Posted on 12/17/2004 2:13:45 PM PST by Rodney King
Bold letters are mine. I believe in Macro creation wtih micro-evolution, if that makes sense. What disturbs me is that this has to be the worst ever editorial in defense of creationism. It is embarassing and Farah is not doing us any favors
Why I believe in Creation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: December 17, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
I was stunned the other day when I asked evolution-believing listeners to my nationally syndicated radio show to call in and tell me why they believed.
"Just give me one reason why you accept the theory," I said. "Just give me the strongest argument. You don't have to give me mountains of evidence. Just tell me why I should accept it."
Not one evolutionist called in. How many listeners do you have? How many of them do you think are not Christians? Maybe that's why none called in.
Meanwhile, the phone banks lit up with dozens of evolution skeptics.
Go figure. For more than 40 years, evolution has been taught as fact in government schools to generations of children, yet there is still widespread skepticism, if not cynicism, about the theory across the country.
But, because of political correctness and the fear of ostracism, most people are afraid to admit what they believe about our origins. That's why I wrote my last column – "I believe in Creation."
The reaction to it has been unprecedented. While I expected mostly negative fallout, most letters have been quite positive. I'm sure that most of the people who take the time to write in are your readers, who are a self-selecting group
So, I decided to take this issue a step further. Since the evolutionists don't want to tell me why they believe in their theory, I figured I would explain why I believe in mine.
The primary reason I believe, of course, is because the Bible tells me so. That's good enough for me, because I haven't found the Bible to be wrong about anything else.OK, fair enough but...
But what about the worldly evidence?
The evolutionists insist the dinosaurs lived millions and millions of years ago and became extinct long before man walked the planet.
I don't believe that for a minute. I don't believe there is a shred of scientific evidence to suggest it. I am 100 percent certain man and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. In fact, I'm not at all sure dinosaurs are even extinct!
Think of all the world's legends about dragons. Look at those images. What were those folks seeing? They were clearly seeing dinosaurs. You can see them etched in cave drawings. You can see them in ancient literature. You can see them described in the Bible. You can see them in virtually every culture in every corner of the world. This is just silly. Absurd even. 5,000 years from now, should our ancestors assume that we had spider man and klingons simply because they are in our literature? Isn't it perfectly reasonable that a human who found a large tooth would dream up dragons?
Did the human race have a collective common nightmare? Or did these people actually see dragons? I believe they saw dragons – what we now call dinosaurs. Too bad we haven't found any fossils of two headed dinosaurs. The reality is that most of Dragon lore is of beasts that don't look like the dinosaurs that we have uncovered.
Furthermore, many of the dinosaur fossils discovered in various parts of the world were found right along human footprints and remains. How did that happen? I'm not sure i fully beleive him, but I think it makes sense that A. Dinosaurs walked all over the earth. B. Man walked all over the earth later. C. The kinds of conditions that preserve dinosaur remain are also likely to preserve human remains.
And what about the not-so-unusual sightings of contemporary sea monsters? Some of them have actually been captured. What? See monsters have been captured? Where? This is what I'm talking about folks. You can not make claims like this without backup and not think that you are coming off like a total loon.
There are also countless contemporary sightings of what appear to be pterodactyls in Asia and Africa. What? WHAT? Where? When? Says who? FARAH, YOU MUST BACK-UP EXTRAORDIANRY STATEMENTS!
You know what I think? I think we've been sold a bill of goods about the dinosaurs. I don't believe they died off millions and millions of years ago. In fact, I'm not at all convinced they've died off completely. Any bill of good we have been solved was presented in a better manner that your claims that we have captured sea dinosaurs.
Evolutionists have put the cart before the horse. They start out with a theory, then ignore all the facts that contradict the theory. Any observation that might call into question their assumptions is discounted, ridiculed and covered up. That's not science. Maybe, but your pathetic illogic and lack of backing up your incredible statements is worse.
How could all the thousands of historical records of dragons and behemoths throughout mankind's time on earth be ignored? Let's admit it. At least some of these observations and records indicate dinosaurs were walking the earth fairly recently – if not still walking it today. So anything that has been drawn must have once existed? Unicorns? Klingons? The crazy aliens that L. Ron Hubbard wrote about?
