Our Websites

Stephen Hawking CAN’T be serious!

When I read Stephen Hawking’s article “Why God Did Not Create the Universe” (Wall Street Journal Sept. 4-5, 2010 P. W-3), I couldn’t help but laugh! I thought, This guy teaches at Cambridge University? He can’t possibly really believe what he wrote here, can he? Does he really believe this entire complex universe and all the amazing life forms in it came about when nothing exploded in the big bang?’ (See I Tim. 6:10)

He admits that “everything in the universe follows laws, without exception” and “the laws of nature had to dictate …” Yet he cannot see that even this would require a Lawgiver.

Does he really believe “the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing?” He freely admits that, “Many improbable occurrences conspired to create Earth’s human-friendly design” and refers to “the miracle of fine tuning,” but then concludes by saying that “this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.” Wow! Satan started that lie in the Garden when he told Eve that she could be like God. (Gen. 3)

II Peter 3:3-7 is so-o-o-o-o-o true! These scoffers like Hawking are indeed “willingly ignorant!” These intellectuals think that they can outsmart God. They believe “God Did Not Create the Universe” And Hawking calls that “modern science?”

I think I’ll just stick with: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

Further Study:

Article: No Stephen Hawking, God DID Create the Universe!
Video: Evolution Formula

,

Leave42 Responses to testStephen Hawking CAN’T be serious!

  1. Chris Hammond September 30, 2010 at 7:15 am #

    I’m simply amazed that when we look at the complexity of life itself, all the unique systems…you can’t help but realize a Designer is there. Reminds me of the song “Fingerprints of God”. It’s just really frustrating that the lost don’t see it…and makes my heart ache for them to know Him…the one true God…and salvation through Jesus. Information does not come from nothing…it is the fear of the Lord that is the beginning of ALL wisdom.

  2. Gary Hendricks September 30, 2010 at 7:36 am #

    I am with you on this one. And whether He did it 6000 years ago or more than 13 billion years ago…”In the beginning God…”

    Isn’t that really what our message should be in the first place?

  3. Mike Ayala September 30, 2010 at 7:38 am #

    Hi Dr. Hovind,

    I think 1 Corinthians 1:25 applies:

    “…the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”

    Hopefully discerning individuals will be able to see through the obvious errors of his speculations. No, it’s not science. Philosophy maybe or a field of interest, but not science.

    It would be interesting for Stephen to pontificate on the origin of the nature from which originates laws that dictate. Hopefully, if his inquisitive mind is pointed into the right direction, it won’t be too long before he comes to the conclusion that it is the supernatural God, creator of heaven and earth, who is Lord of all creation.

    I think it would be great if you would participate in a debate at Cambridge University.

    God bless and protect you in these days of preparation and fill you will all His Joy in the Spirit of God.

    Mike Ayala

  4. Karl Priest September 30, 2010 at 8:32 am #

    Evolutionists are bluffing when they say their beliefs are scientific. Be sure to look at the list of evolutionists who refuse the debate challenge from Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo. See the list on the website lifescienceprize.org.

    Hawking is #20.

  5. H. Bosma September 30, 2010 at 9:17 am #

    Kent Hovind can’t be serious!!

    You have read the book (if you have done that, which I seriously doubt) with a closed mind.
    You believe that the universe was created out of nothing too. Just you say a god did it. Stephen uses an explanation which might leave unexplained endings. You fill these unknowns with an idea called god.
    You base your reasoning on a book that undoubtedly is composed by humans (even you can’t ignore it), where Stephen and other base it on observations and deduction.

    God is a fabrication to fill in the blanks of our knowledge. It’s highly regional, proving there is nothing universal about it. Primitive civilizations had raingods to pray to, because they had no knowledge on the precipitation and climatic models. You have your god to explain how the universe came into being.

    Stephen and myself except the fact that our minds are limited and there will be things we do not know. By fabricating something to fill that hole, we will not progress. You keep trying to fill a hole, which in the end will be filled by reason.

  6. Jon Richt September 30, 2010 at 10:29 am #

    You folks have raised “projection” to an art form…

  7. Alfred Russell Wallace September 30, 2010 at 12:06 pm #

    Kent, there is a difference between PRESCRIPTIVE and DESCRIPTIVE laws. The latter does not require a lawgiver.

