bybee?  When do we get to see your lovely right side?  Your left is so pretty. (Mark 6:17, 18).

Response to comment [from other]  "[C]an't hack any criticism yourself can you? You really are typical of the self satisfied sanctimonious preacher...You're all for dishing it out but you can't hack any criticism yourself can you?"

What?   All I said it leftist are very pretty people.  Their defenders are lovely, too.  They sit in pretty dresses (Ps 26:5) enjoying tea and crumpets (Hos 3:1).  It's all very sweet.  We should all learn from their refined manners (Mark 6:17, 18, Prov 20:17). 

"It's blatantly obvious that PB is not supporting abortion via his argument."

RU486ing people, too?

"[I]f the goalposts of a job change to the extent where it's suddenly expected for an employee to perform tasks that contravene their morals, then that is entirely different...."

I suppose it depends on the playbook you're following (Ac 5:29).  We play for the Angels.  You two are on the opposing team.  

"[Y]ou'll continue your merry way in insulting Christians and others both..."

You want to murder babies and not feel insulted?  Prov 8:36.  You lefties are never satisfied (Eccl 10:2). 

Response to comment [from a "God has mercy on all men, including pagan Catholics and gives them time to repent."

The wicked neglect that time (Re 2:21) and are condemned for it (Mt 11:20).  There is danger in neglecting God's call to repentance today (Mt 11:20-24; Lu 13:3,5; Re 2:22), Swift judgment comes (Re 2:5,16).  Repentance is denied to apostates (Heb 6:4-6). 

Torrey, R. (1995, c1897). The new topical text book : A scriptural text book for the use of ministers, teachers, and all Christian workers. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos research Systems, Inc.

"Law without penalty is only advise." ~ Adrienne Rogers

Response to comment [from other]:  "If  you accept a job knowing the job duties are in opposition with your personal beliefs, you are being dishonest with your employer. Why should any company change their standards for you?"

So now the one who knows right from wrong is in the wrong?  (Isa 5:20).  

You should run for the Senate.

Back to the subject, true repentance is evidenced by fruits (Isa 1:16,17; Da 4:27; Mt 3:8; Ac 26:20).  If you are evil, be evil (Re 22:11).  Just stop claiming that you are something you are not.  

"My values are superior to yours because they reach beyond religious lines...I base my treatment and value of people on how they treat others."

We know how you treat unborn children (Prov 23:7).  What comes around goes around (Lk 19:27).  That belief in behaviorism may not work out so well for you.

"[Y]ou are intentionally misrepresenting PB..."

He/she promotes the use of chemical weapons on unborn children (Prov 8:36).  PB said:

"Religious freedom doesn't cover the "freedom" not to do your job [nurses giving the morning after pill/RU486]...If the law requires that this service be offered to rape victims than you can bet it most certainly is a conflict."

"[R]eligious freedom doesn't include the freedom not to the job you agreed to do when you were hired."

"When they signed up for the job they agreed to do those things which the job requires- in this case dispensing emergency contraception to rape victims.  Don't like the terms of employment- work somewhere else...The law trumps the religious affiliation of the hospital providing services."

"[P]eople who won't dispense emergency contraception shouldn't take jobs..."

"You have a knack for attacking your fellow Christians..."

I don't know many Christians who are:  child-killing, pro-homosexual, humanists.  But maybe that's just me.

"...for not hanging onto and agreeing with everything you say."

Who cares what I say?  Truth is truth independent from me.  What does God say?--Don't murder children (Deut 30:19). 

Response to comment [from other]:  [Some leftists are pretty]  "I'm a bloke. I'm not a transvestite so I don't wear dresses. I'm not pretty."

I'm glad you told me that.  I was starting to wonder.

"I'm not a "leftist". I don't sit on a lawn eating crumpets and drinking tea.  I don't want to murder babies either and neither does PB."

Great.  Killing babies is a bad thing (Deut 30:19).  So, change your mind about supporting the use of chemical weapons on unborn children (Pr 23:7).  You would not want to stand face to face in the presence of Jesus and the murdered children of this country to answer for your view (Pr 23:7, 1 Jn 3:15).  Clean up your heart.  Get right with God (Pr 31:8).

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "Liar."

Liars don't keep Christ's commandments (1 John 2:4) like you--a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist.  Liars promote all that is not truth (1 John 2:21, 27) like you--a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist. 

You exchange God's truth for lies (Rom. 1:25).

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "No man can compel another to take a job that would them require them to do so in the first place."

A righteous person is disqualified to work in an emergency room?  You have it backward (as is usual for a leftist [Eccl 10:2]).  The  Hippocratic Oath is "first do no harm".  This is precisely what the worker is doing when he refuses to use distribute a chemical weapon which will be used to murder an unborn child. 

"To beat you to the punch with the Nazi analogy; when should you take your moral stand, when you are first asked to go on the payroll at Auschwitz or when you are first asked to press the button on the gas chamber? Your position is ridiculous and transparently dishonest and partisan. You know and I know that is nothing but harassment."

Is a person disqualified from employment because he has a moral conscience?  "Under the conscience clause, workers in health-care environments ranging from doctors to maintenance men can refuse to offer services, information, or advice to patients on issues like contraception...if the workers are morally against it."

You and your daddy want to make it hard for the righteous to get a job, don't you? (Re 13:17).

Response to comment [from other]:  "Aww, how sweet of you to wonder dollface..."

I thought you said you weren't effeminate.  You come off as a little limp-wristed?  Is this where your hostility comes from?

"Carry on troll..."

A-No-Brain, you have to have a point if you'd like me to respond.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  [The Bible trumps science. It's not the other way around.]  "You keep saying that, yet you have no evidence. To say that modern science agrees with the archaic scientific worldview, that the theology of the Bible is presented through, is pure fantasy."

