I came across the news of the distribution of Darwins Origin of Species with Ray
Comfort's 50 page introduction. I think this is a worthy cause, but I got a
sick feeling in my stomach when I read some of Ray's points.

Were they incorrect points? Well that's not really the question here. Do Ray's
points give strong evidence that he didn't read Origin of Species?? I can't
say, but maybe he skimmed over it too quickly?

I'm about as biased as you can get when it comes to wanting to support Ray's
cause, and the intro itself doesn't clearly show that Ray didn't read the Origin
of Species, but after seeing some interviews on the Living Waters site, it's
very clear that he didn't read it. In the intro he touches on fish evolution,
and the formation of lungs. Did he not read page 151 and 152 of the same PDF
that has his introduction? On the 700 club interview he proposed the question
as if an individual fish would wa...

First of all, Atheism is NOT a faith. Secondly, I have noticed Mr. Dawkins book
on many of Bestsellers lists for weeks now, and today is the first I'm hearing
of anyone named Ray Comfort. You want to know how I became an Atheist? I grew up
going to church. I went to sunday school, sang in the choir. Then I got old
enought to think for myself. And I realized, what a load of crap I had been
listening to my whole life. And it had nothing to do with a science teacher in
high school, or a professor in University. It was because I took the time to
look at the facts, study the evidence and think for myself. Anywho who is buying
into the things they read on this site, or any other christian site, is ignorant
and unable to have an intellegent, individual though. Please do yourselves a
favor and view this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvZz_pxZ2lw

It is a debate with 2 Atheist and 2 members of the Catholic church. If you still

of Christians astound me. a man such as Andy can say a single word you people
don't agree with and you'll get all up in arms

on inhalejesus.blogspot.com i took a test that told me im going to hell and i am
fine with it because id rather be surrounded by fire, brimstone, and sin then by
ignorant fools

Tyler, you'd rather be burned unquencably, soured sulfer smelled to the point of
vomiting unquencably, and be seared with hate unquencably than to listen to
these putative ignorant fools try to save you from it? Who is the ingnorant
fool here? How can I expect you to listen to me or the word of God when you
don't even listen to youself?

This site is policed from without! Mention

specfic words and automatically thier computer

shuts one down?

This is a very interesting site. It would be

well worth anyone's time to read of biblical works and listen to the videos. A
remark about

the Idumeans was completely out of thin air, sorry! Please keep up the good
work. Thanks.

Paul said: I became everything to everyone so I might perchance win some to the
Lord Jesus. He was a very learned fellow of his day and vehemently debated the
wiseckers of his time in an attempt to shed light to their foolishness which
they regarded as knowledge. If Ray can do the same, I say Go RAY!
But when all is said and done, the moment of truth is in the future when
Darwinists and atheists will get to stand b4 Jesus and hear their very words
condemn them to eternal damnation.
This is not a "theory" or a scare tactic, it's the cold hard truth. You
don't have to agree with it, but it will find you out at the appointed time.
I now have my case resting on the couch, pls don't disturb it.

Please explain the fact the ancient Idumeans,

EDOMITES,as mentioned by MALAKI, through ESAU

is hardly mentioned by christians to day?

Hogorina

You've been told that "evolution is just a theory", a guess, a hunch,
and not a fact, not proven. You've been misled. Keep reading, and in less than
two minutes from now you'll know that you've been misinformed. We're not going
to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that
"it's just a theory" is not a valid argument.

The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the
word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use.1 That's right,
it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a
scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a
theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs
proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a
well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanati...

If what you say is true about the scientific community, I can't help but point
out to you that this is A perfect example of how the worldy flesh is corrupted
and altered by satans tacticts. What sly way to completely change the meaning of
A word to fit your explanation. My prayer for you is that you except Christ as
your Savior and start to read the only truth there really is, and that is the
Holy Bible!!!!!!!!

You say: What sly way to completely change the meaning of A word to fit your
explanation.

It's not sly, a scientific theory is supported by an abundance of facts. This
has always been the case. In any case the evidential can't be slyly changed - go
and look at the fossil evidence for yourself in the natural history museum and
decide for yourself. 'Only a theory' is not an arguement for creationism. Saying
'only a theory' does not argue against anything you need to show POSITIVE
evidence of your own.



Thanks Andy.

and i have yet to see a transitional form... Even heard someone comment about
that who is an old-earther, why is there not 1 transitional form in the Chicago
museum of natural history? (other then the debunked lucy), in fact having the
discredited Lucy, and not mentioning the truth behind it proves how bad their
case is.

Lucy has not been not discredited. Every fossil is a transitional form. We are
transitional forms between our parents and our children. I think you have
misunderstood how evolution works. One animal does not change into another over
one generation, it happens over time. When one species splits 2 ways, by
geographical methods say, 2 new species will evolve. The original species will
be the common ancestor and you will have 2 new species separated by their
position. You may not find the common ancestor in the fossil record but does not
mean the didn't exist.



Thanks Andy.

Andy is another poster that really makes me laugh. Maybe those zits are the
vesitgal buds forming a new limb or face part. Nonsense coming from a master at
his art, falsehood.

We are all transitional froms. Man alive Andy, I think I am gonna start
writting your stuff down and go on the road as a stand-up comic. Wow this stuff
is good.

