Skip to main content

Hi to my Forum Friends,

The article below is taken from the Creation Science Evangelism web site: http://www.drdino.com/index.php

Hopefully, it will give you another view of Creationism and Science -- and how we should view both.

Bold emphasis in the article below is mine.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CREATION ISN'T SCIENCE Author: Jonathan Sampson http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=55

Many evolutionists and atheists alike have - throughout history - shunned Scripture and the lessons learned therein by claiming that Creation Science isn't testable, repeatable, observable, and so forth. As this is true about certain aspects of Creation Science, this is also true about certain aspects of Evolutionary "Science." One cannot deny the overwhelming amounts of assumptions and un-justifiable dedications that materialists demonstrate.

Both Creation and Evolutionism start with philosophical assumptions:

Evolutionists (traditionally) start with the assumption that God has no intervention in this world. This isn't a testable conclusion; they didn't come to this conclusion by science.

Creationists have the philosophical position that God has partaken in the history of this earth, and that He has revealed the True history of the earth through His infallible Word.

As you can see, both Creation and Evolutionism start with philosophical premises. There are many aspects of the Creation Theory that are indeed testable also. For instance, the Bible states that earth was created roughly 6,000 years ago (1), in six literal days (2). Evolutionism claims that the earth came into existence some 3-5 billion years ago (3), over a very long and tedious process of formation. Both of these teachings can be tested to some extent. It's important to also emphasize the knowledge difference between fallible man (who is a fallen creature), and the Omniscient God, Creator and sustainer of all.

When man inspects the earth, the biosphere, the world around us, we formulate hypothesis as to how things came to be as they are today. After data is brought in and analyzed, we can test our hypothesis and see what outcomes we're given. Creationists already have the Truth; the earth was created roughly 6,000 years ago (1). Evolutionists wish to construct their own truth; the earth formed slowly over billions of years. Both of these are subject to the same scientific method. When we observe the outpourings of data rendered from the science, we can see that the evidence greatly supports the idea of a young-earth (6,000 years old).

Now, we can see that both Creation and Evolutionism have non-testable aspects about them, and also testable aspects about them as well. Creation Science Evangelism wishes not to invite Creation into public schools, but only to have incorrect information extracted from taxpayer-purchased textbooks. Schools have a legal, as well as moral obligation to remain truthful to our students. Unfortunately, many schools today have veered from this path and have accepted voodoo-science as part of their curriculum. Material such as the gill slits, the horse evolution, the human evolution, the evolution of the giraffe, and so much more are still presented to children as facts, and done so dogmatically.

When will America - as well as the rest of the World - wake up and smell the indoctrination. Millions of children everyday are being presented with information that is testable, has been tested, and is now scratched off as untrue in the scientific literature. Even our SAT's are presenting incorrect information to our fervent studiers. Both Creation and Evolutionism are testable in certain areas and un-testable in others, both have been tested, and only one prevails - Creation. We were fearfully and wonderfully created, and we will soon stand before He that creates and give an account for the life we lived. Will you be ready? (4)

Additional Information:

1. These figures are found by adding up the genealogies found in scripture, and by Jesus' teachings of man's history.

2. Exodus 20:11, Mark 10:6, Matthew 19:4, and Genesis 1...

3. This number varies slightly with different evolutionists.

4. We're all guilty of breaking God's law. We've lied, we've stolen, we've disobeyed God, we've left Jesus' teachings, and we've followed after worldly things as opposed to spiritual things. On judgment day we will stand before the Creator of everything and we will give an account for that which was done. Will you be found innocent or guilty? Heaven or Hell? If you've not allowed Christ to be the substitute for your punishment, you will pay for your own sins - an eternity in Hell. But Christ came to earth, lived a perfect life, and paid our debts for us so that we might be reunited with the Father.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We all should be open minded, look at both sides, and see how it all fits. While I know that our atheist Friends will never accept any view except SCIENCE ONLY -- GOD, NO! But, that only shows that they are wearing blinders and will not allow themselves to see and acknowledge the wonders of God that we see all around us each and every day.