You don't get to claim the "intelligent community" mantel, sorry.  We get that.  The best scientists believed the Bible [e.g. Johann Kepler (helped develop science of physical astronomy / developed the Ephemeris Tables),  Isaac Newton (helped develop science of dynamics and the discipline of calculus / father of the Law of Gravity / invented the reflecting telescope),  Louis Pasteur (helped develop science of bacteriology / discovered the Law of Biogenesis / invented fermentation control / developed vaccinations and immunizations),  Leonardo da Vinci (helped develop science of hydraulics), among others..." Full text:  Do real scientists believe in Creation?].

Scientists have the same evidence.  It is the interpretation of that evidence that matters.

See:

War of Worldviews  

"..Sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending that there is a perfect correlation between the science of today and the Bible is nothing but a measure to soothe a weak faith."

You are ignorant.  That is not an insult.  It means only that you are uninformed.

"The weakest faith of them all is the faith of the fanatic, because the fanatic can not deal with reality..."

Reality confirms what the Bible said all along.  There is overwhelming evidence for young earth creation. 

Do you think that you know all that there is to know?

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "Liar."

A brief review may be in order:

Liars don't keep Christ's commandments (1 John 2:4) like you--a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist. Liars promote all that is not truth (1 John 2:21, 27) like you--a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist.

You exchange God's truth for lies (Rom. 1:25).

A Christian changes his mind about these things. A Christian gives up his will (pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, humanism, etc.) for God's will. The repentant heart is evidenced by fruits (Isa 1:16,17; Da 4:27; Mt 3:8; Ac 26:20).

Jesus loves you (Jn 3:16). Jesus is willing to save you (2 Pe 3:9). Repent (Eze 18:30-32; Ac 17:30).

Response to comment [from other]:  "My username is already a joke in itself..."

I'm glad you said it...

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "I already told you I'm not responding to your lies..."

Oh bummer.    You're a tough cookie.  We'll just have to see how you come down on all of the other positions then. 

Maybe someday you will be kind enough to answer the question about puppies. I bet you have some standard of right and wrong.  People usually do.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Creationism does not even qualify as science since it fails to meet the requirements of the scientific method."

The man who discovered the scientific method, Francis Bacon, believed the Bible. 

Most fields of science were developed by men who believed the Bible, such as Isaac Newton (dynamics, gravitation, calculus), Michael Faraday (electromagnetics, field theory), Robert Boyle (chemistry), Johannes Kepler (astronomy), and Louis Pasteur (bacteriology, immunization). Francis Bacon, a Bible-believing Christian, developed the scientific method.

"Are you telling me that the difference in dating the earth is a matter of interpretation?"

How do you get a petrified cowboy boot?   

"Being told that I am ignorant by someone who uses answers in genesis as a source of science is quite priceless."

Ad hominem

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it (Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky.  1971.)."  Dismiss people so that you can dismiss their arguments. 

"Where is this evidence?"

You'll have to pick a topic :

Astronomy

What do comets tell us about the age of the solar system?
Comets and the Age of the Solar System (Technical)
Halley’s comet—beacon of creation
Kuiper Belt objects and the short-period comets ‘dilemma’ (for evolutionists)
More problems for the ‘Oort comet cloud’?
Is there evidence that our solar system is only thousands of years old, instead of the millions of years claimed by evolutionists? What about the age of stars?
How old are Saturn’s rings?
Mercury—the tiny planet that causes big problems for evolution
Revelations in the Solar System (Semi-Technical)
Saturn’s Rings Short-Lived and Young (Semi-Technical, available in Spanish)
Speedy Star Changes — No Need for Long Ages
Exploding stars point to a young universe
Extrasolar planets suggest our solar system is unique and young
Venus — cauldron of fire (Semi-Technical)
Titan vs. Billions of Years (ICR Back to Genesis article)
Enceladus: A Cold, Youthful Moon (ICR Back to Genesis article)
How old is the moon?
The Moon: The light that rules the night [age, origin, design] (Semi-Technical, available in Spanish)
Is the moon really old?
Moon Dust Evidence no longer valid
Moon Dust and the Age of the Solar System (Technical)
How old is the sun?
The Sun: our special star [age, origin, design] (Semi-Technical)
Solar Neutrinos — the Critical Shortfall Still Elusive (Semi-Technical)
Steady sun: a problem for billions of years
The Young Faint Sun paradox and the age of the solar system (Semi-Technical, ICR Impact)
The Young Faint Sun paradox and the age of the solar system (Semi-Technical, TJ)
See also Astronomy
Atmospheric Science
What features of earth’s atmosphere are inconsistent with billions-of-years belief?
Blowing Old-Earth Belief Away: Helium gives evidence that the earth is young (available in Spanish)
Answering the Critics. Helium in the Earth’s Atmosphere (Semi-technical)

Botany

Can tree rings reveal how long ago Noah’s Flood took place? What about the Huon pine trees that the media claims could be as much as 30,000 years old?
Patriarchs of the forest
Living tree ‘8,000 years older than Christ’ (?)
The Oldest Living Things — Trees
The Oldest Tree in the World
Tree ring dating (dendrochronology) (available in Spanish)

