January 20, 2020
  • 7:43 pm Are All Religions Equal (Responding To Amazon Synod: Catholic Salvation)
  • 7:43 pm Daily Catholic Mass – 2020-01-09 – Fr. Wade Menezes
  • 7:43 pm Sicily – Adventure of Local Culture and Mummified Corpses!! Ep. 113
  • 7:43 pm People Who Took Pop Culture Way Too Seriously…
  • 7:42 pm Sultan Bahoo | Islamic Speeches | Ishq e Haqeeqi | Soul Satisfactions
Faith and facts (Creation Magazine LIVE! 7-17)


So, there’s faith, and there are facts. But how do they relate to each other? Or don’t they? How a biblical worldview makes the best sense
of the evidence, this week on Creation Magazine LIVE! Welcome to Creation Magazine LIVE! My name is Richard Fangrad. And I’m Matt Bondy. Last week we did a show that we titled, “Does
God exist?” And we talked about various evidences that
support the existence of the Creator/Redeemer God of the Bible. Now this week, while this is sort of a ‘part
2’ to last week’s show, we’re going to take a step back and look at
a more fundamental issue about how evidences, for or against a particular view, are produced
to begin with. Right, yeah. Basically, we’re going to look at the relationship
between faith and facts, presuppositions and evidence, and clarifying (hopefully clarifying)
some of those terms and explaining how it is that people develop the beliefs that they
hold, whether that’s a belief in the Biblical truths like God creating, or a belief in non-Biblical
ideas like evolution over millions of years. And at the end we’ll wrap it all up with how
an understanding of these things will enable you to share Christ more effectively. We’re going to be following mostly an article
by Don Batten from our Australian office titled, “Faith and facts, how a biblical worldview
makes the best sense of the evidence”. That’s right. Have you ever had anyone say to you, ‘Prove
to me that God created everything!’ or ‘Prove to me that God exists’? Again, evidence for God’s existence was the
subject for our show last week. Have you ever tried to do that, but then encountered
like a brick wall of resistance where the challenger dismisses anything that you have
to offer? Your friend might even say, ‘Well you just
have faith, you don’t have any evidence, I base my beliefs on evidence.’ Your hear those kinds of things. Yeah, so what’s going on here? Well, your friend is beginning with a different
worldview, an over-arching view of everything through which he or she interprets the evidence. The common non-Christian worldview in the West nowadays is secularism, or atheism, based on naturalism. Of course this has no place for a divine Creator,
definitely not the One revealed in the Bible, or the history of what God has done, as recorded
in the Bible. So as a result, your arguments they just seem
to fall on deaf ears. Yeah, and that can be really frustrating,
right? You might have, what you feel is great evidence
for God and creation, like we talked about last week, some great evidences there, but
again, it’s like you’re talking to a brick wall. So what’s happening? Why can *you* see the evidences for God, but
others can’t. Yeah, well we find that answer to that question
in Romans 1. See the Bible says that people have no excuse
for adopting a view that excludes God. You know in verse 18 it says, “For the wrath
of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who
by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.” OK, so they are *suppressing truth*. Did you get that? They suppress the truth about God’s existence. And verse 19 and following reveals exactly
what they are suppressing. It says this, “For what can be known about
God is plain to them,” Plain to them. Very interesting. “…because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his
eternal power and divine nature, have been…” Again here it says, “…clearly perceived,
ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” Yeah, so this verse is saying that the evidence
for God is *so clear*, it’s all around us, everywhere we look at creation, with powerful
telescopes deep into space, or powerful microscopes deep into the tiniest parts of living things,
it’s so “plain to them” that when they stand before God, they won’t be able to say, “I
didn’t see any evidence for you.” That’s what this verse is saying. Right, yeah. Now meanwhile, in the secular world, intelligent
people are feverishly trying to work out clever-sounding ways to try to explain how the universe made
itself, how life made itself, and the diversity of life-forms on earth made themselves. It’s a grand scheme of cosmic evolution. That’s what it’s all about, it seems. And there’s a *huge* amount of energy expended
trying to make that seem like they really know how these things happened. Yeah, that’s true. And you know, a lot of that may be even in
an effort to convince *themselves*. But it’s not a massive *conspiracy* to deliberately
censor the evidence that God created. They just honestly think it’s wrong. Yeah, that’s right. They claim, over and over, that this is the
‘scientific view’. You’ve all heard that, of course! But everything making itself from nothing
contradicts something that’s affirmed by every scientific experiment ever done. And that is, at its very core, science operates
on the law of cause and effect; that things don’t happen without something sufficient
to cause them to happen. But that ‘minor point’ is kind of overlooked. And we’ll continue with that thought after
a short break. ‘Mud cracks’, as they are commonly called,
