Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

To believe in Darwinism, you must be either evil or ignorant...or perhaps both? "Men had forgotten God; that is why all this has happened" said Solzhenitsyn!

“Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains ... an unuprooted small corner of evil. 

Since then I have come to understand the truth of all the religions of the world: They struggle with the evil inside a human being (inside every human being). It is impossible to expel evil from the world in its entirety, but it is possible to constrict it within each person.” 

― Aleksandr SolzhenitsynThe Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956

How does tyranny rule in any formerly free society?  What happens is a confluence of evil and ignorance, allowing for a situation in which mankind in general loses the respect for both the freedom to succeed and the associated risk of failure that is part and parcel to discovery and scientific advances and of course capitalism. One must associate free trade and free society and, in order for this to be robust, there needs to be a strong and common bond within a nation that includes a common morality and sense of community and destiny.

The United States was a society built on the foundation of Christian morality and freedom of speech and other freedoms spelled out in the Bill of Rights.   While the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence and fought the Revolutionary War and wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights were all Christians, Theists or at least Deists, they set up a society that would allow for freedom of worship or freedom FROM worship if desired.  These men were determined to build a society that would allow people to dream big and, if both wise and determined, succeed and perhaps provide a living for not only their own family, but for many others as well.  

“A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage . . . . Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elite, causing an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

It is no secret now that the Masons was a society that, in the 18th Century, was an organization within which men seeking to build free societies met to share ideas and dream big.  The Masons helped lead both successful and unsuccessful revolutions in the Western world.  The United States was the biggest success story, a nation where freedom was the most famed aspect of our face we gave to the world, and power was the reason freedom reigned.  We were great because we were free and we were free because we were great.  But it took men of courage and vision to bring our nation into existence!

But our secret was, as the quote goes, that America is great because she is good.  We were good because we respected God and understood that God created all things, including the inherent rights of mankind.  Our Founding Fathers understood this and incorporated it into our founding documentation.

“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.” 
― Aleksandr SolzhenitsynThe Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956

But fools and blackguards have, for many decades, fought to remove God from society and science.  There have been many factions fighting to advance their own evil agendas.  Socialists/Fascists/Communists have sought to put the collective above the individual and build the central government at the expense of local leadership.  Eugenicists have fought to advance racism and elitism and, while the names and labels change, the ideologies remain the same.  Atheists/Naturalists/Pantheists (Darwinists) have sought to remove logic from science along with God.  Originally the Darwins and Huxleys and Haeckels sought to remove God from society in order to advance opportunities for sexual license and allow them to feel free to be irresponsible to their fellow man.  Darwinism is anti-science, completely illogical and unsupported by evidence.  Malthusian philosophy gave rise to radical eco-nuts, those who promote the ridiculous idea that mankind can cause global warming (or global cooling), again in contrast to the actual evidence.

Evidence shows us that the entire Universe, the Solar System, the Earth and all living creatures were designed and created by the Supernatural God.  Evidence shows us that mankind cannot accurately predict the weather, let alone cause it!  

But this is the age of ignorance and evil...propaganda has replaced learning and knowledge.  The powers-that-be in science, academics, government, entertainment and news media have all joined in lockstep to worship Darwinism and Global Warming and, with so many people casting God aside, our society has begun to trade freedom for sustenance.  More than half of the population of the United States now depends on at least some form of government assistance.  At the same time, the Federal government has grown exponentially and especially the Executive branch has attained power unforeseen by the Founding Fathers. Our Supreme Court and subsidiary courts have abandoned defending the Constitution and begun to rewrite it.  Finally, our Representatives and Senators have grown so fat on lobbyists and a future pension and certain paychecks working for influence peddlers or news media that they hardly truly represent the will of the people...or perhaps they actually do?   Have we become so accustomed to the emergence of the Nanny State that we are willing to succumb to it's lure?

“Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

To believe in Darwinism is a key component of abandoning truth and then freedom.   Darwinism is myth rather than science and it only exists because of evil and ignorance.  If we were both informed and determined to seek truth rather than comfort, our United States would not be turning into a Dystopian society.  

“If I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible what was the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men had forgotten God; that is why all this has happened.' ” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Free societies abandon morality first, then they abandon truth and then they find themselves enslaved.  If you have abandoned God, you have abandoned morality.  If you have embraced Darwinism, you have abandoned truth.  What will protect you from the growth of Big Brother and who will fight for you when it is decided that you are not optimal and must be removed from society for the sake of the collective good?  If you think I am engaging in hyperbole and alarmism, think of the words of Solzhenitsyn...

