Naturalistic Atheism: Religious Worship At The Feet Of An Apostate Preacher

Atheism is a religious faith.

Unlike Christianity, atheism doesn’t have the luxury of God’s special revelation to unbelievers and so it’s down to its devoted proponents to force it upon others, any which way. 

Intimidation works well enough at the heights of the academy but the masses are largely ignorant and uninterested in a detailed study of not only biology, but also geology, history, physics, mathematics, language, and human nature itself: things that when explored sincerely totally undermine naturalism, Darwinian molecules-to-man evolution, and the atheistic religious hope and belief that somehow humanity will do whatever we please and get away with it. 

Naturally, the masses will buy something if the sales technique is convincing. It also doesn’t hurt that Darwinian evolution ensures subjective morality at best, permitting you to do whatever you please without accountability, bar to the state and your own seared conscience. 

Consider Don Boys great article below – sure, it’s preaching to the choir but when today’s Big Brother is pressing down with the 2+2=5 routine, it doesn’t hurt to be reminded that actually, it doesn’t.

Evidently the three college professors who wrote to the Chattanooga newspaper were not well-read in the current literature. They seem to be where they were during their college days but those days are long gone. Let me provide some up-to-date information that will help honest and inquiring minds make a judgment on the controversy of origins.

Only an uninformed fanatic says that evolution or creation can be proved scientifically. Christians believe in creationism because we believe in the veracity of the Bible but we also have scientific evidence to support our position.

In every debate I’ve had with evolutionary scientists, the arrogant, asinine accusation is made, “Well, evolution is science while creationism is religion.” Evolution is about as scientific as a voodoo rooster-plucking ceremony in Haiti. Almost.

Science means to know and systematized knowledge derived from observation, study, etc. It is based on observation and experimentation. Evolutionists don’t “know” anything about man’s origins. They guess, suppose, speculate, etc., but they don’t know. Honest scientists have become weary and embarrassed at the confusing, convoluted, and contradictory claptrap that often passes as science. They have watched their colleagues rush to defend Darwin rather than putting him to rigorous tests.

World famous scientist G. G. Simpson stated, “It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked by observation are not about anything…or at the very best, they are not science.” Neither creationism nor evolution can be observed or tested.

Need I remind my readers of the many incredible mistakes made by evolutionists because of their faith: Haeckel’s recapitulation theory that only third-rate scientists believe; also the vestigial organ error; the failure of the fossil record (that no informed evolutionist uses to prove his position), etc.

Let me dwell on the fossil record since most people assume it supports evolution. It does not.

Dr. David Kitts, professor of geology at the University of Oklahoma, said, “Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them….” And Lord Zuckerman admitted there are no “fossil traces” of transformation from an ape-like creature to man! I assume that all college professors know that Darwin admitted the same fact. I also assume they know that Darwin was not trained as a scientist but for the ministry, so evolutionists are worshipping at the feet of an apostate preacher!

Famous fossil expert, Niles Eldredge confessed, “…geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them.” Dr. Eldredge further said, “…no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures.”

World famous paleontologist Colin Patterson agreed saying, “there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” Not one.

All the alleged transitional fossils, that were so dear to the hearts of evolutionists a generation ago, are now an embarrassment to them. Breaks my heart! Archaeopteryx is now considered only a bird, not an intermediate fossil. The famous horse series that is still found in some textbooks and museums has been discarded and is considered a phantom and illusion because it is not proof of evolution. In fact, the first horse in the series is no longer thought to be a horse! And when a horse can’t be counted on being a horse then of course we’ve got trouble, real trouble right here in River City.

Surely it is not necessary for me to remind college professors that Piltdown Man was a total fraud and Nebraska Man turned out to be a pig’s tooth, not an ape man! And in recent years we have discovered that Neanderthal Man was simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired “ape man.” Need I go on? The truth is that only a fool says evolution is a fact as compared to gravity, and to equate scientific creationists with flat earthers as some evolutionists do is outrageous irresponsibility.

Dr. Soren Lovtrup, Professor of Zoo-physiology at the University of Umea in Sweden, wrote, “I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology: for a long time now people discuss evolutionary problems in a peculiar ‘Darwinian’ vocabulary…thereby believing that they contribute to the explanation of natural events.” He went on to say, “I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” He also said, “Evolution is ‘anti-science.’” 

And so it is.

Do those who teach evolution know that scientists have characterized Darwinism as speculation, based on faith, similar to theories of little green men, dead, effectively dead, very flimsy, incoherent, and a myth. Hey, with friends like that, evolutionists don’t need scientific creationists to hold their feet to the fire. Nevertheless, our public school textbooks and teachers, even up to most colleges and some universities, are not up to date on current thought. Did you get that–current “thought”?

