Feed aggregator

A story of origins? Evolution has nothing to say about origins, neither the origin of energy, nor of the cosmos, nor of the first cell, nor of the first species, nor of life.

Not unresolvable?! That is like saying that there is no real conflict between atheism and theism, between evolution and creation. Words have lost their meaning. There can be no meaningful discussion if the total contradiction of the two views is denied as though it did not exist.

On November 5, 2025 voters sent the message that they’re sick of high gas prices, government diktats about what kind of cars they have to drive, billions in subsidies to “green renewable” energy industries, and EVs, and hectoring virtue-signaling from snooty elites about “settled science” and climate change “deniers.” The winds of change have set the “green” paradigm tottering.

What happened? Recently the Wall Street Journal’s Barton Swaim wrote,  “The possibility that an entire academic discipline, climate science, could have gone badly amiss by groupthink and self-flattery wasn’t thought possible. In many quarters this orthodoxy still reigns unquestioned.” But this statement begs the question that the more accurate name for “climate change,” ––Anthropogenic Catastrophic Global Warming (ACGW)–– reflects true science, which has “gone wildly amiss” because of “groupthink and “self-flattery” and other human frailties.

In fact, the real problem is the claim that, as the honest name above says, CO2 emissions from humans will eventually heat the atmosphere to the point that it becomes uninhabitable. But this is not a scientific fact established by the empirically based scientific method, but a dicey hypothesis. We simply do not have a thorough enough understanding of the complexity of global climate over time and space. For example, we don’t know precisely how water vapor in the atmosphere, the biggest greenhouse gas, interacts with CO2, or how it contributes to cyclic cooling and warming.

These gaps in our models and computer simulations have been exposed by many physicists, to whom we should listen rather than “climate scientists.” For example, MIT professor of atmospheric science Richard Lindzen, and Princeton emeritus professor of physics William Happer, wrote  in 2021, “We are both scientists who can attest that the research literature does not support the claim of a climate emergency. Nor will there be one. None of the lurid predictions — dangerously accelerating sea-level rise, increasingly extreme weather, more deadly forest fires, unprecedented warming, etc. — are any more accurate than the fire-and-brimstone sermons used to stoke fanaticism in medieval crusaders.”

The weakness of the “science,” then, makes not just “groupthink” and “self-flattery” possible, but also politicization, the fear-mongering of apocalyptic scenarios, and old-fashioned greed fed by government subsidies, tax breaks, and grants. Worse are the mandates to eliminate carbon-based energy and replace it with intermittent energy from windmills and solar panels, even though the infrastructure needed to store and deliver electricity to cover down times, is many decades from becoming a reality. This is a huge problem for the warmists, since those “clean, renewable” but intermittent energy sources require back-up reserves of electricity generated by natural gas and coal.

So how did ACGW gain such traction given its lack of any scientific bona fides? As with any issue that relies on claims of science, the lack of familiarity with how science works has increased among our students over the postwar decades, who leave K-12 schooling with globally pathetic levels of proficiency in science and mathematics.

Take the popular claim that ACGW is “settled science.” Such a statement violates the protocols of the scientific method, which physicist Richard Feynman defines as “a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards.  For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.”

Or as the theorist of the scientific method Karl Popper put it more bluntly, “The method of science is the method of bold conjectures and ingenious and severe attempts to refute them.” Yet those doing just that regarding the claims of ACGW are met with epithets like “denier,” a sly slur borrowed from “holocaust denier,” and professional ostracizing and “cancellation.” There’s nothing “scientific” about such responses to challenges.

But it’s not just bad science or scientism that explains the “green” energy cult, itself an offshoot of romantic environmentalism. Ancient myths that have been part of Western culture for millennia also have influenced the way we think about the natural world and our place in it. One, the myth of the Golden Age, has been especially pervasive. This explanation of the human condition posits a simpler time in the past during which humans lived in harmony with nature, which like a benevolent mother provided us all we need to survive and flourish. People lived communally, without law, class distinctions, rulers, technology, wealth, or private property, which are all the seeds of war, slavery, conquest, greed, and suffering.

