Clickbank Products

Was Jesus invented through ancient myths?

THINK THIS ARGUMENT WORKS? WELL..NOT REALLY!!

Where in the World?

PROOF OF THE REAL MOUNT SINAI IN ARABIA!

The Bible bends all natural laws and rules because it is a supernatural book.
It cannot POSSIBLY be understood by a natural mind focused upon natural understanding. That is what Nicodemus discovered when he came to Christ trying to understand, with a natural mind, supernatural events and teachings.

Because scientists being naturally skeptical, have minds trapped in the box of the five physical senses they cannot focus therefore on the supernatural aspects to understand the biblical 'Birdseye view' of God, who sees things from OUTSIDE time and space, the box that we as finite are limited within .

There was a reason why Jesus said you must be born again. It is a SPIRITUAL rebirth [Both of Mind and Spirit] that is needed to release the hidden evidence of things we cannot witness from inside this physical 'BOX' universe.

I KNOW from personal experience that the Bible is true but I cannot convince you, you must find the truth yourself. THAT'S HOW LIFE WORKS!

Spend less time developing your skeptical natural mind and THAT'S WHAT YOUR DOING, and more time focusing on what Christ taught and you will discover as I have, the truth. You can only interpret the Universe through the shaded lens of your own understanding!
There was an error in this gadget

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

My Debate with an Atheist on Sodahead- PART 3

MY ATHEIST FRIEND:

"prove this god exists without any biblical references or any writings by others! 

go ahead. i will be waiting.

and again with the insults from a fake minister."
******************************************************
MY RESPONSE:


You don't understand the Laws of evidence do you?
You cannot prove something spiritual to a NON spiritual mind, What I can do is present proof from existing evidences in nature and history that his existence is indeed possible, the rest is based upon 'knowledgeable understanding' through faith as it should be. YOU REFUSE TO SEE IT SO HOW IS THAT MY FAULT EXACTLY?

Atheists created an impossible idea and called it PROOF, because they know the same thing, proof is in the eyes of the beholder and anything can be denied so all you have to do is deny everything without explanation and the Christian is left with nothing!

The truth though is the opposite, the PROOF is there and ABSOLUTE, it never changes, it never goes away, its your understanding of it that changes and morphs not the evidence of God. You simply change the rules of interpretation of the evidence to suite you any time it gets close...BUT ITS STILL THERE NONETHELESS!

The ONLY reason the Bible bothers Atheists is because the witness to truth cannot be refuted, therefore its easier to eliminate the evidence than to deal with it. They would rather take their chances with the secondary proof....Nature, History, and Science because they can confuse the ignorant and create skepticism.

It is you who must PROVE HE DOESN'T EXIST since the evidence from smallest to greatest indicates he is indeed possible! I will be waiting as I have for over 30 years now!

We know that we exist because . We are irrefutable evidence that intelligent life exists in the universe, give or take a few of us.

So, is it really that much of a stretch to think that there might be intelligent life capable of creating a universe with form, structure and physical laws that always seem to remain constant? Just as its not a stretch to think that a Car that's designed might just have a designer.

The fact that we live in a universe with reliable physical laws is a bit ironic, don't you think? Considering that many scientists believe the universe evolved by random processes that had no intelligence of their own.

How could INTELLIGENCE come from nothing colliding with nothing over millions of years? Life comes from life, that's simple science but you think that life came from non-life...who's got more faith? Me or you?

To prove the existence of a higher power, we can begin by assuming there is no higher power.

What kind of universe would we have?

A random one, of course. Everything would happen without a purpose.

Nothing could be predicted; nothing could be relied on.

Mathematics and science would have no value because nothing could be reliably measured or have regularity, that's what random means and without God everything in life if life could finally come together right would be a mixed up puzzle WITHOUT A SET PURPOSE.

A belief that there are NO ABSOLUTES only leads to disorder [Chaos] not order therefore Evolution cannot be true simply because absolutes are not allowed, the universe is FINE TUNED and even its chaotic elements obey certain order. LAWS are proof absolutes exist, evolution obeys PHYSICAL LAWS so it must have absolutes to function though it denies them outright!