I have assumed that the three college professors are familiar with all the world famous scientists I quoted above. All of them! If not, they are really uninformed, and should stay out of the evolution/creation discussion until they spend some time to bring themselves up to date.

So you see evolutionists are dishonest or uninformed when they suggest that creationists are backwoods, snake handling fanatics. In fact, over a thousand scientists with advanced degrees belong to one group that takes a stand for scientific creationism and against the guess of evolution.

Those college professors were correct in stating that Darwin’s book does not deal with the origins of life even though its title was Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. So a book about origins does not deal with the beginning of life!

Later Darwin suggested that life began in a warm little pond, but he never suggested where the pond came from! Most evolutionists teach that life started there also, but scientists have proved conclusively that spontaneous generation is impossible. So where did the first spark of life come from? You think maybe God was involved?

And would it be possible to remind everyone that Darwin and his followers were racists who believed that blacks were closer to the nonexistent ape men than whites? Thomas Huxley, Henry F. Osborne, Professor Edwin Conklin, and others preached white superiority – because of their evolutionary bias. The haters for a hundred years after Darwin can be tied to Darwin starting with Nietzsche (who asserted that God was dead, called for the breeding of a master race and for the annihilation of millions of misfits), followed by Hitler, Mussolini, Marx, Engels, Stalin, etc. Evolutionary teachings have resulted in soaking the soil of Europe in innocent blood. After all, evolutionists tell us that man is only a little higher than the animals rather than a little lower than the angels as the Bible teaches, so what’s a few million lives to be concerned about?

I don’t have the space to deal with numerous problems that evolutionists have such as the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, origin of the universe, beginning of life from non-living matter, the Cambrian explosion, etc.

Evolution is a guess, a speculation, a hypothesis, a theory, and a faith. Yes, evolution is a religion as I document in my book, Evolution: Fact, Fraud or Faith? And, since it is a faith, it should not be taught in public schools. At least, any thinking, honest person would agree that if it is, then scientific creationism should be taught along with it. After all, we do believe in balance and fairness, don’t we? Or do we?

Sorry, professors, evolution is NOT a fact. It is a fraud, a fake, a farce and a faith, and taxpayers should demand that the religion of evolution be kept out of public schools unless the truth of scientific creationism is taught as well.

http://barbwire.com/2016/04/08/evolution-not-fact-fraud-faith/

Naturalistic Evolution And Humanism: The Bloodiest Religion

Blood sacrifice is a part of most religions in some form or another because it seeks to emulate true religion that comes from God. 

It’s actually one of the easy ways to identify a false religion and the kill count of abortion stands as the biggest and longest ongoing blood sacrifice to Satan in history.

Christians are often confronted with the claim that a humanistic worldview will help society become better. Even the first Humanist Manifesto, of which belief in evolution is a subset, declared, “The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently co-operate for the common good.” But can such a statement be true?
For starters, what do the authors mean by “good”? They have no legitimate foundation for such a concept, since one person’s “good” can be another’s “evil.” To have some objective standard, they must borrow from the teachings of God in the Bible.

Beyond that, does evolution really teach a future of prosperity? What has been the result of evolutionary thinking in the past hundred years? Perhaps this could be a test of what is to come. Let’s first look at the casualties stemming from leaders with evolutionary worldviews, beginning in the 1900s, to see the hints of what this “next level” looks like:

Who/What? Specific Event and Estimated Dead

Pre-Hitler Germany/Hitler and the Nazis 

WWI: 20,000,000 dead, 21,000,000 wounded1

WWII: 72,000,0002

Holocaust: 17,000,000? (estimates range from 7 to 26 million)3
Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin Bolshevik revolution and Russian Civil War: 15,000,0004

Joseph Stalin 20,000,0005

Mao Zedong 14,000,000–20,000,0006

Pol Pot (Saloth Sar) 750,000–1,700,0007
Abortion* 

China estimates 1971–2006: 300,000,0008

Russia estimates 1954–1991: 280,000,0009

US estimates 1973–2014: 57,496,01110

France estimates 1936–2006: 5,749,73111

UK estimates 1958–2006: 6,090,73812

Germany estimates 1968–2007: 3,699,62413

Charles Darwin’s view of evolution was catapulted into societies around the world in the mid- to late 1800s. Evolutionary teachings influenced Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, and many others. Let’s take a closer look at some of these people and events and examine the evolutionary influence and repercussions.

