The Fairytale Of Evolution
(Richard Leakey's series of stooping hominids
which never existed but is promoted as 'fact' nonetheless)
Sir Ambrose J. Flemming: "Evolution
is baseless and quite incredible."
Sir William Dawson: "Evolution
is utterly destitute of proof."
Sir Fred Hoyle: "As
a young student I was brainwashed into accounting everything without God."
Sir Francis Bacon:
"Let no man....think or maintain that a man can search too far or be too well
studied in the book of God's word, or in the book of God's
Sir Bernard Lovell: "More scientists believe in creation than disbelieve."
Dr. Clarke Penick: "Evolution is the cultural myth of the twentieth
Dr. Henry Morris: "Evolution is absurd and false scientifically."
Dr. Rendel Short: "Who taught the writers to arrange events in
the correct order? Divine inspiration."
Dr James Allan:
"I came to see that resemblances between taxonomic families, orders, classes,
etc. are due to the work of a creator, not common ancestry."
Dr. Lewis Bounoure, Director of the Zoological
Museum and Director of Research at the National Centre of Scientific Research in France
declared: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups."
Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov and the late Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, rejected
evolution as bad science: "Creation can be and
is a legitimate scientific theory."
Jean-Paul Sartre, publicly stated his "faith" in God just prior
to his death.
Dr Paul Leman, editor of the French Encyclopaedia: "Evolution
is a fairy tale for adults."
Salvador Dali: "The announcement of Drs. Watson & Crick
on the DNA code is for me the real proof of the existence of God!"
Sixty leading scientists, including 24 Nobel Prize winners,
affirm that only God can explain the complexity and order of life, as we know it,
including Arthur L. Schawlow, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics.
In 1981, 22 British biologists said: "Evolution is not a fact."
These reputable scientists, professors, authors and artist, who
are only a tip of the iceberg, all taught and believed that Darwin's self-professed
hypothesis was worthless.
As well as listing the above and distinguished scientists,
that rejected evolution (most of which were not even Christians), it must also be
stated how Professor Kreb of Oxford University and Professor Malcolm Dixon, former
head of the Enzyme Biology Department, from Cambridge University are Bible believing
Christians Dr. Victor
Pearce, The Origin and Destiny of Life, 2001, p 17).
So science and scripture can go hand in hand, but
sadly this is a rarity, especially in the 'secular' west.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen. 1:1).
This verse of Holy Scripture is one of the most hotly and disputed
statements ever recorded in history. For decades clergy, laity, scholars, agnostics,
Darwinists, and atheists have each tried to define and clarify this very simplistic
statement. I would say that this Biblical doctrine is as fiercely debated and contested
as the Deity of Christ. However, what we believe about this verse has monumental consequences
as to what we believe about the Bible in general: either we believe the Bible to be
accurate and honest or we don't. The choice is yours to make.
As this article will unfold, I hope to demonstrate that there is
very little evidence that evolution is possible, but rather that it is quite insane
and should be re-categorised as being a religion and not science. So I would invite
any honest and open-minded person to read this article and examine my findings to
ones own satisfaction.
To start with, there is one very big problem with this 'theory'
'Russian mathematicians have determined
the legendary parting of the Red Sea that let the Jews flee Egypt, was possible' (The
Moscow Times, 21 Jan. 2004).
'The study, published in the Bulletin of the Russian Academy of
Sciences, focused on a reef that runs from the documented spot where the Jews escaped
Egypt, which in Biblical times, was much closer to the surface, according to Naum
Volzinger, a senior researcher at St. Petersburg's Institute of Oceanology, and a
colleague based in Hamburg, Alexei Androsov.'
'The mathematicians calculated the "strong east wind that blew
all that night" mentioned in the Bible needed to blow at a speed of 67 miles per hour
to make the reef, said Volzinger.'
"It would take the Jews - there were 600,000 of them (at least)
- four hours to cross the 4.2-mile reef that runs from one coast to another. Then,
in half an hour, the waters would come back," he said.
'The Egyptian army that followed then drowned in the sea.'