I am reminded of the poem "God Doesn't Believe In Atheists" by Dr. Kent Hovind

God does not believe in atheists
His presence from creation is quite clear
God does not believe in atheists
It takes a fool to tell him he's not here

God believes atheists can get born again
And become a new creation,
But they'd best admit the world around them first
And ask for their salvation
But to only cry, "Recycle!" is the worst

God believes atheists do have certain rights
To seek and search the scriptures
It says, "Come now, let us reason" that's for them
But it doesn't give them reason to
Make up what God is saying
Until it's no true benefit to them.


God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill Gray
billdory@pacbell.net

Alabama bred,
California fed,
Blessed by God to be a Christian American!

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 1_-_Bible-History-Book-1a
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Mr. Bill,

First, "evolutionists" have nothing to say about the origin of the solar system or the Earth. That is the realm of astronomers, geophysicists, nuclear physicists, and geologists.

Second, you are entirely correct. Creationism is many levels down from modern science as an explanation of the natural universe and our Earth.

The current state of the art of earth science and cosmology is so far advanced from the ancient myths of uninformed shepherds it might as well be the difference between radiological surgery and beating evil spirits out of the sick.

Only some of us choose to accept the cumulative knowledge of thousands of people/years of demonstrable science rather than the psychedelic rantings of dishonest and/or deluded mystics.

DF
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Mr. Bill,

First, "evolutionists" have nothing to say about the origin of the solar system or the Earth. That is the realm of astronomers, geophysicists, nuclear physicists, and geologists.

Second, you are entirely correct. Creationism is many levels down from modern science as an explanation of the natural universe and our Earth.

The current state of the art of earth science and cosmology is so far advanced from the ancient myths of uninformed shepherds it might as well be the difference between radiological surgery and beating evil spirits out of the sick.

Only some of us choose to accept the cumulative knowledge of thousands of people/years of demonstrable science rather than the psychedelic rantings of dishonest and/or deluded mystics.

DF
Hi to all,

What better proof of my statement that atheists have tunnel vision and can only see one sign: SCIENCE ONLY -- GOD, NO!

My, how sad it must be to be so spiritually blind. How sad.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • College_Prof-TEXT-1
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Mr. Bill,

I'll put my vision up against yours any day. The pity is yours.

DF
Hi Deep,

I will go you one better. I will put my God up against your god any day. And, my God always wins. Sorry, the game is already over -- and our Coach, Jesus, is waiting in heaven for all believers to join Him soon.

Want a ticket to my game? You will find it at Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB
What evidence of a 6000 year old earth? Scant, trumped up, and the desperate last ditch attempts of the those who desire to wish -- perhaps "pray" would be better here? -- away the Enlightenment
That is what kind of evidence there is, supported by people who are one step away from lifetime membership in the Flat Earth, the Hollow Earth and Non-Heliocentric Societies, that is what kind of "evidence" it is.
Their evidence would have us believe that a talking snake made babies into moral degenerates from birth, that a terrorist squad leader could command the sun to stand still, and theocracy with laisser faire capitalism is the chosen system of an occasionally anthromorphic deity, except when he isn't anthromorphic, but merely a spirit who has lost his taste for blood and burning flesh for condemning those not born in selected areas of the earth to an eternal bbq.
ASDDFHSJHIKIQLWM, msfnaswodas. Amen. I was just typing in tongues. Now where is that copperhead they saw the other day beside the new bridge over Second Creek? I need to test my faith.
quote:
Originally posted by alpp:
Quote:
________________________________________________
When we observe the outpourings of data rendered from the science, we can see that the evidence greatly supports the idea of a young-earth(6000 years old).
________________________________________________

What evidence is that?
Hi Al,

Visit the web site and find out about it. That is why I always give URL links -- so folks can check what I give them.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Billy, this presented to us is nothing more than an opinion piece, somehow published as an example of the "poor Christians being denied an adequate place at the debate table through ungodly philosophy."
This is a pretty old talking point by now. Most who keep track of the loonie right with Bibles know what they are by now.
I actually took the trouble to find out about your boy Sampson (Jonny, not the one with Delilah) and here is his own testiimony:

"Hello everybody, I'm Jonathan Sampson. My story begins during the middle of 2002. I was living in Illinois, working a security position for a local power plant, and listening to Catholic/Protestant debates on SermonAudio in the evenings - I love controversial topics. One night, I noticed a subject that I had never heard of before, "Creation / Evolution." I had to check it out.

