Connect with us

Jessa Duggar And Husband Ben Prove Atheists Don’t Exist But Creationism Does (Video)

Published

on

Finally, thanks to the “19 Kids and Counting” couple of Jessa Duggar and her husband Ben Seewald, we’re able to learn the truth about the existence of God, atheists, and that evolution is a myth.

“This morning, Jessa and I had the privilege of visiting the Institute for Creation Research!,” Ben Seewald wrote last week on Instagram. “We got to tour and meet all the scientists there! Really cool! Got to chat with Dr. Jason Lisle. He graduated summa cum laude from Ohio Wesleyan University where he double-majored in physics and astronomy and minored in mathematics. He earned a master’s degree and a Ph.D. in astrophysics at the University of Colorado. Dr. Lisle specialized in solar astrophysics and has made a number of scientific discoveries regarding the solar photosphere and has contributed to the field of general relativity.”

The Institute for Creation Research is similar to Ken Ham’s Creation Museum in that it professes that God created the universe, and that the “first human beings did not evolve from an animal ancestry, but were specially created in fully human form from the start.”

Ben interviewed Dr. Lisle, the Director of Research in Astronomy, Apologetics, Physics at the Institute for Creation Research.

For some reason, Jessa Duggar, who is now Jessa Seewald, was not part of the interview, but she posted her husband’s video to her Facebook page, writing, “‘How can you prove to me that God exists?’ Ben poses this question and Dr. Jason Lisle gives a profound answer!”

And what was that answer?

“The evidence of God is ubiquitous. It is everywhere,” Dr. Lisle tells Seewald in the video below. “In fact, Roman 1 tells us that God has revealed himself to everyone, and what that means is, there is really no such thing as an atheist.”

Despite being a researcher, he says that he has no need to even prove it. 

“I don’t really have to give new evidence to a professing atheist,” Lisle explains. “All I have to do is expose his suppressed knowledge of God, because you see, in Romans I again, it tells us that the reason that unbelievers profess, you know, they say there’s no God, et cetera et cetera, it’s not because they don’t know Him, it’s because they’re suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. The Bible says.”

God, turns out, exists merely because Dr. Lisle and the Bible say so. And atheists, it turns out, do not exist.

Meanwhile, Seewald explains why creationism is real.

“I know there is also a lot of scientific evidence, we are here at the Institute for Creation Research, and there is a lot of — really, all science points to the validation of the Genesis account.”

See? Simple!

Not is simple, however, is getting creationists and religious fanatics to understand that atheists actually don’t need religion to understand morality, and right vs. wrong.

Lisle tells Seewald he has a “secular friend” who believes that “some actions are morally commendable and some are morally despicable. But how would that be if there’s no god?”

Seriously, he said that.

“In an atheistic worldview right and wrong is nothing more than just personal opinions,” Lisle claims. “When you say, ‘I don’t like anchovies on a pizza,’ that has the same moral value as, ‘murder is wrong,’ to an atheist.”

Um, no, wrong. False. Totally wrong and false.

Watch:

 

Image by Ben Seewald via Instagram
Hat tip: Raw Story and Wonkette

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘I Can’t Imagine a Better Turnout Engine’: CNN Conservative Warns GOP About Roe Ruling Blowback

Published

on

On CNN Saturday afternoon, conservative commentator S.E. Cupp insisted the Supreme Court ruling dismantling Roe v Wade after 50 years of allowing women to make choices about their reproductive freedom no matter where they live, will come back the haunt the Republican Party in the 2022 midterms.

As Cupp explained, combined with the battle over gun laws, the unpopular 6-3 decision by the conservative court could be a defining issue that increases voter turnout that will, in turn, cripple GOP efforts to reclaim both chambers of Congress.

Speaking with CNN hosts Christ Paul and Boris Sanchez, Cupp insisted the past week’s news has benefitted Democrats as they make their case for November 2022 and beyond.

RELATED: ‘This is a losing issue’: GOP campaign consultants panicked about upcoming midterms after Roe decision

“Yeah, I think the Roe ruling was a huge — they [Republicans] might like the outcome, but politically I can’t imagine a better turnout engine than this ruling for democrats,” Cupp claimed. “And you can make the argument that the Republicans’ legislative victories and the Supreme Court victory by a conservative court are regressive, they’re taking us backwards. Whether you like them or not, you can’t deny the fact that they’re going backwards, right? They’re taking us back to a different time when these weren’t rights.”