"I am convinced that God rules the earth through the laws of physics,"
Volzinger told the Times.
The reader, therefore, is presented with four possible options
concerning how the universe began, and only one can be correct:
1. The universe came from nothing naturally. This violates the
1st law of thermodynamics. (Please note you cannot create energy or matter).
2. The universe came from nothing supernaturally. Theists believe
this to be the only probable and plausible option.
3. The universe has always existed. This violates the 2nd law of
thermodynamics. It should be pointed out that had the earth been just a fraction of
4 billion years old, a date conveniently plucked out of thin air by certain scientists,
it would have become mush over 35,000,000 years ago. We know this because everything
is constantly breaking down. The heat from the sun is no longer as fierce as it used
to be, nor is the glare from the moon or the stars as bright as they once were.
4. The universe is not real - it is simply an illusion. Only mentally
insane people believe this to be so.
The late atheist scientist, Herbert Spencer in 1903, taught that
everything in the universe came down to the following five components:
If we look at the creation record that Moses wrote for us in the
book of Genesis, 1550 BC we see just how profoundly interesting Spencer's system becomes:
In the beginning [time] God [force] created [action] the
heaven [space] and the earth [matter].
I find it simply incredible that an unsaved scientist, like Spencer
could create a system, some three thousands years after Genesis was written, and yet
it prophetically fits this verse like a glove, and didn't even realise it.
In Victor Pearce's book, p. 30-31, he draws his own amazing
parallel between science and creation. Interestingly the source for evolution comes
from the British Museum book, The Succession of Life
through Geological time, which he was sent unsolicited.
From the origin of the earth to the beginning of the Cambrian.
'In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.'
The earth started possibly as a whirling globe of hot gases. It
passed through a liquid stage.
'The earth was without form and void.'
For long ages the earth was surrounded by a thick, steamy atmosphere.
'And darkness was on the face on the deep.'
As soon as the surface became cool enough, the water vapour condensed
as rain, producing rivers and seas.
God said, 'Let there be a expanse (atmosphere) in the middle of
the waters and let it separate the waters from the waters.'
The atmosphere lacked oxygen most of the free oxygen present in
the air has been produced by the activities of green plant life.
And God said, 'Let the earth bring forth greenness'. Pearce goes
on to say that the Hebrew word deshe should not be translated as grass. It actually
means something green.
The scientists: blue-green algae.
Due to restricted space, a detailed exposition cannot be taken
with Spencer's five components or Pearce's remarkable harmony, but I would certainly
encourage the reader to research this at ones own leisure.
A spokesman for the atheist organisation P.E.T.A once said:
"A rat is a pig, is a dog, is a boy."
The reader may be interested to know that China's former atheist
dictator, Mao Tse Tung, also
used this ideology, in conversation with fellow Darwinist, Edgar Snow, while hideously justifying
the slaughter of millions of his innocent subjects.
And from one atheist to another, the Russian novelist Aleksandr Solzenitsyn
said when justifying the genocide of millions of people:
"We have forgotten God."
He would say:
"When God does not exist, everything is possible."
This statement would also explain how Darwin's disciples justify
their belief in
a society that does not have any 'absolute moral beliefs.'
One writer also said of this:
"When man closes the door to God, he opens it to the devil."
Interestingly however, was a remark made by the late Mrs Gorbachev
(a devout communist) to a well known Christian:
"That there had to be something higher than ourselves" (Graham, Just
as I am, p. 593).
The Church of Euthanasia went further:
"Animals are more important than man. If we are going to kill species,
let's kill mankind."
But what does the Bible say about this:
"Behold the fowls of
the air: for they sow not, neither do
they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? (Matt.
Some evolutionists even teach that eating meat is murder! While
others state, killing chickens is just as bad as the holocaust! (1 Cor. 7:17).
Darwinists, quite unashamedly,
strip mankind of all his God given dignity. They teach that at best man is a glorified
animal that evolved by chance from slime and then became a fish or a reptile after
millions of years of volcanic ash beating down on rocks; or at worst was a dreadful
mistake that came about by pure chance!
