Updated 04:40 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009

Education|Wed, Apr. 22 2009 05:09 PM EDT

Creation Institute Sues Texas Edu Agency Over Alleged Discrimination

By Katherine T. Phan|Christian Post Reporter

Correction appended

A California-based Creation college is suing the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and some of its members for rejecting its application to grant a master's degree in science education.

The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) filed a federal lawsuit last week, alleging that THECB Commissioner Raymund A. Paredes and several Board members violated its civil rights to teach a religious-based view of science.

The suit claims that its graduate school degree program was rejected because it does not teach science from an "evolution-only" viewpoint.

In court papers, the school argues: "It is viewpoint discrimination for defendants to use their state offices, under color of state law, to withhold a government license (or other benefit), such as a THECB-issued Certificate of Authority, essentially because ICRGS has an unpopular institutional viewpoint (i.e. its Biblical creationist 'Tenets') that guides and informs its approach to teaching Science Education programs."

In a similar lawsuit filed in Texas state court, the school also names the Texas agency itself as a defendant alongside its members.

The legal action comes nearly one year after the THECB voted 8-0 to the deny a Certificate of Authority to ICR.

Despite receiving favorable recommendations by the Board's Site Evaluation Team and Advisory Committee, Paredes had recommended to the THECB to reject the license to ICR. The Commissioner argued that ICRGS did not demonstrate it met acceptable standards of science and science education, saying "religion is not science."

ICR has also submitted a petition to appeal the THECB decision that is working its way through Texas' Office of Administrative Hearings.

A Texas lawmaker, Rep. Leo Berman (R-Tyler) has proposed a bill that would allow the institute to offer the science degree without the coordinating board's approval. The measure, pending in the House Higher Education Committee, would exempt private, nonprofit educational institutions that do not accept state funding and state-administered federal funding from coordinating board rules.

The Institute for Creation Research began offering graduate degrees in California in 1981 where it received full authority by the state to operate its graduate school. The ICR is now is based in Dallas, Texas, while the ICR remains in Santee, Calif., where it currently offers the M.S. in Science Education through an online distance education program.

Its mission is to equip believers "with evidence of the Bible's accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework."

A footnote on the ICR's Web site states that the school currently offers an M.S. in Science Education only to qualified students who are not Texas residents.

"ICR is currently examining its legal options regarding how it can best serve the educational 'gaps' of Texas residents."

Correction: Saturday, April 25, 2009:

An article on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, about a lawsuit filed by the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) misstated the Calif.-based college's key claim. The suit claims that its graduate school degree program was rejected because it does not teach science from an "evolution-only" viewpoint, not because it holds an "evolution-only" view of science.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2
  • Sun May 03, 2009 8:32 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi johnzon,
    thanks for asking. Ok self defeating nature of philosophical naturalism.
    First let me say I am not talking about methodological naturalism: essentially the scientific method as a means of understanding and explaining the natural world.

    Rather I am thinking of the philosophical stance of materialism that nature is all that there is to reality and there is nothing beyond nature. The basic problem with this as a rational view of reality is that it in itself denies the possibility of reasoning.

    Here is how. Let us presume that nature is all there is and that there is nothing beyond or in addition to nature. Therfore all phenomena that are or could ever possibly be observed or occur are the result of natural causes. Natural causes are by definition non-rational. So for example all human thoughts are in fact the artifacts of non rational natural causes. Furthermore all human decisions are likewise artifacts of these same non-rational natural causes.
    So if philosophical naturalism is correct then no human thought (including naturalism)is rational nor can it be relied upon or legitimately argued as valid. The best that a holder of this position could say is that he/she believes that nature has caused them to believe that naturalism is true. Also of course if they hold this view then they must hold that all other views are equally valid (since they are equally caused by nature) and morally equivalent. Therefore someone who asserts naturalism as a world view can not without hypocrisy hold that those who believe otherwise are less intelligent of valid in their reasoning or beliefs.
    Also of course someone who asserts naturalism must accept that they are the philosophical equivalent of a zombie having neither reason, nor free will nor identity.

  • Sat May 02, 2009 11:16 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    viking

    <<self defeating nature of philisophical naturalism >>

    What is that?

  • Sat May 02, 2009 10:33 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi Ifeelfine,
    wondering what your thoughts were on the self defeating nature of philisophical naturalism as a way of understanding human existence vs. methodological naturalism.