Today these mythic motifs and ideals saturate modern environmentalism, including hypotheses like ACGW, and policies like the protection of animal species threatened with extinction, even at the expense of human well-being. Popular culture has been filled with these ideas, from Disney cartoons to movies that feature American Indians as Noble Savages and peaceful environmentalists, contrary to their actual history. Other exotic ethnicities likewise are labeled by this same Western cliché.

Moreover, as historian of ideas Isaiah Berlin writes, these mythic residues like the Noble Savage have political uses: “The notion that somewhere whether in a real or imagined sociey, man dwells in his natural state, is at the heart of primitivist theories; it is found in various guises in every anarchist and popramme of the last hundred years, and has deeply affected Marxism and the vast variety of youth movements with radical or revolutionary goals.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-green-paradigm-is-shifting-fast/

Atheists get excited about using “evolution” to reorganize the DNA in various bacterium.15 But that is not evolution, although Dawkins and others continually call it that. Kenneth R. Miller’s enthusiasm is almost unbounded when it comes to origins. He bluntly declares that

“. . . evolution is, by definition, a story of origins. This means . . . it really does supersede another creation story—in particular, the creation story at the very core of the Judeo-Christian narrative. The conflict between these two versions of our history is real, and . . . needs to be addressed. [But] I do not believe that the conflict is unresolvable.”

Hitchens refers to “the unarguable facts of evolution” but gives us none of them. Like other atheists and evolutionists, he is referring to modifications within a species—even within a bacterium. We’re still waiting for an example of genuine evolution from one species to another. The abundant variety of dogs is not evidence of evolution from one kind, as defined in Genesis 1, to another kind. Clearly “kind” is still a division that cannot be crossed. Let us have just one example of evolution changing a dog into something other than a dog. No such examples are offered. As we showed in chapter 2, Colin Patterson confessed that he couldn’t think of even one!

Islamist land claims pertaining to Palestine (by which they infer all of Eretz Yisrael - the land of Israel) are, unfortunately, based on false allegations of illegitimate colonialist actions by the Jewish people of the area. The Jews have, it is claimed, usurped the rights of Muslim Palestinians to their historical land. These allegations, however, are merely a façade for covering the true motives of jihadist Islamists who control the public narrative.

The less-than-elevating background to the "Palestinian movement" was exposed by leading Harvard Law School Professor Alan M. Dershowitz in his June 2024 article on the notion of Palestinianism. He explained that the dispute over land has escalated in recent times from "a resolvable conflict over land to an irresolvable conflict over religion." The true nature of the conflict is thus one of religion.

The late senior PLO official Zuheir Mohsen even openly admitted in the Dutch daily Trouw in 1977 that the Palestinian cause is actually, well, fake:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."
— Zuheir Mohsen to James Dorsey, "Wij zijn alleen Palestijn om politieke reden", Trouw, March 31, 1977.

Palestinianism has nevertheless accelerated on the world stage through an intersection of Western ideologies based on the neo-Marxist premise that if someone succeeds, it can only have happened because they have oppressed someone else. A situation of win-win capitalism -- with unions protecting workers, and profit-sharing plans and investments that share the opportunity so that if an enterprise is successful, all the investors win (and if it is not, they all share the risk and lose) -- does not occur to them. For the Marxists, there must always be an oppressor and an oppressed.

The primary Islamic claim to Jerusalem, as noted by journalist Roy Hirsch and Dr. Tanveer Zamani, founder of the People's Party of Pakistan, is based on:

"The Quranic chapter Ibrahim 14:37 recounts that God instructed Abraham to leave Hagar and Ishmael in the barren valley of Mecca, while Isaac stayed in Canaan. This deliberate landmark separation not only highlights the distinct identities of these religious civilizations but also provides insights into resolving contemporary disputes over land claims.

"The Islamic connection to Jerusalem is linked to Prophet Muhammad's brief, one-time stop at the farthest Temple Mount during his nocturnal journey to Heaven in 620 CE, as mentioned in Quran, Al-Isra -17:1.

["Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things)." Al-Isra -17:1]

"This passage describes a fleeting visit that should not be misused as a lasting religious claim. The stop at the Temple Mount was an initial stage of Prophet Muhammad's nocturnal journey to Heaven, involving the witnessing of heavenly signs on Earth before his ascension. These Holy sites, associated with earlier prophets such as Abraham, and Isaac, lineage; Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, and Zakariya, served as a prelude to his ultimate ascent to Heaven. The Al-Aqsa Mosque, established by Caliph Umar in 638 CE, was not even present during the Prophet's time."

The Al-Aqsa Mosque would therefore have been constructed six years after Muhamad's death: c. 570 - June 8, 632 CE

The two holiest sites for Muslims, and exclusive to them, do not include either the Al-Aqsa Mosque or Jerusalem, but are the Sacred Mosque in Mecca (in the direction of which Muslims pray daily) and the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina – neither of which is anywhere near Jerusalem. Hence, declarations by Islamists claiming Jerusalem are not founded on history, reality nor legitimacy, notwithstanding the Palestinian Authority in 2000, "passing a law declaring Jerusalem to be their capital."

In the result, the propagated basis for the invasions of Israel during times of intifada and particularly on October 7, 2023, ostensibly to prevent a Jewish take-over of the Al-Aqsa mosque, are simply false -- part of Palestinianism propaganda claims first proposed as a pretext by Hitler's ally, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al Husseini.

The October 7 jihadist operation, named "Al-Aqsa flood" supposedly to "liberate" that part of Jerusalem's Temple Mount where the mosque is located, was therefore founded on a gross deception. The jihadist utilization of Palestinianism was, however, successful in gathering a mass of terrorists in a common cause to execute the Islamist agenda of conqueringIsrael, "liberating" Jerusalem, and killing all occupants. Hence the slogan, "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." Again, the jihadist strategy was doomed to failure -- as are all attempts to annihilate Israel and its people.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21374/the-palestinian-people-does-not-exist

Recently, many science news media outlets seemed to think that ‘fake news’ was OK when it denigrated the Bible. Researchers recently extracted DNA from skeletons, dated at around 3,750 years old and unearthed in Sidon, an ancient city inhabited by Canaanites at the time. When the DNA was compared to modern Lebanese people, they found that modern Lebanese derive about 93% of their ancestry from these Canaanites. There appears to be little reason to doubt the findings. And it’s interesting to see how genetics can provide clues to history when we lack written records. But science reporters seemed to have been utterly enthralled with the idea that these findings ‘contradicted’ the Bible. Here are some examples:

·  “Bible says Canaanites were wiped out by Israelites but scientists just found their descendants living in Lebanon” (The Independent)
·  “New DNA study casts doubt on Bible claim” (Mother Nature Network)
·  “The Bible was WRONG: Civilisation God ordered to be KILLED still live and kicking” (Express)

What the Bible actually says about the fate of the Canaanites

Clearly these ‘reports’ didn’t check the source they say this DNA evidence ‘contradicted’. It will help to quote Scripture at some length, just to show how ludicrous these headlines really are. First, Numbers:33:55But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.
See All...: “But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those of them whom you let remain shall be as barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall trouble you in the land where you dwell.”

But how well did Israel do at driving the Canaanites out? Joshua:16:10And they drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute.
See All...: “However, they did not drive out the Canaanites who lived in Gezer, so the Canaanites have lived in the midst of Ephraim to this day but have been made to do forced labor.”

“Clearly, if the Canaanites were used as forced labour ‘to this day’,” they were not exterminated. Note again that they were supposed to drive out the Canaanites, not slaughter them all. Death was meant to be used only for those sinful and stupid enough to stay and fight. Instead, Israel did precisely what God commanded them not to do with the Canaanites; subjugate them.

Finally, God’s verdict on all this comes down in Judges:2:1And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
See All...–3:

Now the angel of the Lord went up from Gilgal to Bochim. And he said, “I brought you up from Egypt and brought you into the land that I swore to give to your fathers. I said, ‘I will never break my covenant with you, and you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall break down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed my voice. What is this you have done? So now I say, I will not drive them out before you, but they shall become thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare to you.”

