[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (remove xxxxxx to access link)
Someone asked:
No doubt about it...
Anthony Bennett | September 27, 2013 at 10:18 am
One day, each one of us will have to appear before the Lord Jesus Christ, our Creator, on the Day of Judgment. Some of those who do so will need to give an account of why they did not believe He was God, why they denied He came down from heaven to provide a means of forgiveness from original sin, why they deny His crucifixion and resurrection, why they promote the theory of evolution (which is impossible biologically and is contradicted by the fossil record), and why they oppose so bitterly the activities of those who try to share with others the Good News about Him.
========
Anthony Bennett | September 30, 2013 at 10:04 am
@ Steerpike
In answer to your first question, scientists who hold a ‘young earth special creation’ belief about origins are simply not allowed to submit their papers to the ‘science community’ for peer review. Because the ‘scientific community’ insists that evolution is true, creationist scientists are not even invited to submit papers for peer review. For a recent illustration of this mindset, look no further than the treatment meted out to the former Royal Society’s Director of Education, Michael Reiss, after merely arguing (2009) that creationism and intelligent design should be addressed as a ‘world view’ if they were raised by pupils. He didn’t go further than that, yet the scientific establishment aggressively rounded on him and forced him out.
On your second point, I am not aware of any creationists ‘intentionally targeting individuals lacking in scientific knowledge’. To give just one example, Creation magazine is targeted at the lay reader, but there is also a Creation Technical Journal for a scientific and academic audience. Look also at the Answers in Genesis website. Detailed scientific papers on such issues as the origin of sedimentary rocks and analysis of ice cores can be found there.
On your final point, a Christian’s faith is most certainly based on evidence. It is a fully rational belief. One of the foundational evidences of the Christian faith is that the Bible has an unequalled record of historical accuracy. Not one verifiable historical fact in the Bible has ever been falsified. Similarly, it has an accurate record with regard to prophecy. In the Old Testament, just to give one example, there are at least 80 specific prophecies about the person who would be mankind’s Redeemer, or ‘Messiah’. These were written hundreds of years before Christ. How else can we explain that all of these were fulfilled to the letter, unless it be that Christ was God, as He claimed?
Someone asked:
Brian Jordan | September 27, 2013 at 8:49 pm
Would you by any chance be the creationist Tony Bennett, sometime UKIP officer?
No doubt about it...
Anthony Bennett | September 30, 2013 at 10:17 am
Comment deleted by moderator (Jonny Scaramanga). The site’s comment policy clearly states that creationist arguments are not allowed. Anthony Bennett may feel that this is unfair, since he was asked to provide these comments by other users. This is fair; I should have nipped the conversation in the bud sooner. I am not, however, suppressing freedom of speech. There are plenty of places online where creationist critiques of evolution can be found and discussed. This is not one of them.
How many forums has he been kicked off?Anthony Bennett | September 30, 2013 at 8:04 pm
@ Ashley Haworth-roberts
I did not know my comments were being deleted. If they are, then there’s no point in debating further. It tends to prove my suspicion that evolutionists do not welcome debate with evolution-doubters. I have spoken about historically verifiable facts, and will always be happy to discuss with anyone any evidence they think they have that disproves any fact recorded in the Bible. Yes, there are also many statements in the Bible which are either not verifiable or are not yet capable of verification. The Flood is, I suppose, unverifiable, except that I would suggest that there is a great volume of evidence in its favour (primarily from the record of rocks clearly laid down rapidly and in great quantities by fast flowing sediments in water) – and no historical or scientific fact or combination of facts that can contradict it. But that would require further debate. If that is not welcome, then I shall bow out here.
Stephen Baines | September 30, 2013 at 8:14 pm
@Anthony – thanks for popping by, there are plenty of academic journals waiting for your historically verifiable facts to be submitted for peer review. here is not the place but thanks for the entertainment.