And please, stop with the nonsense about insults, you OF ALL PEOPLE cannot talk, you trample peoples beliefs and feelings with each response here and then cry when your told your ignorant about something, that only means you don't know as much as you think you know, NOT that your stupid or dumb! I stated before that you ARE smarter than your acting on here, I know that's true!
*********************************************
MY ATHEIST FRIEND:


the only reason the big book of fairytales bothers us is because the believers think its true and throw it in our faces as fact all the time!
bible  writing cartoons bible  writing cartoons


***************************************************
MY RESPONSE:

We do what? I didn't know you existed before you opened YOUR TEXT to insult my beliefs, so I guess I can use that same excuse on why I find Atheism repulsive?

Your religion is just as bad as all religion so stop pretending to be pure apart from religion, your in the same 'UNHOLY BED' with the hypocrites you hate!

ITS THE LAW OF THE LAND, if you deny it, well how can you, you have become your enemy....now what?

Court rules atheism a religion
Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate’s right to start study group.

http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31...

Atheism Is Protected As a Religion, says Court.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/603...


HERE'S GREAT PROOF THAT ITS A RELIGION:
http://debunkingatheists.blog...

I know, I know, you have heard it all before.

I read a blog post that spelled it out pretty well, enough to re post it. Kevin Childs is a DJ at The Rock (Rockc3.com) and he did a post discussing how Atheists belong to a religion.

We, as rational individuals, all know its true except the atheists themselves. When, and only when, they understand that they indeed belong to a religion, then we can get down as to who holds the most accurate and truthful religion out there.

For Atheists to attempt to claim "neutrality", in reference to God, is a complete cop out and disingenuous intellectually. They have indeed picked a side. They choose their religion based on what they believe is evidential to their presuppositions.

Denying what they believe, and hold as truth, may be an easier pill for them to swallow but they are only attempting to deceive themselves.

Childs makes the case:

Atheism is a religion.

Atheism IS a religion. I know that some have made that statement without much evidence. And I know that atheists themselves heatedly deny it.

I’ve heard their rejoinders: If atheism is a religion, then not playing baseball is a sport. Or, atheism is to religion what bald is to hair color. Clever. I guess I don’t blame them for denying it, but denying something doesn’t prove it is not there. (I would advise any atheist readers to re-read the previous sentence until BOTH meanings sink in.)


A religion doesn’t have to posit a god who must be identified or worshiped. Some religions are polytheistic (Hinduism, Mormonism), some monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), some non-theistic (Buddhism). I’d say the new atheists and their religion are “anti-theistic.” But their atheism is religious nonetheless.

Consider this:

They have their own worldview.

Materialism (the view that the material world is all there is) is the lens through which atheists view the world. Far from being the open-minded, follow-the-evidence-wherever thinkers they claim to be, they interpret all data ONLY within the very narrow worldview of materialism. They are like a guy wearing dark sunglasses who chides all others for thinking the sun is out.


They have their own orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy is a set of beliefs acceptable to a faith community. Just as there are orthodox Christian beliefs, there is an atheist orthodoxy as well. In brief, it is that EVERYTHING can be explained as the product of unintentional, undirected, purposeless evolution. No truth claim is acceptable if it cannot be subjected to scientific scrutiny.


They have their own brand of apostasy.

Apostasy is to abandon one’s former religious faith. Antony Flew was for many years one of the world’s most prominent atheists. And then he did the unthinkable: he changed his mind. You can imagine the response of the “open-minded, tolerant” New Atheist movement. Flew was vilified.

Richard Dawkins accused Flew of “tergiversation.” It’s a fancy word for apostasy. By their own admission, then, Flew abandoned their “faith.”

They have their own prophets:

Nietzsche, Russell, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx.


They have their own messiah:

He is, of course, Charles Darwin. Darwin – in their view – drove the definitive stake through the heart of theism by providing a comprehensive explanation of life that never needs God as a cause or explanation. Daniel Dennett has even written a book seeking to define religious faith itself as merely an evolutionary development.


They have their own preachers and evangelists.

And boy, are they “evangelistic.” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens (Speaking of which, our prayers goes out to Christopher Hitchens in hopes of a speedy recovery for his cancer, we need more time with him Lord) are NOT out to ask that atheism be given respect. They are seeking converts. They are preaching a “gospel” calling for the end of theism.

They have faith. That’s right, faith.