“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. "One word of truth outweighs the world.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

All quotes from Aleksandr are from Goodreads.com.

Now a normal person who believes that God created has become NEWS?   We are approaching the intersection of evil and ignorance and the collision will be disastrous if people do not wake up and see that God indeed created and Darwinism is a hideous lie!!!



Scienceimage-question5-large
Published on July 23rd, 2013 | by Gary DeMar
14

Journalist Admits She’s a Creationist and Drives Evolutionists Insane

In the midst of the George Zimmerman “not guilty” verdict, rioting, beatings, threats of violence, calls for “checking your white privilege,” and demands that we “give money to the Dream Defenders, to the Urban League, to the Southern Poverty Law Center… because racism is a natural disaster just like hurricanes and bombings and shootings are,” there’s a story going around about a journalist who admits that she’s a creationist.
The liberal disdain for her is thicker than quick-drying cement. Here’s just one example, written by Laura Helmuth at Slate:
“This is all just to say that I am trying to sympathize, I really am, with Virginia Heffernan. Heffernan is a writer for Yahoo News, formerly of the New York Times and formerly-formerly a TV critic for Slate. Last week she published an essay in which she revealed that she is a creationist. I’m not exaggerating. The essay is titled ‘Why I’m a Creationist,’ and she wrote: ‘Also, at heart, I am a creationist. There, I said it.’”
image-question5-largeThe article drips with disdain but does not offer a single verifiable scientific fact supporting how nothing became something.
Evolutionists can ridicule all they want (it’s all they have left), but they can’t prove that inorganic matter evolved into organic matter that evolved into the complex life forms we are and see around us. Evolutionists can’t get from atoms to people. It’s even worse for them since they can’t account for the original matter or the organized information necessary to organize the matter.
To believe in evolution is to believe in magic — literally. At least stage and street magicians start with a deck of cards, a coin, or a rabbit. Magicians (illusionists who get away with the illusion because they have information that you and I don’t) can’t really make something appear out of thin air. But that’s exactly what evolutionists claim for evolution. When I sayexactly, I mean exactly. Here’s an example found in the prestigious Scientific American:
“It is virtually impossible to imagine how a cell’s machines, which are mostly protein-based catalysts called enzymes, could have formed spontaneously as life first arose from nonliving matter around 3.7 billion years ago.”[1]
It’s impossible to imagine because it’s impossible, but that’s what evolutionists believe. One of the first scientific laws biology students learn is that spontaneous generation is not science, and yet in order to be an evolutionist, you must believe in it even though it’s contrary to logic, experience, and experimentation.
Did you notice that the authors describe cells as “machines”? When has a machine ever spontaneously come into existence? Never! “But there was this time 3.7 billion years ago. . . .”
Helmuth writes, “Whatever levels of analysis you care to use, from molecular to planetary, they all mutually reinforce the discovery that all living things evolve through a process of natural selection. Absolutely nothing in the 154 years since Origin was published has undermined the theory.” “Absolutely nothing”? Do I detect a hint of desperation and fear in the absolutism of the claim?
Ms. Helmuth needs to take a look at the “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism” that has nearly a thousand signatures of scientists who “are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”
Edward Peltzer, Ph.D. Oceanography, University of California, San Diego (Scripps Institute), writes:
“As a chemist, the most fascinating issue for me revolves around the origin of life. Before life began, there was no biology, only chemistry — and chemistry is the same for all time. What works (or not) today, worked (or not) back in the beginning. So, our ideas about what happened on Earth prior to the emergence of life are eminently testable in the lab. And what we have seen thus far when the reactions are left unguided as they would be in the natural world is not much. Indeed, the decomposition reactions and competing reactions out distance the synthetic reactions by far. It is only when an intelligent agent (such as a scientist or graduate student) intervenes and ‘tweaks’ the reactions conditions ‘just right’ do we see any progress at all, and even then it is still quite limited and very far from where we need to get. Thus, it is the very chemistry that speaks of a need for something more than just time and chance. And whether that be simply a highly specified set of initial conditions (fine-tuning) or some form of continual guidance until life ultimately emerges is still unknown. But what we do know is the random chemical reactions are both woefully insufficient and are often working against the pathways needed to succeed. For these reasons I have serious doubts about whether the current Darwinian paradigm will ever make additional progress in this area.”
Chris Williams, Ph.D., Biochemistry Ohio State University, offers similar commentary on the complexity of life that cannot be explained by Darwinism:
“As a biochemist and software developer who works in genetic and metabolic screening, I am continually amazed by the incredible complexity of life. For example, each of us has a vast ‘computer program’ of six billion DNA bases in every cell that guided our development from a fertilized egg, specifies how to make more than 200 tissue types, and ties all this together in numerous highly functional organ systems. Few people outside of genetics or biochemistry realize that evolutionists still can provide no substantive details at all about the origin of life, and particularly the origin of genetic information in the first self-replicating organism. What genes did it require — or did it even have genes? How much DNA and RNA did it have — or did it even have nucleic acids? How did huge information-rich molecules arise before natural selection? Exactly how did the genetic code linking nucleic acids to amino acid sequence originate? Clearly the origin of life — the foundation of evolution — is still virtually all speculation, and little if no fact.”
A lot has been published, even by self-admitted evolutionists who know there are problems with the theory. Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge were so bummed about not finding evidence for the gradual approach to evolutionary development that they created a new theory called “punctuated equilibrium,” “punk eek” for short.
“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology,” Gould wrote. “[T]o preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.”[2]
Eldredge, the co-developer along with Gould of “punctuated equilibrium,” writes, “No wonder paleontologists shied away from evolution for so long. It never seems to happen.”[3]
OK, Laura, like you, I started with the molecular. Using observation (no one was around 3.7 billion years ago and no one has seen nothing become something) and experimentation (no one has been able to produce life in the lab), demonstrate to us how evolution took place. Don’t theorize. Don’t assert. Don’t propagandize. Show us. You can’t and neither can Richard Dawkins or any other evolutionist living or dead.