  • Sat May 02, 2009 10:26 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi all,
    Uke you stated
    Even Einstein admitted that our theories come totally from our opinions, and all finds we make are interpreted by those preconceived ideas. Just creationists are honest enough to admit it.

    Are you saying that creationists "admit" that creationism is "totally from our opinions" rather than revealed truth of god.

    Just to be clear I support belief in theistic evolution but felt maybe you got carried away in your argument and made statements you don't actually believe.

  • Sat May 02, 2009 12:37 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    feelfine, ukmike, knows nothing of science, evolution or the meaning of a scientific theory, so wouldnt count on anything of sustance on your question of a scientific theory of evolution from him...

  • Fri May 01, 2009 8:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ukulelemike: Since you seem so intent on your position - please lay out the scientific theory of evolution as you understand it (very briefly) and please lay out the scientific theory of creationism as you understand it. Thanks.

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ukulemike,

    I have to tell you, you really are not worth the time to get into a discussion of science, you have no idea whatsoever what science is and is not. My advice to you is to stick to your religious studies, science is not your bag. To prevent further embarrassment, you should not comment at all on science and please do not attempt to explain anything about Einstein because you have not a clue. I really pity your state of ignorance on the topic of science. I assume you dont use the modern conveniences that science and its theories have brought us because "all theories come totally from our opinions" , oh wait, of course you do, you are on the internet. Isn't amazing how "opinions" can bring us such marvelous technologies such as the internet and modern medicine.

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Another good book is "Bones of Contention". A good look at the various fossil humans found throughout time. Lays out very well how many early discoverers like DuBois fudged on their finds to fit into the time they thought they should, to make them seem more than they were.

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Comes Johnzon, let those nucleotides make themselves, just like they did in evolution.

    Yes, I'm serious, science has not proven evolution-it cannot, because, by it's very nature, it can't be proven. If man somehow reproduces evolution by putting the right things together, it still took a person to put the things together. When you can take a bunch of nothing, set it alone, and watch something be produced, then you'll have proven evolution.
    See, there's the problem-evolution by it's very nature MUST happen all by itself-anything that a scientist does automatically pollutes the experiment.
    As for fossil evidence, all of that completely dependes on your views. Even Einstein admitted that our theories come totally from our opinions, and all finds we make are interpreted by those preconceived ideas. Just creationists are honest enough to admit it.

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    desl49, I've read portions of Strobel's books and find them very well written and researched and well grounded in the Word of God.

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer, Bellhaven and Mathetes...thank you! I am a burgeoning biology/nursing student. Offering the full Gospel is so vital but being ready to give a good word 'in season'is important. Let us not forget the Scripture even points out 'not every thing is written in this book'. Meaning(?)perhaps the infinite detail of HOW our Lord performed the mirable of creation, establishment and order is NOT written. Contemporary folks like the Lee Stroebel series of 'The Case for...'scientists and The 'Expelled' documentary scientists/researchers are so amazingly coming to Christ through revealed knowledge of His creation around us more and more BECAUSE they are becoming aware of how things work. They are challenging the false religions of humanism, aethism and evoluntionism. Hurray! I am so excited! Praise God!

  • Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:32 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Belhaven, have you ever read books written by Creationists like Henry Morris, John Whitcomb, or Jonathan Sarfati? Now I don't claim to be a scientific expert, but what I read from these men and other creationists certainly appears to be well researched and documented on their part.

  • Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:22 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    <<I find it interesting that articles of this nature bring out the atheist trolls. Their prideful attitudes, arrogant words and totalitarian mindset demonstrate that their "fairy tales" seem incapable of making them into better people. If atheists are so right, why are they so obnoxious? Even monkeys have better attitudes. The attitudes of atheists are better evidence for devolution rather than evolution.>> -philomath777

    Philomath,

    Religion is not science. It is really that simple. Science is about understanding how the universe works. Creationism has produced no information of any kind regarding this subject. This is not a judgment against religion, it simply a statement of differences.

    Calling people trolls because you cannot answer their arguments does not help your case. Calling them arrogant because you can not understand what they are saying doesn't help either. Insulting people, comparing them to monkeys, and then claiming that they are obnoxious, begs a look in the mirror.

    Every time I read about a new creationist lawsuit trying to undermine science, I donate money to the NCSE. Lying to children about science is criminal.

  • Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I worked on the industrial side, first in aluminum anodizing finishes and later waste reclamation. God had a different plan for my life: now I'm a teacher. Those industrial days seem like a lifetime ago.

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:32 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    mathetes

    My background is chemistry, I am involved in making modified nucleotides which are components of DNA. What area were you involved in?

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:00 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Michaelj,

    In responding to: "There is no error in the Word of God",
    you wrote: "I noticed God left out a lot of information when it supposedly inspired ancient sheep herders about the universe."

    Check the dictionary again. An error is not the same as an omission. If you're alleging there's an error, show it. If you're arguing the Bible has omissions, please name any book that does not have omissions.

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:53 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Johnzon,
    I used to be a lab tech. What does your lab do?

    And in case you missed it, UMike asked you a question:
    "Johnzon, what scientific area is YOUR PhD in?"

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:01 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

    ukemike

    <<So far, science has not proven evolution>>

    Your joking, right?? The theory of evolution is supported by tremendous amounts of data, you might want to read up on it sometime.

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:34 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 5

    Now, see, here's the problem with all the evolutionist whiners who fear having their divine right of rule in things scientific threatened:

    So far, science has not proven evolution. In fact, the further they go, the more problems they are faced with, and thus, evolution must be relegated to remain in the "scientific theory' aisle at the local library.

    Bu what really galls them, is that there are actual scientists, who have studied the exact same principles and theories, at the same schools as their precious evolutionary scientists, who have graduated with highg honors and degrees from the same institutions of learning, whose findings have taken them in a diffeent direction. Instead of seeing random accidents of nature, they have accepted, against the generally accepted norm, that there is obvious design in nature, from the astrological scale, down to the microscopic. There are impossibilites in the random idea of a Big bang theory that cannot be overcome, save to hope that the magical ingredient of 'billions of years' might either solve the problem, or at least give the excuse of why they can't prove it.
    Macro-evolution has never been seen nor proven in any area of evolutionary study; micro evolution, or changes within a species, has, and that's fine, but it's not evolution.
    The bottom line is, creationists take a much larger risk in what they study, because 6,000 years is not much time to work with-we have more to prove in our theories, while anytime an evolutionis can't back up what they say, it is blamed on 'billions of years'. neither can be proven without a doubt, but considering that there are real scientists with real degrees from real colleges who, through real scientific study, find enough evidence to follow it, even at the cost of their careers and reputations, tells me there is more to it that just wacko Christian righty's with an unscientific agenda.

    Johnzon, what scientific area is YOUR PhD in?

  • Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:19 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    I find it interesting that articles of this nature bring out the atheist trolls. Their prideful attitudes, arrogant words and totalitarian mindset demonstrate that their "fairy tales" seem incapable of making them into better people. If atheists are so right, why are they so obnoxious? Even monkeys have better attitudes. The attitudes of atheists are better evidence for devolution rather than evolution.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:15 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Question:

    Where would these creation "scientists" get work? Who would hire them besides a burger joint OR a creation institute? As a lab manager, I wouldn't hire them to clean glassware.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:08 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "....violated its civil rights to teach a religious-based view of science."

    Religious based view of science...LOL. What is a religious based view of science?? I didn't know science had a religious based view. In my many years of scientific study, I never thought of religion being a part of science. Perhaps those in the religious community need to look up the definition of science, they dont seem to understand.

    I say grant them their masters program, just not in science, but religion studies. Religion has NO place in the science classroom for one very simple reason - it is not science.


    I like this part:

    "Its mission is to equip believers "with evidence of the Bible's accuracy and authority through scientific research"

    So, does that mean they are going to show data that the earth is really only 6,000 years old which refutes the thousands of pieces of scientific data from a multitude of scientific disciplines that tell us Earth is billions of years old. Can we please see that data.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 7:28 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "the same academic credentials"

    How many of these creationists graduated from Harvard?

    Zero.

    How many of these creationists graduated from MIT?

    Zero.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 7:09 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "many of the people associated with Institute for Creation Research and Answers In Genesis hold the same academic credentials as those who promote Evolution." Flagged as inappropriate, but here it is again. Anyone who believes the entire universe was magically created 6,000 years ago is insane. hide

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:25 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    "There is no error in the Word of God."

