What must I do to be saved?

1: Hear The Word

God vs. Science

God vs. Science
'Let me explain the problem science has with religion.'   The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'
'Yes sir,' the student says.
'So you believe in God?'
'Absolutely. '
'Is God good?'
'Sure! God's good.'
'Is God all-powerful?  Can God do anything?'
'Yes'
'Are you good or evil?'
'The Bible says I'm evil.'
The professor grins knowingly.  'Aha!  The Bible!  He considers for a moment.  'Here's one for you.  Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him.  You can do it.  Would you help him?  Would you try?'
'Yes sir, I would.'
'So you're good!'
'I wouldn't say that.'
'But why not say that?  You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could.  Most of us would if we could.  But God doesn't.'
The student does not answer, so the professor continues.  'He doesn't, does he?  My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good?  Can you answer that one?'
The student remains silent. 
'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says.  He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.  'Let's start again, young fella.  Is God good?'
'Er..yes,' the student says.
'Is Satan good?'
The student doesn't hesitate on this one.  'No.'
'Then where does Satan come from?'
The student falters.  'From God'
'That's right.  God made Satan, didn't he?  Tell me, son.  Is there evil in this world?'
'Yes, sir..'
'Evil's everywhere, isn't it?  And God did make everything, correct?'
'Yes'
'So who created evil?'  The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'
Again, the student has no answer.  'Is there sickness?  Immorality?  Hatred?  Ugliness?  All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'
The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'

Read more...

 

‘Moa’s Ark’ vs Noah’s Ark

by David Catchpoole 

Published: 26 August 2010(GMT+10)

Despite many similarities, biologists did not consider the rhea to be a close relative of the tinamou, which also lives in South America, as the tinamou can fly, but the rhea cannot.  But DNA comparisons are forcing evolutionists to dramatically rethink the origin of flightless birds—even linking New Zealand’s moa to the tinamou.

Despite many similarities, biologists did not consider the rhea to be a close relative of the tinamou, which also lives in South America, as the tinamou can fly, but the rhea cannot. But DNA comparisons are forcing evolutionists to dramatically rethink the origin of flightless birds—even linking New Zealand’s moa to the tinamou. (Left to right: tinamou, rhea, moa.)
(Images from Wikipedia.org)

The headline of the Massey University (New Zealand) press release was certainly intriguing: “Bird molecules challenge to Moa’s Ark theory”.1

Not Noah’s Ark. Moa’s Ark. The ‘Moa’s Ark theory’ basically says that New Zealand’s animal and plant life evolved ‘largely untouched’, i.e. isolated in New Zealand from life in the rest of the world, over a period of 80 million years.2

The press release referred to a recent review article in The International Journal of Avian Science, by Steven Trewick and Gillian Gibb, both of Massey University. The review explained that the ‘Moa’s Ark’ idea had been encouraged by “the potential for an old geological age of New Zealand”.3

Read more...

 

Fraud and Forgery in Paleoanthropology

Answers Research Journal 2 (2009): 201-210.
www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v2/n1/controversy-in-anthropology

by Jerry Bergman, Northwest State College

December 23, 2009

 

A review of the history of paleoanthropology leads to the conclusion that the discipline is far less objective than that for physics, chemistry, or even biology. The field is rife with controversy and fraud, including outright faking. Classic examples include Piltdown man and Hesperopithecus, but many other less well-known examples exist that are reviewed in this paper. Several well-documented examples are cited in some detail to illustrate the types of problems encountered, and the results of fraud in paleoanthropology.

Read more...

 

Feathered Dinosaur Debate Exhibits Young Earth Evidence


by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
http://www.icr.org/article/5200/

 

Fossil fibers found in China over a decade ago are believed by some to have come from “dinosaur feathers.” It has been suggested that the fibers bolster the claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs. But a recent study calls the whole evolutionary paradigm into question by presenting evidence of a young age for these “millions of years old” fibers.

The ancestry of both birds and their feathers is a matter of contention in the evolutionary camp. Feathers on a dinosaur could become one of the long-sought-after, yet still elusive, “transitional” features that some evolutionists believe would support their theory. Evolutionary paleontologists, therefore, are interested in when and how feathers “emerged” from among those reptiles they consider to be bird ancestors. But the jury is still out on what the fossil fibers actually represent.

Read more...

 

False Teachings

How Can I Know the Truth?

John 18:33-38

The question Pilate asked, "What is truth?" is still one people who are searching are asking today. It is a valid question, because there are so many things being said by so many people, that we also ask "How can I know what is true?" What distinguishes truth from error? What can I be assured of, what can I rest my soul on? With what can I say, "I know this is true and will never lie to me?"

Jesus said, "You are right in saying I am a king.  In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth.  Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." (John 18:37).  Truth is found in Jesus.

Read more...

 

Darwin, Evolution, and Racism

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
(http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/240063)

 

The creation and evolution models stand in stark contradistinction in many ways. One model suggests the Universe is the product of an infinite, eternal, omnipotent Creator; the other credits time and random chance processes for the Universe and everything in it. The creation model declares that an intelligent Designer created a variety of life on Earth; evolution purports that all life evolved from a common ancestor. The creation model maintains that morality originated with the Creator; atheistic evolution implies that morality is a human invention without a universal standard.

Read more...

 

Creation vs Evolution

I would like to point out, that all the quotes used below come directly from evolutionists. I don't think there are any quotes from creationist biased scientists. Its all evolutionists disproving themselves :)


At this moment creation is the only alternative to evolution. The theory of evolution is shonky at best and here is why.

I. Both contain miracles:


Some reject creationism because of the miraculous/supernatural elements in it. But evolution contains miracles too. A miracle is something that happens that is contrary to natural law (the physical laws that govern this world). Eventually evolution must concede that life arose from non-life (spontaneous generation), and that is contrary to the physical laws that govern this universe, which would be a miracle. In the classic work on evolution, "Implications of Evolution", by Dr. G.A. Kerkut (an evolutionist); the author mentioned seven assumptions that evolution rests upon, the first two are: (a) Non-living things gave rise to living material-spontaneous generation occurred, and (b) Occurred only once. (The Implications of Evolution. G.A. Kerkut. Pergamon, London. 1960, p. 7)

Read more...