The biologist and Nobel peace winner, Jock Monroe, once said:
"Man is alone in the universe. He emerged by chance."
Perhaps NASA should listen to Monroe, for they annually
spend billions of American dollars flying to space in search for life, and yet have
absolutely nothing whatsoever to show for it. One might think that they (and also
the European Space Agency) would try and put their own house in order first before
trying to conquer distant planets afar off. America has problems with poverty, high
suicide rates, narcotics, illiteracy is still far too high, under age sex, single
mums, abortions, and many other domestic and moral issues, which should be dealt with
as a priority, instead of jetting off to the moon and now Mars, just to bring back
volcanic ash, or erect even more commercial satellites in space, resulting in more
people becoming couch potato zombies.
Adolph Hitler (a Darwinist/Catholic) who was never excommunicated
from the Catholic church nor was Mussolini for that matter, wrote in his autobiography Mein
"I regard Christianity as the most fatal and seductive lie that
I quote this because some have claimed Hitler used the Gospel accounts
of the Lord Jesus' crucifixion to somehow 'justify' his obsessive and disgraceful
hatred of the Jews, while trying to exterminate them.
This, I can say, is not true. Hitler used Charles Darwin's gospel,
as did Stalin and others to further his lust for worldwide power.
But ever the complex man, Hitler would go on to say
the following about his own religion, that being the catholic church: "As for the
Jews, I am just carrying on with the same policy which the catholic church has adopted
for fifteen hundred years."
Also of interest to the student of history is the
following quote made by Spain's fascist leader and fellow catholic and once close
friend of Hitler, Francisco Franco, from May 3 1945: "Adolf Hitler, son of the catholic
church, died while defending Christianity."
(Unfortunately ignorant catholics believe their religion
to be Christian. Nothing of course could be further from the truth).
Darwin, the man
He was raised by his father (his mother died when he was only eight)
in the Unitarian church.
Biblical Christianity has long recognised this group as being as
cult, for they deny the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, and other cardinal doctrines
of the Christian faith.
Charles' father and grandfather were both freemasons, as was Charles
himself (William R. Denslow, 10,000 Famous Freemasons, Vol. I. &
Henry Morris, The Long War Against God).
He failed in his medical studies, so on advice from his father,
he spent three years as a pre-divinity student at Christ College, Cambridge. He
graduated with a BA in theology in 1831, but was never ordained. However, according
to Taylor p. 119: "Darwin never even opened his Bible while
studying at Cambridge; it appears his knowledge of the Word of God was non-existent!"
The course he studied comprised of the classics, mathematics and
theology. For theology he would study Paleys Evidence of Christianity and Paleys
Moral and Political Philosophy (Taylor p. 121).
In 1857, he consulted a clairvoyant and met mediums (Pearce, p.
Married his first cousin. Today
this incest is outlawed in most nations. According to Taylor p. 127, the Darwin's
were trying to create a super-breed race, a form of eugenics, similar to what
the Nazis attempted to achieve.
Taylor goes on to say:
"Darwin's idea of inbreeding to produce superior stock can be seen
to be a complete disaster in the case of his own children. Out of the ten, one girl,
Mary, died shortly after birth; another girl, Anne, died at the age of ten; his eldest
daughter, Henrietta, had a serious and prolonged breakdown at fifteen in 1859. Three
of his sons suffered such frequent illnesses that Darwin regarded them as semi-invalids
his last son, Charles Jr., was born mentally retarded and died in 1858, nineteen months
after his birth. His own poor health dogged him for over fifty years. Some days
he could only work one hour a day" (p. 133).
One of the most incredible events in the history of evolution was
how easy it was for people like Thomas Huxley (Darwin's Goebbels) and others, to convince
Parliament to pass special legislation to allow Darwin's body to be buried in Westminster
Abbey (Ps. 11:3). And yet what is rarely spoken about is how his son, Dr.
Julian Huxley later recanted of his father's beliefs towards the end of his own life,
declaring how he 'needed religion.'
For me, this is the equivalent of burying Adolph Hitler in a Jewish
cemetery in Israel!