If I'm right about that – which I am – then the whole evolutionary house of cards comes tumbling down. Then please, where are these dinosaurs that we have captured and/or are still alive?
This is the evidence about which the evolutionists dare not speak.WHAT EVIDENCE?!
I believe in creation and adaptation of a given species. But this dude would not sway me if I was an evolutionist. Your bolded comments are a hoot.
Yes, that's what I mean by macro-creation with micro-evolution.
More tedious debate on evolution vs. cerationism. From what I hear most scientific evidence backs up evolution. I tend to believe in divinly guided evolution. But, so long as we agree that God was the director of our creation, does it really matter how He went about it? I have no problem with people who believe in some form of creationism, nor do I care if this popular view is presented in schools, so long as you present the mainstream scientific view (evolution) as the mainstream scientific view. But is it really that important whether God created the world in seven literal days or 15 billion years?
Right, I see your point. I am more concerend with Farah making everyone who believes in any degree of creationism look like a total fool.
I knew that. I use plain speak! ; )
"Isn't it perfectly reasonable that a human who found a large tooth would dream up dragons?"
One of the strange things I found about dragons, is there is more to the legends than typically assumed. From about 1500 and earlier, there are direct witnesses which often read like: "on the 13th of May, Hans of Lieder was walking the road to Liederhaus at about noon and saw a large dragon dead in a field. He...." Such stories (history?) are more widespread, specific (date, time and witness) and universal than most realize. They don't read exactly like legends--unless of course you assume a priori they are impossible. The idea that dragons and dinosaurs are the same actually makes a lot of sense...unless you insist on having an evolutionary perspective.
Even so, you have to admit that Farah makes some pretty extraordinary claims here.
Yikes. Maybe Farah needs to call Art Bell. Pterodactyls in Africa?
He's like this on many issues. A nice man, it appears, but a noodle.
(And I'm a barking moonbat 6-day creationist, too!)
| But is it really that important whether God created the world in seven literal days or 15 billion years? It is important because the discussion over HOW God created man eventually turns into a discussion of HOW you are to interpret the Bible. If you accept the theory that man was created over billions of years, you must also reject a multitude of other verses in the Bible as being literally true... and I'm not just referring to Genesis. |
I looked through a college level biology text recently that was admitedly by leftists pushing an evolutionary point of view. Which is fine, but for any attempt at even explaining the unknowns of biogenesis, which otherwise, given the marvelous complexity of their material one would think that question should just naturally arise....
Farah is a few sandwiches short of a picnic, and not just on this issue. WorldNet Daily, while having some decent columns by good writers, is often an embarrassment. I don't even go there anymore.
God created evolution as a method to allow life to change as the environment on Earth changes.
Creation is not in the Theory of Evolution.
There is no conflict between the Bible and science if the Bible is interpreted in a reasonable manner.
Since God created everything, including evolution; if you reject evolution, you reject God's Creation.
There is no such thing as Mendel's Law. Science doesn't prove Laws. The term "law" is an old fashioned reference to what is generally called a theory today.
However, some mathematical concepts are still called laws.
Biogenesis or abiogenesis is not in the Theory of Evolution.
...Which I don't think they ever will, because they would then understand where life "goes" knowing form whence it came.
I take that, and the millions of other "coincidences" in the "evolution" of our universe, as the emanating from the "mind" of God.
Best to you....
| God created evolution You won't find this in the bible... you'll find just the opposite... therefore, you must be talking about a different God. There is no conflict between the Bible and science if the Bible is interpreted in a reasonable manner. This is what it's really about isn't it?... you cannot see, therefore you cannot believe. Your statement makes it pretty clear that your faith in science is greater than your faith in God. By holding the written word of God subject to the rules of science, you in effect are stating that God is only what man can prove about Him. Science is limited to the physical realm, because the spiritual realm is not observable. God is Spirit. He spoke the physical realm into existence FROM the spiritual realm. The laws of science are limited to the physical realm. The spiritual realm operates above it. Since God created everything, including evolution; if you reject evolution, you reject God's Creation. If you reject the existence of the spiritual realm, you reject God. |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.