form when muddy sediment is exposed to the air and dries out. This causes the mud to dehydrate, shrink and
crack. Some Bible critics claim that mud cracks disprove
the global flood, because they are supposedly found throughout the geological record, and
therefore imply a series of prolonged periods of drying out, instead of one great watery
cataclysm that laid down most sedimentary layers. However, this argument is far from ‘rock
solid’, because true mud cracks are easy to confuse with cracks formed by other mechanisms
that don’t involve a period of drying out. For instance, it is well known that structures
resembling mud cracks can form underwater. Moreover, research suggests that true mud
cracks could develop within hours. So flood sediments, briefly exposed with tidal
movements as the waters rose, could shrink and crack very quickly. Thus cracks in mud don’t disprove the flood! To find out more from Creation Ministries
International visit our website, creation.com OK, so if you just tuned in, this week we
are talking about faith and facts, and sort of pulling back the curtain a bit to reveal how people
come to hold the beliefs that they do. We are talking about presuppositions here;
fundamental assumptions, or axioms, that people bring to the evidence, and which they use
to interpret it accordingly. Now it’s very important to remember, especially
as you’re sharing Christ with someone and pointing out evidences for God, that every
person brings a worldview to the table when considering the origin of pretty much everything. That’s right, yeah. We all have the same facts in the present
that we interpret according to an assumed history of the origin of everything, either
that things self-created somehow, or that God created them. So, it’s not ‘science versus religion’
or ‘facts versus faith’ but one faith versus another faith. You know, it’s very important, and can be
quite helpful when witnessing, to show someone that their view, whatever it is, it’s not
‘just the facts’, but they’ve brought certain assumptions to the table, for which
they have no evidence, and that their presuppositions determine how they interpret the facts, which
they then claim are evidences for their worldview. That’s right, yeah. Biblical creationists interpret the facts,
in other words all the data in terms of the axioms revealed by Scripture: creation about
6,000 years ago, the Fall bringing in sin and death, and a global Flood. From different axioms are deduced different
world histories to explain how the facts came to be. Yeah, that’s right. So all the data from geology, biology, the
fossil record, astronomy, and everywhere else, it will be interpreted according to that history. So, the facts will be interpreted and explained
within the history that we believe is the true history of the universe. And evolutionists do exactly the same thing. They will interpret all the facts within the
history they believe to be true. For example, over the past decade and a half
or so, more than 40 instances of soft tissue in dinosaurs has been found, some incredible
discoveries, including blood vessels, blood cells, different kinds of dinosaur proteinshave been analyzed and even dinosaur DNA has been discovered. Mary Schweitzer and her crew there. But since the history of dinosaurs that evolutionists
believe includes them dying out about 65 million years ago, these facts *must* be understood
and interpreted according to that version of history. That’s gonna be a challenge! Absolutely, yeah. And that’s just one example of some facts
that are extremely difficult to fit into that millions of years history. And there’s a boat load of others. You know, in reality, evolution is a historical idea deduced from the assumption of materialism or naturalism. That’s the idea that matter is all there is. In creationist circles, this understanding
about the importance of presuppositions in the origins debate has been loosely termed
‘presuppositionalism’ (and that’s to distinguish it from ‘evidentialism’ which
presumes that the evidence speaks for itself). And that’s been very significant in advancing
the creationist cause. Yes it has, but it can be taken too far. Some speak almost as if the evidence doesn’t
matter at all, that it’s just a matter of interpretation: ‘Same data, just different
interpretations.’ This view can quickly morph into sort of a
post-modernism, where ‘it’s all in your head’ and all we can hope to do is work
on changing the person’s worldview so that he or she can begin to see the same evidence
in a different light that is compatible with the Christian worldview. That’s right, and people who prefer this
view often recommend that approach, rather than dealing with the creation-evolution issues. It involves pulling the philosophical rug
from under an unbeliever. Yeah, in fact some even go so far as to attack
‘human logic’, saying that man’s truth, logic, and meaning *differ* from God’s. And they reason that the original sin causes
completely depraved thinking that unregenerate man (or non-Christians) can’t think *any*
logical truths. But, if that’s true then it would wipe out the clear teaching of Romans 1:18, that we just read and following. If people suppress the truth in unrighteousness
(v.18) they must, at some level, know what truth is in order to suppress it. And furthermore, Scripture says that they’re
“without excuse” (there in verse 20) for denying that God exists. But if they can’t see it because they just
