The Root of All Evil? Us!

In a stunning decision Lewis Black slammed down that gavel to say that the blogger is the root of all evil over the "ultimate fighters" in Comedy Central's show called “The Root of All Evil”

It was a hard fight until Patton Oswalt made me giggle like a school girl, in his introduction, asks if blogging "unfiltered brain leakage is somehow changing the world?" that blogging takes "...one of the most essential activities of communicating and degrades it to 'poo flinging'... If left unchecked, blogging will educe all human expression to abbreviated grunts, emoticons and pictograms"

After picking myself up off the floor from laughter. Sorry I forgot 'ROFL'. I questioned how evil we really are. Do we change people's mind by doing this? Are we just flinging poo at each other? Would I be more effective on a milk crate at a crowded event? I need a couple of days to think about this one.

Another important question to ask myself: Am I just feeding the machine and blogging about the subject of blogging?

I believe they got it all wrong. The root of all evil is all of us, bloggers or non-bloggers. We are wicked sinners, and that all are in need of a savior. We have transgressed God's Law and we all need to repent. Forgive my poo flinging to any of you.

Am I evil? This makes me think of a song I heard the other day, I haven't heard it in a long time and it won't get out of my head. Please join me. Warning, clicking below and listening may render you involuntarily singing to the Lord throughout the day. Which is a good thing! "What's going on inside of me? I despise my own behavior. This only serves to confirm my suspicions that I'm still a man in need of a Savior. I want to be in the light" DC Talk

I want to shine like the stars in Heaven. Oh, Lord be my light, and be my salvation, all I want is to be in the light.

Best Viewpoint: G.E said: "but I think we lost communication for a tremendously long while, and somehow, blogging instead of sitting in front of the tv brings communication back." Well said! Bravo!

The world is coming to an end soon!

This guy named Patrick Greene was attempting to sue using bullying tactics to censor Ray Comfort. Ray has a bumper sticker (and yes I have one) that says "National Atheist Day, April 1" in bold letters with Psalm 14:1 "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God."

On april 1 2008 I sent the Atheist Experience people a present for their day. We all had a good laugh that day because even Martin renamed his "Atheist Experience" blog to the "Dan Marvin Apologetic Power Hour" but apparently some atheists don't have a sense of humor.

There is strange phenomena happening all over the world. Yes the world is coming to an end very soon. How do I know this? To what proof can this be determined by?

I will give you the proof that Ray Comfort, Matt Dillahunty and I, all agree on a subject, and that is how I know for a fact the end days are near. Even though I hate to admit that I agree with Matt Dillahunty on any subject, I do on this subject of suing someone just because they disagree with them.

We that have been in the military, both Matt and myself included, are strong fighters for the Constitution. Matt makes a point when he stated that "Nobody has an inherent right not to be offended."

Matt admittedly has a bumper sticker on his car that says: "Blasphemy is a victimless crime" he list many like "Prayer is talking to yourself" and one of my favorites "Rapture is a world without religious nuts"

Look, We all have our favorite bumper stickers:

I am offended daily by what people say on television and movies and blogs. They use blasphemous language and say the most horrible things about Jesus. I just don't like it, but I don't have to watch those shows or go to the blogs. I can only control things in my environment, like here at this blog.

So how do you handle a bully? By punching him in the nose. (not Jesus' advice) Ray fought back and had to shut down Patrick's Lawyers before this could get out of hand.

According to Ray's post: That afternoon the lawyers sent their letter to him. It said that there were 1200 Christian lawyers involved in the organization (The Alliance Defense Fund), and that they take threats of this nature very seriously.

The atheist (Patrick) immediately called them and politely withdrew the threat, and followed it up with a faxed confirmation. He then emailed us and said, "It's o.k. if you put it back on your site. And I will not file a lawsuit of any type for any reason at any time."

He may be bitter about the bumper sticker they made about him but apparently Patrick Greene is now filing complaints to the FCC about The Atheist Experience people. In an email to the "AE" team, he writes:

I did some research on the FCC webpage, and called them. I have filed the following complaint with the FCC.

Matt Dillahunty, the host of the Atheist Experience program, read my e-mail to him, referring to him as an "asshole". I was speaking to him via telephone, when his program was live on Sunday July 27th. During the conversation between us, where we were disagreeing on a subject, he referred to me as an "asshole" live on the program.
I don't know if this is acceptable language for the middle of the afternoon, when children could be viewing.

So Patrick is complaining about Matt reading an email with a cuss word that Patrick himself wrote to AE? Where did you find this guy? Let me guess the TAM6? Patrick, please take the advice of the 40+ people that wrote to you telling you to stop threatening to sue. Have you heard of this one? If forty people tell you you're drunk, fall down. Patrick your wasted, sleep it off.

So what does the Bible say about all this? The first thing that comes to mind is James 3 in it's entirety.

James 3:8 "But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison."

We are flawed individuals and are all in need of a Savior. James 317 "But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy."

We need to take a lesson from God's leadership.

We are all guilty of breaking God's Law and we need to turn to Him for our Salvation. We need to be united together, in our repentance for our sins, not this he said she said stuff.

UPDATE: I let Ray know I sent this post to Patrick via the email Patrick gave everyone at AE. To my complete shock Ray went against his link policy and posted my comment. Ray Comfort, I don't know if a thanks is in order quite yet, I might have to change my blog name to Atheist Central's Overflow. Anyway, thanks for your friendship through these past years. Keep up all that great work you do, tirelessly seeking to save the lost. You hear that Atheists, "I love Ray Comfort!"

Someday soon, all of us can have great laughs about all this together in Heaven. Join us please.

Should Christians Judge People?

I often get the don't judge verses thrown at me. The Bible is clear that we should judge others in their sinning but we must do it according to God's standard and not inject our own beliefs.