Darwin did more damage to ignorant and gullible Christians, whether
naively or willfully, than any man since or before him.
Only Satan has done more (Gen. 3:1).
I also find it quite incredible that on an English £10 note, Darwin's
image is on one side, while Queen Elizabeth II is on the other side. How
can it be that the head of the Church of England can also share the same bank
note with Charles Darwin? Maybe it is because she is the Grand Patroness of the
freemasons, so both are cut from the same cloth, or should I say from the same
What does light have in common with darkness? Absolutely nothing!
(2 Cor. 6:14; Eph. 5:8).
Did Darwin repent on his deathbed?
There has long existed a story about a Lady Hope, visiting Darwin
shortly before he died; apparently he was found reading the epistles of the Hebrews.
The account is that he hadn't abandoned God (but
God may have abandoned him) and was devastated that many people had used his 'theory'
to abandon God. However, there is some doubt about the authenticity of this story,
as the source is believed to have been Emma, his wife, who was ashamed and embarrassed
at her husband's radical and ridiculous beliefs (Taylor p. 137).
Whilst researching Pearce's book, p. 164, he lists the following
proofs that Darwin did indeed convert to Christianity and renounced his 'theory.' Pearce
also believes that many evolutionists have tried to dismiss this story by propagating
misinformation about Lady Hope. And even leading Christians have oddly decided
to join forces with them to discredit this account.
So, for the sake of this article, please see the following:
Darwin's conversion reported by Lady Hope. Who was she?
Lady Hope was the daughter of General Sir Arthur Cotton
She was wife of Admiral Sir James Hope
She authored 37 books (British Library)
She was an ardent and faithful temperance worker
Evidence of Darwin's deathbed conversation was affirmed
by the following:
James Fegan, evangelist, and temperance worker
Ishmael Jones in Christian Herald periodical
Booth Tucker of the Salvation Army
A. N. Nichols heard Darwin renounce evolution
Mission conversions on Darwin's house lawn reported by:
Darwin's wife, Emma
The Bromley and Kent Times
Accuracy confirmed by:
Sir Hedley Atkins, President of Royal College of
Darwin's reference to harmonium and summerhouse
Darwin's letter to evangelist, J. Fegan
Dr. L. R. Croft of Salford University
Regretted the results of his theory
Regretted use made by Karl Marx, etc
Regretted use made by Hegel
Admitted that fossil record looked like special creation
And supported donations to a South African Christian
I will leave the reader
therefore to reach one's own conclusion about whether or not to believe the above
Darwin, the champion
"I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions,
wondering all the time over everything and to my astonishment the ideas took like
wildfire. People made a religion of them."
This honest and quite frank statement by Charles is, I think, all
that needs to be said!
Throughout his life he consistently doubted his own theories. He
was very much a tortured man. His struggle to explain away the sophisticated mechanism
of the human eye, frustrated him to no ends. He would also be furious that no transitional
fossils had ever been found, which he and others could then parade around as 'proof
of his theory.'
To this day, this embarrassing omission is still
a major stumbling block for his disciples. The same is true of Iraq's illusive 'weapons
of mass destruction.'
Darwin was also a mass of contradictions. While he believed himself to be of
'great importance,' he also believed that all he taught was utter rubbish, and he
as good as said so in his book The Origin of the Species.
(Please note that the first day this book was sold in the shops, five thousand
copies were instantly snapped up. While most in the science world shunned him and
his work, clearly other 'parties' had deliberately set out to hype up the importance
of this book, much like we witnessed when Dan Brown's fictitious and heretical book The
Da Vinci Code, initially went
on sale. Possibly members of the Illuminati
or the freemasons could so easily have orchestrated this).
In fact, the following quote, shares some much needed light on this hypothesis,
and explicitly who benefits the most from marketing and promoting this new type of
"The Soviet Union, under the initial lead of Academician
Professor Alexsandr Oparin, were pioneers in studies on the origin of life to further
the influence of Marxist-Leninist doctrine. British scientific colleagues and supporters,
Professor J.B.H. Haldane (biophysicist) and Professor J. D. Bernel (crystallographer),
were both opposed to religious beliefs....these studies deliberately aimed to focus
scientific thinking away from religion" (Dr. Jim Brookes, vice-president of the Geological
So, clearly the above further underscores how atheist
Russian, successfully orchestrated a long-term plan to fund atheism/Darwin's in the
UK, and also throughout the word!