    “Laws” have two meanings, the one Hawking refers to is;

    2 a statement of fact, deduced from observation, to the effect that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present : the second law of thermodynamics.

    From you Kent, I ask for an E-word. Evidence. What evidence do you have that points to the Hewbrew God of ‘Yahweh’ more than say the Muslim God “Allah”, the Norse Gods, the Greek Gods, the Hindu Gods, or Zenu?

    You have a rather old book written by 7-9 different people with different handwriting and writing styles. You have a somewhat newer book written decades after the events reported in the book itself. Do you think that there might have been exaggeration and lies in the bible?

    Your book is not the inerrant perfect word, there are mistakes!

    example:

    2 Kings 8:26 “Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.”

    2 Chronicles 22:2 “Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.”

  8. Stephen Holshouser September 30, 2010 at 11:38 am #

    For all of you who believe what Hawking said;

    I’m sure that all of you have secretly imagined what your rebuttal to God would be when you stand before Him in judgment. Richard Dawkins was asked by Ben Stein what he would say to God if he was allowed to question Him. Dawkins said that he would ask God why He went to such great lengths to conceal Himself from us. If you have thought the same thing as Dawkins, know that this question (and all other questions designed to make God look unfair or unjust) will appear to be so ridiculously foolish to everyone present and even to you, that your mouth will indeed be stopped… you will be speechless when you finally realize that God IS good and just in all that He has done and that it was utterly ludicrous to reject Him or be willingly ignorant of Him.

    The creation itself is your clear, undeniable, infallible proof that God is who He says He is (Rom 1). Your only other option is Hawking’s conclusion; the universe made itself. Do you really intend to stand up there before God and everybody and say, “No really, I thought that we just came from absolutely nothing!” or some other such nonsense?

    Kent is right on… the laws didn’t put themselves into place, the Lawgiver did… it is so easy to see, unless you don’t want to see it. I plead with you, open your eyes to the unavoidable, obvious truth that God has made all of us with a purpose and that we are accountable to Him!

    Psalm 34:8
    John 1:29-30

  9. Jack Napper September 30, 2010 at 12:40 pm #

    “He admits that “everything in the universe follows laws, without exception” and “the laws of nature had to dictate…. Yet he cannot see that even this would require a Lawgiver.”

    Nice assertion but what you evidence for this requirement? I suggest first looking the term ‘scientific laws’. Then look up the word ‘assertion’.

    “Does he really believe “the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing?”

    Let me jump in here and ask if you really thought you could get away with this quote mine having posted a link to the full article. Yes Kent, we all know you like to claim to have ‘taught high school science for 15 years’ but do you really think this makes you an authority on quantum physics?

    “but then concludes by saying that “this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.” Wow! Satan started that lie in the Garden when he told Eve that she could be like God. (Gen. 3)”

    WHOA!!!! Settle down there Kent. I think you need to re-read that because you obviously saw the word ‘lords’ and didn’t bother to read the word in context.

    “These scoffers like Hawking are indeed “willingly ignorant!” These intellectuals think that they can outsmart God. They believe “God Did Not Create the Universe” And Hawking calls that “modern science”?”

    FACEPALM

    “I think I’ll just stick with: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”.”

    You do that Kent. You just stick with ‘GODDIDIT’ while the rest of us seek answers to how things actually work. I’m sure you’re gonna have some response you think is rather witty like ‘we have the answers’ or ‘we know’ but ‘God just did it that way’ isn’t science and it’s certainly not a very good answer.

  10. Natasha Bates September 30, 2010 at 11:50 am #

    It’s sad that people are given great minds to do great things and yet they will foolishly use it because they lust after themselves! This just gives me more of a reason to smile and pray for them! Hopefully the slap of God will not be to red on their face when its time for them to see the truth haha!!

  11. Martin Morgan September 30, 2010 at 12:44 pm #

    Couldn’t agree more Dr. Hovind! When I first seen what he said it amazed me that he could believe that. However just as you said he is “willingly ignorant”!

  12. ted sebastian September 30, 2010 at 12:53 pm #

    Professing to be wise, they have become fools. Universal Law, as it is called, can only be God-given. Order doesn’t just happen, and certainly doesn’t happen as a result of chaos. I’m just waiting to see it Hawking gives himself credit for the creation of the universe, lol.