Geology

General:
Studies in Flood Geology by John Woodmorappe (Semi-Technical, off-site)
Is there any geologic evidence that, contrary to evolutionary ideas, supports a young age for the earth?
The Earth’s Magnetic Field: Evidence that the Earth is Young (Semi-Technical)
The Earth's magnetic field and the age of the Earth
Eroding Ages
Fossil magnetism reveals rapid reversals of the earth's magnetic field
Geology and the Young Earth
Granite grain size: not a problem for rapid cooling of plutons (Technical)
It’s about time
Kodachrome Basin State Park: Where Can We See Young-Earth Evidence? (ICR BTG 211a)
The Lesson of Surtsey
Lord Kelvin revisited on the young age of the earth (Technical)
Microscopic Diamonds Confound Geologists (Technical)
Not ancient 'reefs' but catastrophic deposits
Rapid Granite Formation (Semi-Technical)
Rapid Rocks — Granites … They didn’t need millions of years of cooling!
Sandy Stripes — Do Many Layers Mean Many Years?
Shaking hands on a recent creation
The collapse of ‘geologic time’:
Tiny halos in coalified wood tell a story that demolishes ‘long ages’
What about the dating of fossils by evolutionists, who claim they are ‘millions of years old’?
The Clock in the Rock
Geological conflict: young radiocarbon date for ancient fossil wood challenges fossil dating
Geology and the Young Earth
Green River Blues (Semi-Technical)
‘Instant’ Petrified Wood
Rapid Petrification of Wood: An Unexpected Confirmation of Creationist Research (ICR Impact article)
Tarawera’s Night of Terror (Rapid Fossilization)
Doesn’t it take millions of years for caves to form?
See Q&A: Geology
How long does it take for coal formation? What about the argument that there is too much coal for a young earth?
See Q&A: Geology

Glaciology

Does the great depth of some glaciers indicate that the earth is millions of years old?
The Lost Squadron (Rapid ice buildup)
Ice-bound plane flies again!

Human History

Have archaeologists truly found Aboriginal artefacts that are about 176,000 years old? What was the dating method, and is it considered reliable?
Age of Aboriginal Art Disputed
How long have Aborigines lived in Australia?
Are human population growth studies an indicator of antiquity or youth of humanity?
Where are all the people?
Can all people be genetically traced back to one woman ancestor, as the ‘mitochondrial Eve’ hypothesis claims? How about tracing all people back to one common male ancestor?
A shrinking date for Eve (Semi-Technical)

Oceanography

Does it take a long time for coral reefs to form?
Coral Reef Growth (Geoscience Research Institute Origins)
How Long Does it Take for a Coral Reef to Grow?
Telling a geological tale
What oceanographic evidence points to a young age for the oceans?
The sea’s missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists (Technical, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism 2:17–33, 1990)
Salty seas: Evidence for a young earth (popular-level article based on above paper)
Does salt come from evaporated sea water? (ICR Acts and Facts)
Sea Floor Sediment (Technical, book review)
Sea salt loses its savour for evolutionists

Survey:

What is the most compelling scientific evidence of a young earth?
The earth: how old does it look?
A Young Earth: it's not the issue!
Evidence for a Young World
How old is the earth?
The god of an old earth
Real history: the timeline of the Bible Young Age Evidence

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "As soon as you stop lying I will be happy to discuss these things with you."

You'll have to provide an example of where I have misrepresented your position.  I would be happy to be proven wrong.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "...[Y]ou made the assertion that your understanding of PB's beliefs are accurate..."

Example please. I'm going with PB's own words (e.g. pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist). This is not a biblical worldview.

Changing these godless positions would be an improvement.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "...[C]reationism is not a scientific theory. It employs poor arguments against evolution..."

Creation is a fact given from scripture.  You do not believe Genesis 1:1 but claim to be a Christian?  The theory of evolution is man's next best guess.  It is a theory--and not even a convincing one.  History is best explained by the biblical account:

The Fossil Record

See:   

The Fossil Record: Becoming More Random all the Time

Tower of Babel 

See:  

The Tower of Babel: Relevant Lessons for Today

Fall of Man & Why There is Death

See:

Two Histories of Death

Observational science (what we observe in the human genome; all descend from one man, etc.)

See:

Hasn’t Evolution Been Proven True?

The best answers are the ones God gave all along.  The Bible just so happens to be true.

C-14

See:

Doesn’t Carbon-14 Dating Disprove the Bible?

We have the same data but our interpretations of that data are different. 

War of Worldviews

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "When did I use those words, liar?"

This thread is filled with that documentation based on your own words.   If you've changed your positions--great.  Say so.

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "I have said specifically that I was against abortion, for example."

Are you against the use of chemical weapons on unborn children (RU486/"the morning after pill")?  If a nurse refuses to dispense this to rape victims, does he/she do wrong?  You previously suggested that the one who will not murder is in the wrong (Isa 5:20).  Has your position changed?

"Yet you keep tossing out the term "pro-abort"."

Intentionally ending a pregnancy for convenience is murder (Ps. 139, Ps.51).  Children are not to be put to death for the sins of their fathers (Eze 18:17, Deut 30:19).  The innocent shall not be put to death (Ex 23:7).

"Pro-homosexual" is a meaningless phrase. I am "pro-human-rights", however."

You spend much time defending homosexuality.  This is opposed to God's word.  Homosexuality is forbidden (Lev. 18:22); it is considered an abomination (1 Kin. 14:24); it is to be punished (Lev. 20:13) because it is wicked and unclean (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27).  Thomas Nelson Publishers. (1995). Nelson's quick reference topical Bible index. Nelson's Quick reference (293). Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

"As for humanis[m], I am a Christian."

"Humanism legitimized our heart's self-centered desires, giving them credibility," (MacArthur, Fools Gold:  Discerning Truth in an Age of Error By John MacArthur, Nathan Busenitz, Scott Lang, pg. 166)."

Understand humanism:

"...The Christian humanism of the Renaissance and Reformation period was a complex intellectual movement, primarily literary and philological in nature, but with important historical, philosophical, and religious implications. Humanism was rooted in the love of classical antiquity and the desire for its rebirth, both in terms of form (primarily a search for new aesthetic standards) and of norm (a desire for more enlightened ethical and religious values). The return to original sources is reflected in a parallel way in the reformers' emphasis upon the scripture as norm and New Testament Christianity as the ideal form of church life. Humanism developed in Italy during the fourteenth century and persisted through the Reformation well into the age of the Enlightenment.