Also of relevance to the above is how Professor
Haldane personally confided in Victor Pearce how he too 'felt a need for religion
but that he didn't want to let his friends down (John 12:42-43.)
Darwin once said, possibly prophetically:
"My work is the devil's gospel" (Life and Letters, Vol.
2, p. 124).
To date many of his unpublished writings are still held in Cambridge
University (Taylor p. 115).
His official autobiography from 1876 was heavily edited and revised
by his son, Francis, on orders from his mother, Emma.
According to Taylor's book, some six
thousand words were quietly omitted, so as not to cause Darwin's estate further embarrassment
due to his unorthodox views (Taylor, p. 115).
An advocate of evolution
Pope John Paul II, to his utter shame, once said:
"Evolution is more than just a hypothesis." (He is the fourth pope
to say this and interestingly Origin of the Species was never on the Catholic
churches list of 'banned books' nor was Hitler's Mein Kampf).
John Paul, while cardinal in Poland and during the Second
Vatican Council, stated to his fellow bishops, that a dialogue with atheism should
be not be rejected outright.
This statement should come as no surprise, for the pope would also
go on to say:
"Animals possess a soul and men must love and feel solidarity with
our smaller brethren. Animals are as near to God as men are" (19 Jan. 1990).
May I say that the pope's statement puts him in direct conflict
with the Lord Jesus, for in Matthew's Gospel we read:
"Have ye not read, that he which made
them at the beginning made them male and female" (19:4).
Lord Jesus Christ, for all sceptics, affirmed Biblical creation. If He doesn't
know how His universe came into being, than nobody does, and that would include Stephen
Hawkings and Albert Einstein. (Please note, however that even Einstein moved
towards deism, before his death).
How can it be that in England £100,000,000 taxpayers money is spent
annually funding museums to teach evolution as a proven fact to society? Could taxpayer's
money be wasted in any other way, without ever being queried or scrutinised? The same
could be said of the education system for schools. They too are teaching children
unproven suppositions as fact. This is ridiculous, and very dangerous! (Matt. 18:6).
Why not teach creation side by side with evolution, and let the
children decide which to accept.
But the real offenders are the 'professing church.' With
so many Anglican and Catholic clergy believing in 'Darwin's gospel,' is it any
wonder why so many people are confused today (Matt. 15:14).
For evolution to even be considered as remotely possible, proof
would need to be provided.
To date no evidence whatsoever has been produced.
If man evolved from animal, why
is it that an apes DNA isn't 100% the same as human beings, and could they explain
why a donkey has more chromosomes than a human?
Also if Darwinism is to be considered sacred and gospel truth,
than I would ask any scientific lecturer, or equal opportunities body, three questions:
1) Do they agree with all of Darwin's views or just some, a sort
of pick and mix?
2) Do they agree with Darwin when he taught that the white race
is the strongest and most important of all races?
3) And finally do they agree with Darwin when he states that women
are the weaker vessel and need to be protected by man?
All of the above theories are what Darwin taught. I wonder where
the universities stand on these controversial statements today, and would they possibly
be considered racists or sexist?
Finally, we know the human body is a highly complex machine
(an understatement, I know). There are millions of coded cells that can operate simultaneously
and independent of one another.
Every individual cell is programmed to make the human body function
as a living being.
The human genome has 80,000 genes, arranged in 3 billion DNA molecular
The digestive system is utterly incredible.
The immune system is simply superb.
The human eye is probably the most amazing and spectacular component
in the entire universe.
Man's ability to speak in numerous languages, show emotion, remorse,
fear, sadness, happiness and excitement, etc, etc, etc, is simply breathtaking.
Such amazing factors are too much for the human mind to fathom
or even comprehend.
As for them being initiated by 'pure chance,' quite frankly, no
child in the world would believe this deceit, if it weren't taught in universities
and colleges, with a straight face.