  13. Dave Rice September 30, 2010 at 1:36 pm #

    Christians should have no problem with uncreated laws. For example, we believe that God is holy, unchanging, all powerful, etc. God is not those things because He chose them, but because He has always been them. God did not choose to exist, but simply always did. He is self existent, not self caused.

    If we believe that truth and falsehood are opposites because God chose them to be, then the whole concept of truth is at stake. If God could contradict Himself and call it logically consistent, then our entire system of logic would crumble. No, rather, God is logically consistent and is unable to contradict Himself because He has eternally been Truth.

    This is not to say that God is unable to create any laws. It is rather an assertion that He did not create all of them. Certain laws, particularly those describing God Himself, have been in existence eternally, along with our eternal God.

    The question of eternality of physical laws, e.g. gravity, is a philosophical one: Is the law able to exist when there is no physical universe for it to act upon? Perhaps the law is eternally existent as part of the immutable description of the eternal God of all truth.

    Bible believers should not be offended that God did not create gravity or other laws. We should rather be impressed and compelled to worship a God Who is so logically consistent and mathematical in all that He creates.

  14. Joe Shlabotnik September 30, 2010 at 3:23 pm #

    Dr. Hovind,

    You said, “I think I’ll just stick with: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

    How true! And all glory to God. We cannot ever understand how he created the universe, or the stars or the earth. All of this cam from his breath.
    We can’t know how he made the flood or seperated the fossils into layers.
    I share your love of the creator, but when you pretend to know how he created, or say that evolution is “not true” you try to explain God’s supernatural intentions and his methods.

    Most scientists look at the evidence and see evolution. We cannot say that they don’t see the patterns. It is plain that they are there.
    But we cannot explain any better than they can because God does not tell us how he did it.

    He says a few things about the flood, but we don’t know what the water of the deep are, or how he unleashed them. We cannot explain why at first there were no rainbows and then God spoke them into existence. When scientists ay that this must be a myth, they are correct, because all the laws of nature would have needed to be changed to create rainbows where there weren’t any under the same conditions.

    As Christians, we can not know any better natural causes for natural events than scientists. When we make theories of how old the earth is, we cannot explain why or tell scientists they are wrong, because what they see is the evidence.
    All we have is the Word of God. Nothing more.

    You have fought a good battle, but you are losing because instead of having faith in God’s awsome power,
    Stephen Hawking’s statement that everything came from nothing is apparently correct, because God did just that. But we don’t know how God had gravity, or disappearing particles or anything else to do it.

    Arguing aginst totally sound science is counterproductive because science sees and measures the results of God’s creations. Nether you or Ken Ham can claim to know how God did it, because he necver says how he did it.

    I hope your ministry thrives and your love of God continues to grow as he uses you there in prison to spread His word.

    I am sure you will go down in history as an example of God’s person that suffered through unjust government, but you wil probably not be remembered for trying to show scientists they are wrong. They are just measuring what God left them to measure.

    In His Word,

    Joe.

  15. Jeremey Chinshue September 30, 2010 at 3:40 pm #

    I think he’s just mad at God because of his condition, but he fails to understand the love of Jesus Christ, and that we live in a fallen world that the Devil is prince of.

    Tsk tsk.

  16. dan hart September 30, 2010 at 3:47 pm #

    keep giving with both barrels

  17. David Sanders September 30, 2010 at 4:21 pm #

    I really believe S Hawkins is playing an intellectual joke on his contemporaries. Read “Cosmic Clowning: Stephen Hawking’s “new” theory of everything is the same old CRAP” By John Horgan. He really puts Hawkins in perspective, including Hawkins “science”.

    David Sanders

  18. Ryan Vinter September 30, 2010 at 6:20 pm #

    He wont even debate you Kent, Stephen Hawking’s article is basically the same old, same old, propaganda with no evidence to back it up. I thank you Kent for saving me and helping to save others :) and yes creation has alot more evidence then “Modern Science”

  19. Henry Fiorentini September 30, 2010 at 10:17 pm #

    1. It’s called modern mathematics and physics: the 3D partial derivatives I’m learning now were discovered in the 18th century, over 300 years ago. We’ve come WAY farther than most laymen (including me) can grasp.

    2. Read the next few paragraphs AFTER he talks about “fine tuning”:

    “That [a god] is not the answer of modern science. As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.

    Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning. It is a consequence predicted by many theories in modern cosmology. If it is true it reduces the strong anthropic principle to the weak one, putting the fine tunings of physical law on the same footing as the environmental factors, for it means that our cosmic habitat, now the entire observable universe, is just one of many.

    Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.”

  20. Peter Moeller September 30, 2010 at 9:58 pm #

    Because Stephen Hawking has a brilliant scientific mind and teaches at Cambridge, people may think he talks “science”. Ultimately, he gives us his *personal* belief on the origin of the universe and life.

  21. Alfred Russell Wallace October 1, 2010 at 12:08 am #

    Sorry Nutty Christians!

    Things were not designed in a top-down “invisible man in the sky” kind of way. The eye, the brain, skeleton structures, etc. did not arrive in perfect form like your book of fables tells you.

    Natural Selection works as a bottom-up designer. Evidence for this can be shown in genetic research, fossils, lower organisms, and indeed in our own bodies. Why are the twelve cranial nerves jumbled up like tangled spaghetti? Because these all arrived before our skulls were situated as they are presently. Why do we hiccup? Because early amphibians needed a mechanism to stop water from entering the lungs of air-breathing animals.

    People like Hovind think that because they can’t physically watch a monkey give birth to a human they are correct in their denial of facts of evolution. Natural selection does not assert that monkeys are our ancestors, they are our cousins. The common ancestor lived about 2 million years ago. Oh wait, you guys still think the earth is 6000 years old… right.

    You guys must think life is a total mystery and that Mr. Invisible controls the directions in which you pass gas. Set yourselves free already.

  22. Stephen Holshouser October 1, 2010 at 9:26 am #

    Alfred,

    Here’s your evidence… seriously consider it, my friend; Fulfilled Biblical prophecy. Take a few of the Messianic prophecies for instance… Hundreds of years before it happened, Jesus Christ was prophesied to; be born in Bethlehem, be born of the lineage of David of the Tribe of Judah, be hung on a tree (before crucifixion existed), be called out of Egypt, be born of a virgin, be perfectly sinless, be rejected by His own people, betrayed by a friend, have His garments divided up by casting lots for them, be numbered with the transgressors, die for the sins of many, have the wrath of God poured out upon Him, not have any bones broken, be buried with the wealthy, die the exact year He died (Dan 9), just to name a few. The odds were no less than impossible that anyone could fulfill these things except God Himself purpose it to happen. These writings are also confirmed by the secular world to be written well before Jesus came.

    Jesus Himself prophesied that; Peter would find a piece of money in the mouth of the first fish he caught, He would be betrayed by Judas, all His faithful disciples would forsake Him, Peter would deny Him thrice, He would be killed and rise again the third day, Lazarus would rise again (and raised him from the dead), Peter would be killed for Him, armies would encompass Jerusalem and destroy it and the temple before that very generation passed (70AD), there is an hour coming in which all that in the graves will hear His voice and come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:28-29), when He returns again in glory with all the holy angels that all people will gathered before Him and be finally judged (Matt 25:31-46).

    No one can predict the future like this except God Himself be with them. Has any other religion or atheism done that? What other religion’s leader or founder is not dead and buried? God’s Word is amazing and far surpasses any other work. If you are still unable to believe, John 10:25-26 might apply to you… though I hope not for your sake.

    Concerning the natural laws; No matter what kind of law it is, you still have to have Someone establish it. They don’t establish themselves or wouldn’t there still be more popping up? Every effect has to have a cause. It is logic at the elementary level.

    Concerning the Bible’s accuracy; First of all, the Bible was written over a period of around 2000 years and there are about 40 different Bible writers (not 7-9). There are a handful of scribal errors that concern names and numbers (like the one you list) none of which have any doctrinals issue at stake. Practically any book today has some misprints in them, that doesn’t mean you throw the whole thing away. I have found a few minor misprints in my current King James Bible, but it is easily cleared up by looking at other copies, which is what the translators also did. If there is a slight variation in some manuscripts, finding out what was in the original autograph is easy. Don’t strain at a gnat (the age of king so-and-so was misprinted in the Bible) and swallow a camel (the universe made itself)!

  23. Stephen Holshouser October 1, 2010 at 10:36 am #

    Joe S,

    You said; “Most scientists look at the evidence and see evolution.”