The word humanism came from the phrase studia humanitatis or humaniora, the liberal arts or humane studies, a concept derived largely from Cicero. The liberal arts curriculum emphasized grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history, and moral philosophy. While the course of studies owed something to the traditional education of the medieval cathedral schools, it was less concerned with dialectic or logic, natural science, and Scholastic metaphysics. The term humanist was originally applied to professional public or private teachers of classical literature who continued the medieval vocation of the dictatores, who taught the skills of letter-writing and proper style in speech and writing. But the word gradually came to assume a more comprehensive meaning, referring to all devotees of classical learning. Humanism came to be cultivated not merely by professional educators but by many men of letters, historians, moral philosophers, statesmen, and churchmen, including regular as well as secular clergy. They set the aurea sapientia, or golden wisdom, of the ancients against the arid dialectic of the Scholastic doctors. Christian humanism tended toward religious syncretism, moralism, and ethical Paulinism, and also toward a Christocentrism that emphasized Christ as an example of good living, rather than a Christology that focused on Christ's sacrifice on the cross as sin-bearer, substitute, and savior..."  Full text:  Humanism

"Stop lying. Or at least stop lying so transparently."

I don't wish to lie at all.  If I have misrepresented your position, please indicate where.  The repentant heart is evidenced by fruits (Isa 1:16,17; Da 4:27; Mt 3:8; Ac 26:20).  

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  [Pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, humanism/The repentant heart is evidenced by fruits (Isa 1:16,17; Da 4:27; Mt 3:8; Ac 26:20).] "I have never seen you repent of any of your lies."

You claim to be a Christian but you do not hold a biblical worldview.

You love to mock those who believe the book of Genesis literally, but consider the alternative.

70-90% of "Christians" leave the faith after they graduate. Churches have stopped teaching Genesis as literal history. How will they defend marriage without Genesis?

And those who reject Genesis often reject the rest of the Bible.

Christians who teach Genesis should be praised not mocked (e.g. Ken Ham). Jude 18. They work to restore the foundation of the Christian faith.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "How does Genesis 1:1 conflict with evolution?"

"Once again creationists demonstrate that they have no understanding whatsoever of science."

Creationists are in fact real scientists.

See:

Can creationists be “real” scientists?

In fact, the very best scientists throughout history believed the Bible.

See: 

Do real scientists believe in Creation?

[Radiometric dating]

See:

The Fallacies of Radioactive Dating of RocksBasalt Lava Flows in Grand Canyon

Radioactive ‘dating’ failure: Recent New Zealand lava flows yield ‘ages’ of millions of years

[Helioseismology]

See:

Stars and galaxies

Solar neutrinos—the critical shortfall still elusive

"Creationism is not a different interpretation of data, it is selective use of data which is unscientific."

Then, like PB, you believe that Creation scientists are all liars.  I do not.  You'd think that the whole ClimateGate would have helped you out with that--but maybe not.

[Hasn’t Evolution Been Proven True?]  "Proof? Are you for real? Since when does science deal with proof?"

So you didn't read the article.  That's fine.  It did not make that truth claim. 

Most people will not re-evaluate what they believe (Eze 13:19).  

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Evolution is hardly the same as gravity...."

Exactly.  Natural laws obey God's laws.  

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "People leave the faith after they graduate because of a literal interpretation of Genesis."

They reject a biblical worldview for secular humanism because the foundation is gone.  The Bible is either true or it is false.  

God made the world in six literal days (Ex 20:11; 31:17).  Scripture gives no reason to believe otherwise.  Humanism does.  You'll believe God's word or man's opinion (e.g. evolution).

Marriage was divinely instituted (Ge 2:24).  Jesus affirmed this in the New Testament (Mk 10:6-8).  If you do not believe the foundation of the Bible, why believe the rest of it?

"[P]eople like you, who insist that a Dark Ages understanding of science and a rejection of modern biology are necessary to be a Christian."

Trust in Christ is necessary for the Christian.  If you'd like to believe 150 year old science that is your business.  It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe the Bible.  An honest look at the science makes this clear.

"People can't, and won't, unlearn science."

I thought the scientist never stopped asking questions.

"The foundation of the Christian church is Christ.  Not a literal interpretation of Genesis."

When do you start believing the one you claim to follow?  Lk 6:46.

"If you want to see the Church decline to nothing..."

Your materialism, naturalism and multiculturalism works toward that end.

See:

Materialism

Naturalism

Multiculturalism 

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "...keep making sure that everyone knows they can't be a "real" Christian unless they believe in YEC."

A person does not go to heaven or hell based on a belief in young earth creation.  A person goes to heaven or hell based on a right relationship with Jesus Christ (Geraci). 

Response to comment [from other]:  "Was the tree of knowledge an actual literal tree as well?"

See:

Talking Snakes and Magical Trees

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "Creationism is not science since it fails to meet the requirement posed by the principle of falsifiability..."

Naturalistic scientists were there?

See:

What is science?

"How then can creationists be real scientists?"

Based on your criteria, how then can naturalistic evolutionists be real scientists?

"Climate scientists are more closely tied up with politics. Evolution is not."

You're precious.

"Creation scientists do not exist..."

They're ghosts.

"...[T]hey do not let the data form the hypothesis, the let the hypothesis decide what is real data."

They're evil; I tell you!--evil.

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "[Y]our interpretation of Genesis..is false."

Every verse of Genesis has exactly one meaning--what the author intended.  You'll need a better hermeneutic than "cause I said so...". 

What reason does scripture give you for spiritualizing the book of Genesis?  Do you spiritualize the resurrection of Jesus Christ, too?

See:

Hermeneutics

"I believe God's testimony- which includes nature."