Endnotes:
  1. Alonso Ricardo and Jack Szostak, “Origin of Life on Earth,” Scientific American (September 2009), 54. []
  2. Stephen J. Gould, “Evolution’s erratic pace,” Natural History (1977), 86:14 []
  3. Niles Eldredge, Reinventing Darwin (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1995), 95. Quoted in Philip J. Sampson, 6 Modern Myths About Christianity and Western Civilization (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 59. []

About the Author

 Gary is a graduate of Western Michigan University (1973) and earned his M.Div. at Reformed Theological Seminary in 1979. He is the author of countless essays, news articles, and more than 27 book titles, His most recent book is Exposing the Real Last Days Scoffers. Gary lives in Marietta, Georgia, with his wife, Carol. They have two married sons and four grandchildren, Gary and Carol are members of Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“One day Dostoevsky threw out the enigmatic remark: "Beauty will save the world". What sort of a statement is that? For a long time I considered it mere words. How could that be possible? When in bloodthirsty history did beauty ever save anyone from anything? Ennobled, uplifted, yes - but whom has it saved?

There is, however, a certain peculiarity in the essence of beauty, a peculiarity in the status of art: namely, the convincingness of a true work of art is completely irrefutable and it forces even an opposing heart to surrender. It is possible to compose an outwardly smooth and elegant political speech, a headstrong article, a social program, or a philosophical system on the basis of both a mistake and a lie. What is hidden, what distorted, will not immediately become obvious.

Then a contradictory speech, article, program, a differently constructed philosophy rallies in opposition - and all just as elegant and smooth, and once again it works. Which is why such things are both trusted and mistrusted.

In vain to reiterate what does not reach the heart.

But a work of art bears within itself its own verification: conceptions which are devised or stretched do not stand being portrayed in images, they all come crashing down, appear sickly and pale, convince no one. But those works of art which have scooped up the truth and presented it to us as a living force - they take hold of us, compel us, and nobody ever, not even in ages to come, will appear to refute them.

So perhaps that ancient trinity of Truth, Goodness and Beauty is not simply an empty, faded formula as we thought in the days of our self-confident, materialistic youth? If the tops of these three trees converge, as the scholars maintained, but the too blatant, too direct stems of Truth and Goodness are crushed, cut down, not allowed through - then perhaps the fantastic, unpredictable, unexpected stems of Beauty will push through and soar to that very same place, and in so doing will fulfil the work of all three?