can’t think clearly enough, then they would have an excuse. And also, in 2 Peter 3 we read that “in
the last days scoffers will come” denying that God created everything and that He destroyed
the world in the Flood of Noah. It says that they “deliberately forget”. So here also, they’re not ignorant of the
truth; they suppress it. It’s *wilful* ignorance, not just ignorance. God doesn’t condemn people for what they
don’t know, or don’t perceive, but for *wilfully* going against what they *do* know; which is
that He exists. And that’s sin. So the Bible teaches us that some fundamental
truths about God, and what He has done, His works, are *known* by the un-believer, which
he or she suppresses. And we’ll add more details shortly. The Genesis Account is the “Rolls Royce”
of creation books. It’s a thorough, verse-by-verse analysis
of the first 11 chapters of Genesis, revealing what the text means. Unlike most commentaries, it includes the
additional step of providing cutting-edge scientific support for the history recorded
in Genesis because its author, Dr Jonathan Sarfati, is a PhD scientist. Since science confirms the truths in God’s
Word, if both are properly interpreted, this nearly 800-page book makes a fantastic reference
tool for pastors or anyone wanting to know what Genesis really means. Order your copy at creation.com. On this week’s episode, we are talking about
faith, facts, and the evidence for creation that the Bible says is plain to everyone,
but some people suppress that truth. OK, let’s back up just a little bit. We mentioned logic and human reasoning a few
minutes ago, and this notion that “God’s logic” could be different than “human logic”. Right, OK. So, for all people to be able to see the things that
Romans 1:20 says they can see, it implies that there must be certain principles of logic
and reasoning that are universal, that God has built in to us. Reflecting on the writings of the great 18th
century Christian apologist Jonathan Edwards, Martin Murphy wrote, “The law of non-contradiction,
the law of causality, and the basic reliability of sense perception are three components necessary
to communicate truth.” Yeah, these laws of logic are embedded in
the created order, so they are revealed in the creation. Without all three of these, it wouldn’t be
possible to even cross the street safely. Now, Christians and non-Christians alike can
cross the street safely because God has endowed all people with these principles of reasoning. By the same principles, all people can also
understand propositional truths. Just thinking of chickens crossing the road… This logic is ‘built-in’. It’s a part of the way in which the creation
reveals the attributes of God as Romans 1:19 says. We might see this as part of what theologians
have called ‘common grace’ by which God blesses all people, both believers and non-believers. We have to get our understanding of how to understand the Bible from the Bible, that is, a ‘biblical hermeneutic’. But, how do you get anything from the Bible
without a pre-existing hermeneutic? That hermeneutic has to be rooted in the three
universal principles listed by Murphy, who we just quoted there. Theologian Herman Hoeksema put it clearly:
he said there is no separate ‘God’s meaning’ for words that’s different from ‘man’s
meaning’, and neither is there a ‘divine logic’ that is separate from ‘human logic’. He wrote, “Either the logic of revelation
is our logic, or there is no revelation.” That’s right, otherwise Scripture couldn’t
communicate God’s truth to man, as it says in 2 Timothy 3:15–17, “…and how from childhood
you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation
through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable
for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” So Scripture, breathed out by God, is *understandable*
by man to the point where, when God’s truths are applied to our lives we’re equipped to
do good works: we’re able to meet the demands of godly ministry and righteous living. Now, just to add a little complexity
to this subject today: it’s true that *apart* from God’s works we couldn’t think rational
thoughts; but people *can* think rational thoughts precisely because God has endowed
His creation with rationality; It reflects His very nature. Without this innate, this built-in logic or
rationality it wouldn’t be possible to live. And because of this, no one has any excuse. Right. We even see this logic in babies, who react
to impossible situations with surprise. For example, researchers showed pre-speech
infants balls bouncing inside a container with a hole where the ball could exit. When a ball appeared from the hole without
having travelled on a trajectory toward the hole, the babies were surprised. So they were thinking logically, despite not
even having any words to formulate their ideas. Another example of this is pre-school Japanese
children that have been shown to believe in an unseen intelligent creator of everything. Now this is in a culture where, you know,
it’s a Buddhist and Shinto culture, and the religions there of the adults, they don’t
have such concept of a Creator-God. So obviously the logic is *built-in* and the
conclusions from that logic, for example that God exists, have to be suppressed. OK, now let’s move on to something practical. All of this so far has been about what goes
on in our heads and defining various terms and certain things. Understanding these things, how do we help