World War I and II, Hitler, Nazis, and the Holocaust

Most historians would point to the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 18, 1914, as the event that triggered World War I (WWI). But tensions were already high considering the state of Europe at the time. Darwinian sentiment was brewing in Germany. Darwin once said:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes . . . will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian [Aborigine] and the gorilla.14

Darwin viewed the “Caucasian” (white-skinned Europeans) as the dominant “race” in an evolutionary worldview. To many evolutionists at the time, mankind had evolved from ape-like creatures that had more hair, dark skin, dark eyes, etc. Therefore, more “evolved” meant less body hair, blond hair, blue eyes, etc. Later in Hitler’s era, Nazi Germany practiced Lebensborn, which was a controversial program, the details of which have not been entirely brought to light. Many claim it was a breeding program that tried to evolve the “master race” further—more on this below.

But the German sentiment prior to WWI was very much bent on conquering for the purpose of expanding their territory and their “race.” An encyclopedia entry from 1936 states:

In discussions of the background of the war much has been said of Pan-Germanism, which was the spirit of national consciousness carried to the extreme limit. The Pan-Germans, who included not only militarists, but historians, scientists, educators and statesmen, conceived the German people, no matter where they located, as permanently retaining their nationality. The most ambitious of this group believed that it was their mission of Germans to extend their kultur (culture) over the world, and to accomplish this by conquest if necessary. In this connection the theory was advanced that the German was a superior being, destined to dominate other peoples, most of whom were thought of as decadent.15

Germany had been buying into an extreme view of Darwin’s model of evolution and saw themselves as the superior “race,” destined to dominate the world. This view set the stage for Hitler and the Nazi party and paved the road to WWII.

Hitler

World War II dwarfed World War I in the total number of people who died. Racist attitudes exploded in Germany against people groups such as Jews, Poles, and many others. Adolf Hitler was heavily influenced by Darwin’s teaching on evolution.

Hitler even tried to force the Protestant church in Germany to change fundamental tenants because of his newfound faith.16 In 1936, while Hitler was in power, an encyclopedia entry on Hitler stated:

. . . a Hitler attempt to modify the Protestant faith failed.17

His actions strongly suggest that he did not hold to the basic fundamentals taught in the 66 books of the Bible. Though some of his writings suggest he did believe in some form of God early on, his religious views moved toward humanism after his acceptance of evolution. This refutes notions that Hitler was a Protestant Christian as some have claimed. Consider this quote in his unpublished second book:

The types of creatures on the earth are countless, and on an individual level their self-preservation instinct as well as the longing for procreation is always unlimited; however, the space in which this entire life process plays itself out is limited. It is the surface area of a precisely measured sphere on which billions and billions of individual beings struggle for life and succession. In the limitation of this living space lies the compulsion for the struggle for survival, and the struggle for survival, in turn contains the precondition for evolution.18

Hitler continues:

The history of the world in the ages when humans did not yet exist was initially a representation of geological occurrences. The clash of natural forces with each other, the formation of a habitable surface on this planet, the separation of water and land, the formation of the mountains, plains, and the seas. That [was] is the history of the world during this time. Later, with the emergence of organic life, human interest focuses on the appearance and disappearance of its thousandfold forms. Man himself finally becomes visible very late, and from that point on he begins to understand the term “world history” as referring to the history of his own development—in other words, the representation of his own evolution. This development is characterized by the never-ending battle of humans against animals and also against humans themselves.19

Hitler fully believed Darwin as well as Darwin’s precursors—such as Charles Lyell’s geological ages and millions of years of history. In his statements here, there is no reference to God. Instead, he unreservedly flew the banner of naturalism and evolution. His evolutionary views certainly helped lead him and the Nazi party into WWII because they viewed the “Caucasian” as more evolved, which to them justified their adoption of the idea that lesser “races” would be eliminated in the struggle for survival. Among the first to be targeted were Jews, then Poles, and then many others.

Trotsky, Lenin

Trotsky and Lenin were both notorious leaders of the USSR—and specifically the Russian revolution. Lenin, taking power in 1917, became a ruthless leader and selected Trotsky as his heir. Lenin and Trotsky held to Marxism, which was built on Darwinism and evolution. Karl Marx regarded Darwin’s book as an “epoch making book.” With regards to Darwin’s research on natural origins, Marx claimed, “The latter method is the only materialistic and, therefore, the only scientific one.”20

Few realize or admit that Marxism, the primary idea underlying communism, is built on Darwinism. In 1883, Freidrich Engels, Marx’s longtime friend and collaborator, stated at Marx’s funeral service that “Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history.”21 Both Darwin and Marx built their ideologies on naturalism and materialism.

