Ray Comfort In Hot Water after Publishing Intelligent Design Intro to “Origin of Species”

---

Ray Comfort In Hot Water after Publishing Intelligent Design Intro to “Origin of Species” Posted: 19 Nov 2009 08:22 PM PST Evangelist Ray Comfort, author of a new introduction to Darwin's "Origin of Species" Ray Comfort, the world renowned evangelist, author and speaker known for founding Living Waters Publications and The Way of the Master ministries has become the center of controversy after writing a pro Intelligent Design introduction to evolutionist Charles Darwin’s work “On the Origin of Species.” This special edition of Darwin’s book is laced with Biblical arguments refuting evolution and even suggests connections between Darwin’s theories, Hitler and racism. Yesterday, Comfort and Living Waters, along with American actor and evangelist Kirk Cameron of Fireproof fame, distributed over 100,000 copies of “Origin of Species” across the campuses of the nation’s top 100 universities. Although Cameron had officially announced the distribution would occur today November 19th, both he and Comfort were forced to take action early after it was revealed that several students had planned protests against the campaign. In fact, many students planned to “rip out [Comfort’s] introduction,” according to The Christian Post. Comfort’s special edition has made waves throughout the atheist community, many of who are preparing, along with the rest of the world, to celebrate the 150 year anniversary of Darwin’s theory of evolution and “Origin of Species” on November 21. In his official video announcement at the website for Living Waters, Cameron said, “An entire generation is being brainwashed by atheistic evolution without even hearing the alternative and it’s radically changing the culture of our nation.” Cameron also notes that Comfort’s 50-page introduction includes “the history of evolution, a timeline of Darwin’s life, Adolph Hitler’s undeniable connection with the theory, Darwin’s racism, his disdain for women and Darwin’s thoughts on the existence of God.” These elements are balanced with scientific viewpoints on God gleaned from the minds of such historical figures as Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Copernicus, Bacon, Louis Pasture and Johann Kepler. “All we want to do is present the opposing and correct view,” said Cameron. “These students aren’t stupid. They should be given both sides of the argument and [be] allowed to make up their own minds. We think that’s healthy.” In a strong rebuttal to Comfort’s introduction, the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) responded with this YouTube video entitled “Don’t Diss Darwin.” Comfort’s most recent book, “Nothing Created Everything,” poses strong arguments against evolution, while asserting how many sound, highly esteemed and awarded scientists profess to believe in Intelligent Design. Speaking on his introduction to “Origin of Species”, Comfort said, “The [entire] 304-page publication will be Charles Darwin’s every word—not one jot or tittle will be removed.” He then asked, “Besides, if they [those opposed] think my arguments have no merit, why are they so upset? They should actually enjoy the fact that I’m spreading more of my idiotic claims that intelligent students will see right through—that way my stupidity will be much more apparent.” According to an official press release at Living Waters, several atheists have already planned an online resistance movement to Comfort’s introduction through Richarddawkins.net. Ironically, and quite humorously, Comfort officially dedicated “Nothing Created Everything” to the renowned British atheistic biologist, much to the outrage of countless loyal Dawkins followers and Dawkins himself. Comfort admits that he has been baffled by the protests and cries of offense voiced by countless atheists in online forums, particularly considering that to date there have been over 140 different editions of On the Origin of Species, many of which contain introductions from various authors’ viewpoints.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag

Islamophobia and its effect on other faiths

---

Islamophobia and its effect on other faiths Posted: 22 Nov 2009 10:00 PM PST The United Nations’ Second World Conference on Racism (April, 2009) claimed that it would focus on all forms of defamation of religion.  When it became known that Iranian President Ahmadinejad would be speaking at the Conference, also known as the Durban Conference II, many countries withdrew (see EuropeNews report). When Ahmadinejad spoke, he accused western nations of defending a form of Israeli Zionism which he considers racist. From that point on, the Conference focused on one thing—“Islamophobia.” Islamophobia implies fearfulness of the Islamic faith and hatred of all Muslims. The word Islamophobia has been popularized since accusations began against terrorists from Muslim backgrounds after September 11, 2001. In the last couple of years, it has become more and more politically incorrect to denounce even the most radical Islamic terrorism. The term Islamophobia is now being stretched to mean that if you fear or speak out against extreme Islamic terrorism, or you express suspicions of it, then you hate all Muslims. This equation is unfair and untrue.  Now, the United Nations (UN) is considering a ”Defamation of Religions” resolution by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the largest group of nations within the UN.  Ironically, the OIC itself is made up mostly of nations under dictatorship or tyrannical leadership; many formally recognizing Islam or an Eastern faith as their state religion, and are almost completely intolerant of other religions. Some OIC nations have appeared on the U.S. State Department’s list of “nations of concern” for human rights and religious rights violations. See this 2008 State Department list for example. The OIC has pushed for this for nearly a decade (per a 2008 Washington Times article), and they have made much headway. Although continued anti-Semitism toward Jewish people and intimidation of Christians has been increasing in many countries which were formerly quite tolerant of various other faiths, the only faith people are afraid to offend today is Islam. The UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights group, has decried this latest OIC resolution as an attempt to imply that defamation of religion makes the Islamic faith itself the real victim of 9/11 –not the 3,000 people who actually died in the attack. The International Humanist and Ethical Union suggests that a resolution like this would make simple religious disagreement a crime of blasphemy as it already is in some Middle Eastern and Asian countries. This could be especially dangerous if the country considers blasphemy (or “apostasy”) a crime deserving of life imprisonment or death. Forbidding hate speech against Muslims, and against Islam as a faith, is of course understandable. There are many good and decent Muslims around the world. However, we shouldn’t stop people from speaking out against past terrorism, or expressing warning signs of forthcoming acts of possible terrorism. Case in point: the now-known fact that no one reported the earlier suspicious remarks and activities of the Fort Hood attacker, who – if not a terrorist – was influenced to a certain extent by a jihadist mindset. Instead, the government and media are jumping through hoops to create other scenarios for him. Another case: In 2007, a University of Florida student group was censored by school authorities from passing out information about a movie revealing the dangers of radical Islamic terrorism. By using the description “radical” before the word “Islamic” and then the word “terrorism” in the title, the flier bearers made it clear that they didn’t want to offend Muslims who disagree with radical Islamic terrorism. Still, according to the Tampa Tribune, the University censored the group’s fliers for not being in the best interest of diversity.   We must be able to recognize and identify our enemies. True, there is home-grown American terrorism, like Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. But  avoiding the real possibilities of “extreme Islamic terrorism” is a mistake. In the name of tolerance, events are escalating to desensitize us into our own demise. We are becoming an increasingly easier target.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag

Sugar Daddy Ken Doll Creates Controversy in Barbie World

---

Sugar Daddy Ken Doll Creates Controversy in Barbie World Posted: 25 Nov 2009 12:16 PM PST How Will New Doll Affect Young Girls’ Views of Men? Mattel Inc., the world’s largest and most profitable toy company known for their Hot Wheels and Matchbox toy cars, has released a brand new version of Ken into their popular Barbie Doll line. While Barbie has often received flak from certain sects of consumers for her unrealistic physical proportions and negative influence on younger girls’ self image, Ken has for the most part gone untouched by critics. Until now. Sugar Daddy Ken, the latest rendition of Barbie’s boyfriend, comes outfitted in “a dashing jacquard-patterned jacket with a light pink polo shirt and crisp white pants” according to Sugar Daddy Ken online retailer Entertainment Earth. The doll is further accessorized by a small white poodle and accompanying leash. However, Ken’s extravagant clothes, bleach blond hair, fake tan that rivals any previous Barbie doll and pet may be among parents’ least concerns. According to Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, a “sugar daddy” is defined as “1. a well-to-do usually older man who supports or spends lavishly on a mistress, girlfriend, or boyfriend.” The online Urban Dictionary contains several definitions for this increasingly popular and cultural term, including “1. A man who provides money or other favors in exchange for sexual relations. 2. An older man who is able to gain a younger woman by having lots of cash and assets. The younger woman is known as a ‘gold digger.’ The sugar daddy is generally being used by the ‘gold digger’ for his house, cars and clothes [and] money.” In response to parental concerns and outcries from conservative consumers, one Mattel spokesperson told the New York Post, “The Palm Beach Sugar Daddy Ken is actually part of the adult Barbie Collector Line. It is targeted toward adults.” The spokesperson also added, “The little dog’s name is actually Sugar. That’s where the [doll’s] name comes from. He’s Sugar’s daddy, as a reference to the dog.” However, Entertainment Earth’s description of the doll contradicts Mattel’s statement and ends with the phrase “Look no further for your sugar daddy!” as opposed to the possessive “Sugar’s Daddy.” Sugar Daddy Ken is already available for purchase online through Mattel’s official website, as well as through Entertainment Earth. While the Barbie line boasts a rather innocent and wholesome historical past, the future cultural ramifications of such a doll may prove to be a factor in affecting younger girls’ views of men, specifically their relationships with older men. It may additionally prove difficult to hinder younger girls from purchasing dolls from the adult Barbie Collection, particularly if parents see no harm in such a doll or its attributes. The doll will be release in stores and made available to the mass public sometime early next year.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag

Sherwood Pictures to Tackle Fatherhood in Upcoming Film

---

Sherwood Pictures to Tackle Fatherhood in Upcoming Film Posted: 16 Nov 2009 11:05 PM PST Left to right: Senior Pastor Michael Catt, Stephen Kendrick, Jim McBride, Alex Kendrick at the official announcement service. Religious filmmaking brothers Alex and Stephen Kendrick of Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Georgia revealed in an official announcement service Sunday evening that their next anticipated Christian film is entitled “Courageous” and will focus on the theme of godly fatherhood, according to their official web site: www.courageousthemovie.com. The film will follow the dramatic lives of four police officers, their dangerous jobs and the struggles they encounter within their own families after enduring a horrible tragedy. In a separate video announcement, Stephen Kendrick said, “We believe that God has led us very clearly after a year of prayer in the direction that He wants us to go for the next movie. And we believe that He is calling us to focus in on the issue of calling men to rise up with strength and with leadership in their homes and with their families and their children.” Whereas Sherwood’s previous film “Fireproof” (2008) dealt solely with the theme of marriage, “Courageous” will instead expand to encompass a more family-oriented perspective. “The statistics on fatherless children are devastating,” said Sherwood Executive Pastor Jim McBride to the nearly 1300 service attendees. “And because the family is the building block of society, one important place to rebuild families is through fathers who stay and lead and love.” Sherwood Pictures also noted that four out of ten marriages currently end in divorce and the vast majority of today’s children grow up without the companionship of their biological parents. During the reception that followed, the Kendrick brothers said that not each of the four stories found within the film will result in happy endings. The brothers also promised that “Courageous” will be sure to include their “trademark humor, powerful spiritual message, drama and, for the first time, action sequences,” according to The Christian Post. Stephen Kendrick also suggested the film may include a few elements of romance as well. Mt. Zion Baptist Church Pastor Daniel Simmons prayed for the direction of the movie at the official dedication service and also stated that he believes “Courageous” will have a significant impact on the African-American community. Simmons additionally noted that he intends to use this film to minister to African-American fathers in the same way he ministered to the families and spouses of his church through Sherwood’s 2008 film “Fireproof” and the Kendrick brother’s accompanying book “The Love Dare.” Although the movie is currently still in the preproduction stages of scriptwriting and casting, the Kendrick brothers plan to begin filming by next spring with a tentative release date set for early 2011.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag

Update: Iranian Christian women released from prison

---

Update: Iranian Christian women released from prison Posted: 18 Nov 2009 11:33 AM PST Maryam Rustampoor and Marzieh Amirizadeh (last name posted as Esmaeilabad in some reports) were released from Iran’s Evin prison on Wednesday, November 18. They’d been held there since their arrest in March on various charges in connection with their Christian faith. On trial during the summer, neither would recant their Christianity even at the promise of being set free (see The Underground’s original report here). There was no bail demanded for their release, but the two still face court hearings. In October, a judge dropped the charge that the women were “anti-state.” But they are still accused of trying to spread Christianity, which carries the charge of apostasy against Iran’s formally recognized religion of Islam. So the prayers of Christians everywhere are still needed. Evin prison has been noted for human rights violations. According to Charisma Online, Rustampoor and Amirizadeh’s health suffered with ailments from infected teeth, headaches and back pain to severe food poisoning. Solitary confinement and repeat interrogations also took their toll. Although Iran is watched for human rights violations by the United States Government as a “nation of concern,” not much action is being taken. It was a group called Open Doors that actively pursued the release of the women. Open Doors is an organization dedicated to rescuing and praying for persecuted Christians around the world. Iranian-based intimidation of Christians has been increasing since the late 1970’s. Read about the Iranian Christian Church, its history and persecution, here at Elam Ministries. “You will be persecuted and brought before syngagogues and prisons…this will lead to an opportunity to present your testimony” (Luke 21:12-13, NAS excerpts).

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag

Does the Bible Put Women Down?, Gap Inc. Censoring “Christmas,” Christians Urged to Boycott

---

Does the Bible Put Women Down? Posted: 13 Nov 2009 08:51 AM PST Feminists and political correctness advocates often ask the question, “Does the Bible put women down?” The Bible, Jesus’ words and His actions give a loud, resounding “No.” When the “Feminist Movement” gained strength in the 1960’s, it was a fight for equal jobs, equal pay and respect for women. Absentee husbands and dads were called to task for their commitments. The second stage was women engaging in bra-burning and buying the message that casual sex would break our invisible chains. Helen Reddy’s 1972 song “I Am Woman” became the iconic feminist theme. Next, the Feminist Movement began viewing men as unnecessary extras to their lives and to child-rearing. And the Bible was suddenly regarded as a tool for men to keep women “barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen sink.” Some became convinced that the Bible even gave men a license to abuse women. How did God’s Word become embroiled in the battle? As biblical principles in schools, government and at home began to sink below the American horizon, the bad rap on the Bible expanded. Fewer people were exposed to its pages, and simply believed what they heard when verses were twisted or eliminated for the Movement’s purpose. The Bible doesn’t belittle women or make them second-class citizens. Jesus told Martha to get out of the kitchen and come learn the Scriptures like her sister Mary (Luke 10:38-43). We could even say he followed a woman’s orders by making wine for a wedding at his mother’s request, although He didn’t think it was time for His miracles yet (John 2:1-10). Wow. Sounds like today’s kind of guy. When He rose from the tomb, Jesus thought enough about women to reveal Himself to them first, before any of the male disciples (Mark 16:1-7, Luke 24:1-9). As people became Christ followers, women like Priscilla were highly regarded as leaders of the faith in spreading the Gospel (Acts 18). When no man among the disciples believed Peter was free from jail, God used a woman, Rhoda, to convince them he was really knocking at their door (Acts 12). Jesus began instructing men to stop treating women like possessions. In Matthew 5:27-31 and Mark 10:2-12, He tells men to stop committing adultery and discarding women in divorce. Isn’t this exactly one of the things the feminists originally wanted…for men to be faithful and respectful? By saying “Anyone who has not sinned cast the first stone,” (John 8:6-8) Jesus rebuked the double standard of a woman being accused alone for adultery when a man was also involved. Plus, He gave her a clean slate and took her into His group of followers. Jesus addressed women in public, looking them in the eye, which was not the male standard at that time. The woman at the well was the first person He spoke with in Samaria (John 4:4-14 ). He used a widow’s contribution of her last coins to illustrate sacrificial giving instead of giving out of plenty (Mark 12:41-44); and chose a woman for his story comparing the wisdom of finding one lost coin to angels singing over one saved soul (Luke 15:7-9). There are outstanding women in the Old Testament, too. Deborah, the Judge, and Esther, the Queen, were chosen to save the entire Israelite population from their enemies. Rahab, a prostitute, sheltered Hebrew scouts instead of notifying authorities of their whereabouts. The Proverbs 31 woman worked outside the home and dealt with merchants on her own, without her husband. Ruth started the bloodline of Jesus. Whole Bible books are named for Ruth and Esther. However, these exemplary women are often overlooked because of verses in the New Testament that are taken out of context. At the top of the list is Ephesians 5:22-24 beginning with: “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” Granted, there are unfortunately some men in churches who abuse this idea of “submission” to keep women suppressed, even to verbally and physically abuse them. The seldom-read next few verses, Ephesians 5:25-26, prove these men are wrong and in violation of Scripture. The apostle Paul continued Jesus’ respect for women by telling men to love their wives as they would love their own bodies and the church. What man will beat himself black and blue, or put himself in the hospital with broken bones? Although men are generally assigned to be heads and leaders of the church, their scriptural role is to be a servant to the people, not a deliberate dictator. Paul states in Galatians 3:28-29, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Scriptures are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by the International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.)