Glen, if you are using my stuff for your comedy show you need to send me 10% of
the earnings. That can be your tithing.



Thanks Andy.

tithing goes to God not man. You are not God. But funny nevertheless.

I think it is very exciting to see how much knowledge about God you have. You
even know about tithing. Now you have been convicted of having no excuse when
your time comes. There is a vast difference between knowledge about God and
Knowing God personnally. The dif-ference is a gulf that you cannot cross,
unless you know God; unless you have accepted the cross. Andy I wish I could
unblind your eyes but that is an issue between you and God. All you have to do
is accept his payment of your sin debt.

I wonder which book is outselling the other.

I bet a thousand dollers that Dawkins book is out selling Ray's, probably due to
the fact that Creation is alread scientificly discredited in almost everything
it does. So that is just a wild guess, but then again...

Charles Stephens comments really make me laugh out loud sometimes. I mean
really laugh. Ray is giving "his" book away not selling it and Dawkins
is selling "his" book. Charlie boy I am not gonna take you up on that
bet. It is a sucker bet. And not because science has any-thing at all to do
with it. Science cannot discredit the very thing it studies. It is profoundly
dumb to make such a statement. Again, science cannot discredit the very thing
is works hard to describe; namely creation. Sorry fella. Try that line on
another mark. This one ain't buyin'.

What is interesting in Brent's statement is that the christian must read the
non-christian stuff in order to creat or formulate an agreeable arguement to
disuade the non-bliever.



Nonsense! It is not biblical. The Holy Spirit lead Jesus to answer the
Pharisee's trying to trap him and will lead us in the same way. Interestingly
Jesus usually answered in a way that foiled the question by attacking the
underlying lie.



There are those Christians though that have been brought out of this line of
thinking. They ave already consumed this poison and have been cleansed of teh
lies by turning to Jesus. Jesus them uses thier intimate understandings to lead
the way in the battle. Not because they know somethng Jesus doesn't. It is
because they can now testify along with the Holy Spirit to who Jesus is and the
work Jesus has done.



It is the testimony that is important.



All Paul did was to p...

Brent, I'm just passing through the site and saw your comment. I do read some
science texts-not very many, though, because I prefer novels. I did like Bill
Bryson's Short History of Nearly Everything.



The reason I don't read Dawkins, though, is that he takes an antagonistic view
of my culture in his books. While I respect his choices, I don't see the need to
read a book by a man who thinks that religion is 'society's greatest evil'.
However, I will admit that he seems like a decent guy in his interviews.

It's too bad more Christians don't read the books put out by Dawkins, Eldridge,
etc. which espouse a point of view contrary to their own positions. Only by
doing so can we understand what they believe, where they stand, and be able to
put together coherent arguments to counter them. It is also the only way to
find the logical or other faults in their arguments. You might be surprised to
find that many of the evolutionist authors admit they have to take evolution on
faith because they have no evidence to support it as anything but a theory, and
that they continue with it because they don't want to believe in a god, let
alone the God.

Brent, I must vehemently disagree with you. Quite the opposite is true. The
Bible NEVER admonishes Christians to "study the works of darkness",
which is what "books put out by Dawkins, Eldridge, etc." clearly are.
Rather, we are told, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman
that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2
Timothy 2:15) Furthermore, we are to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful
works of darkness, but rather, reprove them", where to "reprove" is
to "make manifest" with "light" (Ephesians 5:11-13) That
"light" is GOD'S WORD, specifically, God's law! (Psalm 119:105; Proverbs
6:23) Those who are trained in "spotting a counterfeit" don't do so by
studying the counterfeit,

but the genuine. If Christians would spend more time prayerfully studying the
Bible, having a true heart for the lost as their Lord J...

"How could he not stand up for his faith?"

I've read before that Dawkins will not take part in debates with people such as
Ray as he is of the opinion that by granting a debate will legitimise their
opinions. Dawkins has said he has no interest in arguing with somebody who is
"utterly ignorant" on a topic and that it would only serve to advance
the case put forward by Ray.

I was not a fan of Dawkins, but I have been watching some of his debates on
youtube and despite his very hostile nature, he is a very intelligent well
spoken man and his arguments do seem compelling.

Regarding evolution, logically some elements seemed fantastical to me
originally. However, I have been listening to a podcast called the Skeptics
Guide to The Universe - the presenter Steven Novella does explain away some of
the confusion in a very clear easy to understand way. I love that this subject
has become so popu...

Just read TGSOE and is an excellent read. Richard a good film to watch on
youtube is:

Carl Sagan 'we are star stuff'. This outlines evolution in a diagramatic way
that is easy to understand. Don't know why Brent encourages Christians to read
more Dawkins and Eldridge and then misunderstands the word 'theory' which
Dawkins explains at length in his book - that is the difference between an
ordinary idea and a proper scientific theory. Evolution is a proper scientific
theory supported by many facts.

Andy yoou are wrong! And you are a liar.

Richard Dawkins has already gone through alot of debates, and in many, videos
were edited to make it seem like he did not know the anwser to a question. The
reason Dawkins did not go into that debate is because he had already debunked
creationism and does not want another edited video out there because many people
won't check to get thier facts straight.