someone realize that his or her worldview (or their religion) don’t measure up? Just asserting that ours is better isn’t going
to get us very far. It’s also not going to help by asserting,
as some do, that they have to accept our worldview (that the Bible is God’s revelation to man),
before they can think anything rational; especially since, as we’ve shown earlier, they clearly
can think rationally, even in infancy. No, you see we need to demonstrate that the
other person’s worldview doesn’t actually do a good job of accounting for the evidence. The evidence that we both have before us. In other words, the evidence matters. Yes, it does! A sound worldview, like the one that’s derived
from the Bible, actually accounts for what we see around us; there is a ‘coherency
of truth’, whereas we can show that in an atheistic view, for example, it’s incoherent. Yes, the well-known *non*-Christian philosopher
Thomas Nagel has acknowledged that the modern evolutionary view of origins is incoherent,
as commentator Andrew Ferguson noted, he said: “His [that’s Nagel’s] working assumption
is, in today’s intellectual climate, radical: If the materialist, neo-Darwinian orthodoxy
contradicts common sense, then this is a mark against the orthodoxy, not against common
sense. When a chain of reasoning leads us to deny
the obvious, we should double-check the chain of reasoning before we give up on the obvious.” Wow! Did you get that? It might take a bit for that to sink in. Let’s put it up again. So Mr. Ferguson is saying that Nagel’s working
assumption is *radical* in today’s intellectual climate. But when we read what the assumption is, it’s
not radical. It’s completely logical! Beginning after the colon there, “If the materialist
[he writes], neo-Darwinian orthodoxy…” in other words: evolution, “If [evolution]
contradicts common sense,” then you ought to stick with common sense. Well yeah. And then he says, “When a chain of reasoning
leads us to deny the obvious, we ought to question the chain of reasoning.” Yup, no kidding. But that kind of thinking is, apparently,
‘radical’. Yeah, it’s sad, but again, this reflects
Romans 1, where it says when people suppress the truth about His existence, God gives them
over to futile thinking. Verse 21 and 22 says: “For although they
knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, [because] they became futile
in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools,” They became fools. That is incredible. And you see that happening in large parts
of society today in the so-called academic world. Yeah, that’s right. You see it in the modern Western secular mindset
of cosmic evolution, that ‘everything made itself’, which is an astounding idea that
contradicts the most fundamental principles of science and rationality. Materialism and atheism fails at multiple
levels. Many atheists claim that science is the only
way of knowing, but since there’s no way for science to prove this, the claim itself
is incapable of being known to be true. So this position (the ‘scientism’ is what
it really is), it refutes itself. In other words, science cannot prove that
science is valid either way. The presuppositions needed for doing science
don’t come from science; they come from *outside* of science. They actually come from a biblical Christian
worldview. We did a show on that last year titled, “The
Biblical basis for modern science”, and, as much as the skeptics don’t like it, even secular
historians of science, who we referenced, can see that science flourished in a biblical
worldview. Let’s take a break. More on this topic in just a minute. Dropstones are rocks that have been carried
and dropped into finely grained sediment. For instance, icebergs can carry and drop
rocks on the ocean floor, to be covered by further sedimentation. Noah’s flood was a worldwide catastrophe
that deposited much of earth’s fossil-bearing rocks. However, within these rocks, we find what
appear to be dropstones. This is often interpreted as evidence of previous
ice ages. And since you can’t have ice ages occurring
during the flood, this has prompted some to claim that dropstones disprove Noah’s flood. However, dropstones can be formed by mechanisms
that don’t involve icebergs. For example, floating tree stumps can have
rocks entangled within them, which are then dropped on the ocean floor. Moreover, recent research in the journal “Marine
Geology” has shown that a large seaweed known as kelp has a surprising ability to
carry and drop sizeable rocks. So dropstones don’t disprove Noah’s flood. To find out more from Creation Ministries
International visit our website, creation.com Our subject this week is faith and facts. Now we want to define these things carefully,
especially the relationship between them, which can get quite complex. Right, and some say there is no relationship. That there’s the world of facts and science,
and then there’s the world of faith and warm fuzzy feelings, and the two don’t connect
at all. Hey, everyone ultimately lives by faith, even
atheists. We did a show on that a couple years ago,
it was titled, “Everyone lives by faith”, and we spent half an hour unpacking the different
kinds of faith that people hold. That’s right, yeah. The Atheists, the materialists, that is, people
who believe that there’s no supernatural anything, believe that our existence is a cosmic accident;
our origin ultimately depended on random events. For example, in biological evolution mutations
are random events. But, as the Christian apologist C.S. Lewis
