Ray Comfort's Blog, page 57

Amazing Scientific Discovery

New York, 4:47 EST, February 21. Evolutionary biologists at the Institute of Natural Biology in New York have discovered a well-preserved fossil of what they believe is a legless, carnivorous reptile. It was found deeply embedded in ice on the slopes of the province of Quang Ninh, in Northern Japan, and is believed to be 120 million years old. This snake-like creature clearly had vocal cords and may have been able to communicate audibly.

If scientists had found such a snake, would you believe it? I'm sure you would, if there was fossil evidence. After all, animals do have the ability to think. Who could argue with the overwhelming evidence that many have some sort of language, and that they have an understanding of what they are communicating? Dogs speak to each other in the night. Birds alert each other to danger, and elephants that mourn the death of one of their own, will trumpet some sort of communication to other elephants.

Then there's "Koko," the Western Lowland Gorilla, who, according to the animal's trainer, was able to understand more than 1,000 signs based on American Sign Language, and was also able to understand about 2,000 words of spoken English.

So it is clearly possible for an animal to make its thoughts known to human beings. But when I recently asked atheists if they thought animals could speak, there was instant mockery. I suspect that was because of the implications...could a snake or donkey talk, as portrayed in the Bible? No doubt it was deemed ridiculous because I was speaking of the miraculous and therefore involving God. But let's set aside the Supernatural for a moment and look at this from a purely natural perspective.

The consensus seemed to be that a snake could never talk, not because it lacked the intelligence to do so, but because it lacked vocal cords. After all, snakes, like many animals are very intelligent. Before you laugh at such a thought, think of the amazing seeing-ability of the eagle, the smelling ability of a bloodhound, or the skill needed for a bear to catch fish in his bare hands.

Unless you believe that they are all dummies, and that they were given incredible physical ability but left lacking mentally. But the two cannot be separated.

So, the thought that animals can't speak because they lack the physical means to do so, seems to be a correct deduction. But imagine if animals could speak. What secrets would they reveal? Doctor Doolittle did much to stir the human imagination.

But it's my belief that two animals did speak, not because of their natural ability, but because they were given supernatural ability. I also believe that one Man walked on water, fed 5,000 with five loaves and two fish, and many other mind-bogglers.

But don't laugh too much. If you believe in evolution, you believe that primates can audibly communicate. You even believe that they speak English and many other languages. This is because you believe that you are an English-speaking primate. Now that is funny.For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

Something for Atheists on Sunday...

"And the disciples of John showed him of all these things. And John calling to him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Are you he that should come? or look we for another? When the men were come to him, they said, John Baptist has sent us to you, saying, Are you he that should come? or look we for another? And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and to many that were blind he gave sight. Then Jesus answering said to them, Go your way, and tell John what things you have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached. And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me" (Luke 7:18-23).


Does the name of Jesus offend you? Do you honor Him or do you treat Him with contempt? Or do you dishonor Him by using it as a cuss word? Have you ever done that with Ghandi, Buddha, Mother Theresa or Hitler? Why is it only done with the name of Jesus? Why does Hollywood use the name of Jesus Christ as blasphemy in its movies? It's because they are offended by Him, and so are their patrons. It's not only His name that offends, it's His teachings. The first time He opened His mouth in a pulpit His hearers tried to murder Him, and they did it because His words were with power. They still are. They produce guilt in the guilty. I remember the uncomfortable feeling the name of Jesus had on me before I was a Christian. His name makes demons tremble.

Do you love Him? Did you know that if you don't love Him, you are under the curse of God? (see 1 Corinthians 16:22).Whether you love Him or treat Him with contempt, you will one day bow the knee to Him. Everyone will. You can either do it willingly in repentance, or in terror when He comes in wrath:

"And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power..." (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9).

More than 800 years before He came to this earth, the Scriptures gave a sober warning: "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him"(Psalm 2:12).For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

Thanks for your input on the possibily of talking animals...

Thanks for your input on the possibily of talking animals. I will post about the subject on Monday.For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

A question for you...

As an evolutionist, why is it so difficult to believe in a talking snake and a talking donkey (as written in the Bible)? Animals think, reason, communicate, etc., why couldn't they talk? Explain why evolutionists continually mock the Bible's account of talking animals?For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

For the "seeing is believing" folks...

This picture is for those atheists who thought that I wasn't being truthful when I said that scientists put a camera on an eagle and filmed the wing. In case you think I faked the picture, you can see the Japanese network on one side, and the National Geographic symbol on the screen (then again, I could have faked those as well). See how much I love you guys...For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

What evolution believes...

"Wow, next you'll claim that a crocoduck is a viable transitional.... LOL." Cameron

"Ray, you really think National Geographic makes up their evolution programs? You really are stupider and crazier than I thought (and I didn't have a very high opinion of you to start with)!" Kiwi Skeptic

"NOBODY is expecting dogs to give birth to kittens. Only people like you expect this because you don't know what evolution is. And yet you have the arrogance to talk as if you are an authority on the subject. It is laughable." Matt Volpato

Of course, evolution doesn't expect dogs to give birth to kittens. However, believers are still (after 200 years) looking for "the missing link." This is anything that would give credence to the belief of evolution. There should be evidence that shows species-to-species transitional forms in the fossil record (one animal slowly evolving into another), or evidence of one in a living form. That's what evolution believes--that man had a common ancestor with primates and that both man and animals we see today are not what they were millions of years ago.