Gap Inc. Censoring “Christmas,” Christians Urged to Boycott Posted: 12 Nov 2009 11:02 PM PST The Same Holiday Story Once Again Right-wing conservative Christian organization American Family Association (AFA) is urging Christians nationwide to participate in a two month boycott of San Francisco-based clothing retail giant Gap Inc., according to several national news media. The movement is based largely on Gap’s executive advertising decision to remove the word “Christmas” from their holiday ad campaigns, both in print and broadcast form. The boycott will include each of Gap’s subsidiaries: Old Navy, Banana Republic, Piperlime (online retailer) and Athleta. The AFA, along with the so-called Christian legal group Liberty Counsel, has planned and executed countless similar campaigns during past holiday seasons, including one against international department store chain Sears. In its e-mail newsletter, the AFA argued “Christmas is special because of Jesus. It’s not just a ‘winter holiday.’ For millions of Americans the giving and receiving of gifts is in honor of the One who gave Himself. For the Gap to pretend that isn’t the foundation of the Christmas season is political correctness at best and religious bigotry at worst.” The official website of the AFA boasts an American flag image reconstructed to reflect their message. Typed within each of the flags white stripes is the phrase “Boycott Gap Inc. this Christmas.” By selecting the link entitled “Take Action Now,” the user is instantly connected to a company press release, summarizing the campaign. The summary ends with an opportunity for visitors to sign the Boycott Gap Pledge, by which the AFA will regularly update Gap on the number of participating protestors. Website visitors can also link to a printable Boycott Gap “pass along” sheet, which can be distributed to “friends, family and Sunday school members,” according to the official release. Unfortunately, such a boycott may not be seen as the wisest of approaches by many Christians, church leaders and other religious organizations. In week five of his July 2008 sermon series “You Asked for It”, NewSpring Church Senior Pastor Perry Noble candidly spoke of Christians who hop on “boycott bandwagons” and stated that, “God did not call us to condemn secular organizations for acting like secular organizations. God forgive the church for selling out to a political agenda instead of preaching Jesus.” He added, “If God did not send Jesus into the world to condemn it [John 3:17], then he sure didn’t send self-centered, self-righteous, arrogant Christians to condemn it either. We are not called to fight the world. We’re called to reach the world. It’s not us against them. It’s us for them.” Despite opposition from certain sects of Christians and pan-denominational groups, it seems the AFA is content to continue with its mission and is urging participators to “ask Gap to reconsider its policy of censoring Christmas in promotional material” The AFA also suggests that you “Let them  know that until you see Christmas in their advertising, you will boycott them.” The end result of this annual campaign awaits to be seen.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Underground To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Posted via email from The Underground-- Not Your Average Christian Mag