    I noticed God left out a lot of information when it supposedly inspired ancient sheep herders about the universe.

    Any mention of galaxies?

    No.

    Any explanation for why the moon gives off light? (The reflection from the Sun's light.)

    No.

    Any explanation of comets, asteroids, how star systems form? Anything?

    No.

    The truth is either Mr. God was scientifically illiterate, or the book was written by ignorant people who were just making everything up.

    Compare the Bible to any 21st century science textbook. There's no comparison. The Bible is for First Graders. The science textbooks are for university students.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "visit Answers In Genesis and Institute for Creation Research's websites and check out the credentials of their staffs" Sorry mister. If someone believes the entire universe was magically created 6,000 years ago, that person is insane. hide

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:15 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "you will see many if not most have science and other professional Masters degrees and Phds from very reputable institutes of learning."

    Have they made any scientific discoveries?

    I didn't think so.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:37 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "The suit claims that its graduate school degree program was rejected because it does not teach science from an "evolution-only" viewpoint."

    This attitude on the part of TX is no different from the Church and Galileo. There can be no "only" standpoint and still be science. Science is about challenging what we think to be right in order to learn more about what is right.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:20 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

    talltree, I would encourage you to visit Answers In Genesis and Institute for Creation Research's websites and check out the credentials of their staffs and you will see many if not most have science and other professional Masters degrees and Phds from very reputable institutes of learning.

  • Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:35 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    this is truly a joke. creationism is NOT science; it is philosophy. HOW can anyone seriously contend that they obtained a master's degree in science education 1. online, 2. without any lab equipment and 3. while denying 99% of the wealth of scholarship on evolution and true science that sometimes even predates one's birth. once again christian radicals are trying to blur the fine lines of legality and academics.

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:41 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steveh20

    Here is an article that talks about the effects of the moon on tides, and fishing in general.

    The Tides and Moon Phases Really Effect the Fishing in Grand Isle, Louisana
    http://www.outdoorblogging.com/the-tides-and-moon-phases-really-effect-the-fishing-in-grand-isle-louisiana/

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:37 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Steveh20

    When I made the comment that the moon affects biological systems I made it based on the comments of a few people who have noticed that at a full moon things are different.

    One example involves fishing. In my group at work many years ago we had a pot luck lunch. One of the guys who did a lot of fishing volunteered to make gumbo. In his gumbo he included crabs (in put them in whole which freek out our Section head). He made the comments that crabs had more meat during a full moon and the least amount during the new moon. This caught my interest and I wondered if that was true. Since he did a lot of fishing for crab I assumed he knew what he was talking about.

    Another involved crime that occured on a full moon. I was living in a rooming house at the time and their was a resident who had picked up an female aquaintance on the street and brought her to his room. He tried to assult her and the assult was observed by someone from the outside because he had his blinds up and the lights on so any out side could see in. The police were called. After they dealt with the incident and handcuffed the guy the police mentioned that they were having a very busy night as they seem to have every time there is a full moon.

    Just recently I was talking with a police officer at McDonalds. I mentioned to him what these other police officers had said and he responded that it does seem to be true but they don't know why.

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Grace2,

    I think you are right. If it is, he doesn't even know what his "tells" are, which is good for us so we know who we're dealing with. If he is not Jerry, then Believer is right: two peas in a pod.

    God bless you all.

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:36 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Thank you Lonestar, can't say it applies to me at all, but appreciate you passing it on.
    S

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:42 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Grace2, if he's not he could sure pass for his twin brother!!

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:13 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 3

    Kudos to the ICR graduate school for filing these lawsuits. It is disgusting that a state agency would discriminate against ICR because of their different intrepretation of scientific "facts" and their adherence to the Bible which is true in all matters it addresses including science, geography, and history. The scientists at ICR are highly trained in their disciplines and most hold a terminal degree (Ph.D., M.D., etc).

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:43 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    michael-j are you the same guy who has posted under all kinds of names like pro-science, oldguy, Jerry2, Dwen, Howard, ccccc, ERV, asdfg, xxxx, yyyy, and etc?

  • Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:39 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hi Steve

    Here is an article on the effects of moon phases on people.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_mood_swings_be_connected_to_the_moon_phases

    LoneStar

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:01 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    pvl, just because some who profess to be Christians choose to pick and choose what they will and won't believe or obey does not negate the fact that the Bible in its original autographs is the God-breathed, inerrant, plenary, Word of God, literally God's Word.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:58 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    pvl, it appears in this case it is the evolutionists who are forcing their views on others to the point their scared to death to even allow evolution to be questioned by students in science classes or allow them to hear any other alternatives. My point has and will always be why not allow for both the theory of evolution and creation to be discussed in the classroom, I mean if the theory of creation is such a fluke bring it into the classroom and show it for the fluke theory it is!!

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Lonestar,

    I've always read that passage to mean that the sun would have rule, or dominate with it's brightness, over the day and the moon would rule, or dominate with its brightness, over the night.
    But many scientist do concur that the gravitational pull of both the sun and the moon do have an affect on animals and people, as we are made up of 70% water, and water is extremely vulnerable to the effects of their gravitational pull. Especially on full moons when the sun and moon are at opposite sides of the earth pulling from each side.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:31 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Hello Lone star

    What biological systems does the moon have power or control over over? Do you mean that some organisms use it in their mateing cycle etc.. I'm intrigued, but am always willing to learn more.

    Thanks

    Steve

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:22 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    michael-j

    Genesis 1:16 - "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."

    "light" in this verse, Gen 1:16 is translated from the Hebrew word mawore which means a luminous body or luminary; in the abstract, light (as an element) and figuratively, brightness. So "light" would be referring to the illumination that the sun and the moon gives.

    "greater" is a relative term and doesn't have meaning until you compare it with something else. To an inhabitant on the earth who is observing the brightness of the lights in the sky, it is obvious that the sun is of greater brightness than the moon and the light from the sun and and the light from the moon are both greater lights compared to the stars.

    The sun does rule the day. "rule" means to have power over. It has control over most forms of life, the climate, and weather. The moon rules over the night. It has power over the oceans, like tides, and it also has control or power over biological systems.

    There is no error in the Word of God. The error lies in the foolish thoughts and interpretations of godless men.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:59 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "ICR is currently examining its legal options regarding how it can best serve the educational 'gaps' of Texas residents."
    -
    Leaving Texas would be a great beginning. There's too many people in that state who don't need any more gaps in their education.
    -
    So, if this outfit were to issue a master's degree, what vocational pursuit would the recipient be qualified for? Stocking shelves at Wal-Mart? Inflating tires at Firestone? Perhaps they could be investment brokers for Bernard Madoff, eh? Or schedule appointments for Sarah Palin.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:51 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    Micheal of course it's a man author book. Why would a divinely inspired book contain so many passage that it allows the books believers to cafeteria shop for passage that allows them to do what they will.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:46 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 3

    I yearn for the day when Christians cease forcing their will on others. I really doubt the Lord freed them from oppresion for them to become the oppressors. Christisns ARE NOT under attack in America, to be saying so is self serving lie.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:09 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 5

    michealj, no you've just validated your ignorance with regards to creationism and those scientists who support it.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:27 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show The problem with bcoontz, believer, and others here, is they get ALL of their scientific information from compulsive liars. Their other problem is their refusal to study scientific discoveries as explained by the scientists who made those discoveries. All their information is filtered by Christian extremists who don't know what they're talking about and who have never discovered anything. hide

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:24 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 1

    bcoontz, I could care less about your childish belief in a magic fairy. What interests me is your total ignorance of science. I've met young children more scientifically literate than the Christian extremists on this blog.

  • Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:21 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    I'm here again because I want to demonstrate beyond any doubt the Bible has errors. This error is so obvious even the worst Christian extremist should be able to understand.

    FROM TODAY'S NEWS IN A TEXAS NEWSPAPER:

    The Emmy-winning scientist angered a few audience members when he criticized literal interpretation of the biblical verse Genesis 1:16, which reads: "God made two great lights - the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars."

    He pointed out that the sun, the "greater light," is but one of countless stars and that the "lesser light" is the moon, which really is not a light at all, rather a reflector of light.

    A number of audience members left the room at that point, visibly angered by what some perceived as irreverence.

    "We believe in a God!" exclaimed one woman as she left the room with three young children.

    http://www.wacotrib.com/news/content/features/stories/2009/04/23/billnye.html

    Any Christian who isn't totally deranged (and who is honest) will admit this is an error in the Bible.

    So why trust anything else in that worthless book written by ancient people who knew nothing about science.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • DVD
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links