Thursday, July 04, 2024

God Loves You Tour.

Franklin Graham preached in Glasgow, launches new fund to defend religious freedom in the UK.

Staff writer  Franklin Graham preaching at the OVO Hydro in Glasgow on Saturday 22nd June 2024.(Photo: BGEA)

Over 7,000 came to the OVO Hydro in Glasgow on Saturday night to hear American evangelist Rev Franklin Graham preach the Gospel as he announced the creation of a new fund to help Christians in the UK "who may be threatened into silence".

Graham, who heads up the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) and Samaritan's Purse, was in the UK this week for two more stops on his God Loves You tour. CT.

Birdie.


 

Largest Rally Was By ...

Thousands For Farage: Mr Brexit Addressed Largest Rally of UK General Election.


With zero days to go, Reform is performing better than “anyone in the media, in politics, even dares to imagine.
Breitbart.

Love Is ...


 

Hmm.

Be Assured - God WILL Punish

 Jude.

5) Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord.
 at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.
 6) And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7) In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.


Jude was almost certainly half-brother of Jesus:

As the brother of James, it has traditionally meant Jude was also a brother of Jesus, since James is described as being the brother of Jesus. This is why Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215 AD) wrote in his work "Comments on the Epistle of Jude" that Jude, the author, was a son of Joseph and a brother of Jesus.

There Has Been A Goodly Number of Poor Presidents of The US But Biden Has Achieved A New Low That May Never Be Equalled!

Joe Biden’s presidency has been a conspiracy against the world.