Within a year or so I had found myself working with Dr. Hovind in Pensacola, FL. During this time I had also began reading every creation book I could get my hands on, and watching every presentation on the subject of Creation and Evolution that I could find. Within a few months of relocating, I had the ability to sit-in on an Evolution lecture at the local University. Afterwards I found myself in an exciting exchange with two professors, and the local atheist coordinator of the event. I wanted to talk Science, they wanted to bring religion into the discussion. It was that night that I decided, "This is what I love. This is what I want to do for the rest of my life."



God has since blessed me with an unquenchable thirst for Science. I am an avid reader of Scientific American, and Discover Magazine. I have numerous secular books on genetics and Biology in my personal library, and I spend too much time reading Science articles online at places like Wikipedia, TalkOrigins, Answers in Genesis, ICR, and TrueOrigin. I can honestly say that I find nothing more rewarding than to defend God's Word, and teach the true purpose of Science - to bring God the glory for his creation."
Here
is the link. I note several troubling things as one who teaches and researches research techniques: firstly, popular magazines and Wikipedia should not be touted as the beginning of one's quest for "expert" status, rather pitied. Reading a bunch of creation books is a good start, as one must do extensive reading before even considering oneself an expert in anything, however, it is rather odd that books in the gentleman scholar's personal library are those which might refute the Dr. Dino answers. What has the gentleman done to reinforce his floors, pray tell? How much money does he have to spend on literally thousands of books on genetics and evolution? Why limit oneself to books, when the majority of new research is not presented in books, rather in journals? Why just subscribing to a standard scientific journal is a luxury that few outside the teaching of said subject or libraries can afford to accord themselves!
Perhaps he just avails himself to a local academic library?
While we do not doubt the earnest zeal of Mr. Sampson, we also do not doubt the same zeal of those who argue over where the True Holy Grail is located: Roswell Chapel, not in a vault in the Dom in Aachen as others argue.

Finally, the use of footnotes is very funny, as the footnotes are presented mainly to give the little opinion piece a "scholarly tone" to those awed by such things as a footnote!
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Mr. Bill,

First, "evolutionists" have nothing to say about the origin of the solar system or the Earth. That is the realm of astronomers, geophysicists, nuclear physicists, and geologists.

Second, you are entirely correct. Creationism is many levels down from modern science as an explanation of the natural universe and our Earth.

The current state of the art of earth science and cosmology is so far advanced from the ancient myths of uninformed shepherds it might as well be the difference between radiological surgery and beating evil spirits out of the sick.

Only some of us choose to accept the cumulative knowledge of thousands of people/years of demonstrable science rather than the psychedelic rantings of dishonest and/or deluded mystics.

DF
Hi to all,

What better proof of my statement that atheists have tunnel vision and can only see one sign: SCIENCE ONLY -- GOD, NO!

My, how sad it must be to be so spiritually blind. How sad.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


And you are even more preposterously limited when you hold a sign that says GOD ONLY -- SCIENCE NO.

My how sad it must be to be so realistically blind.

Have a blissed day, Bill.
quote:
Visit the web site and find out about it. That is why I always give URL links -- so folks can check what I give them.


Bill,

Do you know you are promoting the views of a person who used the bible as his basis for avoiding paying taxes? He is currently serving time in our luxurious federal prison system.

Are you aware that even the "Answers in Genesis" people (that you normally use for your foundation for your ridiculous claims) has distanced itself from him?

