Category Archives: Theism

Atheism, Ayn Rand, Bigotry and Hate, Christian Libertarianism, Cosmology, Evolutionism, Francis Schaeffer, Free will, Freedom, King James Bible, Liberate your Mind!, Materialism, Monism vs Dualism, Nihilism, Psychology, Revelation, Theism, There is a God!

Ayn Rand Didn’t Understand Capitalism. Or Altruism. Or Christianity. Or Reality. JOE CARTER. Acton Institute Powerblog

Saturday 16 November 2013 Tim 1 Comment

rand self

There once was a time when I was enamored by the philosophy of Ayn Rand. An émigré from the Soviet Union, the influential novelist and founder of Objectivism had an enthusiasm for market capitalism and a hatred of communism that I found entrancing. I discovered her two major philosophical novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, in my early years in college as I was beginning to wake from my enchantment with liberalism. I was instantly hooked.

Rand’s ideas were intriguing, yet she harbored sentiments that made it difficult for a young Christian to accept. She was an atheist who despised altruism and preached the “virtue of selfishness.” She believed that rational self-interest was the greatest good and sang the praises of egoism.

In retrospect, it appears obvious that any attempt to reconcile these ideas with my orthodox evangelicalism was destined to fail. Still, I thought there might be something to the philosophy and was particularly intrigued by her defense of capitalism. My understanding of our economic system was a rather immature, though, and I failed to recognize that Rand had an almost complete misunderstanding of capitalism. She confused self-interest with selfishness.
Read more >>>Here<<< Read More of my criticisms of Objectivism below... We are not Robots Ayn Rand. We are Moral Agents.

Higher Values than Wealth or Self Interest

Classic Libertarian Idealism Cares (Objectivism is as silly as Socialism)

Christ-likeness…Heroic Self-sacrifice… John Shear throws himself in front of a horse to save little girl. (Ayn Rand’s Objectivism blows!)

Jefferson’s God. The Rock upon which Liberty is founded. (God save us from Atheism!)

Faith, Science, and Reason. The Pomposity of Atheism.

God is the Font of Morality. Why Objectivists Hate Ron Paul. (updated)

The Failure of Objectivist Libertarianism.

Thorns in the Flesh.

Materialism renders Man Nought. Meaning-less, Value-less, Right-less

Atheism has no basis for Rights… or Morals.

Atheism, Christian Libertarianism, Compulsion, Constitution, Cosmology, Democracy, Easy Listening, Francis Schaeffer, Freedom, Hypocrites, Indoctrination, Justice, King James Bible, Liberate your Mind!, Libertarianz, Live Like It's Legal, Materialism, Merciful Grace, Nanny State, Nihilism, Prohibition, Propaganda, Protestant Reformation, Regulation, Religious Toleration, Sheeple, Slashing Bureaucracy, Slavery, Socialism, Theism, There is a God!, Totalitarianism, Truth, Tyranny

Spiritual Warfare. The Great Controversy.

Saturday 16 November 2013 Tim Leave a comment

evo christ war

This is an old and valid….(though a tad simplistic I admit) Christian argument which is simply showing that the Modern regression in morality is founded upon both the acceptance of Atheist evolution and the rejection of Bible based theistic Christianity.
I say it is simplistic because some of this ‘liberalism’ has in fact been real progress because it has removed bad Laws… and as such should in fact be supported by Christians… like the End of Prohibitions on Homosexuality, etc…)
Many Christians have been taught by ignorant and bigoted preachers that such reforms are evil…. when infact Christianity proper is not about oppressing sinners and infidels. That has historically been a great evil which resulted from the merging of Church and state…. Constantine…. etc… which was a deviation from what Christianity truly is… a voluntary association… not A political lobby for Power.

This is not to say that Christians ought not to participate in the democratic process, but that they must take care to be on the side of Liberty and justice… not tyranny and oppression.
They must seek to be ‘the salt of the earth’ not by despotic Laws…. but by Example and preaching Christian values and inspiring voluntary endorsement of their beliefs.

This picture also attempts to show Christians why they must be prepared to directly confront the False religion/ pseudo science of Evolution…. because it is the foundation of so many lies and Great evils.
It was when I realised that Evolution was Bogus, that I became much more open to the truth of the Bible…. because The idea of God crating Mankind began to make much more sense.