pointed out, random origins wouldn’t give any basis for believing in reliable (in other
words non-random) thoughts about those origins. It’s a position that is, again, self-refuting. A very simple and productive tool to use to
determine which worldview, which belief system, is right, is, every time there’s some bit
of data, some fact, ask the question, which history fits best? Which history provides the best framework
for understanding that fact. That’s right, and there are many facts that just don’t
make much sense in an atheistic worldview: the existence of altruism (a selfless concern
for the well-being of others). That doesn’t fit well into a ‘no-God’ belief
system. Other things include the existence of love,
and intelligence for example. Also, the incredible design in living things
and the language code of DNA, I mean, it’s impossible to account for that without intelligent
design. Almost every biological feature, particularly
at the molecular level, shows irreducible complexity, where multiple complex components
have to be present for it all to work. Design is the elephant in the room for the
modern evolutionary biologists and every day the elephant gets bigger and harder to ignore. The more science discovers about the world
around us, the more it supports biblical history. That’s right, absolutely! We can also look at some of the overwhelming
evidence for the world-wide Flood of Noah, and see more and more problems with the billions-of-years belief system, like finding carbon-14 in coal of all supposed ages. I mean it just shouldn’t be there. And then there’s the fragile organic compounds
in fossils supposedly formed millions of years ago that we mentioned earlier. Well, we’ll be back with more in a short break. Creation magazine is a 56-page full-colour
family magazine that is an essential tool for anyone wanting to immunize their family
against the anti-biblical worldviews bombarding us from all sides. With no paid advertising, every page is full
of powerful articles, ammunition to intelligently discuss nature, history, science, the Bible,
and related subjects. Although written for laypeople, every effort
is made to ensure the content is technically accurate so that even experts are satisfied. And young children look forward to the section
written especially for them. Visit creation.com to get your subscription! Welcome back. We’ve been talking about the relationship
between faith and facts and how that relationship impacts a person’s worldview. We sort of highlighted the difference, a little
bit, between presuppositionalism and evidentialism. Our philosophical approach as a scientific
Christian ministry takes seriously and engages the evidence of the real world, while recognizing
the importance of presuppositions and a person’s worldview in interpreting it. Our position is perhaps best labelled as classical
presuppositionalism. Right, and this recognizes that, although
our understanding is seriously affected by our presuppositions, there is an objective
reality independent of what anyone might think (someone might not believe in the Law of Gravity, but they’re still gonna go splat if they jump off a cliff) And it also recognizes the importance of showing
that one worldview (biblical creation) and the axioms that it’s based on, enable a more
coherent and rational explanation of reality than another (like naturalism). And this approach has many benefits. One of the big ones is that it makes for an
effective witness. 2 Corinthians 10:5 says, “We destroy arguments
and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive
to obey Christ” So, we dismantle and destroy those falsehoods by showing that non-biblical
worldviews don’t work. Rather, facts *do* conform to a biblical worldview. We also strive to fulfil the command in 1
Peter 3:15: to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is
in you. As a ministry, our goal is to equip *you*
with the tools that you need to accomplish that. We connect with unbelievers, where they’re
at, and don’t insult them by trying to prove or imply that they can’t think any logical
thoughts whatsoever. And we don’t use esoteric philosophical
arguments that most people won’t relate to, and which can come across as avoiding the
evidence. Now, in all this, we recognize the vital role
of the Holy Spirit in enabling a person to change his or her attitude toward God. And that involves repentance and faith. That’s right, yeah. Apologetics can’t save anyone. It’s the powerful work of God, the Holy
Spirit, that can and does change minds, setting them on Christ. God uses apologetics to clear away the falsehoods
as He draws the sinner. Yeah, right in the parable of the soils, the
seed, or the Gospel, it only takes root, and produces fruit in the soil that is cultivated
and free of rocks and weeds. So apologetics, that means giving a defense
for the faith, it clears away those things that make the seed unfruitful. And that’s, of course the ultimate goal of
CMI, of this ministry. We produce tools, like this TV show, books,
videos, a massive online database of faith-building articles at creation.com there, and you can use those to equip yourself and then confidently witness to others. That’s right. So, we’d love to hear from you! If the show has helped you, and you want to
understand more about science or true history, then please write back to us at our feedback
section on creation.com. We’ll see you next week, and remember, Christianity
is an evidence-based faith. And science supports Scripture.

