The Bathwater – Ray Comfort
'"You are not an animal.' He he, Genius. This is one of the funniest things about Modern Creationists. They are so afraid of science that they spurn and throw away so much that they are afraid of acknowledging, that they actually throw out discoveries and findings by God fearing Creationists too. It's a classic case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater..." BathTub
There's no baby with the bathwater Bathtub. You are higher than the animals, in that you are a moral creature. The dictionary tells us that the word "creature" is "anything created, whether animate or inanimate." You were created by God with an inherent knowledge of right and wrong. That's why a civil court will punish you if you step over certain moral boundaries. No animal sets up court systems and strives, at tremendous cost to itself, to see that justice is done.
We alone do this because man was made in the image of God, as male and female, with the ability to reproduce after his own kind, and as a morally accountable agent.
Evolution has no explanation for man's beginning. Some of its believers think that perhaps there was a big bang, but they don't know where the materials came from for it to take place. They don't know what was in the beginning, but they are certain that there was no God. They believe the scientific absurdity that life rose out of non-life. It was simply a case of evolution-did-it.
Evolution is ridiculously nebulous when it comes to the origin of male and female, and it hangs all of its faith on non-existent evidence for species-to-species transitional forms.
No, there's no baby, and the bathwater is pretty murky and should be quickly flushed down the drain. The theory of evolution has nothing to do with science. It's simply a pseudo-science of an unproven theory, that gives man temporary license to act like an animal.
Albert Einstein No Different than the Rest of us
From the moment Albert Einstein came into a place of eminence, he became public domain. Decades later, he still is. Theists and non-theists alike continually use him as an intellectual measurement in a tug of war. Who's side was he on? Did he believe in God or didn't he? Theists provide a mass of quotes to show that he did believe in the existence of God, but atheists are quick to retort that it wasn't the God of the Bible, and think they have gained ground by saying so.
In truth, Albert Einstein was no different than most of us when it comes to a belief in God. He was what the Bible calls, an "idolater." He had his own conception of God. He made a god in his own image and was in transgression of the First and the Second of the Ten Commandments. "You shall have no other gods before Me," and "You shall not make yourself a graven image," are not confined to physically shaping a stone or wooden god. The Commandments include a god shaped in the mind.
There is a serious problem though for the idolater. By their very nature idolaters reject the God of the Bible. The two aren't compatible. The God revealed in Scripture forbids the giving of homage to the non-existent, and in turn, the idolater refuses to give homage to the God of Scripture.
Here's how it works. The average idol maker is offended by the thought that God would be vindictive. He is affronted by any thought of the existence of Hell. He therefore creates a god that is non-vindictive. His god is rather an impersonal but benevolence force. He has no sense of right or wrong, justice or truth. But there's the problem.
This "benevolent" deity stands by and cruelly lets children starve to death--40,000 every 24 hours. He lets people die in agony of cancerous disease. Millions of them. He coldly watches as hundreds of thousands are crushed in earthquakes, drowned in floods, struck by lightning, and ravished by tornados and hurricanes.
Then, as time passes, as the pains of daily life come to the individual idolater, he cannot reconcile what his "loving" God allows to come his way. So he either becomes embittered (or disillusioned) at the thought of God existing. He loses faith, because his god let him down.
Such was the tragic case, it would seem, with Albert Einstein. He rejected the God who revealed Himself in Holy Scripture, shaped an idol for himself, and then discarded it when the pains of old age took their predictable hold, and pulled him closer and closer to death. But it was only right that he should toss the idol. His god could do nothing for him. It was impotent . . . nothing more than an imaginary friend.
Questions from an Atheist
"Lurker said... Excuse me, Pastor Ray, I enjoyed your service, but I think that it is funny that you bring up the importance of da Vinci's notebooks.... are you aware that Leonardo da Vinci gained valuable knowledge about the workings of the human body by going against the will of the church and dissecting corpses, an act that would have surely landed him in a load of religious trouble? How do you feel about the church's involvement in holding back science and medicine, historically, as well as the role of religious groups holding back science today?"
Lurker...I think you are a little confused as to the biblical meaning of the words "the Church." According to the Bible it's those who love God, irrespective of their denomination. The Church is called a number of things in Scripture--"The Body of Christ," "believers" "saints" and Christians."
It was rather the Roman Catholic church (small "c") that held back science, imprisoned Galileo, was responsible for The Inquisition (the torture of Christians), The Crusades, etc. The Catholic church is still at it today. It is filled with pedophiles, officially rejects the authority of Genesis, and instead embraces the fairytale of evolution.
By the way, I love Roman Catholics as much as I do atheists. None of the above is untrue. Still, watch atheists call me a Catholic-basher/hater, because I mention these undeniable facts.
Distributed by www.worldviewweekend.com
Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.
Printer Friendly Version |
Return to home |
Send this article to a friend
As a former atheist, I can attest to the existence of God - I've met Him. It was recognizing order and arrangement in nature that brought me to a consideration of the existence of God. It was faith in Jesus Christ that brought me into fellowship with Him. Neither science nor religion can prove how the universe began, but an honest, objective examination of the evidence leads far more toward creation than evolution. Sorry guys, evolution is still a fairy-tale propounded by those who don't want to answer to God. "The fool hath said in his heart (there is) no God."
|Posted On: 04/12/10 10:53:19 AM
||Age 65, NC
Evolution has no explanation for man's beginning.
That's because evolution isn't about man's beginning.
See Ray, this is why you're a joke (outside the whole bananas thing) you don't even make an effort to understand what it is you're opposing.
Science cheerfully admits it has no idea how life started (there are many theories of course) but that doesn't mean your silly superstitions and mythical nonsense are true or even credible.
|Posted On: 04/08/10 09:28:23 AM
||Age 88, CA
Definition of evolution
Ray, you have been repeatedly told the definition of evolution. It starts *after* life has begun. It has nothing to do with the Big Bang. The term for life from non-life is abiogenesis.
|Posted On: 04/07/10 10:17:10 AM
||Age 40, CA
Click Here to Watch Now
Ebook + Hard Cover
Click Here for Details
Sign up to receive our
FREE Biblical Worldview Newsletter!