They would have you believe the opposite. Their writings ridicule faith, condemn faith. Harris’s book is called The End of Faith. But theirs is a faith-based enterprise. The existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven.

To deny it takes faith. Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable. In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation.

There is no accounting for the things they hope you won’t ask:

Why do we have self-awareness?

What makes us conscious?

From what source is there a universal sense of right and wrong?

They just take such unexplained things by … faith.

There are days when evil and suffering are hard to explain, even for the most ardent follower of God. There are questions we cannot answer. There are days when every honest Christian will admit doubt. But we don’t become atheists. It is because our soul JUST KNOWS that God is there. And maybe because atheism is a religion that requires too much untenable faith.

Not only is Atheism a religion, the entire premise is a negative proof fallacy.

bit.ly/AtheistReligion

I posted this [With Credit to the Author] to prove to others that your as phony as any hypocrite you've accused because its really sickening how much contradiction there is in your postings.

You see after becoming a Christian after being Atheistic in thought for years, I used to live and let live UNTIL a group of hit and run Atheists wouldn't let well enough alone on the insulting and moronic comments THEN I decided from that moment on never to let ignorance rule a conversation. I, like most people get SICK of the crappy presentations by those who hate God!

What should bother you is that pic you used looks exactly like every Dr. of Atheism I've ever heard speak along with quite a few dumb religious leaders as well, and that's a lot! Atheism and Religion without relationship offers us nothing in return for our souls, nice trade off!


Atheistic Moron Atheistic Moron


*****************************************************
MY ATHEIST FRIEND:

"the fact that you think atheism, no belief in a god, is a religion proves once again how ignorant you are.

we don't think about proving anything or care about a god. so again you lose."
christianity  cosmic  god

***************************************************
MY RESPONSE:




You TALK BIG but present little proof of ANYTHING, ITS YOUR MENTAL PICTURE OF LIFE AND NOTHING MORE.

I proved it was and is a RELIGION LOGICALLY its not MY BELIEF its the facts presented, but instead of proving it you insult me and my Lord? A religion doesn't have to believe in a god at all as was stated, you DO BELIEVE IN SOMETHING, Evolution, Survival of the fittest, Mother earth and the Universe are your god because you exalt them as I would God. THAT'S A BELIEF SYSTEM PLAIN AND SIMPLE!



It is impossible to prove that there is no God. Don't believe me? Let's take a look at the nature of the statement, "God does not exist."


Back up for just a minute and think about the difference between positive and negative statements of fact. The difference can be illustrated by a simple example. Suppose there are 10,000 clovers in a field. Person A declares, "There is a four-leaf clover in that field," while Person B objects, "There are no four-leaf clovers in that field." Now, how many clovers does each person have to observe and know about in order to be certain that they are correct?
Since Person A must find only one single four-leaf clover in order to be correct, in theory he could prove his statement after observing only one clover, provided that it had four leaves on it. But Person B, in order to know for a fact that she is right, has a lot of work to do! That's because until all 10,000 clovers have been inspected, there would still be the possibility that among the clovers which remained "unknown" to her was one which boasted a fourth leaf. She could never be certain that she was right until she knew everything there was to know about that field and the clovers it contained.

The same principle holds for statements such as, "There is a God," and "There is no God," only this time on a cosmic scale. In order to prove the claim, "There is no God in the universe," one would have to know everything there is to know about the universe. As long as some body of knowledge remains unknown to anyone making that statement, there will always be the possibility that sufficient evidence for the existence of God is out there, despite the individual's ignorance of it.
And since no one can seriously claim to know everything, anyone who is honest will admit that they can never prove there isn't a God. One Christian author put it this way: "Somewhere, in the vast knowledge you haven't yet discovered, there could be enough evidence to prove that God does exist. . . . If you insist upon disbelief in God, what you must say is, 'Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God.'"**

It is the word "believe" in the above quotation which brings us to the assertion made in the title of this article: "Atheism is a faith-based belief system." To be an atheist, you have to have to rely on belief, not factual knowledge. You could never amass enough knowledge to prove the nonexistence of God, so you must place your faith in the improvable assumption that there is no God. My Christian brothers and sisters, do not ever let an atheist deride you on the basis of your faith in God (as if "faith" were a dirty word!), because atheism is no stranger to the concept of faith, either. Ask your atheist friends what it would take for them to accept God's existence. Then pray that the Lord will open their spiritual eyes to see the beauty and glory of Jesus Christ, as well as the depravity and hopelessness of their current situation, guilty as they are of sin against a holy and just God. May the Lord grant repentance to those who are strangers to His mercy and grace!