    No, many scientist have been pre-indoctrinated with evolution and therefore the evidence is interpreted only though their “evolutionary glasses.” Their pre-conceived beliefs are what dictate how they interpret the facts. For instance, this article about the moon. If the moon were billions of years old; its core would already be cold, we would have lost it from orbit because it is regressing at a certain rate, and it would have more dust on its surface. The facts don’t matter with evolutionary scientists as pointed out by Eric here… the theory of evolution and great age of the earth is sacred above all facts and evidence.

    There are thousands of scientists who reject evolution and an old earth and they have the exact same facts the evolutionists do. Don’t be fooled into separating “Christian” from “science.” There are plenty of excellent Christian scientsts who are young earth creationists.

    You said: “All we have is the Word of God. Nothing more.”

    The Lord sees what you write on this blog… did you think about that before you wrote this? You seem to place very little value at all on God’s Word and much value on the word of those who vehemently reject Him… think long and hard about whose side you are actually on. I’m not saying you aren’t on God’s side because I can’t see your heart, but consider Matt 7:21-27.

    Respectfully,

  24. Alfred Russell Wallace October 1, 2010 at 2:33 pm #

    Stephen,

    You wrote a huge piece that was largely unnecessary. Islam has prophecies too, so do most other religions. The idea that the new testament was written to coincide with prophecy of the old testament is not a shock to me. Poor excuse to believe in christianity. Do you honestly think devout believers follow this faith only because of a few prophecies?

    Secondly, you are quite right about something. The bible has scribal errors in it.

    BINGO.

    Kent Hovind believes that the bible is completely inerrant, meaning divinely inspired and there should be NO mistakes. Evangelicals who believe in this inerrancy have no response to this problem. Sadly, they need to realize that human beings wrote the bible in order to formulate a system of philosophy and law. It can also be used to take possession of women, something that shifted when our species moved from the more equal sexes of the hunter-gatherers to the property ownership of men in the farming era.

    Your book will only yield answers of an ignorant stupefied ancient civilization that should be re-thought and not reaffirmed.

  25. Reina Powlison October 1, 2010 at 2:59 pm #

    The only people who don’t see are the “willingly blind”. Unfortunately, I’ve seen more evidence than I care to remember that these willing blind people are that way because of self-professing “Christians” who want to cram faith in God down other people’s throats. You don’t have to look hard or long to find someone raving about the depraved pagans all around. No sensitivity or compassion in these human machine guns. Scripture tells us to speak “…the truth in love.” As we can see, the truth doesn’t get far without the Love part. Maybe all of us need to step back a bit and check with God on our approach to people. I just can’t imagine Jesus railing away at someone who said they didn’t believe in God… The only people He got a bit rough with were the “extremely religious” fanatics who “believed in God” all over everybody’s toes. He would have plenty to say to us, I fear, because we are easily categorized in many cases as fanatics who don’t really care about the person we’re talking to. Love comes first. When a firm foundation of love is laid, it makes a great highway, paved and perfect for the truth to arrive.

  26. Mike Ayala October 1, 2010 at 6:06 pm #

    Hi Alfraud,

    Oops! Scribal error.

    Seriously, can you provide from any other bona fide writings religious or non-religious anywhere a single fulfilled prophecy of significance which would pass the test of a prophet and the test of a prophecy found in the Bible? Please do not try some trivial utterance like the generic bland likelihoods found in horror-scopes or the unintelligible ambiguities of Nostradamus, but something meaty, very specific of an earth-shaping and earth-shaking nature, just like the prophecies found in the Bible.

    I think you just threw that one out as a smoke screen to justify closing your ears and shutting your eyes to Stephen’s post not expecting to be challenged on it:

    “Islam has prophecies too, so do most other religions.”

    There is as much difference between the fulfilled prophecies of the Bible and the false prophecies and false prophets of Islam, cults, and other religions as is the difference between heaven and hell.

    Speaking of hell, in all sincerity without malice, your ignorance is exceeded maybe only by your arrogance. But that’s ok if you are willing to humble yourself, and you are willing to have a love of the truth. Without a love of the truth I fear for your eternal destiny, something about which Jesus has much to say. You ought to study what God the Son says about those whose names are not written in the Lamb’s book of life.

    You lied saying:

    “that the new testament was written to coincide with prophecy of the old testament”

    That is just blatantly false. Recorded history bears witness to just how much of a lie that is.

    Stephen’s post is just exactly that for which you asked:

    “I ask for an E-word. Evidence.”