In that case Dostoevsky's remark, "Beauty will save the world", was not a careless phrase but a prophecy? After all he was granted to see much, a man of fantastic illumination.
And in that case art, literature might really be able to help the world today?” 
― Aleksandr SolzhenitsynNobel Lecture

The Bible contains truth.  Truth is the enemy of tyranny and the prescription for ignorance.   No Darwinist can show us life evolving from non-life or simple life becoming more complex.  No Darwinist can explain the sedimentary rock layers without lying or ignoring most of the evidence.  No Darwinist can provide a logical evolutionary path for the formation of stars or planets from dust and no Darwinist can explain how existence can spring forth miraculously from non-existence.  Darwinism is the opposite of truth.

The Bible says this in John 8:31-32.  "So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,  and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

“That which is called humanism, but what would be more correctly called irreligious anthropocentrism, cannot yield answers to the most essential questions of our life” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

You either believe in God and Creation or in Darwin and Evolution.   Anything else is just indecision. How many have asked Darwinists to provide actual evidence for their foolish fairy tales?  I have done it for years and have learned that they cannot do it.  So now I am saying that Darwinism is not just wrong, it is ignorant and it is evil and the propagandizers who spread such folly are part and parcel to the evil intentions of those who would return us to the Middle Ages.  There are those who wish to be the tyrants and rule over everyone else.  In Russia, they succeeded and ruled for generations, murdering tens of millions of innocents and causing tens of millions to live in poverty and despair.  You think it cannot happen here?  It happened in Cuba, it happened in Venezuela, it happened in China and many other societies.  Invariably the society that kicks God out of the center of morality and puts mankind on the throne (Humanism) will deteriorate.

“If humanism were right in declaring that man is born to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to die, his task on earth evidently must be of a more spiritual nature. It cannot the unrestrained enjoyment of everyday life. It cannot be the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then cheerfully get the most out of them. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one's life journey may become an experience of moral growth, so that one may leave life a better human being than one started it. It is imperative to review the table of widespread human values. Its present incorrectness is astounding. It is not possible that assessment of the President's performance be reduced to the question of how much money one makes or of unlimited availability of gasoline. Only voluntary, inspired self-restraint can raise man above the world stream of materialism.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

If you will seek truth and love it above comfort, you will be going against the flow.   Our society has become focused on self-satisfaction and comfort above what is true and right.   

“Our life consists not in the pursuit of material success but in the quest for worthy spiritual growth. Our entire earthly existence is but a transitional stage in the movement toward something higher, and we must not stumble and fall, nor must we linger fruitlessly on one rung of the ladder. Material laws alone do not explain our life or give it direction. The laws of physics and physiology will never reveal the indisputable manner in which the Creator constantly, day in and day out, participates in the life of each of us, unfailingly granting us the energy of existence; when this assistance leaves us, we die. And in the life of our entire planet, the Divine Spirit surely moves with no less force: this we must grasp in our dark and terrible hour.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Hebrews 1:1-3 -  "Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets,  but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.  He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high"

One thing Aleksandr and I well understood was that God will win out in the end.  If I see the United States fall, if I see the spread of tyranny seem to win for a short time here in the land of my birth, I yet know that God made the world and He will decide when and how to end it.  When God decides to accomplish something, it will be done.  Our lives are short and those who remember us soon join us in leaving this temporal existence and then discover the joy of fellowship with God or the disaster of eternal damnation.  Love will win out over hate and Truth will win out over deceit in the end.  

“It is here that we see the dawn of hope: for no matter how formidably Communism bristles with tanks and rockets, no matter what successes it attains in seizing the planet, it is doomed never to vanquish Christianity.” 
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

3 comments:

radar said...

"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate...

It is almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence." Sir Fredrick Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe
(From Evolutionisdead.com)

radar said...

"...we are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." | The Virtue of Selfishness - Ayn Rand

radar said...

"Interestingly, I've read a number of biographies of scientists who are leaders in both creationist and evolutionary thought. The overwhelming trend is that the leaders of evolutionary thought all make their living purely from evolutionary theory. They are 'specialists in evolution' and there is no way that you could see how someone whose entire life and reputation and livelihood were bound up with the theory could turn against it.
On the other hand, the leaders of the creationist movement usually have made a name for themselves in some area of fundamental and applied science — real science — before moving into creation science." Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov,
"Interview with Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov," Ex Nihilo, Vol. 14, No. 1, p. 36.
(EED)