The administration and the media closed ranks to pretend that the US wasn’t being led by a zombie
Joe Biden might not remember his debate performance, but the world does, and it’s etched on our memory as a symbol of national decline. As the Democrats discussed who might replace him on the ticket – “Can Jimmy Carter still walk?” – I thought, “They’ll have to prise it from his cold dead hand.” For this tragedy is about a man in total denial, enabled by a system steeped in paranoid fantasy. The Democrats kept us distracted with Russiagate, January 6 and “Trump humped a porn star” while the world’s last superpower was being run by a zombie.
The American empire looks old. Old and tacky. If Ronald Reagan was, to quote Gore Vidal, “a triumph of the embalmer’s art”, Joe resembles an ostrich stuffed by an amateur – his eyes black marbles, the sharp teeth set in an alarming grin. The president belongs to a vain generation that thinks it figured out how to run the world in 1968 and now won’t let go. Senator Dianne Feinstein passed away in office at 90. Nancy Pelosi stepped aside as Speaker at the tender age of 82. Biden, 81, has done nothing but politics, having entered the Senate in 1973 and run for the presidency three times – dropping out on the first go because he was caught stealing his lines rather than fluffing them.
So, we are where we are because of Joe. Feel no pity: he’s a narcissist who can’t see his limits. A truly wise, compassionate and patriotic man, to borrow some of the titles bestowed on this Caesar Arthritis by his courtiers, would’ve settled for one term and used it to groom a successor. Instead, he insisted on entering the 2024 primaries practically unopposed, putting him in control of almost every delegate at the August convention. 
This left no practical way to remove the old fool from the nomination without his consent. Even if he gave it, the prospect of an unplanned “open” convention has long filled the Democrat leadership with dread. They are control freaks. They fear the delegates who hate Netanyahu and love Bernie Sanders. But most importantly, they’ve seen the polling and know that, even on a sad day, Biden polls slightly better than Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom et al. That’s why they’ve stuck with him for so long.
The party that thought Hillary Clinton could beat Donald Trump in 2016 prefers mediocrity to risk. Besides, nobody wants to pick a fight with Jill, Joe’s terrifying, Cerberus-like wife. She introduced him to a post-debate crowd with the words: “You did such a great job, you answered every question!” He also finished his cookies and went to the bathroom all by himself.
Jill reminds one of Edith Wilson, the wife of president Woodrow Wilson, who, when Woodrow had a stroke, locked her husband in the bedroom, pretended he was fine, and took over the management of the country. All government, one might say, is a conspiracy – power consolidated, hoarded and clouded in spin. Biden’s White House is run by a tiny group of fierce loyalists. They have disagreements but circle the wagons once policy is decided, which is why they stuck so doggedly and stupidly to Joe’s bungled dash from Afghanistan. 
Of the debate, they said immediately that “he had a cold”: a bad night, yes, but we’ve months to recover. Someone tipped off journalists that the president gets tired after 4pm, a detail published as if it were a stunning revelation.
We’ve known his work patterns via the White House logs for ages. There’s a reason why Trump nicknamed him “Sleepy Joe” in 2020 and accused him of hiding in his basement – but the US media joined the administration in closing ranks. People who pointed out the president’s obvious decline were accused of taking moments out of context, being mean or even displaying an anti-age prejudice akin to racism (yes, that card was played). 
Journalists gaslit America. TV host Joe Scarborough described Biden four months ago as “far beyond cogent, in fact I think he’s better than he’s ever been, intellectually, analytically”. Only after the debate did he suggest that his friend consider retirement.
The U-turn is as preposterous as the original direction. A thousand articles have been published to say “Dear Joe, we love you so, but you need to go – to save the world from Trump.” But wasn’t the time to tell grandpa he needs to take a rest before he secured his delegates for renomination? 
The “be kind” crowd has participated in one of the most shocking cases of elder abuse in history, driven by the lunatic consensus that even someone incapable of doing the job would be better than a Republican nominee. They have charged the GOP with cowardice for sticking with Trump, yet done exactly the same themselves – labelling anyone within their own ranks who dared to question Biden’s faculties a far-Right stooge.
New York Times editorial finally argued, long after the damage was done, that Biden should step aside. It also said that if he didn’t, it would still support him “unequivocally” over Trump, preferring senility to criminality – a new twist on “Better Dead than Red.” With such low expectations, why not hand the nomination over to Jimmy Carter? He has the age of an Old Testament prophet, yes, but also the wisdom and character, having spent his retirement building houses and overseeing elections. A man from a better age, when public servants put the people first. DT.
Blogger: almost his first act as president was to let Iran off the leash that Trump had put in place.
The world sits on the edge of a World War because of this folly. Hamas would not have tried its abomination of October 7th with Iran shackled - nor would Hezbollah have started a war in Northern Israel the danger of which for the globe is simply terrifying!

Wednesday, July 03, 2024

Has The Beeb Ever Met Anyone Who Is To The Right of Centre Right?

The BBC can’t stand Nigel Farage.

The reality is that there is a systematic Left-wing bias bordering on group-think in the BBC’s key editorial teams.

Nigel Farage appearing on a BBC One current affairs programme

Whenever presenters on the BBC seemingly reveal their bias, people talk about “the mask slipping”. So it is today in the case of the BBC News Channel presenter Geeta Guru-Murthy. She commented as follows after the channel cut away from a Nigel Farage election press conference and back to the studio: “Nigel Farage with his…um…customary inflammatory language there.”

Yet since the bias exhibited in such episodes is almost invariably in favour of a Left-wing world view, it is odd that we talk about it being masked at all. Rather, it is almost always in plain sight if you bother looking out for it, but usually confines itself to phrases that indirectly imply that one view is to be favoured over another. Every now and then, however, the quiet part that underpins it all gets said out loud and a rumpus ensues.

Something similar happened back in autumn 2022 when Ms Guru-Murthy’s colleague Martine Croxall reacted to newspaper front pages revealing Boris Johnson would not stand in the leadership contest to replace Liz Truss by declaring: “Am I allowed to be this gleeful? Well I am.” She was taken off air for a short time amid an outcry over bias.

Given that Guru-Murthy’s comments today followed Farage having quoted Poland’s PM Donald Tusk about illegal immigration being a national security emergency, it might be said that the BBC generally thinks of him as belonging in the “basket of deplorables” famously referred to by Hillary Clinton in 2016.

