Testing Testing 1, 2

Many people know how hard pressed Christians are when they are giving accounts to Skeptics. More and more skeptics come up with fascinating ideas and blatant debauchery of what the real character of Christ is all about. We are often confronted with many questions and put under strict scrutiny of evidence and forced to defend our faith against questions that probably are no more worthy of mention but seemingly a shrug of the shoulders if they were intended towards another historical figure. I will show later on in another thread why this is not necessarily an issue against our personal faith, but even with this in mind, it still does need to be addressed. More and more it appears that the evil methodology of the world is causing more and more Apologists headaches that are unwarranted due to the media. With publications like the Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty, Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman and the ever popular The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, more and more questions abound for skeptics to address Christians with. This has caused the Christian community to gain an edge, I believe, in the brains department over other religions and secular groups within the world, but many headaches along the way that could and should have been avoided. Interestingly enough, we've never seen these critical methods used against the presuppositional stances of the people who actually utilize these skeptical methods against Christianity in practicality......until now. I have always wondered how this process would work against the skeptical viewpoints that oppose Christianity and decided to put it into full force. For this reason, I applied this process of questioning against a group I like to call the “Emo Evos.” For those unfamiliar with the term “Emo Evo” it is a term that is meant to be applied to “Overly Emotionally Charged Evolutionists.” They are basically what we know in modern day society as Libs (Liberals) or Poseur Posties (Postmodernists).

I have actually tested similar questions that are presented against Christ towards Charles Darwin that are posed to Evolutionists just to see how they would respond to the same questions that Christians are required to respond to concerning who Christ was. My discoveries in this research have proved laughable at best. On Panda's Thumb, one of the most renown Evolutionist sites on the web today, I addressed an issue as to whether or not anybody had firsthand eyewitness accounts of whether Charles Darwin visited the Galapogos Islands. I told them I would believe in Evolution if they could provide me this response. Sadly, the only responses to this I got were, "Yeah, I guess he has evidence from other people or maybe family members" or "It doesn't matter because it wouldn't matter what Charles Darwin believed in one way or the other, Scientists were coming to the same conclusion", and that quite frankly doesn't cut it as a response. The finches scenario on the Galapogos islands are an all important issue as to whether or not Evolution could even potentially make sense at all. The other Scientists never visited the Galapogos islands and used speculation off of the ideas that Charles Darwin had. So if we had no Darwin, we would have no Evolution today. My writing of the previous thread the Darwin Code makes just as much sense as Darwinism based on this logic.
This basic trend was tested further as I travelled to Theology web and asked the same question. Interestingly enough, I have the responses from the actual thread itself. In regards to whether or not Charles Darwin existed, one response completely avoided the issue, "Darwin's existance may have been a Nazi farce, but what of Anaximander?" Anaximander was a Greek Gnostic whose conjecture made probably less sense than the theory of Evolution does today. His idea was that the mud caused beings to rise up after the sun made contact with it. It sounds more like some slimey green mutant monster theorem over anything else. http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=81935&highlight=The+Darwin+Code. Further responses concluded from the question, "Do we have any eyewitness accounts of Darwin on the Galapogos Islands" gave us another wonderful and insightful answer in the likes of, "Yes I think we do." And basically, that was about the best answer I could get out of this question. How many people would believe Jesus Christ rose from the dead if when we replied to the question of whether there were eyewitness accounts the only thing we could think of was, "Yes, I think we do."? Yeah...probably not too many willing to buy that story. In fact, if thats all we had concerning the verifiability of Christ's resurrection, I'm not too sure I wouldn't have abandoned Christianity myself by now. Likewise, I'm not even the least bit sold that Evolutionists have any bit of a valid argument to support their theory that include solely a bunch of arguments that I like to call "Evolution of the gaps." Evolution is purely hyped up speculation. We have no evidence to support a basic and fundamentally sound question such as this and for that matter, I believe there are plenty of other fundamentally flawed problems with Evolution. If this evidence is lacking, imagine the extent of the rest of the evidence that must be lacking on this subject. Why is this conjecture still around? I believe its regarding two reasons. One, contrary to what a Relativist one time told me, which was laughable at best, the media does not support Christianity in the foggiest. When we turn on our television sets, we constantly time and time again see Christian hate messages set out against us. So we have the worldly press against us which serves as a disadvantage to Christianity and portrays it in the light of the world as merely a "fantasy world." The second is that I believe Naturalism and Humanism are two of the predominantly shaped viewpoints within the United States of today. While many people proclaim to be Christians within the United States, the question of whether they are truly Christian constantly comes up. Evolution is basically the Emo Evos and the Fundie Atheists "last hope" and the best thing going for them today. However, if we were to take the Flat Earth Society, UFOs, NWO theories, Area 51, Elvis is alive press, Liberalistic (Relativistic) "honesty" and the National Enquirer, and put them alongside Evolution, we'd have similar media press for the entire world to view. So the question is clearly, who has more credibility? Christians or Emo Evos? You make the call.