But there's no evidence of that--just nebulous conjecture.

In 2009, the National Geographic News reported that leading scientists were asked for their picks of the most important fossils that show evolution in action. They headlined "Seven Major 'Missing Links' Since Darwin," and the number one missing link was a "Fishapod."

They don't have empirical evidence for the Fishapod, but they do have a painting. This is an artist's rendition (his mental image) of what the Fishapod may have looked like. He did a good job.

Among the magnificent seven, you will also find nice paintings of "the Walking Whale." Researchers think that the whale could have once been a sort of hyena with hooves. So this creature could rightly be called a "Whale-ena." Then there's the old "Halfway Flatfish" (perhaps you could make up your own name for this pretending creature).

NASA's earth observatory said that the Fishapod was a fish with four "legs" and a crocodile head. It really is a "Croco-fish," or it could have easily been called a "Crocoduck," (if it looks like a duck...).

So now you know what modern evolution is and what its many believers believe. It's the laughable belief that somewhere out there, there may be evidence for this fairytale for grownups. It would just be a harmless belief for the simple unscientific folks, except for the fact that it gives an excuse for guilty sinners to reject God's gift of eternal life. What a tragedy.

Sources: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...

Picture: The FishapodFor Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

Copying the Designer...

The airbus A380 is the world's largest plane. The secret of flight is the lift that planes are able to get because of the wing shape. However, designers of the massive plane had a problem, in that the thinner end of each wing wasn't able to get lift. They couldn't extend it because it would make the plane too big for most airports.
So scientists placed a camera on the back of an eagle to watch the wing in flight, and found that the bird was able to deal with the same problem, by making the feathers on the end of its wing stand almost vertical while in flight. They copied God's design of a bird's wing (just as the Wright brother's did 100 years earlier), and solved the A380's problem.  Source: http://www.airbus.com/innovation/eco-efficiency/design/biomimicry/For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

The silly ol' Bible...

"Alright Ray in simple words please tell us why it is OK for a Christian to enjoy a rare steak in light of this passage from Act 15:29 'You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.'" Iago

I would never eat a steak that is dripping with blood. This isn't only because the Bible says not to, but because science says the same thing. Scientists tell us that food contains unseen bacteria which can result in food-borne illness. The way to kill them is to well-cook the meat. It's no fun getting up in the night and having your body wracked with pain, as it ejects these toxins.

Still, many people nowadays like their meat dripping with blood. Although most of these infections are unreported, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that around 76 million people in the United States become ill from pathogens in food. Of those, about 5,000 tragically die. I'm sure they wished that they had taken notice of what that silly old Bible out-dated says.

The same portion of Scripture also tells us to abstain from sexual immorality. You can also save yourself a lot of pain by taking notice here as well. If someone obeys God's instructions and remains sexually pure until marriage, they won't get gonorrhea, herpes, syphilis or AIDS.

That means that they won't have a problem with painful urination or pelvic pain, painful blisters, horrible headaches, swollen glands, itchy skin, genital bumps, genital warts, foul discharges, and ulcers. These are just some of the symptoms that come from sexually transmitted diseases that result from being sexually immoral. Some of these are incurable and can be past onto the one you love. Of course many are dead because of these diseases also. They thought they knew better than God, and ignored the voice of both conscience and Holy Scripture.For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

Now Avaliable...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrVVTHl_N1U
For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.

Perhaps for a fleeting moment...

Ray said God's 'hand' on you is anthropomorphic. What in the h...[pause] Ray, have you lost your m...[pause]. Ray, could you please explain that last thing you said? Thanks. captain howdy

The dictionary definition of anthropomorphic is "the attribution of human form or behaviour to a deity, animal, etc." The word comes from the Greek language: anthropos "human," and morphe "form." I tend to stay away from large words because my goal isn't to try and impress, it's to impart truth, and the most effective way to do that is through simplicity.

Simply stated, God is Spirit and likened to the wind. He is omnipresent and is nothing like you and me. Yet the Bible uses human words to describe Him. It speaks of His mind, His nostrils, face, hand, ear, eye, etc. Yet God doesn't have a physical hand, eye, or ear. The use of word such as "anthropomorphic" simply helps us to understand that He touches, sees, and He hears. It brings the infinitude of Almighty God (in one sense) down to the very low level of human understanding, even though we can't begin to understand the exceeding greatness of His majesty and power.

How could any Being create the universe and fill it with His presence? How could He create time? The sun? How could He make the mind of man with its independence, its personality, and its amazing ability to perceive, imagine and create? How could He form the eye, with its 137 million light sensitive cells? Or even make a tiny hummingbird?

But when our minds, for a fleeting moment, do grasp what God must be like, something else takes our breath away even further: "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory" (1 Timothy 3:16).

The amazing consequence of such an inconceivable incarnation resulted in our justification, and that came because of the unwarranted imputation of perfect virtue.For Evangelism Resources, please visit LivingWaters.com.