Trotsky once said of Darwin:

Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe. I was intoxicated with his minute, precise, conscientious and at the same time powerful, thought. I was the more astonished when I read . . . that he had preserved his belief in God. I absolutely declined to understand how a theory of the origin of species by way of natural selection and sexual selection and a belief in God could find room in one and the same head.22

Trotsky’s high regard for evolution and Darwin were the foundation of his belief system. Like many, Trotsky probably did not realize that most of the precious few instances of the name “God” did not appear in the first edition of Origin of Species. These references were added later, and many suspect that this was done to influence church members to adopt Darwinism. Regardless, Trotsky may not have read much of Darwin’s second book, Descent of Man, in which Darwin claims that man invented God:

The same high mental faculties which first led man to believe in unseen spiritual agencies, then in fetishism, polytheism, and ultimately in monotheism, would infallibly lead him, as long as his reasoning powers remained poorly developed, to various strange superstitions and customs.23

Vladimir Lenin picked up on Darwinism and Marxism and ruled very harshly as an evolutionist. His variants of Marxism have become known as Leninism (see The Development of Capitalism in Russia). Regardless, the evolutionist roots of Marx, Trotsky, and Lenin were the foundation that Communism has stood on—and continues to stand on.

Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, to name a few

Perhaps the most ruthless communist leaders were Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. Each of these were social Darwinists, ruling three different countries—the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia respectively. Their reigns of terror demonstrated the end result of reducing the value of human life to that of mere animals, a Darwinistic teaching.24

Abortion

The war on children has been one of the quietest and yet bloodiest in the past hundred years. In an evolutionary mindset, the unborn have been treated as though they are going through an “animal phase” and can simply be discarded.

Haeckel’s Embryo Drawing

Early evolutionist Ernst Haeckel first popularized the concept that babies in the womb are actually undergoing animal developmental stages, such as a fish stage and so on. This idea has come to be known as ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Haeckel even faked drawings of various animals’ embryos and had them next to drawn human embryos looking virtually identical.

These drawings have been shown to be completely false.25 Haeckel himself partially confessed as much.26 However, this discredited idea has been used repeatedly for a hundred years! Textbooks today still use this concept, and museums around the world still teach it.

Through this deception, many women have been convinced that the babies they are carrying in their wombs are simply going through an animal phase and can be aborted. Author Ken Ham states:

In fact, some abortion clinics in America have taken women aside to explain to them that what is being aborted is just an embryo in the fish stage of evolution, and that the embryo must not be thought of as human. These women are being fed outright lies.27

Evolutionary views have decreased the value of human life. Throughout the world the casualties of the war on children is staggering. Though deaths of children and the unborn did exist prior to the “evolution revolution,” they have increased exponentially as a result of Darwinian teachings.

Conclusion

Is evolution the cause of wars and deaths? Absolutely not—both existed long before Darwin was born. Sin is the ultimate cause.28 But an evolutionary worldview has done nothing but add fuel to the fire.

In spite of the wars and atrocities caused by those who subscribed to an evolutionary worldview in recent times, there is still hope. We can end the seemingly endless atrocities against the unborn.

In Egypt, Israelite boys were slaughtered by being thrown into the Nile at the command of Pharaoh (Exodus 1:20). And yet, by the providence of God, Moses survived and led the Israelites to safety, and the Lord later judged the Egyptians.

In Israel under the Roman Empire, Herod the Great commanded the slaughter of all the boys under the age of two in and around Bethlehem. And yet, by the providence of God, Jesus, the Son of God, survived and later laid down His life to bring salvation to mankind as the Prince of Peace. Herod’s name, however, went down in history as an evil tyrant and murderer.

In this day and age, governments readily permit the killing of children, both boys and girls, and sometimes command it (abortion). By providence, however, you survived. While we can’t change the past, we can learn from it. If we are to stop this continuing bloodshed, we must get back to the Bible and realize the bankrupt religion of evolution has led only to death—by the millions.
Footnotes

World War I Casualties, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties, October 23, 2008, as with all of these statistics, they may have some variance depending on source.

World War II Casualties, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties, October 23, 2008.

The Holocaust, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust, October 23, 2008.

Russian Civil War, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War, October 23, 2008.

Joseph Stalin, http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/stalin.html, October 23, 2008.

Mao Tse-Tung, http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/mao.html, October 23, 2008.

Pol Pot, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_Pot, October 23, 2008.

Historical abortion statistics, PR China, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston , last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-prchina.html.

Historical abortion statistics, U.S.S.R., compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston , last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-ussr.html

“Abortion Statistics: United States Data & Trends,” National Right to Life, http://www.nrlc.org/uploads/factsheets/FS01AbortionintheUS.pdf.

Historical abortion statistics, France, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-france.html.