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

What does for reproof, for correction, mean to you?

Do you believe that "Christian love" is to coddle people in their wickedness? Should we "not" judge others if they're a Pedophile? Should we not judge people if they speed in a school zone? Laws are judging right over wrong. Should judges not judge?

Do you remember what it says in Matthew 22:39 "And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"

But what does this truly mean? Does that mean we are to love them no matter what they do because we are sinners also? Do we coddle them in their sins, tell them God loves them no matter what? Nope Jesus was clear when he said this. He was telling us what the standard was. The way to show your love to your neighbor is to warn them and their sins will take them to hell.

The only way you can show your love to your neighbor was outlined in Leviticus 19:17-18 "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not suffer sin upon him. Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD." (emphasis added)

If you believe coddling is love then you are delusional. You must confront to show love to someone. Would you let a friend go and drink and drive? We will take the keys and get into your face, if necessary, to show that you are wrong. Get offended if you wish, but I will not accept the evil wickedness of unrepentant sinning.

I have no clue if you have children but we correct out of love, not hate. We guide. Hebrews 12 makes that point clear. I love you, but love is not coddling.

I am merely commanded to speak the truth, defend it, and expose falsehoods. I do not condone sin and if you shall perish because of your wickedness then so be it, without any grudge, Hell's Gates will be locked from the inside as CS Lewis said.

Do we listen to part or the whole Bible?

Ephesians 5:11 "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." HOW do we do this, without judging?

Psalm 37:30 "The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment."

Amos 5:15 "Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the LORD God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph." How can you hate the evil and love the good if you refuse to judge? You can't. You are SINNING when you refuse to judge.

Our generation is well described in Isaiah 59:8: "The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace." People have refused to judge, so there is no peace.

Paul said in I Corinthians 1:10 to ". . . be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." Why would Paul make such a statement if judging is wrong?

In I Corinthians 2:15 Paul says, "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." Judging is not a sin; judging is a characteristic of being a spiritual person! Satan has been lying to us, hoping that we will NOT judge, because he knows that the right kind of judgment PLEASES God and betters our lives and Christian service.

If judging is wrong, then Paul needs to confess and repent for misleading these Christians! He clearly told them to JUDGE PEOPLE. 1 Corinthians 6:1-5

If judging people is wrong, how can we obey Romans 16:17-18? II Corinthians 6:17? II Timothy 3:5-6? I John 4:1? If judging is wrong, then God has contradicted Himself and His words cannot be trusted!

Notice Malachi 3:18: "Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not." WOW! Does that sound like it is wrong to judge?

What about Revelation 2:2? " I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:" Why would the Lord be pleased with these Christians if judging was wrong? Is it not impossible to find someone a "liar" without judging them?

John 7:24 "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment."

Sometimes people judge when they have no business doing so. This can only be done by following the rules that God has established in His word. Here follow seven good rules from Scripture: (taken from Is It Right to Judge?)

Judge Scripturally (Isaiah 8:20), Don't Judge When God's Word Is Silent. Don't rush to judgment on an issue when the Bible says very little or is silent about it. Don't make more of a matter than God makes of it. A good example of this is found in Colossians 2:16, Pray for Good Judgement Ability (I Kings 3:9, James 1:5),Don't Respect Persons truly fair judge is blind and deaf to any outer influence. (Isa. 42:1,19-21,Proverbs 24:23),Judge in Truth A true judge is one who seeks the truth. Do not judge another when you do not have all the relevant facts. (Jeremiah 5:1),Judge Mercifully (Matthew 7:2,Gal. 6:7-8) You'll reap what you sow.If you are swift and harsh in judging others, then God will see to it that you receive the same from others. Has God not been very merciful to you, even though you don't deserve it? Likewise, you should exercise mercy toward others. Don't Forget to Judge Yourself (I Corinthians 11:30-31) If you refuse to judge and improve yourself as a child of God, then God will take it upon Himself to judge you.A good judge will not fail to judge himself.

Should we Judge others? Yes, but do it that is pleasing to God.

Matthew 7:6-15 is clear that we can judge the message and fruit of false apostles. Obedience to such commandments obviously requires one to make a judgment as to whether certain unbelievers should be regarded as "dogs" or "swine," to whom it would be counterproductive to try to speak of spiritual matters; or whether certain professing Christian leaders are actually false prophets who should be repudiated. However, Jesus is saying in Matthew 7:1 that we should be careful in nitpicking and judging people’s motives or eternal destiny. Ultimately only God is the judge of those things. We can, after all, be too hard on people in minor matters.

We can judge qualifications, however we cannot judge qualities. Qualities are internal motivations known only by God Himself.

In John 21:16-17, Jesus said, “Peter, feed my sheep.” The feeding of sheep has to do with external qualifications. We can evaluate a man’s sermons, appraise if he has studied and researched. Lack of preparation will become obvious in time. Poor doctrine or overtly false doctrine is obvious.

But Jesus also said in John 21:15-17, “Peter, do you love me?” This has to do with qualities and internal motivation. Does a man feed the sheep for power? For prestige? For money? Only God knows the motivation. Or is he doing it out of love for Christ? Again, only God knows. If the person is living an ostentatious and lavish lifestyle, those externals all say something and may be an obvious outworking of the inner motivation.

1 Corinthians 6:2 "Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?"

A great explanation on how to judge properly is in 1 Corinthians 6:3-6

After all we are judging for Him:

2 Chronicles 19:6 "And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment."

On that Day of Judgment God will judge the world for their iniquities, why not let us warn you with love before that happens? 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove (Examine) all things; hold fast that which is good."