As the sister of a Channel Four News anchor and wife of a former Labour speechwriter, this is not even the first time Ms Guru-Murthy has exhibited an apparent bias on air. Back in 2020 she provoked another bias row by referring to those celebrating a Brexit Night event in Parliament Square as “very white”. The BBC stood by her that time. 

Of course, there is no shame in BBC presenters holding political views, so long as they are discarded at the office door and are counterbalanced by others on the team holding contrary private views which likewise do not get taken onto air. Many brilliant BBC political journalists have been from the Left. One thinks of the 1980s political editor John Cole, who was so scrupulously unbiased on the job that he commanded the respect of every MP. 

Today’s issue is different. The reality is that there is a systematic Left-wing bias bordering on groupthink in the BBC’s key editorial teams. Issues such as immigration control or Brexit are overwhelmingly disparaged while complaints about alleged Islamophobia or overzealous policing are amplified. Given many BBC journalists are London-based graduates, such a bias hardly comes as a surprise. But the Corporation’s executives should be doing far more to counter it. 


Gary Lineker on Suella Braverman, Emily Maitlis on Dominic Cummings, Martine Croxall on Boris Johnson and now Geeta Guru-Murthy on Nigel Farage: it’s always the same basic pattern of London Lefty denigration of Right-of-centre voices. To force people to fund such a partial outlook via a compulsory poll tax is iniquitous and wrong. The bias is clearly never going to end but the licence fee really ought to. DT.

Who Are 'They'?

Just who are 'they'?

So often you hear ordinary folk complain about what 'they' have done to our nation. Who precisely are the mysterious 'they'?
I may be able to help in explaining to an extent but regrettably, the explanation will perforce be incomplete as it is an extremely complex area. Here's a shot at it.

Firstly, let us take the intellectuals. These are the detached, over-educated, feet-off-the-ground individuals who hover inside and all around the ruling elite. Often but not exclusively, Cambridge educated.
Secondly, there are the guilt-ridden upper classes and hand-wringing upper middle classes who cannot bear the thought that they may have had some advantages in their education or upbringing. Consequently, once lodged in full guilt mode, they move into panic mode in a vain attempt to right the wrong wrongs: that is 'wrongs' which they have perceived incorrectly to be the root of something which may not even have been a problem in the first place.
Thirdly, we have the ivory tower dwellers who overlap nicely with the first two groups.
Fourthly, we have the terminally naive. These are the ones who have fallen into the trap of believing that left-wing politics picked up at university have some relevance in the real world.
Fifthly, we have the cocooned, those who find a niche in society where the reality of their leftist upbringing or education is never challenged by real life. Such people can be found throughout government-run organisations, QUANGOS, The Civil Service et al. Sixthly, we have certain people who, even at the sharp end are incapable of being unblinkered. These are the 'throw money at every problem types'. These may be found in the realms of social work, the Probation Service and astonishingly - even in teaching
Next we have the career politicians - those straight out of university and straight into politics.
In eighth place come the 'liberal christians': folks who cannot see the wood for the trees.
Next we have the university lefties who have moved into the media - and have taken it over!
In tenth place come the 'luvvies' from the world of TV, theatre, writing and the Arts.

Consider these ten groups. How many of your neighbours are represented? How many of your friends, colleagues and workmates fit into these categories?
Not that many - I would wager.
In other words, their influence is way beyond their numbers.
Scary innit?
The worst of all is that however much these groups are unrepresentative, they have the arrogance to 'always know what is best for us!' They are the personification of arrogance and their influence seems unending!

Birdie.

Phew!

3 John 1.

 11)  Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God.

Christian Growth in Iran.

 https://www.christiantoday.com/article/from.dreams.to.reality.the.miraculous.growth.of.christianity.in.iran/141840.htm

Jude - Sounds Like Very MANY So-Called Christian Churches, Today!