    Stephen gave evidence to you, enough evidence to point you in the right direction to research it yourself, but you really do not want evidence – because the evidence proves you to be a liar.

    Alfred, you are a fraud.

    Alfred, I pray for your soul that the Spirit of God would shine the light of Jesus deeply into the dark recesses of your heart that you would be confronted by the one and only true God, Creator of heaven and earth. When that happens, you’d be wise to humble yourself before Him.

    In all sincerity,

    Mike Ayala

    PS: Natural selection designs nothing.

  27. Stephen Holshouser October 1, 2010 at 5:43 pm #

    Alfred,

    You said, “Why are the twelve cranial nerves jumbled up like tangled spaghetti? Because these all arrived before our skulls were situated as they are presently.”

    Actually, it is because our genes have been pre-programmed to form them exactly like they are. It is an excellent design! but maybe you could do a better job…
    By what mechanism do YOU suppose our cranial nerves evolved?? Natural selection only selects from what is already there, it creates nothing. Mutations only scramble what is already there, are always detrimental, and are not passed on… this also creates no new genetic material. Genetics don’t improve, they constantly degrade. Do you see how impotent and embarassing your theory is now?

    You said, “Why do we hiccup? Because early amphibians needed a mechanism to stop water from entering the lungs of air-breathing animals.”

    This is only a religious statement of your unprovable faith. Are you having trouble with hiccups? Two of the real world medical reasons for hiccups are alcoholism and over-eating… just fyi.

  28. Mike Ayala October 1, 2010 at 6:10 pm #

    Henry,

    Can you make a case that Cosmology actually falls under the category of pure science, the observation and reporting of observable repeatable phenomena?

    Mike Ayala

  29. Charles Rivers October 1, 2010 at 8:41 pm #

    Alfred

    You said:

    “The idea that the new testament was written to coincide with prophecy of the old testament is not a shock to me. Poor excuse to believe in Christianity. Do you honestly think devout believers follow this faith only because of a few prophecies?”

    Your comments Alfred all seem to be subjective in regards to hatred of Christianity and really have no basis for argument.

    Secondly, you seem biblically illiterate to say “a few prophecies” if you’ve done any scholarly research you will find much more than a “few” prophecies being fulfilled.

    Third, any religion that says you must kill those who don’t convert over to your beliefs, I’m running away fast.

    Fourth, no other religion offers the atonement for the fallen nature of man besides Christianity. Every other religion acknowledges we need atonement but doesn’t offer any solutions. That’s like me telling you that you have the flu but I can’t do anything for you, why mention it.

    Fifth, Christianity describes the most accurate nature of man yet people fail to realize these basic facts.

    Sixth, if you believe in evolution then you support slavery because evolution is built on the notion that the stronger kill the weaker so being African American myself why would I support a “religion” that deprives my God given rights to live equally with all. (These theories are taught by the same evolutionist you support)

    Seventh, God does not condone slavery He acknowledges that it exist. As a matter of fact he sent Moses to FREE the children of Israel, from what you might ask, slavery!!!

    Eighth, well why would God allow slavery in the first place? One of the great things about God is that He gives us humans FREE WILL. If God didn’t give us the ability to choose than His reason for creating us would be void. Just like you choose to reject His Word, I choose to accept it, in either scenario His Word still exist.

    Ninth, the bible was written by humans but so were the books of everything else you read from ancient literature. Why does the bible get tossed out as fallacy and other books accepted? It’s been the problem since the fall of Satan. Man trying to be his own god and trying to create his own humanistic views of life.

    Alfred your walking down a dangerous path and every time a Christian attempts to explain to you what sets Christianity apart that is God trying to get your attention. You can either accept it or reject it but if your going to continue to debate please keep it clean and un-offensive.

    Your Soon To Be Brother In Christ
    Charles

  30. Caleb Fielding October 2, 2010 at 7:55 pm #

    Your book is not the inerrant perfect word, there are mistakes!

    example:

    2 Kings 8:26 “Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.”

    2 Chronicles 22:2 “Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.”

    I would like to point out that two verses before II Chron 22:2 in the preceding chapter it says his dad was only 40 when he died. So either the dozens of translaters either completly missed a very glaring error or they knew something you didnt. For example in the book of Chronicles it sometimes refers to somebodies age, as the age of the dynasty. for me go to http://www.febc.edu.sg/VPP4.htm

    sometimes Gods word requires more than a skim through.

