Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Jul
24
How Old Is Human DNA?
Genesis 11:8
"So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city."
Mitochondria generate energy inside each of your cells. They have their own DNA, which is passed directly from mother to child. This fact and the known rate at which mitochondrial DNA mutates has led...
RSS

Wickedpedia – Online Encyclopedia of Misinformation

In this age of the Internet, most people turn to Wikipedia for information. We use it ourselves from time to time. However, we'd like to emphasize that this online encyclopedia should be used with extreme caution, especially when looking up any topic touching on politics, religion or worldviews. Take, for instance, its article about "creationism":

"Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in some form by a supernatural being or beings. However the term is more commonly used to refer to religiously motivated rejection of certain biological processes, in particular evolution, in favour of an interpretation of a creation myth as an explanation accounting for the history, diversity, and complexity of life on earth (the creation-evolution controversy).  In Christian sects such creationism is usually based on a literal reading of the creation myth found in the book of Genesis. Other religions have deity-led creation myths which are quite different."

We've italicized certain phrases above to emphasize Wikipedia's liberal, anti-biblical stance ... and this is just in the first paragraph of a very long article. In contrast to what it calls the "creation myth," Wikipedia describes evolution in a quite different way: "This powerful explanatory and predictive theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, directing research and providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth." In other words, biblical creation is a myth and evolution is true.

As the Conservapedia website quite correctly points out, Wikipedia "was initiated by two atheists: entrepreneur Jimmy Wales and philosophy professor Larry Sanger on January 15, 2001. Despite its official 'neutrality policy,' Wikipedia has a strong liberal bias."

And that liberal bias, as you can well imagine, turns into a bias against a biblical understanding of history and the world around us. For a shocking account of nearly 200 instances of Wikipedia's liberal and anti-Christian bias, check out this well-footnoted article at Conservapedia: http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia.

Comments

One thing that has always made Wikipedia a limited source is the fact that it is written by individuals and based on their opinions and bias. It is not corroborated and anyone can post them and/or change them. This is why colleges and even high schools do not accept information gleaned from Wikipedia as a credible source for research projects and papers. Nonetheless, it is a very important to be aware of what the enemy (Satan - the true architect of all means to turn individuals away from coming to Christ) is doing and the means he is utilizing to propagate his deception.

PRAY THE BLINDERS FALL FROM THERE EYES THAT THEY SEE THE LOVE AND TRUTH OF JESUS CHRIST. THROUGH THAT, I THINK WE CAN POINT THEM TO THE CREATOR GOD.

Tom is correct. Having a medium open to all to edit allows people to post what they want in ways telling only their viewpoint. While Wikipedia provides a source for individuals to turn to, many treat any site like this as if all the information is factual. I'm certain their site contains a lot of factual information, there are many opinions posted also. For example, today I looked up the Hoatzin, trying to learn more about this strange bird that evolutionists have trouble fitting into any evolution pattern. Since evolution is simply a theory that has yet to be proven, many articles are written with evolutionists' points of view, stating the "billions of years ago" views. There are even many places marked as "citation needed", showing the holes in the information provided on the site.

All this needs to be looked at as if anyone can build a web site. There is no control over what you put on that web site. The internet is considered a place where free speech is allowed and is difficult to get false information removed.

Interesting article about "Wikedpedia!" I've heard criticism before about the liberal bias and inaccuracies, but your example is certainly blatant! Thank you.

The Internet is an intellectual jungle. Ideas grow wild here in astonishing profusion. Some ideas are good mental food, even great treasure can be found; while others are poison, and in some sites predators roam free. I figure a Christian had better be firmly based, knowing the scripture and the power of God, and having strong fellowship in the local church. Not a place to go "adventuring". Know where you are going, what you are looking for, believe nothing on the spot, but test all things in light of scripture and IN THE PERSONAL PRESENCE OF GOOD FELLOW CHRISTIANS.

No real surprise...

Remember Jesus said, "You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved." Mark 13:13

And in 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16 Paul stated, "... we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe. For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last." ~

Best to remember of Lord's words from Luke 6:27-36, " But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. and if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful."

I agree with what Allen Johnson, WeeklyZoo have said and the rest of the above. Standing on the Word of God is a sure foundation, unmovable in any storm.

Matthew, 10:16-20,
16 "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.
19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."

The way I see it is since anyone can contribute to the Wikipedia, all the liberal views are just a reflection of the culture we live in.
Sad but true.
I wasn't aware of Wikipedia's liberal bias ( I only use it occasionally), but now that I know about conservapedia I will use it exclusively.

Fallen man corrupts everything to one degree or another. Ethics for progressives/humanists are founded on moral relativity with the motto: the ends justify the means. So goes Wikipedia.
Posted: December 21, 2009
8:32 pm Eastern
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new report reveals a British scientist and Wikipedia administrator rewrote climate history, editing more than 5,000 unique articles in the online encyclopedia to cover traces of a medieval warming period – something Climategate scientists saw as a major roadblock in the effort to spread the global warming message....

I was recently angered when I saw that Wikipedia was treating abiogenesis (nonliving matter creating life) as a scientifically valid point but creation was being referred to as a "myth." Also, when I was looking up information on the Wikipedia site, I noticed that any treatment of evolution as a theory rather than a fact by a fair-minded contributor infuriated evolutionists.

Wikipedia does accept articles from people whose research is questionable and whose expertise is non-existent. But people do take Wikipedia as accurate — every semester, I have to warn students not to use it as a source, and every semester, a number of students ignore my warning.

