Publications
Partners
Here we are, shouting the odds over who is right and who is wrong. Athiests argue that they do not believe in any diety, yet they will vehemently protect their stance as if it is a proven FACT. Evolutionists, who I am sure are not all athiest, but will call anybody a fool who dares question their “knowledge”. The tired old argument about the 6-day creation, which I would rather like to think any rational minded person would take as an allegorical attempt at explaining the phases of this planet of ours. The fellows who study this stuff seem to follow the pattern already laid down in Genesis, starting with the BIG BANG, as opposed to LET THERE BE LIGHT. Well I am going to skip over the first few “days” seeing as our sun and the moon only seem to appear on the “3rd day” and still no creatures have appeared, so the “4th day” and “5th day” the sea and the land were filled with plants and fish and creatures and birds and crawling things and animals etc all after their own kind, and lastly on the “6th day” we came along. With me so far? As far as I can see the patterns remain the same for the evolutionist and the creationist.
Lets digress a bit here, for evolution to have taken place at the pace we are to believe it to have happened of which there is no manual just educated guesswork. Billions upon billions of years of uninterupted progression should have occurred, which everybody knows just never did happen, the uninterupted thingy I mean. Ice ages, big ones, little ones, occassional collisions, super volcanoes, climatic disorder, temprature flunctuations and of course the rather evident flood catastrophy of recent history. The evolutionist will point out quite indignantly that the prehistoric reptiles/birds/dinosaurs and humans never saw each other at all, but in Cambodia there is a temple complex supposedly built in 900 AD with very definite carvings of these very same creatures. This of course is ignored because the builders of these structures were in some way or the other touched by the mythical gods of their ancient past and are not reliable as witnesses to their very own history. When the Hindu writings speak of one of their many gods releasing the ice-giants coiled around the mountains who bring with them a flood like no other, this too is dismissed as the ramblings of illiterate religious mumbo jumbo.
Even if I was not a Christian and was born in ignorance of any knowledge, I still would look up at the stars in wonder, I would still marvel at the wind and the change of seasons. I would watch the plants and animals and the various creatures that inhabit my world and I would wonder. I would ask the elders who gave them the knowledge of the plants and the herbs for healing and the direction on what is good to eat and what is perilous. Atheists do you not ask these questions? If you do, why do you reject the answers? Your argument is that it is science, or the knowledge of science that makes this all knowable, but the humble herdsman in the Southern Sudan, tending his herds who told him? The “lost” tribes of the Amazon basin where did they acquire their volumes of knowledge on the plants and animals they live with? The Pacific Islander just got into his canoe and populated the islands of the Pacific by pure luck? Humans must be the most luckiest being on this planet because from out of nowhere we woke up with the knowledge for everything!
All I wish to say is, do not assume we are fools because we believe that there were those who came before us with much more than you give them credit for, and they are exactly who they said they were, yes I believe in God and I do not need to make it evident, the world is evidence enough for me.