Atheistic Materialistic Naturalistic Snowmen.

Thursday 10 October 2013 Tim 1 Comment

1385293_658330927531417_355358686_n

Bigotry and Hate, Evolutionism, Faith, Materialism, Nazi Thugs, Nihilism, Science, Theism, There is a God!

“Moral Teacher’s more important than Physicists”

Tuesday 17 September 2013 Tim 1 Comment

Saith Einstein.

apple terrorists

Science is Amoral in the sense that it works for whosoever employs her… without regard of the Righteousness or Wickedness of her Employer’s cause …
That is why Ethics are more essential than Technology.
As Einstein said… “Moral Teachers (like Jesus) are more important than Physicists”
And as the man who understood the horrific global implications if the Nazi’s should have time enough to get command of the power or the Atom…. He would know!
Ironically It was Hitler’s Immoral Anti-Semitism which caused Einstein to quit Germany and emigrate to America….
Poetic Justice!

Atheism, Bogus Science, Cosmology, Epistemology, Evolutionism, Faith, Genesis, Indoctrination, Intelligent Design, Keeping It Real, Liberate your Mind!, Materialism, Metaphysics, Philosophy, Physics, Revelation, Science, Theism, There is a God!

Richard Dawkins Produces Another Theist: Proslogion

Friday 30 August 2013 Tim 1 Comment

laura_keynes

Dr. Laura Keynes grew up in Cambridge, arguably the intellectual center of the United Kingdom. She studied at the University College of Oxford on a full-ride scholarship and ended up earning a Doctor of Philosophy degree. Her doctoral thesis was on epistemology, the study of knowledge and justified belief. As her last name indicates, she is the great-grandniece of the famous economist John Maynard Keynes. She is also the great-great-great-granddaughter of Charles Darwin.
Why am I telling you about this young lady? Because she recently wrote an article entitled, “I’m a Direct Descendant of Darwin…and a Catholic.” Now the title didn’t surprise me at all. I know a lot of Catholics (and even more Protestants) who believe in evolution. Indeed, one of the leaders of the Intelligent Design movement, Dr. Michael Behe, says:1

You can be a good Catholic and believe in Darwinism. Biochemistry has made it increasingly difficult, however, to be a thoughtful scientist and believe in it.

However, as I read the article, I couldn’t help but smile. You see, Laura was raised Catholic but drifted away from the faith after her mother became a Buddhist and her brother rejected all organized religion. By the time she was studying for her Doctor of Philosophy degree, she was an agnostic. During that time, however, Richard Dawkins had opened up an international dialogue on the existence of God with his thoroughly awful book, The God Delusion. Well, Laura decided to read Dawkins and his fellow New Atheists, and she says:

I expected to be moved from agnosticism to atheism by their arguments, but after reading on both sides of the debate, I couldn’t dismiss a compelling intellectual case for faith. As for being good without God, I’d tried and didn’t get very far. At some point, life will bring you to your knees, and no act of will is enough in that situation. Surrendering and asking for grace is the logical human response.

I don’t think that’s the response Dawkins and his colleagues were hoping for. The entire article is worth a read, because it really shows how an intellectual person should respond to what the New Atheists have produced:

I read central texts on both sides of the debate and found more to convince me in the thoughtful and measured responses of Alister McGrath and John Cornwell, among others, than in the impassioned prose of Hitchens et al. New Atheism seemed to harbor a germ of intolerance and contempt for people of faith that could only undermine secular Humanist claims to liberalism.

Notice what she did. She read the central texts on both sides of the debate. Most people don’t do that, but it is the most important thing a real intellectual can do. I suspect that working on her dissertation made her realize that there is no such thing as an unbiased argument. All authors start with their preconceived notions, which color the way they view and present the evidence. As a result, the only way to come close to getting an unbiased view of the debate is to read from both sides. By doing that, you will hopefully be able to start seeing how the various authors are “coloring” the evidence, and that will allow you to remove some of the “coloring” and look at the evidence a bit more clearly.

When Laura did that, she saw something that should be immediately obvious to those who read both sides of this debate: the New Atheists are full of bluster and bravado, but their arguments are incredibly weak. Those who have responded to the New Atheists (at least the ones she read) provide a start contrast. They are calm, measured, and rational in their response. According to her, this contrast helped to demonstrate that the majority of the evidence clearly goes against the atheist position, and the bluster of the New Atheists is an attempt to cover up this inconvenient fact. As a result, she returned to the faith of her childhood.