Nature obeys God's laws.  Why don't you?

"[You] worry so much about evolution..." 

See if it doesn't sound like these ghosts from the past haunt you...

"In this century, we are being haunted by some philosophical ghosts came into being in the last century. Christians need a Christian worldview that is based on truth. There is a difference between knowledge and truth. For example, knowledge will double and triple but genuine truth does not.

Young people go to school and study facts. But there is a difference between facts and truth. Facts are like the recipe. Truth is like the meal. Digest the truth and it will change your life. God wants us to have truth. Why did God give us the Bible? Jesus said in Jn 17 "Thy word is truth." Why did God send us the Holy Spirit? He's called in the Bible the spirit of truth. Why did the Messiah come, the Lord Jesus? He said "I am the truth". Why do we have churches? Churches are the pillar and the ground of the truth. Truth is to your spirit what food is to your body, what light is to your eyes, and what sound is to your ears. To know truth is to know God. And to know God is to know truth.

Secular education is not enough. Our young people need a Christian worldview. When you have a Christian worldview, you'll find out that all of these facts intersect in truth. And that it's all related. You don't just niche out your church life and put it over here, and think that none of the rest of these thing matter.

The marks of a good education is, that it is so interwoven with truth that all things begin to intersect and cohere together. There is a famine in the world for truth. Jobs friends encouraged him to appeal to the human mind--an ancient appeal to humanism (Job 8:8) Humanism is not new, it's one of the dustiest, mustiest things around.

How did we get to this state in America? A pastor prayed a prayer to the Kansas House of Representatives:

Heavenly Father, we come before You today to ask Your forgiveness and seek Your direction and guidance.

We know Your Word says, "Woe on those who call evil good,"
but that's exactly what we have done.
We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values.

We confess that:
We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word
and called it pluralism;

We have worshipped other gods
and called it multiculturalism;

We have endorsed perversion
and called it an alternative lifestyle;

We have exploited the poor
and called it the lottery;

We have neglected the needy
and called it self-preservation;

We have rewarded laziness
and called it welfare;

We have killed our unborn
and called it choice;

We have shot abortionists
and called it justifiable;

We have neglected to discipline our children
and called it building self- esteem;

We have abused power
and called it political savvy;

We have coveted our neighbor's possessions
and called it ambition;

We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography
and called it freedom of expression;

We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers
and called it enlightenment.

Search us, O God, and know our hearts today;
try us and see if there be some wicked way in us;
cleanse us from every sin and set us free.

Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of Kansas,
and who have been ordained by You, to govern this great state.
Grant them Your wisdom to rule
and may their decisions direct us to the center of Your will.

I ask it in the name of Your Son, the Living Savior, Jesus Christ.

Amen.

What is wrong in America? We are in a crisis. No longer do we believe in absolute truth. If you go back to a period, it began in 1962 to 1982, the courts in 20 years reversed the principle of "One Nation Under God" that had been the principle of American History. In 1962, in Engel v. Vitale Justice Hugo Black ruled that voluntary prayer in schools was unconstitutional. In 1963, in Abington Township School District v. Schempp Justice Thomas Clark set in motion the dismantling of Bible reading. Then, in 1980 the posting of the Ten Commandments was declared unconstitutional. Then came 1982, and the courts prohibited the teaching of creationism--that men, boys and girls were created by Almighty God. Twenty years it took them to expel God from the public schools and tell him not to come back.

What has been the result of that? Children need permission to have medication, but aided by high school counselors, they may have an abortion and to kill a baby. We are in serious times. God has been so systematically excluded a study by the U.S. Department of Education headed up by Dr. Vitz, a professor of psychology at New York university was released to the American public. It was a study centered on text books used by millions of boys and girls in public schools. After the study, Dr. Vitz said: "Those responsible for these books appear to have a deep seated fear of any form of active contemporary Christianity, especially serious, committed Protestantism. This fear has led the authors to deny and repress the importance of this kind of religion in American life. This nature of the bias is clear. Religion, traditional family values, and conservative political and economic positions have been reliably excluded from children's textbooks. The exclusion is particularly disturbing because it is found in a system paid for by taxpayers and one that claims moreover to be committed to impartial knowledge and accuracy. Textbooks are so written as to present a systematic denial of the history, heritage, beliefs, and values of a very large segment of the American people."

That is not a preacher saying that. That is a report by a professor of psychology of New York University, funded by the United States Department of Education. There has been a systematic move to exclude those things we find dear and what we believe to be the foundation of this nation. And as a result, we see values clarification being put into schools. We see values neutral sex education put into schools. We see dispensing of birth control devices and condoms being put into schools. We see abortion counseling without parental notification being put into schools. We see homosexuality being introduced in textbooks as an acceptable lifestyle.
How did all of this happen? What has happened to America?

Roger Friend is quite a scholar. Remember Job's friends made an appeal for him to inquire of the philosophers of yesterday? Who are some of the philosophers of yesterday that have so skewed American thinking today? What happened in the 1800s, in the 19th century? Five men shaped and molded what has happened in America today.
The first was Georg Friedrich Hegel. He lived in the 1820s. For 1500 years people had accepted without question the fact of moral absolutes. That right was right and wrong was wrong universally. Everywhere people thought that murder was wrong. Everywhere adultery was thought to be wrong and if it were not thought to be wrong it was only an aberration. The consensus was that there is a fixed standard of right and wrong. But Hegel came along and he rejected moral absolutes. He had what he called a "dialectic theory". Dialecticism is simply an argument. He had a reasoned argument, a dialectic theory. And what was his dialectic theory? He said all history is made up of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Thesis is an idea, a proposition that people believed to be true and they hold that idea until somebody comes along with an opposing idea, an antithesis. So, these two get into a battle--a thesis and an antithesis. They battle back and forth until each of them gives a little and somewhere in the middle you come to a synthesis, which is a thesis and an antithesis coming together. That synthesis becomes the new thesis. That becomes the new accepted model for truth. Hegel said therefore there are no moral absolutes. He's not talking about biological evolution, he's talking about philosophical and social evolution--that society is always in a flux. It's always moving and there is no fixed standard of right and wrong. Hegel said that ideas come under the heading of survival of the strongest. The strongest idea wins and therefore history is evolutionary and there can be no absolutes.

