No I am not beginning regular posts, it is just that weekends tend to get very long when you are recuperating and I need something to do. People around the internet have been sounding off a lot lately so this is just an update of their actions and a few words on my part in rebuttal
#1. Attacks on Creation (creationism)
Bill Nye— he has been active lately, for what reason I do not know except maybe to spread hatred against Bible believers who believe Genesis 1. He has two articles out recently:
All he is doing is insulting those who disagree with him which is par for the course for evolutionists. For some reason they have this need for everyone to think their way and they are not happy when people reject their lies. Nye brings nothing new to the table and offers nothing to no one. Creationists do think we just do not need to think about origins because God laid it out for us thus we can spend our time and resources focusing on those problems in life that really matter. Evolutionists prefer to be selfish and would rather spend their money on themselves and their theory and could careless about the poor, the starving, or those who have other needs to be met.
James McGrath also has had a few anti-creation posts lately as he seems to want to be the leader in attacking those who side with God:
Again you see the insults hurled at true believers in the last two links and if evolution were true and if progressive christianity was the right path, why do we see so little of what Jesus taught in those people’s behavior and words? I do not know which group is worse, those who are secular and side with their evolutionary theory or those who claim to be christian yet adopted the progressive alternative? I have experienced large doses of insults, personal attacks and so on from both groups.
I participated in the discussion at the second link and had to wade through the usual wisecracks. Most of the people stopped talking to me when I pointed out that I could not believe that rational thinking people could believe that physical evidence could lay untouched for millions of years yet could not accept physical evidence for an event a few thousand years ago. (I paraphrased myself).
In other words I pointed out how irrational they were being. To address the top link, it is true that evolution is not impossible for God. He could easily have created a process to develop everything BUT he didn’t do origins that way. He told us how he did it–he spoke and it was. Why is this so hard for anti-Genesis 1 people to grasp?
They are saying things that are very obvious in their contradiction to God’s own words yet they refuse to repent of their error. The problem is not with the creationist but those who reject God’s words.
Age Of Rocks– is at it again with their scientific mumbo jumbo
One quote struck me as what is wrong with the scientific view of origins:
Earth history is recorded in fine detail for those who can decipher its cryptic text.
In other words, you need to be specially trained in bible codes and scientific mumbo jumbo to figure out how origins took place or how the dinosaurs became extinct. Earth’s history is not as simple to read as God made it, the scientist has to make it for the elite only then the rest of the world just has to take their word for it. Sounds more like Mormonism than science.
Everything that author said in that post is just wrong and presents nothing of value to anyone. The truth is and this is where I agree with Ken Ham, the lengthy life spans in the pre-flood worlds allowed for animals to grow far larger than what we see in today’s world. There is NO evidence for a meteor hitting the earth and wiping out the dinosaurs, none whatsoever. We have evidence for Noah’s flood destroying the pre-flood animals but none for this fictitious meteor.
#2. Bad Move:
Ken Ham and his billboard. What a disappointing maneuver on his part. It makes me sad to see him react in this manner. Christianity does not need this childish behavior from those who defend its truth. It is just all round a bad move on AIG’s part. Sometimes I think AIG is all about Ham’s ego than the truth.
I wish all Christian organizations would get their biblical act together and follow Jesus in their responses to negative comments or decisions.
B. Corey and his hate mail list:
It is a bad move as he calls himself a Christian yet whines about all the negative responses he gets from those who disagree with him. His own list is contrary to God’s word yet he has the audacity to say he presented biblical arguments. I asked him what criteria he used to categorize what letters went into his hate mail file and which didn’t, I have yet to receive an answer to that inquiry.
If you look at his list you can see why he is getting ‘hate mail’. He just says that God and the Bible are wrong and presents nothing divinely inspired to replace those passages he doesn’t like or supports his point of view. He should know that there is no such thing as racism as everyone is part of 1 race yet he promotes it like multiple races are real. Churches should teach the truth concerning humans and maybe that way we can cut down on the attacks on those with different colored skin
He calls homosexuals christian when God clearly does not include them in his kingdom. Yup, I can understand why he is getting hate mail, he just places himself above God and his word.
#3. Going To The Absurd and Sick—
The last link is just sick and missing important captions to understand what is going on in their minds. Who in their right mind would post such a picture as that? It certainly isn’t funny. The other two just mock and has no place in the Christian repertoire. As you can tell I am not a fan of religious cartoons as they do not send the correct message and cartoons are supposed to make someone laugh or be entertaining and only someone with a twisted mind would find those either.
I am also not a Jim West fan. The following just cinched that attitude
Only someone with mental illness would publicly post that quote and then agree with it.
#4. Bad Advice
B. Corey dispenses terrible advice supported by bad logic in this post. Under his reasoning a Christian could not work in government, be a politician or a part of the military or for that matter work for any unbeliever because they all do bad things. I am not supporting torture but that article is throwing the baby out with the bath water and calling anything good America or Americans have done over the past 300 years useless.
What he wrote is not a biblical perspective but his own personal view for his own personal, biased agenda. You do not toss out the country but pray for it and its leaders asking God to bring his change.
#5. Flood & Jesus Stories
James McGrath goes after the multitude of flood stories found throughout the ancient world and of course he argument makes no sense. There is no reason for every ancient nation to have a flood account in their history, especially when they all take place at roughly the same time in all their histories.
The only thing that makes sense is the biblical account of the flood then when the people dispersed, they took their memories of that event and altered it as their commitment to God wore thin and disappeared.There is no valid reason for Israel to have copied a Babylonian flood story and adapt it to their religious beliefs. What purpose would such an act serve?
Every Jewish person would know its source and would not accept the altered story as part of their actual history. Any explanation other than the biblical one explodes in the faces of the unbeliever once the believer starts looking beneath the surface of the explanation.
As for the Jesus, it wasn’t the biblical authors who borrowed from ancient cults or their leaders’ biographies. Again there is no valid reason or real purpose for them to do so. It always amazes me that scholars would automatically declare that it was the biblical authors who copied from secular sources. So far they have never said the opposite, yet if the biblical authors copied from secular sources that means there is no God and maybe that is what the secular really wants.
#6. More Copying Accusations
So it seems logical to surmisethat the religion of Israel should be seen as rooted in its Canaaniteenvironment (Korpel 1990; De Moor 1997)