  31. Caleb Fielding October 2, 2010 at 7:59 pm #

    Natural Selection works as a bottom-up designer. Evidence for this can be shown in genetic research, fossils, lower organisms, and indeed in our own bodies. Why are the twelve cranial nerves jumbled up like tangled spaghetti? Because these all arrived before our skulls were situated as they are presently.

    I assume you think that their is a better way for the nerves to be situated. If so present the way they should be. If not dont criticize.

  32. Mark James October 2, 2010 at 11:00 pm #

    Hi Alfred (and Stephen),

    I have an Arab Christian friend who laughs when we westerners talk about contradictions in the Bible because we have a tendency to apply our own customs and traditions (and political understanding) to the text and in the process fail to understand what is really going on.

    Here’s a modern example. To someone who doesn’t understand US politics the two statements below might seem to contradict one-another:

    Texas Newspaper says, “George W. Bush was 49 years old when he began to govern; and he governed 8 years in Washington.”

    Washington Newspaper says, “George W. Bush was 54 years old when he began to govern; and he governed 8 years in Washington.”

    But these two accounts do not contradict. The Texas Newspaper focuses on Texas politics, so it tells the age of George W. Bush at the time when he began to govern Texas as the state governor. The Washington Newspaper, on the other hand, focuses on federal politics so it tells the age of George W. Bush at the time when he began to govern the United States as the president. The accounts may be unclear without the qualifying phrases, “as governor” or “as president,” but unclear parallel statements are not the same as contradicting parallel statements.

    Co-regency was typical in the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel. Ahaziah was a co-regent of Israel at age twenty-two and later became king of Judah at age forty-two.

  33. Mark James October 3, 2010 at 1:46 am #

    Hi Joe,

    I think you’ll find that the Hovinds have no problem with scientists measuring what God has left them to measure. They do, however, have a problem with how some scientists interpret what they have measured.

  34. Mark James October 3, 2010 at 2:11 am #

    Hi Alfred,

    Please give us an example of a mutation that adds coherent information to the genetic code.

    Unless it was originally created as we see it today, the only explanation is that DNA started out as a much smaller molecule (a couple of base pairs, even) and, over time, random mutations added all the information for structures such as the eye, the brain, skeleton, etc.

    This type of mutation is essential if natural selection is to work as a bottom-up designer. There must have been many billions of billions of them and they must still be happening today. All I’d like is an example of one.

    (Sorry to keep repeating myself)

  35. Kenneth Haven October 3, 2010 at 2:34 pm #

    Ohh those NUTTY evolutionists…

  36. Eric Hovind October 3, 2010 at 9:24 pm #

    Had a great visit with Dr. Hovind this weekend. I brought up Jack’s thoughts and here was Dr. Hovind’s response.

    So, Jack, this is to you.

    Ask this guy to explain the origin of computers but he cannot say man designed them.. The answer must be purely naturalistic. We know that laws like gravity, inertia, the strong and weak nuclear force etc exist. Using only the known laws of physics and the known properties of matter, explain the origin on the computer.

    Pawned! I love my Dad!

  37. Daniel Struse October 3, 2010 at 9:26 pm #

    Spontaneous creation ? Please show evidence? Spontaneous creation is supernatural by
    Definition. and hawking says he doesn’t believe in a god….? That takes a lot of faith.

  38. Jeff Brace October 4, 2010 at 5:26 am #

    Hi Eric,

    Great answer Dr. Hovind. I hope you are with us again soon. God Bless !!!

  39. Alfred Russell Wallace October 4, 2010 at 11:44 am #

    Mark James,

    Mutations can be deleterious and can also slightly alter the encoded genes creating slight modifications in organisms.

    It should be no surprise that the beneficial modifications remain, because those with poor modifications were either not fit for the environments (leading to death and subsequently no offspring), become so mutated that they are now sterile (subsequently no offspring), or were not sexually selected by the opposite sex due to unattractiveness(no offspring).

    Natural selection works in this way, by building upon previous modifications slowly over millions and millions of years. For example, the eye can be seen at various evolutionary stages in multiple organisms; flatworms have pinhole eyes and can only make out fuzzy objects and lighting. The octopus actually has better vision than the human being, while the squid still has a very basic eye.