A smaller point in some articles is that archaeologists think there was no Conquest, and Joshua was just a myth written long after the purported events. However, there is plenty of archaeological evidence for the Conquest; the key is to understand when the evidence points to. For more information, please see The walls of Jericho and more generally Egyptian chronology and the Bible—framing the issues.

[For full article and links, see] https://creation.com/canaanite-dna-confirms-bible

As it is with the writings of evolutionists, so it is with those of atheists. Obviously, it is impossible to be only one or the other; these two come as a package, as Dawkins admits in declaring that Darwinism led him to atheism. In the index to Hitchens’s book, he offers one reference to origins.14 The entry is, Origin of Species, The (Darwin, 269-70). Those pages have nothing to do with the origin of species—nor does Darwin’s entire book, though that is its title.

For the record, I personally believe that God can, has, and does heal people according to His discretion, and I don’t know any born-again followers of Jesus who would say that God can’t, doesn’t, or won’t heal whomever He chooses to heal.

From my interaction with Cessationists, they don’t categorically discount the possibility that God still heals people in the 21st century; they rightly question the deceptive and manipulative methods employed by far too many people who claim to use the gifts of the Holy Spirit — rather than the Holy Spirit using them as humble servants to display God’s love, mercy and grace.

The Holy Spirit isn’t a circus performer or a carnival act, and He isn’t subject to the commands, Decrees, Declarations of anyone. And lest we forget, Jesus rebuked the religious leaders who asked to see “a sign,” and instead referred them to the Scriptures; which was, is, and should always be our definitive and final authority concerning biblical doctrine and application. (See Matthew:12:38-40 [38] Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. [39] But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: [40] For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
See All...)

Simply stated, subjective experiences should always be tested by the written Word. If there’s a disparity between the two and someone’s experience contradicts the clear teaching of the Scriptures, it’s the experience that should be rejected.

A few simple and obvious questions should be addressed to anyone who claims to have the gift of healing. (And by the way, there are many pagan, wiccan and occultic groups and gnostic/metaphysical religions like Christian Science, which is an oxymoron because it’s neither Christian nor Science), Religious Science and numerous other “Mind Science” groups claim to experience “divine healings,” — which presents a dilemma for Charismatics who rely on subjective experiences and personal testimonies when people who reject the Bible claim to have the same experiences that they have.

People who claim to “impart” miraculous powers that are ascribed solely and ONLY to the Holy Spirit and are subject to His discretion are nothing more than charlatans, frauds, and hucksters.

Hyper-charismatic salesmen and saleswomen who charge money to “train” people how to “heal and/or prophesy” in their schools of “Supernatural Ministry” are no different from Simon, the sorcerer in Acts:8:4-24 [4] Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word. [5] Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. [6] And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. [7] For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed. [8] And there was great joy in that city. [9] But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: [10] To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. [11] And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries. [12] But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. [13] Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. [14] Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: [15] Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: [16] (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) [17] Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. [18] And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, [19] Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. [20] But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. [21] Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. [22] Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. [23] For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. [24] Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the LORD for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.
See All.... He was quite willing to pay money to receive the miraculous gifts. And Peter’s response was quick and direct:

“May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent, therefore, of this wickedness and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bondage of iniquity.”  (Acts:8:20-23 [20] But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. [21] Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. [22] Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. [23] For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
See All...)

But Simon did what was right and should be an example to the marketers of miraculous gifts. They should do what he did and repent.

Simon answered:

“Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.” (Acts:8:24Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the LORD for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.
See All...)

My hope is that the charlatans of the hyper-charismatic movement will repent before they experience the judgment that Simon desperately wanted to avoid.

https://midwestoutreach.org/2025/01/16/concerning-signs-wonders/#comment-107238

In "My Three Years in a Christian Cult" Peter Schwendener recounts is life from the time he accepted Christ on January 6, 1973. Soon he was involved with Shiloh Fellowship in East Lansing, Michigan. The group, like many groups in that time, became involved in the Shepherding Movement, and added deliverance ministry where one of the leaders discerned Peter had “demon of knowledge,” because he had the "ungodly desire to understand things that should be taken on faith."  Even though he coughed up that particular demon, if didn't seem to help. We deal with many who have come from spiritually abusive groups, cults and authoritarian teachers. Often, they walk away from the faith altogether. Some are barely holding on and are somewhat fearful about asking questions. Peter seems to have made his way out and decided, rightfully so, that the Christianity he left may not have been the biblical faith: 

“I have lived with the memory of Shiloh Fellowship for a long time and tried to figure out what it meant. I am tempted to think that it had nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity, but that is probably going too far. I am now a member of the Episcopal Church who believes, for what it is worth, every part of the Nicene Creed. What Shiloh Fellowship and the Charismatic movement ruined for me was not Christianity. It was the notion of God as something pulsing, immediate. That sounds like a wonderful idea, and perhaps it is if you happen to be Julian of Norwich or St. John of the Cross. It is, in many ways, the religious equivalent of hard drugs. I am a Christian partly because I perversely enjoy the red tape of going to church, believing in crazy things like the Incarnation, singing bad hymns, and generally seeing everything through a glass, darkly.”

What he left was the hyped-up spiritualism and emotionalism which punished followers that wanted to engage their minds into the life of faith. You know, loving God with all of your heart, soul and mind. (Mark:12:30And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
See All...) You know, one of the things Jesus said was part of the Greatest Commandment.

https://mailchi.mp/1471725994b9/the-fad-driven-christian-life?e=169825fd77

What is the point of developing theories about the evolution of something when we don’t even know what is allegedly evolving, how it came into existence, and how life was imparted to it? Wouldn’t it make more sense to find out what life is than to theorize about how it supposedly evolves once it mysteriously appears? Yet the origin of life is almost universally avoided in treatises about evolution, as is the origin of time, space, and matter. For example, the index to Gould’s book Wonderful Life, about the Burgess shale, has no reference at all to origins. Nor does Crick’s The Astonishing Hypothesis, or Hitchens’s God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. In their book, Biology Revisioned, Willis W. Harman and Elisabet Sahtouris make several brave but unsuccessful attempts both to define and to explain the origin of life. The best they can do is to describe what living things do but not what they are, much less how life came out of the total death left by the heat of the Big Bang.

As we continue to point out, it is one thing to speculate about the alleged evolution and natural selection of species once they exist. Literally thousands of volumes and scientific papers have been written on such conjecture. It is something else entirely to explain the origin of the energy out of which all living things are made (even to explain what energy is). The fact that life, as we’ve seen, “comes only from life” requires an explanation of how the first life began. The same is true of the fact that a cell comes only from another living cell. The atheist cannot escape these and dozens of similar “chicken or egg” puzzles. Shouldn’t solving them be the top priority?

Several years ago, a young pastor assumed leadership of his father’s church. The church was located in a large city with an increasing population and technological advancements. Feeling the pressure of his new position, the pastor prayed, “Lord, help me to be perceived as intelligent and wise to this fast-growing city of mostly nonbelievers.”

His thoughts stopped him. “How am I going to communicate that I follow a man who created the heavens and the earth, was born of a virgin, walked on water, and conquered death and not be perceived as foolish?”

This question presents a familiar crossroad for many pastors worldwide. They ask themselves, “Do I continue to trust what the Bible says? Or do I conform to this world and deconstruct Scripture to teach a more palatable message?” While most church leaders know the correct path, some lack the courage to voice their conviction.

In John 5, Jesus doesn’t shy away from proclaiming the truth—even as He’s being persecuted by those who seek to kill Him. On the contrary, He actually doubles down: “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life” (v. 24). This would’ve been a perfect opportunity for Jesus to pacify His accusers and escape. Instead, He boldly proceeds with a fourfold witness of Himself. He first references John the Baptist’s foretelling of the coming Messiah. Then, He presents God the Father, who sent and testified of His Son. God’s Word is the third witness, but Christ’s accusers don’t recognize eternal life in Him. Finally, He cites a witness that the Jewish leaders can’t deny. “For if you believed Moses,” said Jesus, “you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me” (v. 46).

As a former pastor, this verse represents a standard that I won’t ignore. I can either accept all of Scripture or none—and that includes Genesis.

The Bible’s opening verse says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). The beauty of simplicity is masterfully displayed as God (Elohim, the plural name for God in Hebrew) through His Word introduces Himself to man as Creator. Later, John begins his gospel in agreement with Moses and the book of Genesis:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. (John 1:1–3)

The enemy, however, wants nothing more than to obstruct mankind from knowing the Lord Jesus Christ. As the father of lies (John 8:44), he persuades the creation to deny its Creator—and to hesitate to share His truth.

https://www.icr.org/article/courage-conviction/

There are numerous books that defend evolution and natural selection. Their authors admit to many problems with these theories and propose many supposedly possible solutions but never give definitive answers with any degree of certainty. For example, in Stephen Jay Gould’s discussion of the alleged Cambrian explosion, theory after theory is proposed, all of them based upon little evidence and much imagination. If that were not enough to expose the bankruptcy of the whole issue, one even larger and more obvious question stands out above all others: the problem of origins. That should be dealt with first, yet in a book of more than 300 pages, Gould has nothing to say about this most important problem for any scientist or philosopher.

Since the end of World War II, the Vatican has tried hard to make up for its centuries of attacks on the Jewish people, including the Crusades, the Inquisition, priest-incited pogroms, and theological claims that the Jews killed Jesus. The Vatican's complicity in genocide during World War II took the form of Pope Pius XII's refusal to create a "crisis of conscience" among German Catholics by forbidding them from participating in the mass murder of Jews.

Since the death of Pope Pius XII, the Vatican has tried hard to make up for its sordid history. Pope Paul VI led the way by repudiating the allegation of collective Jewish guilt for deicide, with Pope John Paul II speaking of the Jewish faith as the ancestor of the Christian religion. In 1993, the Vatican, after too many years of silence, finally recognized the State of Israel, and over time, the relationships between the Vatican and the nation-state of the Jewish people improved.

Now comes Pope Francis, who has been afflicted with a bad case of "Palestinianism" -- an obsessive focus on Palestinian rights to the minimization of concern for far more deserving groups around the world. In an act that flies in the face of the Christian Bible, the Vatican recently featured a nativity scene which laid the baby Jesus on a keffiyeh, thus accepting the false Palestinian narrative that Jesus was a Palestinian and not a Jew….The Muslim faith only began 600 years after his death.

Much more seriously, Pope Francis has joined the chorus of blood libelers who have accused Israel of genocide, writing: "According to some experts, what is happening in Gaza has the characteristics of a genocide." This indictment is totally false as a matter of fact, law and morality. The Vatican knows what genocide is. It perfected this crime against humanity during the Crusades, the Inquisition and the priest-inspired pogroms that led to the Holocaust. Genocide requires an intent to destroy an entire religious, racial or ethnic group, without exceptions. It does not include acts of self-defense, such as those engaged in by the Israel Defense Forces following the massacres of October 7, 2023.

The Hamas claim that Israel has killed 45,000 Palestinians has now been debunked by several studies. This absurdly exaggerated figure includes thousands of Palestinians who died of cancer and other diseases. It includes Palestinians who were killed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets and by Hamas's own murderous actions against fellow Palestinians who oppose its tyranny. It counts as children 16- and 17-year-old terrorists who have been recruited by Hamas to murder Jews. It includes as "civilians" people who directly participated in the murders and rapes on October 7.

The Hamas figures have turned men into women, adults into children and combatants into innocents. The reality is that Israel has killed far fewer civilians in relation to combatants than any nation in history while fighting comparable urban wars, especially where Hamas combatants hide among civilians, precisely in order to induce Israel to kill as many civilians as possible.

[TBC: For documentation and full article, please see:]

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21295/pope-francis-bearing-false-witness