Perfect love is a constant confronter, it takes far more love to confront than to ignore the situation.



bit.ly/judgepeople

God speaks? Collective Experiences

In light of this weekend movie release: "The X-Files: I Want to Believe" I feel it would be a good time to discuss the various experiences that people have, that they relate to God.

A conversation in Pulp Fiction came to mind where Vincent and Jules were discussing the miricle they witnessed when neither one were shot by that Man. Bullets were behind them but they were untouched. The Man completely misses every shot and is gunned down himself. While Vincent shrugs it off, Jules realizes he should be dead.

VINCENT: Yeah, we were lucky.

JULES: That wasn't luck. That was somethin else.

VINCENT: Yeah, maybe.

JULES: That was...divine intervention. Do you know what divine intervention is?

VINCENT: Yeah, I think so. That means God came down from heaven and stopped the bullets.

JULES: Yeah, man, thats what it means. Thats exactly what it means!

The conversation later continues while getting breakfast in a coffee shop (the Dennys-like place from the opening scene, about to be robbed).

JULES: I just been sittin here thinkin.

VINCENT: (mouthful of food) About what?

JULES: The miracle we witnessed.

VINCENT: The miracle you witnessed. I witnessed a freak occurrence.

JULES: Do you know what a miracle is?

VINCENT: An act of God.

JULES: Whats an act of God?

VINCENT: I guess its when God makes the impossible possible. And Im sorry, Jules, but I dont think what happened this morning qualifies.

JULES: Dont you see, Vince, that dont matter. Youre judging this thing the wrong way. Its not about what. It could be God stopped the bullets, he changed Coke into Pepsi, he found my car keys. You dont judge this based on merit. Whether or not what we experienced was an according-to-Hoyle miracle is insignificant. What is significant is I felt Gods touch. God got involved.

VINCENT: But why?

JULES: ...I dont know why. But I cant go back to sleep.

VINCENT: So youre serious, youre really gonna quit?

JULES: The life? Most definitely.

Atheists are always asking what these 'so called' experiences that people have pertaining to God. I have had many try to explain each one of them away and this is why I named it "Collective Experiences" There are many "God experiences" that removes all doubt. God's Word is vague about these encounters though.

Aimee Moiso said: My Hebrew Bible professor would say, the biblical writers were not interested in psychoanalysing the protagonists.

The Bible says God speaks through a burning bush, through angels, through farm animals. But how does he speak to us? Between these two following lists you can see vastly different personal experiences, so nothing is set in stone. (pun intended) Maybe you could add some more for us. My list is quite similar to these two with few insertions/ deletions. Personally, I should have died 5-7 times in my younger years and when I now look in my children's eyes I understand why God kept me around.

In a different blog in the past, someone asked how does God speak to me and a couple of people, who had much better answers then mine, wrote the following:

So how does God speak to me?
In no particular order:
1) Through scripture.
2) Through nature (the big things and the small).
3) Through other Christians.
4) Through other people (all truth is God breathed).
5) Through impressions in my Spirit.
6) Through dreams (very rarely in my case).
7) With an audible voice (extremely rare in my case).
8) Through seeing things with my eyes that are not actually present in the physical world (rare, but it has happened).
9) Some things I just "know" without having perceived them.
10) Through miracles.
11) Through peace, joy etc. (deeper than mere emotion).
12) Through things I have written.
13) Through science, mathematics, philosophy.
14) Through all expressions of love.
15) Through reason.
16) In music, especially (but not exclusively) gospel / worship music.

Another answered like this:

I do not know How He is speaking with you. He speaks to me most often in:

1. synchronicities…
2. impossible "coincidences"…
3. things that oddly catch my attention…
4. unfolding chains of events.
5. SYMBOLS symbolism found in my dreaming and my waking!
6. "double" meanings and "life signs"…
7. creation. everything existing in the physical world… speaks of the Spirit. everything.
8. supernatural heightening of the senses.
9. out and out "impossibilities"
10. simple spiritual intuition.

Probably most of these things can be argued away as coincidence or whatnot individually, but collectively in someone's life experiences they cannot be written off. There is a double entendre going on with this post title also. The collective experiences of the individual through one's life and collective experiences in a group of people.

These "coincidences" happen to many people all over the world. Are they all phenomena that can be explained away? Does it mean God is reaching out to us? If you are going to rebuttal and debate, then you will have to explain the phenomena as a whole collection of experiences not just each event individually.

You can experience these same experiences yourself but you have to go to God on His terms.

God will manifest himself to you as He promised in John 14:21 "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him."

What should we do with these revelations?

Proverbs 25:2 "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

Atheism is a Religion!

I just read an article that was written on Friday in the local newspaper at my old stomping grounds. The article was chastising the state for making decisions based on religion. "The state picked financial winners and losers, and it did so on a basis of religious content." the Gazette claimed. The most poignant part of the article was the point made about the results of the decision of the courts. The ramifications are going to be wide spread. Let the fighting begin! The decision was that atheism is a religion!

Radical atheists and secularists likely won't applaud this ruling, favoring some religious discrimination over none at all. They'll argue for a ban on scholarships to students at any institution with any religious affiliation at all.

That can't be achieved lawfully, however, because "religion" has a fuzzy definition. A federal court, in an effort to help atheists, ruled in 2005 that atheism is a form of religion that deserves the same protections as beliefs more commonly recognized as religion (Kaufman v. McCaughtry). The Supreme Court of the United States has treated secular humanism as a religion, granting the Fellowship of Humanity religious tax exemption because it's philosophy is analogous to religion (Torcaso v. Watkins). Religion at its root is belief, which means it has everything in common with atheism and secular humanism. No theological position - "there is a god," "there isn't a god," or "it doesn't matter" - serves as common ground upon which the state can reside in order to avoid establishment and prohibition of free exercise. The only way to maintain religious freedom - avoiding de facto establishment, while providing equal protection and protecting free exercise - is to allow religious chaos. (Gazette)

So there you have it, proof that America considers atheism a religion. Now it's our turn; In light of this newest declaration, since atheism has been ruled as a religion in our court system, we have no choice but to sue the states for pushing one religion over another in our public school system. Don't think for one moment that we shouldn't do this because the children are being targeted and lied to.