**Quotation taken from Ray Comfort's book, God Doesn't Believe in Atheists (1993), pp. 14-15.
**************************************************
MY ATHEIST FRIEND:

"you do realize that your fanaticism is BORING?????? or maybe you don't."
*****************************************************
MY RESPONSE:

Hey! I gave you a way out a long while back......STOP ANSWERING ME AND I'LL NOT ANSWER BACK. It can't be all that boring to you or you'd have blocked me a long time ago? Right?

Guess that lack of real knowledge is getting you down? Don't feel bad we're all in that boat together, the Atheist just spends their time in the boat ALONE BY CHOICE!

If you desire to talk I'm here if not STOP ANSWERING ME, its that simple....no compulsion on my part!



 *********************************************
MY ATHEIST FRIEND:

"the lack of knowledge is all yours. since this is my poll,why don't you stop answering me? you are the guest,and they definitely stink after 3 days."

************************************************
 MY RESPONSE:


I will not stop answering until you do, your current poll has NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR CONVERSATION!

You'll notice I said plainly that we are ALL in that boat together you simply choose to be alone with your little bit of understanding. I choose to learn more and grow.

BLOCK ME THEN! But know I will not block you, I believe blocking UNLESS FOR PERSONAL HARASSMENT is the Cowardly way out! Anyone is allowed to attack a point made on either side, that's the point of Sodahead in the first place.


**********************************************

MY ATHEIST FRIEND:


"wow, a liar too! typical of fanatics,they go on and on after anyone has lost interest. you must have a sad boring little life."

 ************************************************

MY FINAL RESPONSE:

I beg to differ with you, and consider this my last response sense I'm bored with your lack of Interest!

You have no interest?

You can't lose what you never had!, which brings me to the question WHY FIGHT IT IF ITS NOT REAL. There's something real and you can't prove it's not, so it bothers you, get over it you'll never prove God isn't there!

Love for Hate

My life is full of Joy because of Christ, and I'm CERTAIN with absolute certainty that he is real. That's something you as an Atheist cannot say about ANYTHING, if you do you have to admit that Absolute truth exists and if it does that it points to an absolute idea in life.

Because you reject the idea of a personal maker you must believe that an impersonal one -- chance -- has determined your reality, that is truly sad and boring!

Either:

1. There are no absolutes that define reality. Everything is relative, and thus there is no actual reality. There is ultimately no authority for deciding if an action is positive or negative; right or wrong.

Or:
2. There are absolutes that define what is real and what is not. Thus, actions can be deemed right or wrong based upon how they measure up against these absolute standards.

Hence, the chance that forms your reality (which by definition has no standard or objective sense) is the only "real" thing in the universe.

Everything is a chance occurrence, including your ability to understand who and what you are talking about!

Your "Meaning" is a fantasy. There is no way to derive a standard of truth that has any authority. Anything goes!

Because I believe that a personal God created all things, I can know:

--I was created for a purpose

--My level of fulfillment in life will be based on how well I accomplish the objectives ("will") of my Creator.

--Some actions are right, while others are wrong. I can discover this difference by learning about the Creator's plan.

--I am accountable to the Creator for my behavior.

Because you believe that "forces" of chance [Evolution] randomness created all things, you can know:

--That nothing is truly knowable, since there is no standard by which to define reality or by which to measure the factual nature of any given idea.

--That no action is any better than another, hence, all actions are meaningless.

--your then life has no value or purpose, because, in a very real sense, it is an accident

--you are not accountable for your behavior, because nothing you do matters.

THIS IS COMPLETELY UNTRUE, BUT ITS WHERE YOUR UNDERSTANDING LEADS YOU. A BORING LITTLE LIFE!














No comments:

Post a Comment

Please, if you are a skeptic, DO NOT swear or name call, if you cannot be civil then your comment will not be seen. If your evidence is that weak, then my point is made before you comment!

Popular Posts

About Me

My photo

Before you look at the links below know this about me, I do not know everything about anything, I know only what God has revealed to me.