The Sin and Doom of Ungodly People.

3) Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people. 4) For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

Tuesday, July 02, 2024

7 False Gods.

7 false gods in the present age.


The study of the fall of civilizations is believed to be a complex phenomenon considered by sociologists, historians, archaeologists, and other academics using a variety of theories and methodologies. These academics study economic, political, social, environmental, external, cyclical, and technological dynamics. By examining these various factors, scholars aim to understand the multifaceted processes that lead to the fall of civilizations. However, the Bible gives a much simpler answer for the reason cultures fail and end up on the ash heap of history.

“In place of these analogies [by academics] the biblical explanation of the end of societies uses the concept of judgment. It depicts them [civilizations] as either having submitted themselves to God or else having rebelled against him … [T]he Old Testament portrays Israel as having become an evil nation, fully deserving the judgment God meted to it. Its rebellion against God was accompanied by a turning to idols, and this idolatry brought the nation to its end. “With silver and gold,” said the prophet Hosea, “they made idols for their own destruction” (Hosea 8:4).

“Idolatry in its larger meaning is properly understood as any substitution of what is created for the Creator. People may worship nature, money, mankind, power, history, or social and political systems instead of the God who created them all. The New Testament writers, in particular, recognized that the relationship need not be explicitly one of cultic worship; a man can place anyone or anything at the top of his pyramid of values, and that is ultimately what he serves. The ultimacy of that service profoundly affects the way he lives. When the society around him also turns away from God to idols, it is an idolatrous society and therefore is heading for destruction.” [1]

A biblical perspective on societal decline

The first commandment in God’s Big Ten is, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3). This commandment does not acknowledge the existence of other gods as real entities. Instead, it emphasizes the exclusive worship and devotion to the one true God. Nothing must ever come before him or be first in one’s heart or life. The Lord is to be loved supremely because he is Supreme and worthy of being supremely adored and obeyed.

John Calvin, the 16th-century theologian, and reformer, has said, “Man’s mind is like a store of idolatry and superstition; so much so that if a man believes his own mind, it is certain that he will forsake God and forge some idol in his own brain.” [3]

A Message from

This insightful observation rings especially true today. The Western world, long shaped by the precepts of Christianity, now finds itself in what many describe as a post-Christian era. This shift is evident in society’s increasing turn to modern idols, placing faith in various temporal and unreliable constructs rather than in the eternal truths of God. As the foundational values of Christianity are set aside, the guiding light that once led the West through centuries of profound moral and cultural development dims with each passing day. This situation challenges us to reexamine the sources of our deepest convictions and the true nature of our ultimate allegiance.

Idols of modern society

Consider these seven pervasive idols in today’s society, which people often prioritize over spiritual values. While these are indeed significant, others might suggest different influential idolatrous forces, depending on their perspective. However, these seven seem the most prominent in Western cultures, and other potential idols mentioned would likely fall under one of these categories.

Humanism

Definition and beliefs:

Humanism is an approach to life that focuses on human rationality, ethics, and justice, without reference to the divine. This worldview advocates for the preeminence of reason, scientific discovery, and a human-based morality. While most often humanism is secular, it may at times wed itself to religious beliefs, but the approach, nevertheless, is still man-centered, denying the Sovereignty and power of God.

Impact on society:

Progressive Christianity is a solid example of the integration of humanism with religion, more specifically, the Christian religion. Generally speaking, Progressive Christians see the Bible as simply a collection of historical and moral writings rather than the inerrant and infallible Word of the Almighty. They typically prioritize contemporary human experience and rational thought when interpreting the Scriptures, downplaying and reinterpreting aspects of the Bible that proclaim God’s dominion and miraculous ability.