2 Timothy 3:7 "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

And war is what was declared in our public school system. Listen to what an American Humanist named John Dunphy said by correctly prophesying about children back in 1983:

"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level--preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new--the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."

Jeremiah 10:2 "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them."

Romans 1:28 "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"

tinyurl.com/AtheismReligion

Science in the Bible

If I showed you evidence that would that prove God to you would your presuppositions prevent a belief again?

There is plenty of evidence for knowing God. Evidence of impossible things that are in the Bible, such as, eye witnesses with dedication to truth, 40 people penned a cohesive message of salvation over 1600 year period, etc.

We don't show evidence of the Bible with science because that would render science the authority. The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. There is even scientific truths in the Bible that would be impossible to know back when it was written a brief list of Atoms (Hebrews 11:3, written 2000 years ago), Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11), Ocean floor contains deep valleys and mountains (2 Samuel 22:16; Jonah 2:6), round earth (Isaiah 40:22) , Second Law of Thermodynamics the Law of Increasing Entropy (Isaiah 51:6; Psalm 102:25,26; and Hebrews 1:11), Each star is different (1 Corinthians 15:41), Light moves (Job 38:19,20),Winds blow in cyclones (Ecclesiastes 1:6), Ocean contains springs (Job 38:16).

Job 38:35 written 3,500 years ago said that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech but did you know that radio waves move at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn't discover this until 1864 when "the British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing" (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia, Vol. 12), Dinosaurs (Job 40:15-24), Why was circumcision to be carried out on the eighth day? (Genesis 17:12) Medical science has discovered that the eighth day is the only day in the entire life of the newborn that the blood clotting element prothrombin is at the highest levels.(LW)

On and on, a handful more things that can be pointed out but you get the point. Others blogs have posted about these things also. I enjoyed the layout and organization of this one called Clarifying Christianity. A website that also claims: "We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible."

My point is that man doesn't/hasn't always known the truth that's in the Bible. Look Doctors/scientists used to bleed people (bloodletting) just 140 years ago, some even think that is how George Washington died. Over 3000 years ago in Leviticus 17:14 it has always said that blood is life.

Are all of these points made acceptable to you, is another question. Obviously, the evidence presented so far doesn't allow atheists to believe so why should this be any different. I am sure your presuppositions are still in place.

Big Bang Busted!

I have posed these questions before, just not at this blog. Secular scientists want to force feed our children and us illogical theories. Big Bang, like evolution, has no evidence just assertions based on ignorance.

big bang problem #1: Missing antimatter problem. (Baryon number) How much in the universe, ZERO. One fluke exception is not an answer either, there should be plenty.

big bang problem #2: Monopoles problem. magnets have +/- and at high temperatures greater then the core of a star can create singular poles and the big bang started at infinite temperature and that would be hot enough. Guess how many we find ZERO.

big bang problem #3: Singularity point problem. The Big Bang DOES NOT even explain the origin of the universe. How did that singular point get there?

big bang problem #4: Known physics breaks down in this situation. General relativity (powerful gravitational fields) and quantum mechanics (very small situation) exists separately but there is NO physics currently that can explain both situations at the same time which is what the Big Bang requires. Known physics cannot describe that (big bang) situation so big banger's take it on BLIND FAITH that if such physics is ever discovered that it would even allow for the theory of the big bang.

big bang problem #5: Population 3 stars there should be these type of first stars everywhere all over the universe. Any guess to how many are out there...ZERO! All stars have trace amounts of the heaver elements.

Now I will admit I had help (like Dr. Jason Lisle) for these points but science cannot explain there theories they try to teach the kids. These are things with no evidence, just assertions based on ignorance.

Here is another point that cannot be answered. Now for eternity all of the universe was compacted in to this infinitesimal point of singularity. All energy and mass compressed in a state of total organization and stability for eternity then one Tuesday afternoon at 3pm BOOM it blows up?

So, what happened to Newton's very first Law of Motion called the law of inertia? Things at rest stay at rest unless acted upon by what? Come on you believe in science right? Things at rest stay at rest unless acted upon an outside force. You have to discount science and the entire laws of physics to believe in no God.

2 Corinthians 4:3-4 "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

This will go down in history of mankind's second biggest blunder. Apparently a great number of Scientists agree that the Big Bang Theory is Busted (Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004)

If that isn't an 'appeal to authority' this one sure is:

Evolution is a fraud! now Evolution Exposed!

Seven reasons why Evolution is a fraud.

1. It's not science. You cannot observe, test and repeat the ever-changing ideas that are little more than wild speculation.

2. It devalues real science. Chemistry, physics and biology don't have the same problems of legitimacy because they are real sciences, not philosophical wannabes trying to appear legit.

3. Complex engineering. Do you ever drive past a skyscraper and think to yourself 'Gee, I guess billions of years of random chance could have just as easily assembled all of that glass, steel and concrete as well as a team of engineers, architects, construction workers working from blueprints? Of course not! But that's what evolutionists would have you believe in when it comes to living organisms.

4. Genetics. The programming code of life, according to evolutionists, is just a series of biochemical accidents and mutations. If you believe this, I have a bridge in New York that's for sale. The infinitely complex engineering of this code means that it did not come about via 'natural selection,' aka random chance.