Historical abortion statistics, United Kingdom, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedkingdom.html

Historical abortion statistics, FR Germany, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-frgermany.html

Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (New York: A.L. Burt, 1874, 2nd ed.), p. 178.

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 3914 under entry “World War.”

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 1702 under entry “Hitler.”

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 1494 under entry “Germany.”

Hitler’s Second Book, Adolf Hitler, Edited by Gerald L. Weinberg, 2003 Enigma books, Translated by Krista Smith, p. 8.

Hitler’s Second Book, Adolf Hitler, Edited by Gerald L. Weinberg, 2003 Enigma books, Translated by Krista Smith, p. 9.

Great Books of the Western World, Volume 50, Capital, Karl Marx, William Benton (Publishers), Chicago, 1952, Footnotes on p. 166 and p. 181

Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution, London,: Chatto & Windus, 1959, p. 348.

Eastman, Max, Trotsky: A portrait of his youth, New York, pp. 117-118, 1925.

Darwin, Charles, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Chapter III (Mental Powers of Man and the Lower Animals), 1871, As printed in the Great Books of the Western World, Volume 49, Robert Hutchins, Ed., Chicago, 1952, p. 303.

Raymond Hall, Darwin’s Impact—The Bloodstained Legacy of Evolution.

Michael Richardson et al, Anatomy and Embryology, 196(2):91-106, 1997.

Haeckel said, “ . . . a small portion of my embryo-pictures (possibly 6 or 8 in a hundred) are really (in Dr Brass’s [one of his critics] sense of the word) “falsified”—all those, namely, in which the disclosed material for inspection is so incomplete or insufficient that one is compelled in a restoration of a connected development series to fill up the gaps through hypotheses, and to reconstruct the missing members through comparative syntheses. What difficulties this task encounters, and how easily the draughts- man may blunder in it, the embryologist alone can judge.” The Truth about Haeckel’s Confession, The Bible Investigator and Inquirer, M.L. Hutchinson, Melbourne, March 11, 1911, p. 22–24.

Ham, Ken, The Lie: Evolution, Chapter 8 (The Evils of Evolution), Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 1987, p. 105.

The New Answers Book 1, Gen. Ed. Ken Ham, Master Books, Green Forest, Arkansas, 2006, Chapter 26: Why Does God’s Creation Include Death and Suffering?, pp.325–338.

https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/the-results-of-evolution/

Dangerous Christians Discarding Scripture

This blog is all about signs highlighting troubles in these last days.

Many Christians become uncomfortable when you start telling them truths such as the 1.5 billion death toll of murder by abortion or that Islam is, according to its own sources, a religion of terror.

They seem to think that because God is loving, he won’t allow their entire culture to sink into a quagmire of destruction. History and scripture say otherwise.

One of the ways to solve the inconvenient problem of truth is to either twist it or abandon it entirely, something theology schools often seem intent on doing very effectively as this recent story reveals:

A Wheaton College professor announced on Facebook Thursday night that she will be wearing a hijab (Muslim head scarf) throughout her celebration of the Advent as a way of showing solidarity with Muslims.
Larycia Hawkins, a political science professor at the Wheaton, Illinois, evangelical higher education institution, explained on her Facebook page that she will be wearing a hijab to work, class, and church. She also vows to wear the hijab during her trip to Chicago and even when she goes on an airplane to return to her hometown for Christmas.

“I don’t love my Muslim neighbor because s/he is American. I love my Muslim neighbor because s/he deserves love by virtue of her/his human dignity,” Hawkins wrote. “I stand in human solidarity with my Muslim neighbor because we are formed of the same primordial clay, descendants of the same cradle of humankind — a cave in Sterkfontein, South Africa that I had the privilege to descend into to plumb the depths of our common humanity in 2014.”

Hawkins, who has been on the Wheaton faculty since 2007, further asserted that not only are Muslims her neighbors but they also “worship the same God.”

“I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book. And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God,” Hawkins stated. “But as I tell my students, theoretical solidarity is not solidarity at all. Thus, beginning tonight, my solidarity has become embodied solidarity.”

“As part of my Advent Worship, I will wear the hijab to work at Wheaton College, to play in Chi-town, in the airport and on the airplane to my home state that initiated one of the first anti-Sharia laws (read: unconstitutional and Islamophobic), and at church,” she added.

Hawkins did not respond to requests from The Christian Post for comments by press time.

The Wheaton College professor further explained that she hopes she is not the only non-Muslim woman wearing a hijab this holiday season, as she desires to start a movement of women showing their solidarity for Muslims.