Wow, thank you for providing this insight and backing up what the Holy Spirit had already given me impressions about - the fallibility of Wikipedia. In fact, there's more than just fallibility. From the start, I had a bad sense about the website in general because of the name itself, "Wikipedia". From the first time I saw the website, I had a bad instinct inside about how the website sounds and resembles the word, "wicca" (meaning witchcraft) which is absolutely evil and an abomination in God's sight. The Bible clearly tells us to steer clear of this, so I have always longed for an alternative website for a valid source of information. The only time I have really used the site in the past was to look up geographic information. But now I will use the alternative site you mentioned above! Thanks for shedding light on the truth. In these days, it is so much needed. God bless in exceeding abundance!

"We’ve italicized certain phrases above to emphasize Wikipedia’s liberal, anti-biblical stance … and this is just in the first paragraph of a very long article. In contrast to what it calls the 'creation myth,' Wikipedia describes evolution in a quite different way: 'This powerful explanatory and predictive theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, directing research and providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.' In other words, biblical creation is a myth and evolution is true."

The wikipedia "stance" is reality. Reality is not a liberal idea. It's a scientific idea. Evolution is reality. The gibberish in your worthless Bible is childish insane nonsense.

I've never had much use for Wikipedia and this just goes to prove my dis-interest in it! Yet another tool in the "Dumbing-down of America!

Ted CHRISTensen writes

Nonetheless, it is a very important to be aware of what the enemy (Satan - the true architect of all means to turn individuals away from coming to Christ) is doing and the means he is utilizing to propagate his deception.

Xianity is full of scared little sheep, children. It is a fear based life. Why? Because all humans are born atheist. Perhaps this is why they had to come up with perversion of Original Sin. You have to taught about Jesus from your guardian. It is nothing you can see and feel on your own. Life never reinforces it. This is why they have to build monstrous churches with high spirals saying LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME. What a shamed filled life for nothing in the end.

Are they kidding me when they say that creation is a myth and evolution is the truth? Have they lost their minds?

personaly, i am realy offended by using words such as "creation myth" and how others(non-believers) address facts in the Bible. But just like in my (catholic)school, i was even shocked to hear my religious studies teacher refer to EXODUS as a myth to help the israelites leaders control the millions of the migrating israelites..and that is from a religious studies teacher!

apart from that , i was also cautioned by my other teachers not to put much emphasis about the Bible 'coz it might offend other people of different religion(really??..yes reaallly!).

i made further inqueries and later learned that, just like wikipedia, others would like to stay neutral when in comes to a religious stand so as to accomodate other beliefs and not offend them.it is a sad fact (especialy in our school)that instead of winning them for Jesus they choose to be neutral.

The response from Human Ape concludes with: "The gibberish in your worthless Bible is childish insane nonsense." Whoa! Such penetrating insights ... such forceful arguments as Human Ape offers are hard to refute! Thanks, Human Ape, for showing us all how knowledgeable you are on this subject.

Thank you for your excellent work. Keep it up!

It doesn't surprise me that this encyclopedia is biased against anything Christian and Creation by GOD's definition. After all, it's NOT a Christian organization. Thank GOD for folks like you who expose the truth! Keep up the GOOD and GODLY work!

As has been pointed out, Wikipedia is not a source of trustworthy information. I would double-check anything I found there.

Nor should we fool ourselves about being accepted by the world. Christ wasn't, nor should we expect to be. He took Scripture seriously. Which brings up a challenge for "Human Ape." Instead of name-calling and disparagement, how about some intelligent argumentation?

Thank you for this very interesting article. I will certainly not use Wikipedia. I am learning so much from Creation Moments. I feel so sorry for people who do not believe in our amazing Creator. They miss out on so much by not having a relationship with Him.

Gracias por su ayuda y la información, que Dios los siga usando. La seudociencia siempre tratará de golpear la verdad, y la ciencia creacionista al final hará resplandecer la majestuosidad de nuestro gran Dios y Señor Jesucristo. Nuestras convicciones de la verdad se mantienen firmes frente al ataque del enemigo.

Thank you, Creation Moments, for telling us the truth. I'm glad to know now that Conservapedia exists, and I will use it. I also find much reliable information from the Institute for Creation Research and from OriginsTV.org. And yes, we must pray for the lost, keep loving them, keep witnessing to them. Remember, we once were as they are, and God was merciful with us. Praise God!

Human Ape said: "The wikipedia 'stance' is reality. Reality is not a liberal idea. It’s a scientific idea. Evolution is reality. The gibberish in your worthless Bible is childish insane nonsense."

Response: When was the last time scientists recorded a genome randomly producing new and improved genetic information from existing information? Never. That makes evolution sheer nonsense my friend, not creation. Evolution doesn't meet the standards of scientific methodology for a valid theory, let alone a fact. It can't be observed, tested, or duplicated.

As for evolution being scientific, theories about the accidental beginnings of life hinge on abiogenesis, another variety of spontaneous generation, a theory that is obsolete. Evolution is an unscientific idea being dragged out long after the foundations of its premise have crumbled.

By the way, the Bible contains historical fact, supported by anthropological evidence and records kept by the civilizations of the time. For example, relics have been uncovered substantiating the account of Daniel during the time of Nebuchadnezzar.

Here's the definition of abiogenesis, according to dictionary.com:
The now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation.

Do your research before you go ape next time.

Wow! It's crazy how the world is getting! I'm definitely showing this to my family and friends!