Jean Kelley

RELATED ARTICLES

16 COMMENTS

  1. Faithful-Honest&True. Posted on November 21, 2018 at 11:32 am

    Hitler Stalin polpot Marx and Evolutionary thinking
    Hitler used the German Word for Evolution 150 times in his Book mein kampf, He used Evolution to Justify the Vile Evil he did to the Jews, because if we Believe in a Creator who Created us in his Image and Likeness All Humans have Value no matter what Color shape or Size we are, he used evolution to show that some humans are Superior and that others aren't, that some people are higher on the evolutionary tree and others are lower on the Tree of life, Stalin, Mao, Polpot all the same, When Polpot was introduced to Darwins book that is when he developed his ideas of Urban Struggle then Murdered hundreds of thousands, Stalin was in a Christian School when he was introduced to Darwins Evolutionary ideas, he developed his ideas on CRITICAL THINKING after this, then went on to kill 10's of millions of people, Mao same thing, he read Darwins book then went on to murder 60 million people, Carl Marx same thing, Karl Marx even wrote a letter to Darwin saying how wonderful he was and how much he admired him. Evolution has been responsible for taking away the idea that All Human beings have intrinsic value no matter color size or shape, Evolutionary ideas take away Moralistic values and the sense of right and wrong, because if you're just an Animal that climbed out of the slime and evolved via naturalistic processes and that its all about survival of the fittest, than there is no Right or wrong, its all about survival of the Superior ones that out compete the Weaker less worthy ones, that which is right for you may not be right for somebody else, if I feel like murdering you than that is right for me because I am superior to you, and if I eliminate you I am simply helping the Human race to become stronger by getting rid of the genetically inferior out of the Gene Pool.

    this is the ultimate conclusion to evolutionary thinking, Evolution is pure evil straight from Satans mind to destroy Gods Creation, and lead us into hell. Teach people they're nothing but animals don't be surprised when they act like Animals.

    Religion starts wars
    "An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod's three-volume incyclopedia of wars, which chronicles some 1763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the Authors categorize 123 as being religious in Nature, which is an astonishingly low 6.93% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam, (66) the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23% "
    A large portion of the wars Christian's are and were involved in were defensive not aggressive". The vast majority of wars Muslims are and were involved in, Were Aggressive in nature not defensive.

    The cause of the vast majority of war death and suffering is, Non-religious people who think they're superior to everybody else around them who think they're more highly evolved
    &
    ATHEISTIC COMMUNISM! Is responsible for hundreds of millions of people going to an early grave.

    Thats 1763 Wars waged across human history, 123 are classed as being Religious, You Atheist Evolutionists belong to a dangerous Murderous cult called Atheism, How many people in Prison do you reckon are Religious Christians, more than 90% of violent criminals are, YES YOU GUESSED IT!! Atheists,, how many people in the violent street crime gangs are Devout religious Christians, You Atheists need to wake up, Teach people they're nothing but animals don't be surprised when they act like animals.

    Reply
  2. Comment Freely Posted on November 21, 2018 at 11:43 am

    Great news slaying the atheist dragon as always with science verses their atheist religiosity and paradigm.

    Reply
  3. Eric A Posted on November 21, 2018 at 2:50 pm

    Believing in god is not exclusive to understanding the age of the earth and evolution – most christians think the earth and the universe are billions of years old.

    Reply
  4. Eric A Posted on November 21, 2018 at 2:50 pm

    8:35 Mary Schweitzer says her research DOES NOT support a young earth.

    Reply
  5. 3x1TV Posted on November 21, 2018 at 4:12 pm

    hello 🙂 i have a question.
    I make some researches about theistic evoultion vs creation and one time i was thinking about the hedgehog, porcupines and their quills. if god created every animal as a vegeterian and the whole creation was good (1.gen),why he created the quills for defense? it doesnt make sense for me and in the web i hadnt found an answer.
    i think its a very good point in the theistic evolution and 6 day creation controversy. i hope i get some answers best regards 🙂

    Reply
  6. Daniel Carter Posted on November 21, 2018 at 6:40 pm

    Great show! I would love to see you adders the religious nature of any belief in "light years", since one light year would be nearly 6 trillion miles and our deepest space probe has not gotten one light day away from Earth in over 40 years of travel.

    Reply
  7. Smash Boy Posted on November 21, 2018 at 8:51 pm

    I’m gonna engage on a lengthy project in which I attempt to make a biblical case for Dual Aspect Objective Idealism by using Idealists’ go-to evidences from Quantum Physics and biblical creationists’ as well to argue for a biblical view for idealism.
    The reason is because over time, I have found Idealism to be more obvious and intuitive, like there has to be one fundamental substance in the world, and that’s a mental one (which even Genesis, John 1:1-3 and Hebrews 11:3 make it clear). Matter, spacetime and energy are emergent and many physicists from quantum gravity and relativistic quantum field theory are concluding. So what I do is connect these evidences to the design arguments and cosmological evidences from biblical creationists and show idealism is the most theologically, philosophically and biblically justified worldview. My radical theory is once biblical creationists accept that God’s way of creating was by speaking it out of existence, and thus an immaterial upbringing, then they admit that the most fundamental substance is immaterial and thus we live in a phenomenal world. Of course, it’s a project and it’s a homework I must undertake. Probably around Christmas and some weeks at summer I’ll get it working.

    Reply
  8. Mike Wilson Posted on November 22, 2018 at 4:43 am

    Yet ANOTHER outstanding video! You guys are truly inspired. I find myself really looking forward to your videos. God bless you guys and everyone that helps you!

    Reply
  9. el Posted on November 24, 2018 at 9:45 pm

    I didn't know about that Japanese study , do have a link to it ?

    Reply
  10. Phillip Jones Posted on November 25, 2018 at 5:18 am

    I accept what your saying as true but the worldview of the atheist or evolutionist does not give them any place to stand to use the laws of logic, as Richard Dawkins has said everything, "is the result of blind pitiless chance." If that is the case there is no room for logic within such a belief system. If they aren't to be contradictory they must eschew the laws of logic. Dr. Jason Lyle makes a very good case for this in several of his lectures.

    Reply
  11. Catholic Conservative Posted on November 29, 2018 at 10:18 am

    Christians argue from both faith and reason.

    Reply
  12. UnApologetic Atheist Posted on August 9, 2019 at 1:31 am

    So, how does Romans address those of us who were believers, but found the Bible to be contradictory to itself and the world we studied? I used to be a christian and apologist, but in depth Bible study and scientific research caused me to de-convert. How would you address those people?

    Reply
  13. Rick Knight Posted on August 11, 2019 at 3:12 pm

    What examples of faith can be used to help nonbelievers understand their worldview is based on faith?

    Reply
  14. atam mardes Posted on October 17, 2019 at 5:16 pm

    "The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible."
    Mark Twain

    Reply
  15. incredible gaming Posted on October 28, 2019 at 12:58 am

    love God love others

    Reply
LEAVE A COMMENT