“I invite all women into the narrative that is embodied, hijab-wearing solidarity with our Muslim sisters — for whatever reason. A large scale movement of Women in Solidarity with Hijabs is my Christmas ‪#‎wish‬ this year,” Hawkins continued. “Perhaps you are a Muslim who does not wear the veil normally. Perhaps you are an atheist or agnostic who finds religion silly or inexplicable. Perhaps you are a Catholic or Protestant Christian like me. Perhaps you already cover your head as part of your religious worship, but not a hijab.”

Hawkins turned to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), where she has a friend on staff, for advice on whether it would be offensive to Muslims if a non-Muslim wears a hijab.

“I asked whether a non-Muslim wearing the hijab was haram (forbidden), patronizing, or otherwise offensive to Muslims. I was assured by my friends at CAIR-Chicago that they welcomed the gesture,” she explained. “So please do not fear joining this embodied narrative of actual as opposed to theoretical unity; human solidarity as opposed to mere nationalistic, sentimentality.”

In a generation in desperate need of people to stand up and speak truth, we have “theology” teachers laying down and becoming absolutely useless.

The reality is that Hawkins has far more in common with atheistic humanists, given her trust in unobserved molecules-to-man evolution and her naive support of Islam, a religion that has killed more Christians than even humanism.

Ken Ham makes some important commentary about this growing trend:

As reported in the Christian Post with the headline “Wheaton College Prof. to Wear Hijab During Advent to Show Solidarity With Muslims,” an associate professor at a once-theologically conservative Christian school, Wheaton College, stated the following on her Facebook page:

As part of my Advent Worship, I will wear the hijab to work at Wheaton College, to play in Chi-town, in the airport and on the airplane to my home state that initiated one of the first anti-Sharia laws (read: unconstitutional and Islamophobic), and at church.

She also stated, “I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book. And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God.”

Now, Christians and Muslims certainly do not “worship the same God.” The God of the Bible is not the same as that of the Quran (Koran).

As AiG speaker/writer Bodie Hodge states,

Religious books, such as Islam’s Koran, Mormonism’s Book of Mormon, and Hinduism’s Vedas, contradict the Bible; and so they cannot be Scripture. For example, the Koran in two chapters (Sura 4:171 and 23:91) says God had no son, but the Bible is clear that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God (Matthew 26:63–64).

In another article on the AiG website we point out,

Like the Bible, the Quran teaches that people are descendants of Adam and Eve and are imperfect sinners. However, the Quran also teaches that their god, Allah, inspired sin in humankind (Quran 4:88; 7:16–18; 9:51; 14:4; 16:93; 35:8; 57:22; 74:31; 91:7–9). Muslims believe that humans are sinners because Allah has willed it. They have no understanding similar to the Bible’s teaching that humans, not God, caused sin through rebellion against God (Romans 5:12, 5:18–19).

The Quran’s teachings regarding salvation are inconsistent. On the one hand, the Quran teaches that salvation is based on purification by good deeds (Quran 7:6–9). A Muslim can become righteous through prayer, almsgiving, fasting, and living according to the Quran. Yet the Quran also teaches that Allah has predetermined every person’s destiny, and one’s righteous acts may or may not affect Allah’s decision (Quran 57:22). It teaches that everyone, both the righteous and the unrighteous, will be led into hell by Allah, before the righteous will enter heaven (Quran 19:67–72). Therefore no Muslim can know his or her eternal destiny in this life. Even Muhammad himself was unsure of his salvation (Quran 31:34; 46:9).

The Quran actually states that people are descendants of Adam and Eve. Yet this associate professor from Wheaton College denies this, and so exhibits a gross inconsistency. She states the following in giving an evolutionary view of history:

I stand in human solidarity with my Muslim neighbor because we are formed of the same primordial clay, descendants of the same cradle of humankind—a cave in Sterkfontein, South Africa that I had the privilege to descend into to plumb the depths of our common humanity in 2014.

So she actually contradicts the Quran when she uses an evolutionary view of history as part of her reasoning to display a solidarity with Muslims.

Over the years, we’ve been warning the church that so many Christian colleges have been compromising God’s Word in Genesis—and we’ve been warning that such compromise will eventually lead to apostasy. This is exactly what we are seeing in this example from a Wheaton College professor.