In contrast, a Biblical worldview stresses God’s authority and his incomparable capacity — nothing is impossible with God. It emphasizes the Bible as the unfailing standard for truth, against which all truth claims are to be measured. Although humanity is created in the image of God with inestimable value and dignity, mankind is fallen and broken on every level, spiritually dead in sin, and desperately in need of redemption through Christ. Human abilities are finite, while God’s are infinite. This perspective encourages individuals to reject relying on their own flawed reasoning, acknowledging that human intellect, no matter how high its quotient, is seriously defective because of sin, and therefore not the ultimate source for discerning truth. Instead, true human welfare and moral responsibility are rooted in a personal relationship with an omniscient God and adherence to his commandments, directed through prayer and the Scriptures.

The Bible says, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart; do not depend on your own understanding. Seek his will in all you do, and he will show you which path to take” (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Destructive example:

Perhaps the most destructive example of the humanist perspective is their advocacy for so-called reproductive rights through the practice of abortion. They base their arguments on principles of individual autonomy, bodily integrity, and gender equality, asserting that women should have the right to make decisions about their bodies without interference from the state or religious influences. Humanists emphasize the importance of abortion access for women’s health and socioeconomic stability, rejecting religious objections based on scriptural teachings. Instead, they believe moral decisions should be based entirely on reasoned considerations. This perspective, however, dismisses the sacred contentions that human life possesses intrinsic value from the moment of conception and disputes the assertion that God alone holds the keys to both life and death.

Eve was the first humanist. She believed the secular argument, “You will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5). In other words, she thought she could attain wisdom and carry out her life without God or true religion. Eve was the first to succumb to self-worship, and Adam quickly followed her in the same error. Every form of suffering known to mankind — physical, emotional, social, and spiritual — flowed from this initial act by Adam and Eve, who chose to trust in their own understanding rather than acknowledge God and his benevolent directives.

Unfortunately, humanism is a monstrous and deadly idol of today.

Schlossberg has written: “When once a man lavishes theological distinctions upon himself, he is less likely to suspect that there exists a standard of behavior more exacting than his own or that a righteous judge is observing his actions.” [2]

Historicism

Origins and development:

Historicism is the belief that history has a discernible direction and that events unfold according to specific patterns and logic. Historicism evolved over several centuries, positing that historical events, cultures, and values are products of their time, shaped by distinct contexts and processes.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, who lived during the 18th and 19th centuries, profoundly influenced historicism with his philosophy of history. Hegel viewed history as a dialectical process, where the unfolding of the World Spirit (Geist) ultimately leads to the realization of human freedom.

Historicism continues to intensely influence various ideologies and movements today.

Marxism:

Marxism is fundamentally rooted in historicism through its theory of historical materialism. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels proposed that history progresses through stages driven by class struggle, leading ultimately to a classless society. This view sees economic and social developments as following a predictable and inevitable path based on material conditions and class relations.

Although not a dominant ideology, Marxism continues to exert influence in the United States, particularly within academic, cultural, and political spheres. In universities, Marxist theory is prevalent in the humanities and social sciences curricula, where it informs critical approaches to literature, sociology, and cultural studies. Culturally, Marxist critiques of capitalism are reflected in various media, art, and literature. Politically, progressive movements and some left-leaning politicians today draw on Marxist ideas to advocate for economic justice, labor rights, and wealth redistribution. Debates about income inequality, labor rights, and economic policies are often framed within a Marxist critique of capitalist structures. Marxist thought remains a significant undercurrent in discussions about social and economic issues in the U.S.

From a biblical worldview, however, Marxism’s focus on class struggle and economic conditions as the primary drivers of societal change reflects a historicist perspective that sees history progressing through unstoppable stages. This contrasts with the Bible’s teaching that human nature is inherently sinful and that true transformation comes only through spiritual renewal in Jesus Christ (Romans 3:232 Corinthians 5:17), rather than through social or economic restructuring. While Marxism, influenced by historicism, advocates for the abolition of private property and collective ownership, the Bible upholds the legitimacy of private property and emphasizes responsible stewardship and generosity (Exodus 20:151 Timothy 6:17-19). Additionally, Marxism envisions a state-controlled economic and social system to achieve equality, which is a historicist belief in the deterministic progression of society. In contrast, the Bible supports limited government that maintains order and justice, warns against excessive power, and advocates for personal responsibility and charity (Romans 13:1-7Micah 6:8). Finally, whereas Marxism’s materialistic focus on economic conditions aligns with historicist views, the Bible prioritizes spiritual wealth over material possessions, teaching that the pursuit of material goods can lead people away from God (Matthew 6:19-211 Timothy 6:10).