After Hegel in the 1820s there came along another man in the 1830s. This man's name was Ludwig Feuerback. He was another German philosopher. One of these things begins to build upon another. Feuerback said if there are no moral absolutes--if Hegel is right (and he accepted that Hegel was right)--then, there can be no God. Because if there is a God, then that God would have absolute truth. So, he said that there can be no God. He said man that creates the idea of God. Man is not made in the image of God but God is in the imagination of man. All that moral flux, this no moral absolutes--causes a deep insecurity in the heart and mind of man. So, Feuerback said that God is created in the imagination of man. Man simply invents God. He said, "Christianity has in fact long vanished. Not only from reason but from the life of mankind. It is nothing more than a fixed idea."
Are we haunted by that ghost today? Yes, that's called humanism. Humanism sounds so much like humanitarianism. But there is a vast difference between humanism and humanitarianism. Humanitarianism means we love one another, we care for one another, and we love the human species that God has made--man. But humanism makes man the center, the circumference, the sum total of everything, it has no room for God. It is a fine sounding name. But, it is atheism just simply wearing another coat.

The third person that we are being haunted by today is Karl Marx. Marx built on the work of Hegel and Feuerback. He said, now if this is true--if there are no absolutes and therefore, there is no God, then what is the future and the purpose of mankind? Where are we going? As a result, Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848. He took Hegel's dialectic argument and he called it dialectical materialism (another word for communism). What he believed was that capitalism--the right to own property, and the right to be productive for yourself--was wrong. That, he said, is the thesis. The antithesis is the desire for equity and fairness in the hearts and minds of the working people. He said if you take that thesis and that antithesis, you will come to a synthesis which will be socialism and communism. That's Marxism. That's Hegelian philosophy and the ideas of Feuerback put together because communism is godless. It's not just another form of economy, it is unspeakably immoral because it does not recognize the worth, the dignity, of the individual. The individual is nothing. Marx said that they way to set all of this about is a revolution. He said it doesn't matter if there is suffering. He believed that there must be violent change. He said that we must be like a foreign body within the existing system that will accelerate its death. So, millions and millions were put to death under godless communism. 40 to 50 million were executed. Why? Because there is no God. If there is not God, there is no fixed standard of right and wrong. Therefore, we as human beings, all we have is materialism. And what we've got to do is to somehow bring in a humanist, godless utopia. Revolution was necessary and here is what Marx said, "The suffering and sacrifice of violent change constitutes the price that mankind has to pay to have any essential progress at all. So, he said, we want change. We want it violently. Marxism and Leninism affects American life today.
Here's the fourth man that has skewed the worldview. His name is Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin wrote the Origin of the Species in 1859, and the Decent of Man in 1871. He came to the conclusion that man is the product of evolution. If there is no God, there can be no fixed standard of right and wrong--and if there is no God, then how did we get here? How do we explain our existance? Evolution is not a science. It is a philosophy. It is the next best guess of the mind that cannot accept divine creation. Darwin went on to write that we, ourselves, are the product of mere chance. We as human beings cannot escape the evolutionary web.

Another philosopher a little later on described what Darwin taught us. "With this single argument, the mystery of the universe is explained. The deity is annulled. And a new era of infinite knowledge is ushered in." And from that time on, man has been endeavoring to make a monkey of himself thanks to Charles Darwin and those that believed him.
The fifth of these five men that haunt us today is a man named Sigmund Freud. Freud lived from 1856 to 1939. He was the one who put the final bow on the whole thing. He put the final touches to the evolutionary model. Feuerback said that we created the idea of God because of the insecurities that Hegel brought about that said there are no absolutes. Freud asked, where do we get the idea of God? What kind of a God do we conjure up? He said our idea of God comes from our childhood father and we conceive of God as we would conceive of our childhood father when we were children. He was the father of psychoanalysis. He taught that mankind is motivated chiefly by pleasure--specifically, by sexual pleasure and eroticism. For Freud almost everything begins and ends with sex. He felt if mankind is repressed in society by his/her erotic urges, if people are failed to be allowed to fulfill their sexual desires, they may get a neurosis. That is the reason we see perversion. The filth, the debauchery that we see in society today, that roots back to the extreme permissiveness that came out of Freudian psychology. You see it in raising children. We are told not to repress children. After all, you don't want to warp the little thing.

What happened when these five men brought these philosophies? It took less than a hundred years for them to come to fruition in this century. In 1924, a man who was a student of: Hegel, Feuerback, Marx--had a name--Adolf Hitler. He thought he had an idea better than Marx, Nazism. He wrote Mein Kampf. He wrote: "No more than natures desires the mating with weaker with stronger individuals..." there you see the survival of the fittest; we're talking about Darwin there. "...even less does she desire the blending of a higher and a lower race." Hitler was the original racist. "...since if she did, her whole work of higher breeding over perhaps hundreds of thousands of years might be ruined with one blow. All great cultures of the past perished only because the originally created race died from blood poisoning that is intermarrying. The man who creates the culture must be preserved. Preservation is bound up with the rigid law of necessity and the right to victory of the best and the strongest in this world." That's just another way of saying survival of the fittest. Then, Hitler said, "Those who want to live, let them fight and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live. Even if this is hard, this is how it is." That lead to the gas ovens.