“Republicans are banning books,” she continued. “I mean, it really does feel anachronistic where the country is, so I think that’s a good message for Democrats.”

“You know, look, the economy is still going to be a huge driver for the election but I absolutely think the Democrats got a big boost from both of these rulings, I feel like, and they needed it, politically,” she added.

Watch below:

 

Continue Reading

News

Marjorie Taylor Greene Flees Supreme Court Protest After Gloating About Abortion Ruling

Published

on

Far-right Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was rushed by her staff away from the protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday as angry pro-choice protesters yelled at her.

Greene celebrated the court’s decision overturning abortion rights nationwide. Smiling and stating,  she said, “I am so happy. It’s a blessing. It’s a miracle.” Then, acknowledging the angry protestors, she said, “I think we have to worry about the radical left. They’re going to perform an insurrection here at the Supreme Court.”

Greene, a dependable troll, has used the word “insurrection” to describe any angry gathering of left-wing protesters. Meanwhile, she considers the actual insurrectionists arrested for ransacking the U.S. Capitol and trying to overthrow the 2020 presidential election “political prisoners.”

Greene’s celebratory moment was punctuated, however, by her staff rushing her off to a protected spot as protesters angrily shouted, “You are a traitor!” and “Lock her up!” One woman, holding an American flag and facemask tried shoving her way toward Greene while screaming, “My body, my choice!”

Greene later told The Hill that the court’s decision was “courageous,” adding, “It’s just taking it back to the states, giving the right back to the states to make their own laws regarding abortion, which is extremely important.”

An estimated 17 states are set to outlaw abortions soon after this ruling. Their criminalization will all but guarantee increased poverty for the poorest gestational parents carrying unwanted pregnancies as well as terrorist actions against abortion providers in adjoining states.

Continue Reading

'ACCOMPLICES

Trump Told Congressional Cronies How to Get Pardons for Aiding His Bogus Election Scheme, GOP Rep. Says

Published

on

Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks (pictured above) has shared an email of former President Donald Trump’s alleged instructions for Senate and House Republicans seeking preemptive pardons for their roles in helping Trump overturn the 2020 presidential election.

The January 11, 2021 email — which Brooks addressed to then-Special Assistant to the President and Oval Office Operations Coordinator Molly Michael — begins with the line, “President Trump asked me to send you this letter.”

“It is clear that deep-pocketed and vitriolic Socialist Democrats (with perhaps some liberal Republican help) are going to abuse America’s judicial system by targeting numerous Republicans with sham charges deriving from our recent fight for honest and accurate elections, and speeches related thereto,” the email continues.

Brooks then suggested that pardons be granted to any Republican who signed onto Texas’ lawsuit asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the outcome of the election, as well as any Congress members who rejected the Electoral College vote submissions of Arizona and Pennsylvania.

The email shows that Trump and Republicans had anticipated legal consequences for trying to overthrow the election. However, Trump never issued any such pardons because no Republicans were charged for their support of his bogus election conspiracy theory.

On Thursday, Cassidy Hutchinson — the aide to Trump’s White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows — told the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack that pardons were sought by Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz, Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar, Louie Gohmert, and Scott Perry. Perry denied the allegation.

On the same day, Brooks shared a letter he sent to the committee, which he called “The Witch Hunt Committee,” explaining his reasons for refusing to sit for a deposition interview.

In his letter, he falsely claimed that the committee refused to seat all of the Republican appointees that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy had nominated to it. In truth, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two of the five Republicans that McCarthy had suggested because those two — Reps. Jim Banks and Jim Jordan — had allegedly made comments indicating that they would sabotage the committee’s investigation, Pelosi said.

Brooks also claimed that the committee was collecting depositions in a clandestine manner in “conflict with time-honored judicial processes.” But the committee isn’t a court. It’s not pursuing charges and, thus, its depositions aren’t part of a judicial process.

Brooks said he would only agree to a public deposition limited to questions about January 6, 2021 (whatever that means), and only if any communications or documents related to their questioning were submitted to him seven days before the public disposition occurs.

Needless to say, the committee will likely continue its work without Brooks.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.