Man has invented many wild stories over the centuries, but few are more far-fetched than Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. The contrived plot is completely unnatural.
Do you honestly think the body of an ape could mysteriously evolve into a man? And on an even more ridiculous level, try to imagine human consciousness evolving from the brain of an animal.
I know. It's bizarre. more >>
Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham, who frequently speaks out against the growth of atheism in society, has said secularists borrow from the Christian worldview, despite rejecting God, since their worldview is "bankrupt, meaningless, and hopeless."
"How do secularists determine right and wrong? Bill Nye told me 'a consensus of the tribe,' but then it's all subjective. How can secularists talk about morality? Without an absolute basis where do they draw the lines? Who draws the lines? Ultimately it fails," Ham wrote on Facebook on Monday.
"Secularists borrow from the Christian world view — they borrow from the laws of nature, from laws of logic — they assume God whom they reject. The secularist worldview is ultimately totally bankrupt, purposeless, meaningless, and hopeless — purpose, hope and meaning are only found in Christ," he added. more >>
Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham said in a speech at Cedarville University, a private Baptist school in Ohio, that believing God created the world in six days serves almost as a "litmus test" on biblical authority, and warned that disagreeing with it is taking man's word over God's.
Ham said in his presentation on why it is important for Christians to believe in six literal days of creation that in a way it is "almost a litmus test on biblical authority."
"Talking about the six days, what we're really talking about is does it really matter what God says. It's an authority issue," he said on Thursday. more >>
A new fossil discovery makes it even tougher for Darwinists to explain the origin of life.
There's an old story about a chemist, a physicist, and an economist stranded on a desert island with nothing to eat but a can of soup. Puzzling over how to open the can, the chemist says, "Let's heat the can until it swells and bursts from the buildup of gases." "No, no," says the physicist, "let's throw it off that cliff with just enough kinetic energy to split it open on the rocks below." The economist, after thinking a moment says, "Assume a can opener."
There's more than one trade that deals in assumptions. The way Darwinists approach the origin of life is a lot like that economist's idea for opening the can. The Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection explains everything about life, we're told — except how it began. "Assume a self-replicating cell containing information in the form of genetic code," Darwinists are forced to say. Well, fine. But where did that little miracle come from? more >>
Evangelist Ray Comfort, who recently released his apologetics film, "The Atheist Delusion," sat down with Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist blog for an interview, and responded to the questions whether Christians must accept a literal interpretation of Genesis and what will happen if atheists are elected to political office, among others.
A Christian doesn't have to believe in Genesis literally to be saved, but you have to believe in the divinity of Jesus, commented Mehta, adding that the faith of a believer is not about evolution or creation.
By rejecting Genesis, you would call Jesus a liar, "because He said, 'In the beginning God created them male and female,'" Comfort responded during the interview, in which both Mehta and the evangelist discussed hard questions in a fairly friendly manner. more >>
After several universities and science institutes suggested earlier in August that billions of years ago Venus might have once supported life, much like Earth, Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham has argued that the Bible shows that God created life only on Earth.
"When we start with God's Word, we get an entirely different interpretation regarding Venus. Our Creator designed Venus on Day Four of Creation Week just a few thousand years ago. Since Earth, not Venus (or any other planet), was designed to be inhabited (Isaiah 45:18), our presupposition implies that we wouldn't expect to find life on Venus in the past or the present," Ham argued in a blog post on Answers in Genesis.
"Now this is entirely different from the evolutionary expectation, but the difference isn't in the evidence. The difference is in the worldview and presuppositions of the person interpreting the evidence." more >>