Proving God exists CANNOT be done for the person who is not open to hearing and seeing the evidence as God sees it. Faith is the KEY to releasing all the evidence contained in creation, in man's heart and his mind. Without FAITH no one can ever please God so to throw away faith as unimportant destroys our receptivity to the evidence!

I was a hypocrite, a sinner and a fool, sometimes even as a believer but as long as God is in control I'm forgiven and healed of every form of human shortcoming. Nothing can stand before the evidence contained in Faith.....NOTHING!


LEARN MORE ABOUT ME AND MY MINISTRY HERE!

http://hopefromdispair.blogspot.com/

http://skepticalofskepticism.blogspot.com/

http://truthinprophecy.blogspot.com/

http://affiliatesgoldenchest.blogspot.com/

http://endwashingtonwaste.blogspot.com/

http://alltheusefulidiots.blogspot.com/
WebRep
Overall rating
 

It Stands Unrefuted by Scientists ANYWHERE!


The following reports are in one of three formats. To view the ones in PDF format, use
Adobe Acrobat Reader. To view the ones in RTF format, you may use MS Word.

Reports Dealing with Radiohalos

  1. Gentry, R.V. 1968. "Fossil Alpha-Recoil Analysis of Certain Variant Radioactive Halos." Science 160, 1228. HTML PDF
  2. Gentry, R.V. 1970. "Giant Radioactive Halos: Indicators of Unknown Alpha-Radioactivity?" Science 169, 670. HTML PDF
  3. Gentry, R.V. 1971. "Radiohalos: Some Unique Pb Isotope Ratios and Unknown Alpha Radioactivity." Science 173, 727. PDF
  4. Gentry, R.V. 1973. "Radioactive Halos." Annual Review of Nuclear Science 23, 347. PDF
  5. Gentry, R.V. 1974. "Radiohalos in Radiochronological and Cosmological Perspective." Science 184, 62. HTML PDF
  6. Gentry, R.V. 1975. Response to J.H. Fremlin's Comments on "Spectacle Halos." Nature 258, 269.
  7. Gentry, R.V. 1977. "Mystery of the Radiohalos." Research Communications NETWORK, Breakthrough Report, February 10, 1977. HTML PDF
  8. Gentry, R.V. 1978a. "Are Any Unusual Radiohalos Evidence for SHE?" International Symposium on Superheavy Elements, Lubbock, Texas. New York: Pergamon Press. PDF
  9. Gentry, R.V. 1978b. "Implications on Unknown Radioactivity of Giant and Dwarf Haloes in Scandinavian Rocks." Nature 274, 457. HTML PDF
  10. Gentry, R.V. 1978c. "Reinvestigation of the α Activity of Conway Granite." Nature 273, 217. HTML PDF
  11. Gentry, R.V. 1979. "Time: Measured Responses." EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 60, 474. PDF RTF
  12. Gentry, R.V. 1980. "Polonium Halos." EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 61, 514. HTML PDF
  13. Gentry, R.V. 1982. Letters. Physics Today 35, No. 10, 13.
  14. Gentry, R.V. 1983a. Letters. Physics Today 36, No. 4, 3.
  15. Gentry, R.V. 1983b. Letters. Physics Today 36, No. 11, 124.
  16. Gentry, R.V. 1984a. "Radioactive Halos in a Radiochronological and Cosmological Perspective." Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science 1, 38. HTML PDF
  17. Gentry, R.V. 1984c. Letters. Physics Today 37, No. 4, 108.
  18. Gentry, R.V. 1984d. Letters. Physics Today 37, No. 12, 92.
  19. Gentry, R.V. 1987a. "Radioactive Halos: Implications for Creation." Proceedings of the First International Conference on Creationism, Vol. II, 89. HTML
  20. Gentry, R.V. 1998. "Fingerprints of Creation." Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 12, 287. HTML
  21. Gentry, R.V. et al. 1973. "Ion Microprobe Confirmation of Pb Isotope Ratios and Search for Isomer Precursors in Polonium Radiohalos." Nature 244, 282. HTML PDF
  22. Gentry, R.V. et al. 1974. "'Spectacle' Array of Po-210 Halo Radiocentres in Biotite: A Nuclear Geophysical Enigma." Nature 252, 564. HTML PDF
  23. Gentry, R.V. et al. 1976a. "Radiohalos and Coalified Wood: New Evidence Relating to the Time of Uranium Introduction and Coalification." Science 194, 315. HTML PDF