    The starting point of the eye was skin cells that detect light, a few million years later… a cup shaped collection of these skin cells, later still…. closing of the gap in the cup, causing a rough image projected onto the cells, over the years the cells become more modified to represent images. Soon the cells are able to detect colours and sharper images.Slowly and finally, the the cup of skin forms transparent cells at the pinhole forming a lens. now the image is sharply reflected onto the photosensitive cells. (upside down of course but our brain reinterprets the images for us.)

    Just an example of a structure forming by natural selection.

  40. Stephen Holshouser October 4, 2010 at 8:53 pm #

    Hi Caleb and Mark,

    I read thru the article a couple of times that Caleb listed in his post and looked up the references. The author makes a very good attempt to explain it, but it all seems to be based on speculations and maybe’s.

    I understand your thinking on why you do not want any misprints in the Bible, no matter how small or insignificant… I just disagree with the premise that you can’t trust any of the Bible if it contains even a few minor scribal errors. As I mentioned, I’ve found minor misprints in my own Authorized KJV… I didn’t throw it away because of that, and it is still God’s Word. I listen to the KJV on tape read by Alexander Scourby and have heard some minor errors in it… does that make it any less inspired? When the Apostles and others quoted from the Old Testament, they did not always quote it word for word… this doesn’t mean they weren’t quoting Holy Spirit inspired Scripture does it?

    If you are worried about people rejecting the entire Bible for a couple of misprints, don’t be… thousands and thousands of devout, born again, God-fearing Christians see the scribal errors and know that it doesn’t change the truth. I believe you can unintentionally cause doubt in the minds of people if you teach them that the Bible “has no misprints or scribal errors or mispellings in it.” When they find one of the very few it has, they think, “Wow, here is an obvious error right here… They told me it didn’t have any… I wonder if it really is inspired by God or not.”
    This happened to me a long time ago, but I quickly came to see that none of them affect any of its teachings… the Sword is just as sharp, just as powerful, just as effective on believers and unbelievers as it was then… even Kent said he was growing in the Lord by reading the RSV when he was a new Christian and that is way worse than a mere scribal error! : )

    I also think that claiming it has no misprints, etc. unintentionally gives atheists like “Alfred Russell Wallace” an easy way to poke holes in your position and then sit back and listen to you stumble through a 30 minute rebuttal that is confusing and weak at best.

    This is all just my opinion and I hope it’s not wrong. If you have access to John Gill’s (he was a great godly expositor who pastored CH Spurgeon’s church before him) commentary on 2Chron.22:2, he gives several different sides of the issue. He points out that copies of the Septuagint along with the Syriac and Arabic versions, read twenty two, as in Kings; particularly the Syriac version, used in the church of Antioch from the most early times.

  41. Duane October 4, 2010 at 10:53 pm #

    Claiming the Bible has fulfilled prophesies in the New Test from the Old is a bit like saying the Harry Potter books prophesied what was going to be in the movies. The writers knew the prophesies and went out of their way to fulfill them, when they understood them or whether they happened or not (one unreliable text doesn’t really confirm another unreliable text). Most of the time, they aren’t even prophesies, but lines taken out of context. Stuff like a virgin will conceive is not only a mistranslation (not a virgin, but a young woman- the writers of the New Test didn’t read the original Hebrew but a Greek Translation), it has nothing to do with Jesus in the context of the story. They are talking about a specific event that will occur right then. Then there’s the line about a child coming out of Egypt, when the context is about the Jews themselves in the Exodus, not Jesus. There’s many more like that. When they actually do prophesy a messiah, they distinctly refer to a man who will become King of the Jews and will smite his enemies with a sword. Jesus most certainly did not do that. Christians have spun these stories so long, they can’t look at them objectively anymore. Plus, they are so used to reading verses in Sunday School out of context that they often don’t realize they mean different things than what they assume.

  42. Mark James October 5, 2010 at 3:42 am #

    Hi Alfred,

    You are right, mutations can be deleterious and they can slightly alter the encoded genes creating slight modifications in organisms. But you overlook one important point – this can only happen if the genes already exist. In order for there to be genes at all there would have to be one or more random processes that add discreet amounts of coherent information to the DNA. No such process has ever been found.

    Beneficial mutations do happen but they invariably involve a loss of genetic information and this can, and will, never explain the complexity of life as we know it.