The question scientists should really be asking themselves
is who set these multiple and highly sophisticated codes? For the theist it is Almighty
God of course.
Prof. Michael J. Behe, a biochemist at Leigh University, wrote
a book Darwin's Black Box. In this book he states that evolution is impossible
and had Darwin lived today, his supposition would never have got off the ground. He
also goes on to say that evolutionists should come clean and admit that they've got
A Christian rebuttal
Scientists regularly state that the existence of God is impossible
to prove. For me, a perfect design (gravity; earth's
rotation at 1,000mph; magnetic pull from the moon which controls the oceans; the sun
positioned in exactly the right place, i.e. too far away, we all freeze, too near,
we all burn; enough food to feed the whole earth 30 times over; humans able to communicate
with one another and even to some animals, plus so much more) presupposes a perfect
and providing designer. Not so, says the evolutionist. Yes, very so, says the theist!
The apostle Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit, said the following:
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that
which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it
unto them. 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: Because that,
when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they
became fools, And changed the glory of
the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things"
God's word is so abundantly clear. Man has always known God is
God and he is universally accountable to Him.
May I also quote another verse from Paul:
"And the times of
this ignorance God winked at;
but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he
hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he
hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men,
in that he hath raised him from the dead"
Why I reject evolution
During my research into this subject, I recalled a song from the
1965 film The Sound of Music, written by Hollywood's elite song writing team,
Rogers and Hammerstein: "Nothing
comes from nothing, nothing ever could."
This simple song, really sums up evolution is just seven words:
7 is God's perfect number!
Yet as the Lord told us in Matt. 11:25:
"At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou
hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."
I think this precious segment of Scripture explains why for many,
they just cannot, or as I believe will not accept the blatant obvious reality, that
God made this beautiful world (Matt. 13:13-16).
So as a Christian, I dismiss evolution because it contradicts what
the Bible says about how the universe came into being, and because common sense dictates
it was designed and is sustained by Jesus Christ (Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2-3).
However, no doubt some people will say, what about the great advances
that science has made, like the successful cloning of Dolly the sheep? My answer is
this: at last science has caught up with the Bible. Cloning is nothing new. We read
in Genesis 2:22 how God took Adam's rib and made a woman. This is the first case of
cloning, and it has taken science over four thousand years to catch up. I
would also like to mention that in 1997, a specialist bone
surgeon confirmed, "That the rib is the only human bone, which can be made to grow
again if removed." How great is God!
While compiling this article, I knew it would be the most important
one that I have written, because so many academics and 'free thinkers' believe it
to be true. What really concerns me, however, is that young people are continually
being encouraged and taught to believe in it too; while universities and colleges,
and of course the media, don't wish to give equal time to theists and creationists. When
such rare debates have occurred, students have been shocked and furious that their
Darwinist lecturers hadn't given them all the facts and evidence for creation.
I now believe, as do many creationists, that there is a conspiracy,
from leading and prominent scientists, past and present, to suppress evidence for
Biblical creation and to continue churning out bias and bigoted propaganda concerning
Consequences of evolution
Sadly one of the real causalities of this hidden agenda is the
excess amount of promiscuity and lawlessness within society, which is repeated
internationally on television and in cinemas. I wonder if the latter is to blame for
I remember reading how in the last 15 years
the amount of swearing and blasphemy on television had rocketed to a staggering 500%.
The National Health Service, our main frontline
emergency service, is almost at breaking point, with cases of sexually transmitted
viruses, alcohol related illnesses, obesity, smoking/respiratory problems and many
other alternative lifestyles seriously draining funds and resources. Abortion is also
on the increase too!
More people are on prescribed medication i.e., prozac and
seroxat than ever before; 98% of abortions (in the UK) are carried out for non-medical
reasons; children can now divorce their parents; the number of young people self-harming
is on the rise; more people are living together (fornication) and those that
marry, 1 out of 3 will end in divorce; the promotion and acceptance of homosexuality
has rocketed, yet only 6% of the British people claim to be homosexual, yet political
correctness demands them to have equal rights to married couples, which averages about
60%+ of the nation.