5. Mathematically Impossible. Basic probability tells you that the odds of a blob of primordial ooze morphing into a man, regardless of how much time has passed, are so remote that mathematicians regard it as impossible. Emile Borel and Fred Hoyle are just two mathematicians who reject evolution on statistical grounds.

6. Evolution is a religion. Yes, evolution is the faith of atheism because it replaces God with man. When you've conned yourself into believing that some kind of ancient slime morphed into progressively complex and directional life forms, you are in the realm of faith, not science.

7. Racism. This is the ugly secret that evolutionists don't want to discuss; that Darwin, Huxley and many of the early advocates of evolution stated publicly that Asians, Africans, Australian Aborigines and other non-white, non-European groups were evolutionary throwbacks. Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, was a pioneer in the early field of eugenics which was the study of skills by ethnic groups. While Galton's work was relatively harmless, Hitler's work — to synthesize natural selection by exterminating a race of people — was not. (evofraud.com)

Also, Hitler even tried to breed apes and humans to make a superior race because of the belief of evolution. Please tell me honestly does evolution really sound logical to you personally? Really? Is this a great example of mass hysteria?

1 Corinthians 1:27 "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;"

This will go down in history of mankind's biggest blunder.

UPDATE: I am not the only one that holds this viewpoint. Many highly accredited Scientists believe in a Creator instead of evolution. Here is a little handy list: A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM Here is another: Creationists holding DOCTORATES IN SCIENCE and another with comments: Creation Scientists and Teachers Comment

I briefly skimmed this article called: Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution which has good referenced facts in it.

Thanks to that article (Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution) I found out about A book that was written and is available online to read if you choose. It's called The Evolution Deceit

UPDATE2: An atheist with a PhD and is a microbiologist said: "It's not contradicting myself at all. You still think that evolutions "is the consensus view." as you claimed which is false.

This [paltry] list of "700 scientists" was far surpassed by the "steve list" in a very short time."

So I wrote:

Dude, you just appealed to authority, give me a break. Wake up! Are we going to just keep comparing groins? I am getting tired of this conversation.

If one scientist, just one, is questioning the results and interpretation of the data, it warrants review again. These pseudo-scientists are just rubber stamping things to acquire funding and fear of their peers. You call it 'proof' I call it failed experiments with extreme bias and assumptions. But we all will know soon now won't we.

"Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and every where, could produce no variety of things. All that diversity of natural things which we find suited to different times and places could arise from nothing but the ideas and will of Being, necessarily existing" Sir Isaac Newton (Ibid, 506)

TBC

Tag? Why am I it? Atheist Meme

Adrian Hayter asked me to fill out this 'originally' atheist meme, relabeled 'Atheist / Theist Meme' So here is my responses:

First, why would I participate in an atheists meme, something Richard Dawkins coined?

But if you wish, I will appease :

*Q1. How would you define "atheism"? A branch or another name of the religion, Secular Humanism.

**Q2. Was your upbringing religious? If so, what tradition? I was raised in an atheist's/atheistic home.

**Q3. How would you describe "Intelligent Design", using only one word? "vague", I prefer 'Biblical Creation'

**Q4. What scientific [endeavor] really excites you? Discovery of any kind, without the subjectivity of scientists that are atheists.

**Q5. If you could change one thing about the "atheist community", what would it be and why? Their belief of no God. Why, because of the end result on Judgment Day.

**Q6. If your child came up to you and said "I'm joining the clergy", what would be your first response? I would ask to be more specific. A bishop or minister? If his soul couldn't live without anything else then he would have my blessings. If he means priesthood in the RCC (Roman Catholic), I would ask why he would want to be a part of the largest pedophilia group/society in the world. I would ask why does he wants to help people into hell. I would rather him be an atheist.

*Q7. What's your favorite theistic argument? Anything Jesus said, like the sermon on the mount. He is the pro!

*Q8. What's your most "controversial" viewpoint? That a building or Church isn't necessary for Salvation and/or denominations are man made.

*Q9. Of the "Four Horsemen" (Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens and Harris) who is your favorite, and why? Dawkins, putting his foot in his mouth in Expelled. The Movie was hilarious. Why, because Dick makes me laugh.

*Q10. If you could convince just one atheistic person to abandon their beliefs, who would it be? My Dad

****
Furthermore, could you possibly answer these questions as well:

How would you define theism? a polytheistic way of claiming a belief in god(s). Christianity, on the other hand is the more accurate description of a belief in our Creator (Monotheistic)

How would you describe Evolution? George Simpson described it best when he wrote "...On this subject, by the way, there has been way too much pussyfooting. Apologists emphasize that man cannot be the descendant of any living ape—a statement that is obvious to the verge of imbecility—and go on to state or imply that man is not really descended from an ape or monkey at all, but from an earlier common ancestor. In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man's ancestors were apes or monkeys (or successively both). It is pusillanimous (cowardly) if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise." Formerly Professor of Paleontology at Harvard university. "The world into which Darwin led us," Science, 131:405:966

Why don't you believe in it? Because it's false and will probably be mankind's biggest blunder/mistake of all time. Hitler even tried to breed apes and humans to make a superior race because of evolution. Give me a break!

Now since I answered everything and played along nicely, I believe now you owe me and should place me in your atheist blogroll. I have earned it.

The Bible isn't proof

"Sorry, I can't examine the claim because the Bible account is pure hearsay...particularly with the fabulous claims."

"The reason I don't believe in ANY supernatural beings is because there is no evidence for their existence."

Are you claiming Jesus and the apostles and/or disciples didn't exist at all? They were made up figures? Your logic is flawed.