LGBT rights movement:

The LGBT rights movement can also be seen through a historicist lens. The legalization of same-sex marriage in many countries, increased recognition of transgender rights, and broader societal acceptance of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities are considered milestones in an inescapable historical progression toward inclusivity and human rights.

In 2020, Netflix featured a documentary titled “Miss Americana.” In the film, superstar Taylor Swift discussed her decision to speak out on LGBT issues, despite concerns from her management team and her father about potential backlash and risks to her singing career. Swift passionately insisted on showing support for the LGBT movement, expressing her desire to be “on the right side of history.”

When activists and supporters of LGBT rights use this oft-repeated phrase, they are drawing from the well of historicism, which suggests that history bends towards justice, equality, and greater freedom. This statement implies that supporting LGBT rights is part of this inevitable progress and that those who oppose these rights will be judged negatively by future generations, much like past opposition to civil rights or women’s suffrage. However, the Scriptures, despite contradictions by the false prophets (clergy) of Progressive Christianity, teach that God will judge unbridled sexual sin — sex outside the marriage of one man and one woman. Those who live sexually pure may suffer the perverted judgment of men, but ultimately, it is God who will judge the sexually immoral and reward the righteous.

Environmental movement:

Even the current environmental movement incorporates historicist thinking by framing the climate change crisis as part of a historical trajectory of industrialization and environmental degradation. The shift towards green energy and other eco-friendly practices is seen as a necessary response to something that history has predestined. Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence that many objectives of the environmental movement’s agenda may do more harm than good.

Historicism is a wicked idol to which the masses bow down – an idol that discounts God’s providence in history. It is an affront to God’s control of the past, present, and future. As someone has said, “History is, His Story,” and this is most definitely the case. Nothing ever takes God by surprise. Each event in history is part and parcel of a divinely directed plan.

So, whether it’s Marxism on the move, LGBT activism, or the environmental crusade, the Bible teaches that true equality, justice, and stewardship of the earth’s resources must align with God’s unchanging Word, not deceptive narratives of historical inevitability. If people really want to “get on the right side of history,” they should get on God’s side. Those things that do not align with God’s revelation will be judged by him, as will the people who practice them.

God will have no rival over history. History belongs exclusively to Him. The Lord declares in the Scripture, “Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, and what is still to come” (Isaiah 46:9-10).

Evolutionary science

Prevalence and acceptance:

Evolutionary science, which speaks to humanity’s origins, is highly prevalent and widely accepted nowadays. It is the very backbone of the biological sciences taught in universities and colleges worldwide. A tremendous amount of research funding is allocated to evolutionary studies, and numerous peer-reviewed journals regularly publish their conclusions in this field. Educational standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in the U.S., include evolution as a fundamental concept for K-12 education. Leading scientific organizations, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), endorse evolution as a crucial framework for understanding life on earth.

The late Dr. John N. Moore, once a natural science educator at Michigan State University, wrote about how widely evolutionary thinking has been adopted:

“Today, evolutionary thinking has been adopted without question in every major discipline of human knowledge. This condition is the reverse of the ‘intellectual climate’ when Charles Darwin was preparing for his famous voyage around the world on the H.M.S. Beagle, which began in 1831. At that time the predominant belief regarding origins was in favor of special creation.