In a way, a similar kind of compromise happened in Jeremiah’s day. Jeremiah warned the people and the leader (the king) to believe God’s Word. When God had Jeremiah write down the warnings to the people, we read,

Now the king was sitting in the winter house in the ninth month, with a fire burning on the hearth before him. And it happened, when Jehudi had read three or four columns, that the king cut it with the scribe’s knife and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the scroll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth. Yet they were not afraid, nor did they tear their garments, the king nor any of his servants who heard all these words. (Jeremiah 36:22–24)

So many Christian college professors have been tearing out God’s Word and, in a sense, “burning” it. They started tearing out the account of the creation in six days, then the account of the Flood, and now the account of the creation of a literal Adam and Eve. They have also been tearing out the Bible’s doctrine of marriage. I submit that they have taken God’s Word and “cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the scroll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.” “Yet they were not afraid,” just like in Jeremiah’s day. But they should be very afraid:

It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (Hebrews 10:31)

One day these Christian colleges, their professors, presidents, and boards will give an account before the Lord for their actions—which are leading generations astray.

In 2011, we published the book Already Compromised that detailed the research on the state of Christian colleges in this nation and what they believe. That book, along with two others, Already Gone and Ready to Return, are the most definitive works on the state of Christianity in America (reflecting the Western world). The research for each book was conducted by renowned researcher Britt Beemer from America’s Research Group. All three books are now available as a special pack titled Ready for Reformation. I urge you to obtain a set and understand what is happening to the church when it comes to compromise with the Bible, and how it is having a devastating impact on generations.

“Times of trouble” is exactly how you describe Christians going AWOL from the gospel about Jesus Christ and the coming kingdom of God and instead centring their lives on catastrophic ignorance and reality-defying idiocy.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/wheaton-college-prof-to-wear-hijab-during-advent-to-show-solidarity-with-muslims-152329/
https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2015/12/15/christian-colleges-burn-gods-word/

The Saviour Of Humanity: Environmental Socialism Or Jesus The Messiah?

Every worldview has a common basic framework.

Cosmogeny describes the origins of the universe and life.

Soteriology introduces a cosmological problem or conflict that requires addressing and describes the journey towards and means of restoring, fixing, or saving the universe and life from this problem.

Eschatology describes the end goal and final destination of the soteriological method.

The biblical worldview establishes that God is both the beginning and the end goal for humanity, with Jesus becoming human, dying, and resurrecting in order to restore us to God and giving us the choice to enter into God’s eternal family. The obvious problem to overcome is sin or rebellion against God’s character and consequently death. The eschatological promise includes a new heavens and a new earth where pain and suffering, sin and death have no place and God dwells with us on the earth forever.

The naturalist worldview likewise follows the above framework and the salvation method it offers is evolutionary progress towards greater complexity, an assumed immortality through technology, and a harmony between humanity and the natural world.

So while naturalistic atheists love to proclaim the Christianity is all about terrorising people with the idea of hell and punishment from a just and holy God (the basic concepts are accurate but they utterly deface the character and the motive because of their hatred of God), they themselves become the prophets of naturalistic doom with the herald of climate catastrophe and the promise of a technological but thoroughly socialist future.

These aforementioned prophets of naturalistic doom include POTUS Barack Obama and, disappointingly, Pope Francis who are two spokes of a United Nations wheel rolling us all towards a world government with excessive power over and access into our personal lives. That is, of course, the price we must all pay for rigidly enforced protection from environmental villainy.

Needless to say, it’s one that finds an enemy in the proclamation of the biblical Jesus and the good news concerning the Kingdom of God.

So where the free market and the freedom to live independently of government coercion, empowered by biblical Christianity and God-fearing Christian values and culture, has led many nations out of abstract poverty and corruption, Obama and the climate-worshiping leftist control freaks are out to give us all a modern shade of communism under the banner of “progressivism”.

Don’t be fooled though, the inner workings of this machine are no different from the one that murdered over one hundred million people during peacetime in the 20th century. Some one get the word out that big government always leads to oppression already!

They offer us names like “Sustainable Development Summit”, which sounds real nice but the end result will obviously look something like Obama’s crowing foreign policy achievement: the disastrous Iran deal. Either that or any of the failed communist states and really, they are probably two sides of the same coin.

Todd Stranberg makes some astute comments about Obama’s functioning plan to destroy America’s economy in the article below and it’s worth getting some insight into where this is all headed:

Obama’s De-growth Agenda

The coal industry is facing its toughest challenge since The Great Depression of 1929. The collapse in coal prices and a growing weight from new regulations has claimed dozens of firms. In just recent months, three major coal producers have filed for bankruptcy.

Alpha Natural Resources operates more than fifty underground and surface mines in five states. It is the nation’s largest producer of the type of coal used in steel production. In 2011, Alpha Natural Resources was worth $11 billion in stock value. The firm is now worth less than $7 million.
Peabody Energy Corporation, is the largest private-sector coal company in the world. In 2011, its stock traded as high as $73 per share. Today, you can buy a share in company with one single dollar.

