Want Some Answers ???Evolutionism
Thanks for your input into the discussion. You wrote,
>>Hello, my name is David, I run the office for the NZARH. Thanks to the CC's from you and Conrad, I have been following your discussion with some interest. I don't wish to intrude into your debate too much, but I was interested by your list of "Books by non-Christian Scientists".
> "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis" Dr.Michael Denton. [non-Christian]
> "Darwin's Black Box". Pro.M.J. Behe. [non-Christian]
> "Not A Change" Dr. Lee Spetner. [non-Christian]
> "Darwin on Trial" P.E. Johnson. [non-Christian]
> "Reason in the Balance P.E. Johnson. [non-Christian]
Actually, Michael Behe is a Roman Catholic and I'm pretty sure the others are all Protestants. Oh, and Philip Johnson is a lawyer, not a scientist. (They're what we call the "Neo-Creationists".)<<
Yes correct, Johnson is a Berkeley law professor, but none write from a biblical Christian, literal Genesis viewpoint or are what are commonly called "creationists". None have any religious confession, and I challenge you to quote the books and prove me wrong. You will find these authors write entirely from a scientific perspective [not Christian] and science the reason for their rejecting evolution.
For example, Denton, (a Ph.D. in molecular biology), is an active medical researcher (he is not a creationist) his hard-hitting and authoritative arguments have tremendous force. He deals at length with homology, molecular biology, genetics, design in nature, taxonomy, the absence of transitional fossils, and the historical development of evolutionary thought. Denton believes that "ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century." But if those authors are suspect, how about these?
'The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution' W.R.Fix (Macmillan Publ. 1984) 'Darwin Retried: An Appeal to Reason' N. Macbeth (Harvard Common Press, 1971). 'The Creation-Evolution Controversy' Pro.R. L Wysong (Inquiry Press, 1976). 'Evolution from Space' F.Holye & C.Wickramasinghe. Simon & Schuster NY 1981. 'Darwin Was Wrong' L. Cohen. New Research Publ. Greenvale NY 1984. 'Algeny' J. Rifkin The Viking Press NY 1983. 'The Neck of the Giraffe' F.Hitching/Ticknor & Fields NY 1982.
These scientists are also thoroughly conversant with the theory of evolution yet reject it on scientific grounds [not religious]. There are thousands of highly qualified scientists around the world who reject evolution because of science. This fact is easily verified, but as yet no humanist in the world will admit it. You wrote,
>>Also, I have a question about abortion. Do you believe that an aborted foetus goes straight to Heaven to be with Jesus? Or do you believe it goes to Hell? (Or does it not go anywhere.) Now, if the foetus does go to Heaven, then isn't this a good thing? After all, the vast majority of human babies will grow up to be non-Christians, in which case they will surely go to Hell. Jesus said of Judas that it "would have been better if he had never been born". What if Judas's mother had had an abortion? I look forward to your reply. Regards, David R.<<
There are a number of questions here. But if I understand the question - is it better some are killed in the womb, rather than live? One can argue that in some circumstances it might seem "appropriate" for an early death. But the problem I have with abortion is that humanism encourages it without ANY good reason. The wholesale slaughter industry of abortion is grounded in humanism and evolutionism, and devalues life and mankind.
Those born for judgment, why not abort them? But would that be right? And how would we know who to abort? All have a right to life. And the Bible says, "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Gen 18:25). God is without evil and judges perfectly. It's not for us to intervene and play God. What of Judas? Better had he never lived? Although his rebellion fulfilled God's Word, it's not right for us to kill him in the womb. But Jesus is right, there's nothing worse than those who reject their Maker. And the most foolish thing one can do is reject God's offer of salvation.
It may be better for Judas not to have been born, but we do not have the knowledge of who the person will be, they may well turn out to be a Mother Terresa for all we know. God has said that it is wrong to murder, this is plain and simple regardless of the outcome, and this is why we are against abortion (Psa.127:3).
Humanism talks about a "right to decide", but denies the right to life to the unborn. There's no justification to take the life of someone else based on 'religion' or a nebulous 'right to decide'.
And surely from the humanists perspective, since there is only one life, then you should advocate it's preservation at ALL costs. Also it is clear that the logical extension of your question is that murder of any innocent is OK within Christian doctrine! But from the true Christian perspective babies have been designed to breath and live and it is Gods desire that they should do so and have the free choice of what they believe, the true 'value' of redemption is brought about through freewill.