Internet websites openly show public executions, child pornography,
rape photos etc; all is available for people to view and has never been easier.
Such depressing and not comprehensive statistics are very worrying
and concerning for society to contemplate. However, for the ardent Bible student,
this comes as no surprise for it was foretold in 66 AD by the apostle Paul the following:
"This know also, that in the last days [before
Jesus returns to earth to judge sinful man] perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers
of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without
natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers
of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded,
lovers of pleasures more than lovers
of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of
the truth" (2
The Bible also shouts at us to take serious when that when
man abandons God, God abandons man (Pro. 1:28; 2 Thess. 2:11-12).
Scientists, by and large, have offered no solution to these and
life's many other problems i.e., sin, suffering, poverty and so on. Of course, if
one has the money, than the latter two can be almost eliminated. But the former cannot,
unless scientists prescribe the one and only remedy that has long been used, Jesus
Christ! (Acts 4:12).
So I am left with the only plausible conclusion open to me, as
to why people suppress the truth and opt for myths and fables, because they hate God
and love their sin (Rom. 1:18-23).
Pearce, in his book, Science, says the following:
"There is more evidence today that the Bible is true and accurate
than ever before, but the facts have been denied to the public and even to many church
I remember listening to an online sermon by a preacher who
said that certain evolutionists that he had debated would often remark, off record:
"I know what you're saying is right. But I can't and won't accept
it for financial and moral reasons. Because it would mean me having to change my life
and become accountable to God. If I believe myself to be no more than a glorified
animal, than I can live as I choose."
I believe this to be a true and systematic reality, among professors
and teachers of Darwinism. (Please note that some creationists have been stigmatised
for openly teaching the Genesis account of creation to their students. So much for
having an open mind!)
Ask yourself this: If evolution is such a cert, why is it that
there are over 30 miles of obsolete books, throughout the world, which evolutionists
no longer believe in? Once upon a time they were considered 'gospel truth,' but now
they are 'out of date.'
May I share some verses, which can be broken down into three categories.
First, for those who genuinely want to know how to find God and
be saved; second, for those who don't; and third, some prophetic passages for you
to ponder over:
"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your
sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson,
they shall be as wool" (Is. 1:18).
"And this is the condemnation, that light is
come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds
were evil" (John 3:19).
"Knowing this first, that there
shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep,
all things continue as
they were from the beginning of
the creation. For this they willingly are
ignorant of, that by
the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that
then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which
are now, by the same word are kept
in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men"
(2 Pet. 3:3-7).
Bible predicted 65 prophecies of the Messiah before He was born. They would range
from 4000 BC (Genesis) 400 BC
According to the Bible, God would bring these supernatural events
to pass, which some mathematicians believe the odds of happening 'by chance' are 1
out of 10 to the 1048th power! And so, according to the Bible, God has fulfilled this
prophetic jigsaw, and it is recorded and preserved in Scripture to this day!
With such clear and unequivocally proven prophecy (not some 'theory'
or find like evolution) but substantial mathematical evidence as this, the defence
rests that the Biblical six/24 hour day creation account is much more creditable and
reliable, compared to evolution.
But in the end, whether I believe in evolution or not, is no doubt
irrelevant to you, the reader.
What I would say, however is this: If the Christian is wrong, he
loses nothing. If you are wrong, you lose everything! Can you really afford to take
Would you risk not insuring your house? How about life insurance
or a retirement fund? No, I didn't think so!
Yet your soul will live forever (Luke 16:19-31) and God wants you
to know this and He will save it, but only if you honestly turn to Him in genuine
The apostle Peter said:
"The Lord is not slack concerning
his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance"
(2 Pet. 3:9).
The Lord God:
"I have made the earth, and created man upon
it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and
all their host have I commanded"
Dr. P. Ruckman, Pensacola Bible
Dr. E. K. Victor Pearce, Evidence
for Truth, Vol. 1 Science
Ian T. Taylor, In the minds of
men, Darwin and the New World Order
(All Rights Reserved)