From Wiki:

"Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American Young Earth creationist and conspiracy theorist currently serving federal prison time for felony convictions regarding tax and fraud related crimes. He is famous for excessive accounts of tax-fraud as well as creation science seminars, which aim to convince listeners to believe in biblical creation and to reject evolution, the Big Bang, and the 4.5 billion year age of the Earth. Hovind's views are criticized by the scientific community, and even some fellow Young Earth creationist (YEC) organizations like Answers In Genesis (AIG)"

Yes, I realize this is an this could be construed as an Ad Hominem attack. However, Hovind used to the bible as defense for unlawfully avoiding his tax obligations is indicative of the man's character. I'm surprised that even you - a dedicated liar for Jaysus - would support this man after what he has done, Bill.
It is not ad hom to attack the agent of lies and expose them as being part of a scam. Ad hom would be to attack him for another part of his life, such as if he had given his wife divorce papers on her hospital bed after a bout of chemo or divorced a wife for getting old after she put him through college and law school rather than for their politics.

Dr. Dino's Dinosaur Museum goes right to the heart of his tax evasion schemes, as he claims/claimed it was a ministry and then refused to pay workers' their due or their taxes, saying they were "volunteers, ministers, etc.". The Pensacola papers have a full exposure of him his wife's scams, done in the name of God and against common sense and the Enlightenment.

Just google "Dr. Dino tax" and see what you get. I was not appalled since it seems to be par for the fundamentalist self-proclaimed "leaders'" course these days.

I would be embarrassed to post such tripe without finding out more about the author were I posting Billvation. Some, evidently, have scant shame.
Hi Fish,

I will admit that I knew nothing of Dr. Kent Hovind's tax problem and was not aware the he is serving time in prison for tax evasion.

If, as the The Pensacola News Journal newspaper reported, "Kent Hovind, whose life’s mission is to debunk evolution, says he and his employees are workers of God and therefore exempt from paying taxes. He pays his employees in cash and does not withhold their taxes or pay his share as an employer" -- then, he is wrong.

Most likely, he said this or something similar. However, we all know how newspapers will twist anyone's words. If he said this, and I am not saying he did not -- then, he is wrong. The Bible teaches that we are to respect our civil government. In Romans 13:1, we are taught, "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God."

In Matthew 17:24-27, Jesus teaches us about our responsibility toward the government and taxes: When they came to Capernaum, those who collected the two-drachma tax came to Peter and said, "Does your teacher not pay the two-drachma tax?" He said, "Yes." And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth collect customs or poll-tax, from their sons or from strangers?"

When Peter said, "From strangers," Jesus said to him, "Then the sons are exempt."

"However, so that we do not offend them, go to the sea and throw in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for you and Me."


It would appear that Dr. Kent Hovind has obviously misinterpreted that Scripture passage and believed that Jesus said that we who are adopted sons of God are exempt from taxes. Yet, if he had read verse 27 he would have seen that Jesus taught that, to avoid any offense, we should honor the government taxes.

No one is above the civil law; for God has put us under its authority.

About twenty years ago, I was Director of Sales for a computer company. At a Monday morning staff meeting one of the other directors was absent. When we asked about him, we were told that John had been stopped for a traffic violation and when the officer asked for his driver's license, John told him, "I don't need a license to drive my own car." Well, the officer disagreed with John, as did the judge -- and John could not come to work because he was incarcerated. He spent time in jail and lost his job as a result of not being able to come to work -- because he felt that the government should not be allowed to license people to drive their own cars. Foolish? Yes. But, this was John's erroneous interpretation of the law.

And, apparently Dr. Hovind also made an erroneous interpretation of the Bible in regard to civil government.

However, that does not mean that his knowledge of Creation and Evolution is wrong. I quoted him on these subjects; not on tax laws.

When I find a Christian leader who is teaching something I feel is not Biblical; I will call him on it. Just last night, I read an article on the web site of a well known Christian apologists. The article was on Astrology and was supposed to be the Biblical view of astrology. In the article, I read all about astrology and the proponents of astrology -- but, I did not read the Biblical view of astrology. I sent an e-mail to this Christian apologist explaining my concern -- and asking, point blank -- what is your view of astrology?