“The modern synthetic ‘theory’ of evolution (a modification of Neo-Darwinism, which in turn was a modification of Darwinism) has been unquestionably adopted in economics, psychology, education, theology, philosophy, American history, political science, literature, and science. The enormity of this ‘capture’ of the minds of such a wide range of intellectuals is seen as even more colossal when a candid inspection reveals the fact that mega evolution (amoeba to man) is without any observational foundation.” [4]

Evolution’s impact:

In the last chapter of his book, Questions and Answers on Creation/Evolution, Moore precedes to show how evolution has deeply impacted every major discipline of knowledge he mentioned. Moore goes on to explain why the question of origins is so important. He says:

“Fundamentally, the issue involved in the creation-evolution controversy is a spiritual question. Is the individual in right relation with God the Creator – with Jesus Christ as Redeemer and Savior? For if Jesus Christ is not known personally as Lord, Master, and Creator of all things, then evolution, as amoeba to man, is the only basic substitute.

“Science began as an intellectual pursuit as a result of those men like Kepler, Newton, Clerk-Maxwell, and others who believed in God, the Creator.

“If humankind is not a special creation of God, then an animal origin is the only logical alternative. Nowhere does Scripture contain even a hint that God chose some anthropoid, some near man, and breathed the breath of life into it. With God all things are possible, and he breathed the breath of life into the dust of the earth. Naturalistically oriented atheists will not have God, so they must believe that humankind ‘evolved.” [5]

In other words, Moore rightly contends that atheism logically follows from the findings and advocacy of evolutionary science.

Theistic evolution?

Some argue against this claim, pointing out that many people today identify as theistic evolutionists. Theistic evolutionists believe that God used evolutionary processes to bring the universe, the earth, and various life forms into existence.

Several years ago, a reporter from Seed Magazine read an article I wrote about evolution and requested an interview. During the interview, she asked how a good Christian should respond if evolution were proven true, as many scientists insist it is. [6]

I responded that it is impossible and will remain impossible to scientifically prove the theory of evolution, regardless of how many scientists claim otherwise. Scientists who assert that evolution has been scientifically proven are spreading false teachings. Evolution operates too slowly to be measured within a human timeframe. Observing the transmutation of one organism into a higher form would presumably take millions of years, making it beyond the realm of empirical science. Although there is evidence of small variations within species today, there is no way to conclusively prove that these changes can eventually lead to different and higher kinds.

Furthermore, I told her that evolution poses an insurmountable difficulty for any Christian serious about their faith. Evolution is neither scientific by strict definition nor is it good theology. The God of the Bible is not a God of chance, confusion, random combinations, natural selection, and survival of the fittest—core doctrines of evolution. God is sovereign over all matters of His creation. Evolution, by definition, denies this sovereignty and repudiates the full scope of God’s work in Jesus Christ, from creation to consummation. Clergy and church leaders who fail to recognize this end up presenting a gospel of randomness and uncertainty. By embracing evolution as part of their faith, they inadvertently lead people away from a God of creative purpose to a god of chance.

Evolution’s harms:

Evolutionary science might be the most beloved god of modern times. It promises a better understanding of humanity but bitterly betrays its followers. By promoting a naturalistic worldview that excludes God, evolution contributes to moral relativism, which undermines humanity’s ability to experience genuine unity. Without belief in divine creation, even the sanctity of human life is weakened. If humans are merely products of random processes and natural selection, rather than beings uniquely created in the image of God with inherent dignity and purpose, then what becomes the basis of human worth and ethical standards? Is it simply one animal’s thinking over others? God help us if that is the case!

Social concepts born out of evolutionary science have unquestionably been associated with harmful ideologies such as social Darwinism, which applies the concept of “survival of the fittest” to human societies, justifying eugenics, racism, and inequality.

The Scripture says, “They traded the truth about God for a lie. So, they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen” (Romans 1:25).

What a cruel and heartless god is the god of evolutionary science. CP.

God Loves You Tour.

Franklin Graham preached in Glasgow, launches new fund to defend religious freedom in the UK. Staff writer     Franklin Graham preaching at ...