Reports Dealing with Helium and Lead Retention in Zircons

  1. Gentry, R.V. 1984b. "Lead Retention in Zircons" (Technical Comment). Science 223, 835.
  2. Gentry, R.V. et al. 1982a. "Differential Lead Retention in Zircons: Implications for Nuclear Waste Containment." Science 216, 296. HTML PDF
  3. Gentry, R.V. et al. 1982b. "Differential Helium Retention in Zircons: Implications for Nuclear Waste Containment." Geophysical Research Letters 9, 1129. HTML PDF

Reports Dealing with Astronomy and Cosmology

  1. Gentry, R. V. 1997. "A New Redshift Interpretation." Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 12, No. 37, 2919. (This paper was also posted in 1998 on the Los Alamos National Laboratory E-Print arXive: astro-ph/9806280.) HTML PDF
  2. Gentry, R. V. 1998. "The Genuine Cosmic Rosetta." This paper was posted on what was then the Los Alamos National Laboratory E-Print arXive: gr-gc/9806061. HTML PDF
  3. Gentry, R. V. 1998. "The New Redshift Interpretation Affirmed." This paper was posted on what was then the Los Alamos National Laboratory E-Print arXive: physics/9810051. HTML PDF
  4. Gentry, R. V. 2003. "Discovery of a Major Contradiction in Big Bang Cosmology Points to the New Cosmic Center Universe Model." CERN Preprint, Ext-2003-021. HTML PDF
  5. Gentry, R. V. 2003. "New Cosmic Center Universe Model Matches Eight of Big Bang's Major Predictions Without the F-L Paradigm." CERN Preprint, Ext-2003-022. PDF
  6. Gentry, R. V. 2004. "Collapse of Big Bang Cosmology and the Emergence of the New Cosmic Center Model of the Universe." Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 56, 4. HTML PDF

The first three astronomy and cosmology papers may also be obtained by going to the the web sites of either Los Alamos National Laboratory or arXiv.org. arXiv.org is currently adminstered by Cornell University.

NOTE: For more information about the Big Bang's fatal flaws and "The Great 21st Century Scientific Watergate," please check out our sister site, www.orionfdn.org.

1987 Challenge to the National Academy of Sciences

  • Our open letter of March 24, 1987, to Dr. Frank Press, president of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Press claimed that "evidence for creationism" has been scientifically invalidated, though he well knew this has not been the case for the polonium-halo evidence. Our letter once again requests him and other evolutionists to publicly explain how the polonium-halo evidence for creation has indeed been invalidated, this time on April 13 at the University of Tennessee. We suggest that Dr. Stephen Gould be the first one to speak on behalf of the academy, given his strong language denouncing the term, "creation science." HTML GIF

  • Our Knoxville Sentinel ad on April 12, 1987, announcing our presentation on the evening of the 13th at the University of Tennessee. Included in the ad was a copy of the above open letter to Dr. Press. HTML GIF

  • A press release from the Society for Creation Science, announcing the reading of Dr. Press's written reply that evening, April 13, 1987, at the University of Tennessee. HTML GIF

Year 2000 Challenge to the National Academy of Sciences
  • Our letter of March 22, 2000, to Dr. Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Alberts claimed that evidence for special creation has been experimentally falsified.

  • This letter requests the Academy to publicly explain at Wichita State University on March 30, 2000, why it has chosen to reject the published evidence for the Genesis creation, evidence which after more than twenty-five years still stands unrefuted in the open scientific literature. HTML

Did you know that scientific evidence abounds to support the biblical accounts of creation and the flood?

Were you aware that reports outlining this evidence passed peer review, and were published in the open scientific literature?

Have you heard that, decades later, this evidence still stands unrefuted by the scientific community?






Watch a real debate about God right here!

Professors Richard Dawkins and John Lennox go head-to-head once again for another remarkable match of intellect.
This time, the same two Oxford Professors who debated in Birmingham's 'God Delusion' Debate are at it again on their home turf at the site of the famed 1860 Evolution debate between Huxley and Wilberforce.