One example:

You have heard of Julius Caesar and I am sure you believe that he existed right? Well there were 10 manuscripts of antiquity that explained who he was as we know him today. 10 that is it, in one language, everything we know today about him came from just those 10 manuscripts, with the earliest one dating to 1,000 years after the original autograph

By contrast, the New Testament antiquity of the Bible (with all its information about Jesus) was claimed to be written between 40 A.D. and 100 A.D. The earliest known copy is from 130 A.D. and there are 5,000+ known copies in Greek, 10,000 in Latin and 9,300 in other languages.

"There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament.

Homer's Iliad, the most renowned book of ancient Greece, is the second best-preserved literary work of all antiquity, with 643 copies of manuscript support discovered to date. In those copies, there are 764 disputed lines of text, as compared to 40 lines in all the New Testament manuscripts. 8 In fact, many people are unaware that there are no surviving manuscripts of any of William Shakespeare's 37 plays (written in the 1600's), and scholars have been forced to fill some gaps in his works. This pales in textual comparison with the over 5,600 copies and fragments of the New Testament in the original Greek that, together, assure us that nothing's been lost. In fact, all of the New Testament except eleven minor verses can be reconstructed outside the Bible from the writings of the early church leaders in the second and third centuries AD." (Bible Manuscripts)

You believe that Caesar existed and a real person but not Jesus, hmm. But again your presuppositions will determine if you will accept documented historical proof or not. I perfectly understand that there is always someone that loses on the other side of truth but I have said many times to others that it takes far more love to confront then to ignore the situation, perfect love is a constant confronter. So I confront with love.

bit.ly/Bibleisproof

Man's Intellect

Pretend with me for a moment.

Let's just say that I stump you all with powerful arguments, using archaeological and scientific evidence. I have even intellectually dwarfed you.

Now all I have to do is convince you that Noah actually built an ark and brought in the animals two by two and lived over 900 years, that Jonah was swallowed by a whale, that Samson killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass, that Daniel was really in the lions' den, that Moses really did divide the Red Sea, and that Adam and Eve ran around naked...and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Do you really think I can prove all of that to you?

Look at what Paul said about how he persuaded men about God: "And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God." (1 Corinthians 2:1) Why didn't Paul dazzle his hearers with eloquent speeches and intellectual wisdom? Bible scholars who have studied his letters tell us that he was extremely capable intellectually. First Corinthians 2:5 tells us why he deliberately stayed away from worldly wisdom: "That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."

If sinners are converted by the intellect (the wisdom of men), they will fall away by the intellect. If they are merely argued into the faith, they will just as easily be argued out of it whenever a respected scholar reports that 'the bones of Jesus" have been found. However if sinners are converted by "the power of God," they will be kept by the power of God. No intellectual argument will cause them to waver because they will know the life-changing reality of their conversion, and their faith will vbe secure in the eternally solid and secure Rock of Ages. (taken from WOTM)

You cannot reason out of Christianity if Jesus Christ is Lord of your reasoning.


tinyurl.com/Manintellect

Atheists Eat Babies!

Let's just say, you know for a fact that eating children is wrong. A great number of people believe as you do and we all acknowledge it in unity. Then there is a website that says that eating babies is fine that you don't need to "buy into it" to believe that eating babies is wrong. There are a couple of blogs that talk all day how liberating and fantastic eating children are. Now whoever listens to them think they are crazy and very wrong but a few listen to the intellect behind the reasoning, they listen to the argument. Let's say the argument says it's natural for many animals eat their young in nature, and people are just a part of the natural process or something like that. Some people buy into it and start doing it.

You struggle everyday as to why people think like that, they all must be crazy, what do they know that you don't? This goes on and on but after a while you get curious. You then start to go around thinking why you don't get to eat babies as others do and how some people demand that you don't, like your parents. Then one day you get an opportunity to do it but everything in your soul KNOWS it is wrong. You shake at the thought of eating that very young child. It's agonizing to you for quite a while, you cuss at yourself for having such insane thoughts!

One day you see a little 5 month old at some playground and you convince yourself that you have to know what it's like. You seize the moment and kidnap the child. You keep that child isolated for days agonizing whether you should do it or not. You almost feel yourself slipping away into insanity to the point you can't take it. So you get the nerve somehow, and do it. Then afterwords you say to yourself that it was too quick that you need to try it again to see if the feelings you had during were genuine. So flash ahead a month and you have done it many times and you now frequent places that do it and go online to websites that also do it and you feel a sense of a warm community. You struggle with the nightmares until they pass and you feel OK. You embrace the fact that you are now a baby eater and you and your new friends are OK with it. The struggle get's a little easier to accept the notion that eating babies is fine for the natural process. You teach you own kids that it is perfectly natural to eat babies. You start your own website that is called "Atheists eat Babies!" and you showcase your work.

Is this what an atheist goes through when they start to deny God? The stories of struggles, that I have heard, turning away from God are similar to this scenario. Many authors talk about the struggle they go through from belief to non belief. The agonizing pain it causes themselves as well as their families. Could atheists talk themselves into anything? The methodical erosion of ones values and morals can be so damaging, to the point that it's acceptable that "Atheists eat babies."

An atheist may still be moral and say murder, rape, and eating babies are wrong; but when asked why, they will not have a final reason, or authority, to which they can appeal to, besides their own subjectivity. Their morality bit.ly/assmorals is clear. So it is merely a personal choice not to.

bit.ly/eatbabies

Coconuts Prove a Designer

I am sure you have seen this video by now:



Apparently my argument was so very compelling he took the video down.

I will submit, on the other hand, that the coconut is proof that it was thought out with precise design.

Pacific islanders recognize different stages of growth, assigning to them different names. When the nut is young, it is without the white endosperm ("meat"), but filled with "water" and is used for drinking. When older the endosperm is soft and rubbery, a stage preferred by some. When still older, the husk is still green, but the shell is now brown. At this stage the water tastes like sparkling water, though I don’t know if this is from dissolved gases. Finally when mature and the husk brown, the endosperm is usually ground off on a serrated blade and added to other dishes or rendered for oil.