Creationism or evolutionism: the theory of evolution refuted.

Sunday 18 August 2013 Tim 1 Comment

dali-egg2

Update…

Though I cant profess to being a privileged member of any high society of Academia the responses I have received on two Facebook pages which claim to be forums for discussion on the rationality of the Christian faith and Creationism…. are very telling…

Facebook page 1….

JL wrote… Big Fail by you Tim Wikiriwhi

CRA wrote… I was looking for two facts. Instead I found a video link. Video blogs are almost always both poorly done, and set up by people who are neither able to write nor reason well, so I see no reason to waste time watching.
If you have any actual facts to present, please present a cogent argument with references from credible sources. When speaking on scientific topics such as the theory of evolution, an example of a credible reference would be a link to research published in a peer-reviewed journal. Links to personal or advocacy sites, accounts of personal revelation, unpublished research (or research published anywhere other than in a peer-reviewed journal), scriptures, and personal opinions are not evidence.

Tim Wikiriwhi (me) wrote… 1,2…. non-answers.
The video was very short and presented two facts Cynthia….not personal opinions
yet all you do is make a general smear against ‘video blogs’… and prove you are too lazy to watch the video… yet still feel vindicated making a comment…. sharing with us *your un-referenced personal opinion*.
Sort of hypocritical dont you think?
May I suggest you only comment on things you actually bother to examine?
You waffle on about ‘credible references’… as if an argument requires the signature of one of your ‘priests’ …

ZH wrote…. He makes a series of misrepresentation of evolution. Around 0:24 seconds into the short video, he made his first misrepresentation. He claims that evolution claims life came from non life. This is false, as evolution never claimed to have authority on our origins in a cosmological sense. It’s intent is to explain the complexity of life and what lead up to what it is today.
A second later, he makes the claim that it is a random process. Most of evolution is in fact the complete opposite. Though there is no grand exterior force manipulating what happens, we know that mutation often occurs as the result of natural selection. A process in where traits best suited for one species typically carries on to later generation, as those carrying those traits have a higher likely hood of procreation.

JP wrote… What facts did your video present?

BB wrote… Yes what facts were those Tim Wikiriwhi?

“IF living organism cannot produce new genetic information.’

IF. Which is an assumption.

Life has never been observed to come from non-life?

Is that the other one?

CRA wrote…. Unlike you, Tim, I’m haven’t made any claims about presenting “facts” that supposedly refute an established scientific theory. When a person makes such claims, he must be prepared to be held to a high standard. You would seem to be lacking in that preparation.
I promise you that if I ever claim to have scientific information to offer, it will be backed with credible references. At the moment, I am quite comfortable with the knowledge that the lack of communication skills and coherence displayed on your comment are wholly consistent with my overall opinion of most video bloggers. You fail to provide the promised “facts,” instead attacking someone who has expressed a willingness to read them if you will but write them out and show your proof.

ZH wrote… XXXXX: I noticed he made no attempts at explaining why what he perceived about evolution to be true. He uses instead vague generalization and intentional misrepresentations of evolution, to undermine the complexity of evolution . Thus shallowly “winning” without having to actually say anything.

SH wrote… What exactly do they mean by “new genetic information”? The term is always defined very vaguely in these arguments.

Also, even if all current models of Abiogenesis were proven unworkable, populations will still change over successive generations. Evolution will still happen.

To be clear, Evolution-theory does not need Abiogenesis(life coming from non-life), it just needs living organisms.

Face book page 2….

TBI said… OMG! That two minute vid just disproved evolution with its deep insight into scientific theory!!! Oh, wait… No, it didn ‘t.

AM said … LOL!

AM said… I watched it. As a Christian, it disturbed me. Dishonesty (especially lying about science and terminology) is not good for the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. The video was a sad rehash of the usual pseudo-science factoids/myths. Truly pathetic.

ACC says… Shaw Wow. That video just made me devolve. Nonsense.

SW says…. that’s an impressive amount of lies and stupidity crammed into a single 2 minute video.

JA say’s…. Seen that video some time ago – it is as crassly ignorant now as it was the first time.

TB says… Even the title of the video demonstrates a logical fallacy; false dichotomy.