This apocalypse in coal could have been predicted by anyone who read President Barack Obama’s views on the industry. On January 17, 2008, Obama made known his hostility toward, of all things, electricity generated from coal and coal-powered plants. He told the San Francisco Chronicle, “You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal . . . under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Obama added “. . . So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all the greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”

The president argues against the use of coal because he views carbon dioxide as a pollutant. In a recent speech, Obama compared it to mercury. Carbon dioxide is not a poison. It is a natural part of the atmosphere. Green plants need it to grow and produce oxygen. Without it our planet would freeze.

The coal business is a vital part of the American economy. It is responsible for over 555,000 Jobs and contributes $65.7 billion to national GDP. Average wages and salaries in coal mine operations (excluding support activities and transportation) is approximately $72,200. Nearly a third of our nation’s electrical power comes from coal fired plants. The state of Kentucky gets 97% of its power from coal.

A rational president would see the damage his previous policies are inflicting on coal and change direction. Obama obviously doesn’t care about the economic impact. He has ordered the EPA to mandate a 32 percent reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030.

The White House expects wind and solar power to play a much bigger role in our energy needs, but we only get 0.4% of our power from solar and wind topped out at 4%. There is a limit to the number of new hydropower plants we can build. Unless we turn to nuclear power, this goal of coal power reduction is a pipe dream.

Another major flaw in this plan is the increase in coal consumption by other nations. China is building one coal-fired power plant every 7 to 10 days, while Japan plans to build 43 coal-fired power projects to replace its shuttered nuclear units. India is another nation with rapidly growing power needs.

The only thing Obama’s socialist plan is going to get us is blackouts, rolling brownouts, and massively higher electric bills. America has such a good power system, most Americans don’t realize how common disruption are in the third world.

The president is seeking to downsize America because he is a supporter of the de-growth agenda. This movement sees the reduction of production and consumption as a benefit to human well-being and the equity of the planet. It calls for a future where societies live within their ecological means, with open localized economies and resources more equally distributed through new forms of Democratic institutions. Obama thinks the U.S. takes too large a piece of the resource pie, so we need to cut back our demand.

Every nation that has followed the Marxist utopian blueprint has ended in disaster. Venezuela is a prime example. Right now, its economy is in a meltdown mode. Lake Maracaibo, at 5,097 square miles, is the largest fresh water lake in South America. Venezuela’s leftist government has allowed oil to leak into Lake Maracaibo, making it one of the most polluted bodies of water on earth.

The de-growth movement is just another plot by the devil to destroy America. The true goal of the environmental movement is to draw the world into a central body that would set the rules. This plan is part of Satan’s master scheme to recreate the type of control he had during the time of the Babylonian Empire. The only way to get back to Babylon is to push for world unity.

I know that environmentalists would bristle at the idea of a refurbished earth being the ultimate solution to all ecological problems. If the world is going to be “dissolved,” there is no need for us to become too attached to it. Knowing that the earth will eventually be put back in order, we need to be concerned with the preservation of our eternal souls.

“…The heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness” (2 Peter 3:10-11).

“For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26).

When did government ever come through on all of its promises? And how often did those promises lead to the murder of its own citizens? 

Exactly!

As for me and my house, we will trust in the Lord Jesus, Messiah.
http://raptureready.com/rap16.html

Germany Was Groomed For The Holocaust By Evolution And Social Darwinism

Many in the West argue that murdering children through abortion is “a woman’s right”. Ask school aged children and you will find a large proportion are totally accepting of this excuse and some will admantly defend this heinous crime as morally sound.

Our society did not always believe this and so we need to understand how it is that we have come to willingly participate in the murder of approximately one fifth of the entire living human race  in the last century (yes, about one and a half billion people dead!)

Likewise, we should understand that Germany didn’t up and decide to gas millions of Jews and other undesirables on a whim – they were prepared by a century of philosophical indoctrination.

The doctrine in question is Darwinian evolution – the unproven idea that all life came from one form of life – and it’s logical social implication was that not all animals are equal: namely, white animals are superior.

This led the German nation under the leadership of avid naturalist Adolf Hitler down the road of eugenics – the improvement of humanity and the removal of the undesirable – which involved the murder of children, the disabled, and anyone who didn’t make the classification of “superior”, including but not limited to the Jews.

So while Martin Luther and others had given the Germans religious reasoning to dislike the Jews (through a false understanding of the bible – keep in mind Jesus is a Jew and therefore not so big on promoting anitsemetism), it was naturalism, evolution, social Darwinism, and eugenics that offered “scientific” reasoning for the extermination of the “sub-human” Jews.

The recent video from Creation Ministries International explores this process and its consequences: