CreationRevelations.com
Title
Creation Revelations - Home
Introduction
Excerpted from the website description:
- If you've read anything at all about Creation Science, you are, no doubt, aware that the creation world-view is at odds with the humanist world-view. Both positions require a great deal of faith on the part of the believer. Though many who embrace the humanist world-view argue that their judgement is based on empirical science, its fellows fall short of presenting irrefutable evidence for their belief system. This site is dedicated to advancing the creationist world-view by presenting evidence that supports the claims made in the Bible. We look forward to imparting a preponderance of evidence that will make the biblical account of the creation story plausible and scientifically demonstrable. It is our prayer that those visiting this site will come away armed with a new understanding of scientific facts that support the creation account.
Most people are exceedingly incognizant of the tenable scientific evidence available to advance the concept that the earth and the universe were formed a very short time ago. Many, if not all, have been indoctrinated into the humanist world-view simply by accepting that the universe is billions of years old. Even many who believe the Bible find its claims difficult to assimilate due to the outpouring of scientific theories that stand in opposition to its claims.
Creationism is, of course, a religion, which is defined by Random House Dictionary as, a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usu. involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code for the conduct of human affairs. As creationists, we believe that God created the heaven and the earth, as described in Genesis 1:1. As creationist we also believe that if creation occurred as described in the Bible, if the creation account is factual, then reason compels us to accept that everything else demarcated within its themes is reliable as well.
This position, however, by the nature of its constructs, puts the creationist world-view at intractable odds with the humanist world-view. From the Council for Secular Humanism's website, http://www.secularhumanism.org, we gleaned this definition of humanism: Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.
To say the very least, humanists are responsible only to themselves for their actions and regard no other being as supreme to man. To the creationist, this is a puzzling idiosyncrasy. How does the humanist consciously arbitrate between right wrong? Who governs their actions? Who provides for their needs? Who do they turn to when things go awry? What becomes of them when they die? What caused it all to get started? So many questions that need to be answered and humanists can only look within themselves to resolve. Doesn’t it stand to reason that, without a set of guidelines (if everyone was a humanist), humanists would be regarded as gods of their own liberty?
While this site is designed to present creation evidence, we believe that it will be necessary to occasionally present opposing views in order to give fair consideration to the ideas many accept as fact. Humanists are usually highly intelligent regarding the disciplines they embrace. Unfortunately, their regimen is flawed at the foundation. Many of their theories are unjustified by the available evidence. In fact, the available evidence points right back to the intelligent design deposition.
Once during a debate with a humanist, I asked the question, “which came first, the chicken or the egg.” My opponent, of course, said the egg and forwarded the notion that in evolutionary theory, that had to be the order of occurrence. For even the casual observer, this answer was not fully acceptable. Nevertheless, he held firm to his position.
Creationist are often accused of being lazy in their scientific approach. We, according to our adversaries, look at an enigma and, rather than seeking deeper understanding, avoid the problem by simply saying that God did it that way and He has the answers hidden. And, to give the devil his due, there are instances where this annoyance has occurred. There have been, however, many, many orthodox scientists who believed in creation that were dogmatic in their pursuit of scientific interpretation, including, Johannes Kepler [1571-1630], Blaise Pascal [1623- 1662],Robert Boyle [1627-1691], Sir Isaac Newton [1642-1727], and Samuel Morse [1791-1872], just to name a few.
We hope you find the information contained in this site to be helpful, factual, and motivational. You are welcome to partner with us and make a personal contribution to our theories. We realize that persons of faith are often targeted for derision by those who espouse their views in opposition to ours, but we welcome those holding humanist views as well. We are gathering together the evidence God has cast about that we might defend our faith as he promised he would. We thank you for coming and look forward to supplying you with the most robust Creation Science evidence available. With any luck, you will leave this site with a renewed sense of accomplishment on your path to understanding Creation Revelations.