My wife also taught me, to tell if a pineapple is ripe, you pluck one of the pointed leaves and if it comes out easily then it is ready to eat. What a great design!

Ah, the versatility of the Coconut and the Pineapple. There you go atheists, the coconut is proof that God exists. There is no more excuses. Repent and Trust in Jesus today and seek Salvation through Christ. What are you waiting for? Seek the Lord while he may be found.

Contradictions everywhere!

Where mankind may contradict themselves, God sure doesn't. Many atheists try to complain about the KJV Bible and claim it has so many contradictions. On the surface that may be how it appears. If you do the research though, and change the presuppositions you have about the Bible, every point can be explained. The original Bible is infallible, inspired, and inerrant word of God without FAIL. Modern translations omit verses, but GNV & KJV were preserved.

On my last post about Dan Barker he devoted a great deal of his book to so called 'contradictions' in the Bible I started to answer some of them. Then I thought this would be a great opportunity for people to voice there concerns about the Bible in hopes we can resolve the confusion. So We will devote this post to that cause.

Here is an assembled list of wonderful websites that have devoted their time to explain the claimed 'contradictions'. I haven't read everything, so if you see something that is unacceptable in the explanation then bring it up we will help you find the truth. Instead of listing each one individually, I enjoy the websites that provides us a list that you can click on for whatever subject you wish. Many atheists write off some of these ministries, out of fear I might add, but the list is very organized and answer some tough questions.

The List:

Countering the Critics

Jim Meritt's list of Bible Contradictions

Countering Bible Contradictions

101 contradictions

Introductions and Outlines to each book of the New Testament

Greenleaf’s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

Using common sense and logic you will be able to understand the common misconceptions made by non believers. What you shouldn't do is depend on mankind for your salvation. The ones that do care about you are the people trying to help you with your relationship with God. If someone is trying to talk you out of the validity of the Bible, like Dan Barker or Sam Harris and the like, one must look at the motives of the individual. An Atheist may claim they want to open your eyes, but they are leading you down a path of destruction. I look for, and usually find, resolutions to passages I do not understand, and trust that there is a resolution for those that I do not.

One tactic for Atheists to claim that God doesn't exist by stating that the Bible has mistakes in it.

First, "[B]iblical documents are 98.5% textually pure. The 1.5% that is in question is mainly nothing more than spelling errors and occasional word omissions. This reduces any serious textual issues to a fraction of the 1.5% and none of these copying errors affects doctrinal truths. Dead Sea Scrolls showed how accurately it was transmitted." ~ carm

Second, an analogy for the failed atheistic "contradictions complaint" would be a debate about: Is there a president of the United States.

My position would be YES there is a President of the United States and furthermore his name is George W. Bush.

The Atheists position would be NO there is no President of the United States and to prove it let me tell you about the failed policies George W. Bush in Iraq and giving tax breaks to the rich and not the poor…

This is not an augment about the President of the United States not existing, this is merely gripes, your complaints about the President of the United States does nothing to prove that the President doesn't exist, and the same is true for Christianity.

To sit and argue about the Bible being full of mistakes, or that there are different interpretations and translations, or God allows certain evils to happen is pointless. These are not arguments to show that God does not exist. These are complaints and gripes.


bit.ly/textuallypure

Doubt itself, the Catalyst for Atheism

We are tempted YES. That doesn't mean we feed those temptations. Always remember the three monkeys, don't allow evil to influence you. Cover up, get away, or remove yourself from false teachings. We don't bring a sex addict to a porn shop, we don't bring a alcoholic to a bar, and we don't feed the doubt, we must continue in FAITH.

Doubt itself, I believe, is the catalyst for atheism.

In the News: Dan Barker and his cronies at Freedom from Religion [Christianity] were in the news yesterday when the Federal Judge threw out their lawsuit. Barker wanted to sue 'Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch' because the courts sometimes order disabled children to the ranch for education and assistance with their mental or troubled needs. It's a ranch that takes in kids that are emotionally/behaviorally disturbed or addicted to substances where all other options has failed. They are a true asset for helping children and have a great success rate. It was Barker's "contention that public money is used to indoctrinate children with religion and the state agencies' referrals to the ranch are unconstitutional." Would you consider Dan Barker's tree of chosen path, good or bad fruit? Does the devil have a firm grip on him?

Barker is the co founder of a secular humanist religious group called 'Freedom from Religion', should be called Freedom from Christ. Barker also wrote a book that I was given the task of reviewing some time ago. Before you ask the answer is yes, I did read it. In his book, "Losing faith in faith" he says the beginning of his atheism began when he started as a preacher, became more of a liberal Christian and kept on doubting (opposite of faith) until "blam" he was an atheist. It was a quite obvious story. Most of you gave me similar stories, most recently Stan.

To make the point clear lets look at the apostles and what they, not to mention the 250 million people in 2007, had or will have to endure, the torture, arrests, be-headings and such. They were put through prosecutions, tribulation, and great turmoils. Yet they kept their Hope and honor and never wavered in their faith.

The Bible talks a great deal of doubt, as you know.

Deuteronomy 28:66 "And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life:"

Matthew 14:31 "And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?"

Luke 12:29 "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind."

Romans 14:23 "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

We must not trust our own lying wickedness, or others, and make sure we are not pushing our own agendas over or replacing God's (a.k.a. denominations or false religions). The thrust of my point though, is about leaving God entirely and abandoning Him.

Faith is a strong belief in a supernatural power that control human destiny, complete confidence in a plan, a loyalty or allegiance to a cause.

Webster says:

1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs.

