This is the kind of aggressive assertion of truth we need more of. This is Chrisopher Hitchens' Christian brother
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyffzNR2R5U
Seeking God again
7 years ago
Friday, June 17, 2022
The Atheist Mentality
It's natural for fallen humanity to be atheist because they don't have the spiritual faculty to discern God. We lost that at the Fall, when our first parents disobeyed God. That was the first death, the loss of the spiritual connection with God. yes we are still responsi8ble to recognize God because of all the evidence around us in Nature, but with our dead spirits it's just too easy not to notice.
We have to be born again. We can't expect a Hitchens or a Dawkins of a Harris to beleive in God. It would take God Himself to draw them and turn their minds to consider the possibility. But in their own fallen conditon they can't apprehend God and since the flesh is at enmity with God have no desire to. What Jesus did and taught is understandable only through the regenerated spirit. Expecting the flesh to obey it is asking too much.
It's of course annoying to hear over and over how "religionb" includes Christianity and Islam and Roman Catholicism and all the rest of them because they have no spiritual ability to discriminate. It's also annoying to hear over and over how Christians are believers becaus we are looking for consolation or meaning or whatnot. Because that isn't why we believe. We believe because we know it is true. THEY can't tell it is true bbbut WE know it is true and that's why we believe. It's why I believe, that's for sure.
Hitchens' hideous accusation of the idea of Christ's sacrifice for us as a shirking of personal responsibility makes my jaw drop through the floor. Good grief. We can't pay for our violations of the Moral Law that runs this universe. We'd all go to Hell if God hadn't sent us His perfect sinless Son to pay our debt for us and yet that is denigrated by this Phiklistine as immoral. Yikes.
We have to be born again. We can't expect a Hitchens or a Dawkins of a Harris to beleive in God. It would take God Himself to draw them and turn their minds to consider the possibility. But in their own fallen conditon they can't apprehend God and since the flesh is at enmity with God have no desire to. What Jesus did and taught is understandable only through the regenerated spirit. Expecting the flesh to obey it is asking too much.
It's of course annoying to hear over and over how "religionb" includes Christianity and Islam and Roman Catholicism and all the rest of them because they have no spiritual ability to discriminate. It's also annoying to hear over and over how Christians are believers becaus we are looking for consolation or meaning or whatnot. Because that isn't why we believe. We believe because we know it is true. THEY can't tell it is true bbbut WE know it is true and that's why we believe. It's why I believe, that's for sure.
Hitchens' hideous accusation of the idea of Christ's sacrifice for us as a shirking of personal responsibility makes my jaw drop through the floor. Good grief. We can't pay for our violations of the Moral Law that runs this universe. We'd all go to Hell if God hadn't sent us His perfect sinless Son to pay our debt for us and yet that is denigrated by this Phiklistine as immoral. Yikes.
Evolution is Such a Fraud But The Sophsticates Wikll Browbeat Us Forever Over It
The more I try to think about the strata, those layers of sedimentary rock found all over the Earth that are equated with specific time pderiods of the past, the wackier it all seems that they were ever equated with time periods. The scientific creationists get into the rocks and examine their content and the fossils they contain and can show that way how the facts support rapid deposition of the sediment rather than slow incremental accumulation over millions of years. B But it still seems to me that just looking at the strata either in the reality of the Grand Canyon or any other actual situation, or on that cross secrion I like so much of the Grand Staircase-Grand Canyon area, you have to see with a little thought that it's absolutely impossible that they could ever have existed as separate time periods for millions of years. The idea is ludicrous in the extreme. You'd think a Dawkins or any of the scientists dealing with these things would see it.
]
I always come back to noting that they are individual undisturbed. Whether you are to think of them as havingb been underwater during their supposed time period, as presumably those of the paelolithic part of the stack would have been since they are mostly marine creatures continaed in the ro rocks, or on the surface of the earth, thethey are straught and flat on their surfaces, they usually cover enormous areas, whole contine nts, are found on many continents, yes the same layers, and surely it's not hard to see that they couldn't have surfivied either underwater or on the surface for anyh time at all in that straight falt condition.
]
,br>
RThose observations and the work of the scientists show over and over again that the best explanation for their actual condition is rapid deposition under water and Noah's Flood fits the necessary conditions both for the structure of the rocks and for the condition of the fossils like no other explanation could. ,br>
And yet they are going to go on believing that nonsense aren't they?
]
And the nonsense that
eEvolution by natural selection" explains all the diversityh of life that exists. That phrase was said over and over again in the atheist discussions, lectures and debates I've been watching. And it's always described as a hallmark of intelligence and grownupness to agree with it. I'm not going to lay it out again here because my computer is already straining to hold this much of a post, but sselection requires the loss of genetic diveristy. Evolution can't be the result of selection therefore.
]
I always come back to noting that they are individual undisturbed. Whether you are to think of them as havingb been underwater during their supposed time period, as presumably those of the paelolithic part of the stack would have been since they are mostly marine creatures continaed in the ro rocks, or on the surface of the earth, thethey are straught and flat on their surfaces, they usually cover enormous areas, whole contine nts, are found on many continents, yes the same layers, and surely it's not hard to see that they couldn't have surfivied either underwater or on the surface for anyh time at all in that straight falt condition.
]
,br>
RThose observations and the work of the scientists show over and over again that the best explanation for their actual condition is rapid deposition under water and Noah's Flood fits the necessary conditions both for the structure of the rocks and for the condition of the fossils like no other explanation could. ,br>
And yet they are going to go on believing that nonsense aren't they?
]
And the nonsense that
eEvolution by natural selection" explains all the diversityh of life that exists. That phrase was said over and over again in the atheist discussions, lectures and debates I've been watching. And it's always described as a hallmark of intelligence and grownupness to agree with it. I'm not going to lay it out again here because my computer is already straining to hold this much of a post, but sselection requires the loss of genetic diveristy. Evolution can't be the result of selection therefore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