****My answer***** which follows I submitted to FB2 yet exposes all these replies from both FB pages…

Tim Wikiriwhi….
“Hahaha… 1,2,3,4,5,6,7… replies All devoid of rebuttal!
This is when you Atheists are supposed to say…. “Oh here is an example of life from Dead matter…. and here is proof of how A fish got the genes to grow lungs and legs…”
You all are Emperors with no clothes….”

….And that folks is how the Atheists deal with two absolute scientific facts they cant refute….
By Slander and denial.
Evolution cannot even get to first base… let alone second base…

Atheism, Bogus Science, Indoctrination, Materialism, Satan Laughing Spreads His Wings, Science, Theism, There is a God!

The Folly of Scientism. Austin L. Hughes

Saturday 3 August 2013 Tim Leave a comment

scientism-refuted

The Folly of Scientism
Austin L. Hughes

When I decided on a scientific career, one of the things that appealed to me about science was the modesty of its practitioners. The typical scientist seemed to be a person who knew one small corner of the natural world and knew it very well, better than most other human beings living and better even than most who had ever lived. But outside of their circumscribed areas of expertise, scientists would hesitate to express an authoritative opinion. This attitude was attractive precisely because it stood in sharp contrast to the arrogance of the philosophers of the positivist tradition, who claimed for science and its practitioners a broad authority with which many practicing scientists themselves were uncomfortable.

The temptation to overreach, however, seems increasingly indulged today in discussions about science. Both in the work of professional philosophers and in popular writings by natural scientists, it is frequently claimed that natural science does or soon will constitute the entire domain of truth. And this attitude is becoming more widespread among scientists themselves. All too many of my contemporaries in science have accepted without question the hype that suggests that an advanced degree in some area of natural science confers the ability to pontificate wisely on any and all subjects.

Of course, from the very beginning of the modern scientific enterprise, there have been scientists and philosophers who have been so impressed with the ability of the natural sciences to advance knowledge that they have asserted that these sciences are the only valid way of seeking knowledge in any field. A forthright expression of this viewpoint has been made by the chemist Peter Atkins, who in his 1995 essay “Science as Truth” asserts the “universal competence” of science. This position has been called scientism — a term that was originally intended to be pejorative but has been claimed as a badge of honor by some of its most vocal proponents. In their 2007 book Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized, for example, philosophers James Ladyman, Don Ross, and David Spurrett go so far as to entitle a chapter “In Defense of Scientism.”

Modern science is often described as having emerged from philosophy; many of the early modern scientists were engaged in what they called “natural philosophy.” Later, philosophy came to be seen as an activity distinct from but integral to natural science, with each addressing separate but complementary questions — supporting, correcting, and supplying knowledge to one another. But the status of philosophy has fallen quite a bit in recent times. Central to scientism is the grabbing of nearly the entire territory of what were once considered questions that properly belong to philosophy. Scientism takes science to be not only better than philosophy at answering such questions, but the only means of answering them. For most of those who dabble in scientism, this shift is unacknowledged, and may not even be recognized. But for others, it is explicit. Atkins, for example, is scathing in his dismissal of the entire field: “I consider it to be a defensible proposition that no philosopher has helped to elucidate nature; philosophy is but the refinement of hindrance.”

Is scientism defensible? Is it really true that natural science provides a satisfying and reasonably complete account of everything we see, experience, and seek to understand — of every phenomenon in the universe? And is it true that science is more capable, even singularly capable, of answering the questions that once were addressed by philosophy? This subject is too large to tackle all at once. But by looking briefly at the modern understandings of science and philosophy on which scientism rests, and examining a few case studies of the attempt to supplant philosophy entirely with science, we might get a sense of how the reach of scientism exceeds its grasp.

World’s Hottest Porn Star gives life to God.

Sunday 28 July 2013 Tim 5 Comments

Jenna

Once named by Maxim as one of the hottest porn stars in the world, Jenna Presley performed in more than 275 pornographic films, stripped for money, sold her body in prostitution, abused drugs and even tried to kill herself – but now the young brunette stunner says she has found her true calling in life.

“Thank you, Jesus! I found Him, I’m home!” she declared, announcing that she has become a born-again Christian.

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/07/worlds-hottest-porn-star-gives-life-to-god/#XuesGZ9LbZs41mjO.99

Hyperlink… http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/07/worlds-hottest-porn-star-gives-life-to-god/#XuesGZ9LbZs41mjO.99

kiki-600x399

True Christian Modus Operandi. Jesus Loves Porn Stars.

rachellllll

The False Deity Called Evolution.

ellie-goulding-1024x682 (1)

Way too Starry for Atheism.

Divine Aesthetics.
Some people may think I’m being a Knob when I say that the sight of a Beautiful woman is proof to me of God’s existence, yet I am being absolutely serious! My argument is It is too incredulous to believe that it is a mere coincidence that there is such beauty in the world and that I just so happen to have the eyes to see it and the mind to appreciate it. To me this ‘symbiosis’ smacks of design… and causes an urge to ‘Worship’ the creator of this *Art*.

And I am alluding to more than just the beauty of Woman… I am saying *Beauty* itself, and my ability to experience it is evidence of God…. beautiful beaches…. sunsets… too prove this.
Thus I am saying that my sense of beauty here is more than just a genetic/ sexual urge… Thus I find a Female butterfly to be Beautiful… and a Male Peacock… and this carries over into sound, taste, smell… etc.
Why I make this point Re : Beauty is because before I was a theist, it never occurred to me just how spectacular was this relationship between the beauty of Creation, and my ability to perceive it. after my conversion it dawned on me that all this could have existed and yet if I was ‘born a tree’ I would never have appreciated any of it! Never tasted a peach… never smelled a rose…. never herd a birds song… never appreciated the sun setting over the ocean… Ie My perception was heightened as to just how miraculously God had made me… so as to be able to apprehend his greatness as an artist… The beauty of God.
On a facebook tread discussing my assertions an Atheist tried to say my ‘feelings’ and sence of beauty were merely a product of ‘Nurture’… not nature.
I retorted… Give me a break! What I am talking about is something which is a fundamental capacity designed in human beings to the degree that it’s absence would be a mental handicap… nothing to do with cultural relativism.”

To me Naturalistic theories not only struggle to explain The happy conditions of Life on Earth, they really become absurd when you realise that the Atheist must believe that not only is every beautiful thing merely the product of a giant explosion, but that our sense of beauty itself must be explained thereby… as merely another property of matter.

When I was an Atheist myself, I was blind to this reality, and it was not until I have converted that the true implications of how many things which pass as common experience actually testifies to Intelligent design.
Prior to my faith, I Saw beauty, I tasted beauty, yet took it for granted… as mundane.

Tim Wikiriwhi.

970752_396918493748094_240536832_n

There is a God! (part1)

good

Hell is for the Self Righteous, Heaven is for Sinners.

Abiogenesis, Atheism, Bogus Science, Break on through to the other side, Consciousness, Cosmology, Deism, Evolutionism, Faith, Intelligent Design, Keeping It Real, King James Bible, Laws of Nature, Liberate your Mind!, Materialism, Monism vs Dualism, Revelation, Semantics, Theism, There is a God!

A Mathematician Debunks Atheist Evolutionism. Lennox vs Dawkins

Thursday 25 July 2013 Tim Leave a comment

awwwe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJYAnpMKuu4

I love how Dawkin’s hangs his disdain for the word ‘faith’ … according to his own warped definition of the term. And this is a fundamental Sophist Semantic Delusion… an anti-concept purposely designed to make Faith look ridiculous. Lennox annihilated Dawkins puerile argument that belief in a creator tends towards and is a product of Intellectual sloth! He was able to show that not only was it Faith in a God of REASON which spurred the idea that the universe was *Rationally constructed and therefore comprehensible, But also that increasing scientific wisdom and discovery increases reverence for the Creator!

Dawkins contradicts himself? One minute he is saying Theism is Anti science… and intellectual sloth, the next he is admitting that Theism / creationism is making Scientific claims! Haha!
Dawkins has shot himself in the foot here. It is one thing to say theistic Faith is Anti-science, and quite another to say it is Bad science.

The greatest aspect of the Theism/ atheism debate is that Atheists are delusional about holding a monopoly on science… because of their worship of Naturalism… They think *their myths* are somehow ‘more rational’ because they are cloaked in naturalistic jargon…. and conversely, they foolishly assume that because Theists believe in a Super- Nature above and beyond the laws of physics that they have utterly abandoned all claims to science… and that their notions of creationism… because they involve intelligence which is not a naturalistic law, or property of matter…. are somehow more absurd that their own far fetched Fantasies. And yet Design is by far the most Rational reason for the existence of such things as man than the blind forces of Nature, and belief in a Super nature does not negate belief and understanding of mundane nature also … atheists really are pitiful creatures!
“The fool hath said in his heart there is no God”.

Robo Fish Reality.

Wednesday 24 July 2013 Tim Leave a comment

mec fish

My wife bought my son a pair of Robo-fish for the bath. They are quite incredibly fish-like… swimming about just like Goldfish…Looking at them I realised that it would be easier for nature to make those robofish than to make a single celled protozoa… and yet are our oceans filled with clock work fish???? No!
The only way a Robo fish has managed to become a reality… in this type of universe… is via Intelligent design and manipulation of Matter and physics and chemistry.
This is because the bind forces of nature cant make complex things like Robo fish… or single celled organisms!
Thus the theory of Naturalistic Abiogenesis and evolution are 100% falsified.
They cannot account for the existence of Fish … robotic or otherwise.
How the Robo-fish came into existence…by design… also clearly demonstrates the only plausible way *Real fish* and every other biological wonder came to be…

Kids love these things!

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”
St Paul Romans 1vs 20

ikT0OnAqi.6E

The Fossil Record *Proves Evolution to be false* because *Fish Remain Fish*. See the Fossilized Coelacanth above (dated at 400 million years )
In the 2oth century it was argued by Evolutionists that these ancient fish were ‘primitive’ and that they had died out ‘millions of years ago’…. how embarrassing for them however that they were discovered to be alive and well… and *unchanged* despite the tens of millions of years these so-called ‘scientists’ have dated their fossils.
These Fish are part of a massive number of creatures, and plants that have been called ‘living fossils’ because they are easily identifiable as being living representatives of Fossils said to be sometimes hundreds of millions of years old.
In complete contradiction to the theory of Evolution Their genetic integrity has remained intact… despite exposure to the elements and their struggle for survival through the eons that are supposed to have elapsed.

Wikipedia says… “Coelacanths belong to the subclass Actinistia, a group of lobed-finned fish related to lungfish and certain extinct Devonian fish such as osteolepiforms, porolepiforms, rhizodonts, and Panderichthys.[5] Coelacanths were thought to have become extinct in the Late Cretaceous, around 66 million years ago, but were rediscovered in 1938 off the coast of South Africa.[6]

The coelacanth was long considered a “living fossil” because it was believed to be the sole remaining member of a taxon otherwise known only from fossils, with no close relations alive,[5] and to have evolved into roughly its current form approximately 400 million years ago”

*****

All this exposes the great fallacy and absurdity of the pseudo-scientific theory of Evolution, and the *Truthfulness* of the Biblical principle of *Kind after its kind* clearly enunciated in the Book of Genesis.
And it should not be any surprise to know that *Darwin was completely ignorant* of Genetics… the true science of heredity… which was discovered by one of his contemporaries….a Christian Monk named Geggor Mendel… yet because the world was too busy following Darwin… that for decades they did not grasp the Great truths that Mendel had discovered that are today known as ‘Mendel’s Law’.

This is why there is no such thing as ‘Darwins Law’… and why today… despite 160 years … Darwins ideas are still only defined as being ‘a theory’… *Not a fact*… and indeed with the advance of Science… such as the electron Microscope… Scientists have discovered just how fantastically complex living things really are… even the single celled organism is fantastically complex… and smacks of Design… Nanno- Technology!
The Myth of the spontaneous generation and evolution of ‘the simple cell’ is today *Far harder* to believe than it was for the scientists of Darwin’s day because the Facts have gotten harder to reconcile with his theory… not easier.

Coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae), close-up

A living Coelacanth.

Why then has not the Evolution been abandoned?

Simply because of the fanatical Atheism and absolute hatred of the only rational and alternative interpretation that is in harmony with the evidence… That Living this … look designed…. because they are designed… By God Almighty… exactly as the Bible says.

It was the realisation that Evolution was a gigantic lie… and that The Bible was true… scientifically speaking… that converted me from a militant Atheist to a Bible believing Christian over 30 years ago… and in that time, I have studied all the so-called arguements that are put up to prove the Bible wrong… and they *all fail*.

The word of God remains sure… like a Rock.