This is the task all believers are given in Acts 17:11, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."

All believers are urged to question the teacher or pastor; to go to Scripture themselves to make certain they are being taught Biblical truths -- to search the Scriptures daily.

So, yes, Dr. Hovind is wrong in his interpretation of Matthew 17 and I should have been aware of this problem. But, this does not negate his teaching on Creation and Evolution.

However, thank you for making me aware of this problem.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB
Bill, he is one step from PT Barnum with a Bible!
It does negate his teaching, for it exposes him as a complete fraud. Even were a word he wrote true, and I doubt that even the "the's" and the "and's" are truthful, as Mary McCarthy said of Lillian Hellman, he is so discredited that he ought not be saying a word to anyone except to the parole board.
Scholarship and communication are rooted in two things: the truth and credentials for being cited as truthful. Mr. Snakehandler, or Dr. Dino or however he styles himself with his dubious PhD would not know an iota about that when there are gullible to fleece.
He is either a crook, a flim-flam artist, or a complete fruitcake, or some combination thereof.
Citing someone associated with him makes you look like an accomplice to me, by the way, whether you wish to admit it or not.
You better check out your heroes before you tell us how great they are, Brother Bill!

p.s. There ain't nothing wrong with saying, "Oops, got fooled," by the way rather than trying to try to parse your way out of it. I think the Who had a song about it . . . now what was the name, oh, yes, "Won't Get Fooled Again."
quote:
So, yes, Dr. Hovind i


And, Bill, calling this man a "doctor" is stretching the truth a little, too. Hovind was fond of saying he had a doctorate "in education" but always left off the fact that it was an evangelical degree from a questionable institution.

It's not unlike a "doctorate" from a chiropractic "college" - not worth the sheepskin its printed on.
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
quote:
So, yes, Dr. Hovind i


And, Bill, calling this man a "doctor" is stretching the truth a little, too. Hovind was fond of saying he had a doctorate "in education" but always left off the fact that it was an evangelical degree from a questionable institution.

It's not unlike a "doctorate" from a chiropractic "college" - not worth the sheepskin its printed on.

AND, YOUR DOCTORATE IS. . .?
Bill, the academic world is full of crazy PhDs and the whole world full of dubious ones. Frankly, I am acquainted with enough on both personal and professional levels that I take the degree for granted and am not awed, per se. Their dog still has to hunt.
Some of the dumbest things I have ever heard a supposedly educated person say have been by a doctorate holding individual.
OK, my friends mostly have PhDs in English and History, should they become creation experts? John concentrates on working class and Georgian England and the Royal Navy, Rob in New Deal South, the other Rob in desegregation, and need I go on?
Theirs are real with dissertations one can look up and order and read and their schools not closed by a state for running a diploma mill. Real, you know, second language if not third, three or four fields besides the major area of the dissertation . . . and probably an untested one these days, to boot.
And Dr. Dino's research languages would be what? Hokum and Bunkum? I would imagine the dissertation to be along the lines of "Saps, How to Recognize and Raise them for Fun and Profit."
quote:
It would appear that Dr. Kent Hovind has obviously misinterpreted that Scripture

And Hitler was a little bad tempered..... LMAO!!

Mr. Bill, Hovind is a splendid example of the dishonest, self-serving, egotistical, profiteering, brassy charlatans who foster Creationism!

He is the poster boy for your cause, and you're welcome to him. I do wish him and his new "best friend" Bubba the best, however.

DF
Since when did admitting that one did not have the blessed title of Doctor in front of their name and PhD after it become even remotely on par with calling someone who has a dubious one if at all?

Did you ever take the analogies part of a standardized test? You know, black is to night as blue is to _________. a)color, b)sky, c)stupid, d)judge.

The red coat makes no sense in the context in which it was used to me. Did you mean glass houses, perhaps? Even then it is not applicable, as one person never claimed to be a PhD while the con artist in question does -- or did -- perhaps he has changed his degree now, since in court he argued he was employed by God. Who knows what degree he has granted himself these days?

Didn't Dylan say it best? "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×