Faith, in a sense, is synonymous with loyalty and TRUST. In fact the synonyms are: confidence, trust, reliance, conviction, belief, assurance, devotion, loyalty, faithfulness, commitment, fidelity, constancy, fealty, dedication, allegiance.

To doubt God Himself or that Jesus is not Lord is so damaging that this atheism is a move from light to darkness. This is the point that 2 John 7 is clear about.

Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
 
I beg all of you not to depend on, or lose faith because of, anything that mankind has done. We must have faith that God's plan is true and sound and no one will get to Heaven without Jesus as it says in His Word, the authority we should all live by.

James 1:5-8 "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways."

Have you put Jesus on like a parachute?

"Two men are seated in a plane. The first is given a parachute and told to put is on as it would improve his flight. He's a little skeptical at first because he can't see how wearing a parachute in a plane could possibly improve the flight. After a time he decides to experiment and see if the claim is true. As he puts it on he notices the weight of it upon his shoulders and he finds that he has difficulty in sitting upright. However, he consoles himself with the fact that he was told the parachute would improve the flight. So, he decides to give the thing a little time. As he waits he notices that some of the other passengers are laughing at him, because he's wearing a parachute in a plane. He begins to feel somewhat humiliated. As they begin to point and laugh at him and he can stand it no longer, he slinks in his seat, unstraps the parachute, and throws it to the floor. Disillusionment and bitterness fill his heart, because, as far as he was concerned, he was told an outright lie.

The second man is given a parachute, but listen to what he's told. He's told to put it on because at any moment he'd be jumping 25,000 feet out of the plane. He gratefully puts the parachute on; he doesn't notice the weight of it upon his shoulders, nor that he can't sit upright. His mind is consumed with the thought of what would happen to him if he jumped without that parachute.

Let's analyze the motive and the result of each passenger's experience. The first man's motive for putting the parachute on was solely to improve his flight. The result of his experience was that he was humiliated by the passengers; he was disillusioned and somewhat embittered against those who gave him the parachute. As far as he's concerned it'll be a long time before anyone gets one of those things on his back again. The second man put the parachute on solely to escape the jump to come, and because of his knowledge of what would happen to him without it, he has a deep-rooted joy and peace in his heart knowing that he's saved from sure death. This knowledge gives him the ability to withstand the mockery of the other passengers. His attitude towards those who gave him the parachute is one of heart-felt gratitude.

Now listen to what the modern gospel says. It says, "Put on the Lord Jesus Christ. He'll give you love, joy, peace, fulfillment, and lasting happiness." In other words, "Jesus will improve your flight." So the sinner responds, and in an experimental fashion, puts on the Savior to see if the claims are true. And what does he get? The promised temptation, tribulation, and persecution. The other passengers mock him. So what does he do? He takes off the Lord Jesus Christ, he's offended for the word's sake (Mark 4:17), he's disillusioned and somewhat embittered, and quite rightly so. He was promised peace, joy, love, fulfillment, and lasting happiness, and all he got were trials and humiliation. His bitterness is directed toward those who gave him the so-called "good news". His latter end becomes worse than the first: another inoculated and bitter backslider." ~(Hell's Best Kept Secret)

Does this sound familiar? Have you been duped by this doctrine? Have you put Jesus on to comfort your ride?





bit.ly/Jesusparachute

"ism" = Man made?

I was exploring etymology and in relation to religion, I was contemplating that the suffix "ism" is a great indicator that it's man made. I guess the same can go for "ist". There are some smart people reading this, can someone prove me wrong?

Wiki states: "The suffix -ism denotes a distinctive system of beliefs, myth, doctrine or theory that guides a social movement, institution, class or group."

I cannot find an argument to the contrary. Am I simplifying things?

On a side note and in reflection. I for one, am convinced that atheism is a religion: Hitchens takes 'new atheist' gospel to the masses

From the article:

"Christopher Hitchens offered much more, reflecting the growing visibility and muscle of a new breed of atheists spreading their message with evangelical fervor."

No News is Horrible News!

It sure has been quiet after some time the Phoenix Mars Lander landed, performing the tests to find water and a "habitable zone" for life to exist. They aren't searching for life, like humans, to exist but any life would do such as microbial life. I believe the Lander landed May 26th 2008 and all has been quite since.

We all know that the news of life on another planet would be plastered all over the world, without rest, for months even years to come.

They did find what they were looking for but a certain 'U2' song comes to mind for some reason.

One important question would be, Why would we spend many, many millions of dollars trying to prove life exists knowing that the planet is inhospitable? Mars has an average temperature of -50° to -80°F compared to earth's average of 57°F. Mar's atmosphere contains 96% Co2 and only .2% of Oxygen in stark contrast to earth's .04% Co2 and 20% Oxygen. There is nothing on Mars in comparison with earth's sustaining life's atmospheric attributes. Mars's radiation alone is so intense on the surface that it would suffice to destroy the very molecules of life. (This is why they are trying to dig deeper to find life.)

Plainly reading Genesis we understand the life is on earth only. Earth is uniquely constructed to support life. It has been proven to have a well designed, flourishing atmosphere and planetary complexion that is just right for life. So why all the fuss about Mars?

Darwin published 'On the Origin of Species' in 1859 and within a short period of time the evolution revolution began. All academicians began teaching that all life originated from nature, not God. They eventually thought that, since we have a huge universe, the odds would be great that there actually could be life on other planets. After all, they felt life is spontaneous through natural occurrences, right?

Our good friend Mr. Thomas at ICR said "Evolutionary scientists will keep looking for extraterrestrial life because their theory predicts that it should exist. But why is there such a conspicuous lack of evidence for it? The Genesis account of creation remains consistent with what we observe and is the only satisfactory explanation for the presence of life…on earth."

Well said Mr. Thomas, I agree.