You say, the gas ovens were terrible. What about the abortion business today? What about taking the little babies--the weakest of all creatures and because they are weak, because they cannot defend themselves, they are liquidated. Do you know what Hitler's argument for the extermination of Jews was? He reclassified them as non-persons. Do you know what we are doing to the little babies today? We are re-classifying them as non-persons. Can you imagine someone saying, I personally am against the cremation of human beings but what one does in his own personal gas chamber is his business. I'm for choice.

This is the idea of survival of the strongest. How can "Dr. Death"--Dr. Kevorkain do what he does over and over and over again? Because these people are weak. They're suffering. Many people say, get them out of the way. They want to die. Help them to die. It's only a little step for doctors who will put to death little babies in the womb and be paid for it, will, with a needle and a syringe help some of us to get out of the way in this crowded world because it's just what we call the survival of the fittest.

These ideas have been around for a long time. Actually, they were born in the pit of hell. But there was a resurgence of these kinds of ideas in the last century and now we've sown the wind and we are reaping the whirlwind.

Am I discouraged? No, and I'll tell you why. The Bible says that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty to God unto the pulling down of strongholds. God has given us kingdom authority. Jesus said, behold, I give you authority over all the power of the enemy. Do you know the one thing that they do not have?--is truth. Let me tell you, the other thing they don't have? They don't have the Holy Spirit. So what we need to do is take the word of truth and the spirit of truth and hold up the Christ of truth and we need to get out of the boat with both feet. We need to know who we are, what we believe, and why we believe it. We don't have to be ashamed of what we believe. There are good answers to these things and the Bible says we are to be ready to give answer to those who ask us of these things.

I am convinced that there is not a lot wrong in America that could not be changed radically and quickly if we had a generation of preachers across this land who would stand in the pulpits of God anointed with the Holy Spirit and a heart full of love from a pure life who would preach and teach. Edited notes based on sermon by Adrienne Rogers: Ghosts That Haunt Us.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "[Y]ou have two species that appear to be very close to each other on the evolutionary timeline (you provide all the evidence you want, the principle holds) - you still have dozens, hundreds, maybe even millions of incremental steps of evolution between them according to those evolutionists who believe evolution happens by way of incremental steps of natural selection weeding out the traits.."

"...Once the lack of major transitions is acknowledged, one must face the fact that there is no tree of life because there are no roots, no trunk, no boughs, and no medium-sized branches. There are only mutually disjointed bushes, and even these consist exclusively of variation only within the kind, and this is almost invariably within the family unit of traditional taxonomy. The scientific creationist needs to only reject organic evolution before being in hearty agreement with the foregoing cited statements..." Full text:  Does a ‘transitional form’ replace one gap with two gaps?  Does a ‘Transitional Form’ Replace One Gap with Two Gaps?

"We can believe the word of God (1) because of the scientific accuracy of the Bible.  Some say:  "Of course the Bible is not scientifically accurate because it was was written thousands of years ago."  Before you say that, make sure of two things--make certain that you know science and make certain that you know the word of God.  The Bible does not always agree with science--and for that I am infinitely glad.  If you've been to Paris, you may have visited the Louvre.  There are 3 1/2 miles of books on science and almost every one of them is obsolete.  Science is changing.  What is scientific fact in one era is not in another era.

In 1861 there was an anti-God French academy of science that gave 51 facts that prove the Bible wrong.  Today, more than 100 years later, there is not a reputable scientist who believes one of those 51 facts.  Aren't you glad the Bible did not agree with that science?  Had the Bible agreed with that science the Bible would have been wrong.  Give the scientists enough time, perhaps they'll catch up with the Bible..."  Full text:  How to Be Certain the Bible is the Word of God

SD:  Are you pro-homosexual?

[Re:  homosexuality]

PB:  "I am pro-equality and so is the constitution of this great nation-- if you don't like it, I'm sure you can find a border..."  link

PB:  "Not being anti-gay doesn't make someone pro-homosexual." link

[Will not answer the following:  Is homosexuality an abomination?  (1 Kin. 14:24).  Did God made us male and female?  (Mt 19:4).  Is is disgusting to God to act differently than we were created?  (Deut 22:5).]

SD:  Are you a humanist?

[Re:  young earth creation] 

"I won't apologize for loving truth...Hiding behind a book won't change reality...[P]eople come to associate Christianity...with anti-science dogma and superstition." link

[Did we evolve from monkeys? (Ge 1:26, Jas 3:9)]  "[W]e share a common ancestor [with monkeys]." link

[So a monkey was not created a monkey and a man was not created a man? Man became a man over millions of years through the process of evolution?] "That is what the evidence indicates..."  link

[Did God create the world in six literal days? (Ex 20:11; 31:17)]  "Nope." link

[What hermeneutic do you use to oppose a six normal day creation? (Ex. 20:11; 31:17).] "The use of mythic imagery and symbolism, particularly combined with the scientific evidence, show that Genesis is not meant to a literal, historical revelation but an allegorical presentation containing spiritual truth...I use reason and evidence..." link

This is not a biblical worldview.

See:

War of Worldviews

What is a Biblical Worldview?

Worldview Comparison

Naturalism

Materialism

Humanism

Multiculturalism

Modernity & Postmodernism: An excerpt from The Truth War: Fighting for Certainty in an Age of Deception by John MacArthur 

Response to comment [from other]:  "Just checking to see if any 'revisions' have been made to 'Choleric's list."

Worship the Creator not the creation. 

Excerpt Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis:  "[There] is a big difference between Pantheism and the Christian idea of God...Pantheists usually believe that God, so to speak, animates the universe as you animate you body:  that the universe almost is God, so that if it did not exist He would not exist either, and anything you find in the universe is part of God.  The Christian idea is quite different.  They think God invented and made the universe [Ge 1:1]--like a man making a picture or composing a tune [Gn 1:26–28].  A painter is not a picture, and he does not die if his picture is destroyed.  You may say, 'He's put a lot of himself into it,' but you only mean that all its beauty and interest has come out of his head.  His skill is not in the picture in the same way that it is in his head, or even in his hands.  I expect you see how this difference between Pantheists and Christians hangs together with the other one.  If you do not take the distinction between good and bad very seriously, then it is easy to say that anything you find in this world is part of God.  But, of course, if you think some things really bad, and God really good, then you cannot talk like that,  You must believe that God is separate from the world and that some of the things we see in it are contrary to His will." Ro 1:23.

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "I don't see beloved57 on the list. Not sure where to classify him."

I believe he's a Jehovah's Witness based on his comments.

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  "Grrr! I'm still not on the list!"

Do you believe that your works can save you?  Jud 11.

Add Squeaky (works will save you crowd):  ""Over and over again Jesus said to keep His commandments which is to do the works He said to do." link "You haven't addressed anything I have shared with you. Most Trinitarians are programmed like that (Squeaky)." link

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  "

The devils get frustrated in the heat of summer I think.

See:

Tension Inherent Between Believers and Non-Believers

Response to comment [from a Christian]:  "I am saying Choleric has no moral or spiritual or biblical basis to set himself up to judge others as heretics."

Add patricius79 to "saved by works" (changed identification from "Roman Catholic" to "Christian") and states: 

"[F]aith alone" is not Biblical and is explicitly anti-Biblical..."  link  

"...[W]e can be made holy by the works of God in us..." link 

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  [Do we need faith plus works or a faith that works (carry over from Catholic/Protestant thread)] "Guess we'll have to add God then..."

Too bad this is a difficult issue for you (Ro 9:32).  We are saved by grace alone through faith alone (Jn 1:12; 3:16, 18, 36; Ac 16:31; Ro 10:9-10,13; Eph 2:8-9). The Bible teaches a gospel of grace not a gospel of works (Ac 20:24,32).

How is sin paid for--by your "good" works or by trust in Christ?  How is the breast plate of righteousness put on--by you or or by God? Can you put on your own righteousness? Isa 54:17, Ro 4:13; 9:30; 10:6, Ro 3:22,

Jer 23:6, Isa 61:10.  Can you earn righteousness or is it a gift? Ro 5:17. 

Response to comment [from other]:  "According to Paul's gospel....The righteous are those who do righteousness..."

Man is not justified by his own righteousness (Rom. 10:1–5) or works (Rom. 4:1–5). This faith is a dead faith (Jas 2:14–26).

"Paul spoke about the root of faith (Eph 2:8). James spoke about the fruit of faith (Jas 2:17-18)." ~ Adrian Rogers

Add Cruciform (if you find it necessary to add Catholics at all )-who states: [Serpentdove quote: Works are insufficient for salvation] "Sorry, but your preferred Protestant anti-Catholic doctrinal tradition has misinformed you..."  link 

Response to comment [from other]:  "Oh. So I guess you think that Nazz is a prophet with his foretelling of Doom against the UK as well then?"

You sound concerned.  

"Btw I don't cook raisin cakes and nor am I a pagan..."

TMI (Song 2:5).

"...[B]but don't let little details like that get in the way of anything SD. You OTOH are a fruitcake..."

"Not really. Unlike Japan I don't have to worry about massive earthquakes and the subsequent devastation and flooding. Whatever 'disaster' befalls this country, it ain't gonna be on that scale unless we're talking nuclear holocaust or asteroid impact etc..."

Asteroid?

“While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, Cold and heat, winter and summer, and day and night shall not cease (Ge 8:22)."

Sidebar: Did you know that BBC is broadcasting here now? They are terrible there. Why must they come here?

Response to comment [from an atheist]:  "The British Broadcasting Company is generally considered the best news gathering broadcaster in the world..."

Jer 5:31.

"Ahhh the joke[']s on you and one day I may explain why!"

I do like Monty Python and Are you Being Served?

[Monty Python/Are You Being Served?] "Really? Wow...Now that is a shock..."

Are you a big fan, bunny?

Response to comment [from other]:  "Uh yeh SD, "while the earth remains". The current one may well have an expiry date..."

It does.  The Lord created this world (Joh 1:3,10; Col 1:16).  He upholds it (Heb 1:3).  One day he will uncreate it (2 Pe 3:10).

"I didn't even state an asteroid impact was likely anyway..."

An asteroid is the least of your problems (Prov. 11:7).

 

Add Krsto (non-trinitarian) who states:  "[N]o, I don't believe God is a trinity." link

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "You can add Lazy Afternoon to this list. Along with godrulz, graceandpeace, and andyc."

Lazy Afternoon is number 11 on The 'Jesus is not God' people (non-trinitarians) list. Didn't you get the memo.

Response to comment [from other]: "Funny thing about these 'memos'. They tend to be so boring and full of hot pompous air that folk just fall as zzz...........zzz"

There would be far more interesting things to talk about if you were a Christian.  You have yet to enter the kiddie pool.

"My word SD. That was almost asinine enough to keep me from falling as zzz..."

You need a new hat.

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]:  [Christians] "They are not true monotheists..."

One what. Three whose.

"...If you don’t believe in the Trinity, then you don’t understand who God is. You may say the word “God” but you don’t understand His nature. Second, you couldn’t possibly understand who Christ is--that He is God in human flesh. The Incarnation of Christ is an essential component of the biblical gospel, as John 1:1-14 and many other biblical passages make clear. To deny the Trinity is to deny the Incarnation. And to deny the Incarnation is to wrongly understand the true gospel..." Full text: Can You Be a Christian and Deny the Trinity? John 1:1-14 John MacArthur

Response to comment [from a Catholic]:  "[T]rue monotheists" = "those who happen to agree with Krsto..."