Why Believe Jesus?

James Morey asked many questions in a previous conversation. They are all important questions, if someone is honestly seeking answers. We have seen in the past that many are not seeking answers, but seek an argument. There is a difference. While we all love to banter here I thought it would be fitting to answer these questions as a post.

First, James here is a kind man. He questions the morality of hell and Christianity. I believe at one time he claimed "I'm effectively a Buddhist/Taoist."

I am sure its safe to say that his driving force is compassion, moderation, and humility towards others. Unlike Atheists, Buddhists may have some assemblance of moral accountability. To who is another subject to discuss.

Dan,

So you would say, rather that without God there is no basis for morality, without God there would be no morality, period. So all secular or differently religious ethical systems that lead to goodness are ultimately God's doing.

...and is it fair to say that you believe it is simply impossible to be good without God, regardless of whether or not a person believes in the existence of a god?

Would it follow that the ultimate human good, in your mind, is acceptance of Jesus as god/savior, as that is what, all else excepted, "saves" you? You've written that religions that focus on works are "false," and that grace is the sole reason for salvation.

So it ultimately comes down to whether or not a person believes in Jesus as savior or not, other goodness (Godliness, to you) excepted.

...if I understand you correctly. I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is you believe so I don't ask questions of you that aren't germane to your beliefs.

Morey,

Yes, I am claiming that without God there is no good. Now, does it matter if you believe it or not? Not at all. Gravity still exists even if I don't believe in it. So, even if you have a professing atheist, they will still have morality because we have consciences that was given to us by God. Your religion may call it alaya-vijnana although I don't fully understand the term.

>>So it ultimately comes down to whether or not a person believes in Jesus as savior or not, other goodness (Godliness, to you) excepted.

Not at all!! I believed in Jesus for years as a false convert. (James 2:19) The difference is what God says that He will do to save us. Like a gift given to us we have to open it to receive it. First, we must first repent (turn away) from sinning, simply as an understanding how wretched and broken and corrupt that we really are compared to a perfect and loving God. Second, we have to trust Jesus that He did do what He did in sacrifice to save us and trust Him with our lives and our Salvation. If you do that, at that moment and for eternity, you are saved by Christ and you will spend eternity in Heaven. Fight it, deny it, and reject it then there is no other avenue but Hell.

>> I'm avoiding it because theism makes close to zero sense to me and because theistic religions in general strike me as profoundly unfair should they happen to be true.

Ray says that its a legal transaction. You have violated the law (God's Law) and Jesus has paid your fine in full.

Its not just a belief, its an understanding of ourselves and a release of ourselves to Him. Because we are separate from God in sin.

Someone else over at "To The Ends" put it nicely this way "This way back to God is not just a legal transaction, but results in an inner spiritual awakening described as a "new birth" or being "born from above" (John 3:3). This is a personal, spiritual transformation in which inner emptiness and death is replaced by new life, and "all things have become new" (2 Cor. 5:17) The key to accepting this new life is accepting Jesus himself, accepting his resurrection and his claims to be God, and then submitting yourself to his absolute authority as God over your life."

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

On Religions

Moshe over at carm.org said to me in the past, "That is, our religion is from the Creator. It is a result of our hope and trust in God. It is the natural fruit. False religions have stolen from God and not the other way around. False religions have a common denominator and that is there assault on the term "Justification." They are working toward their salvation. We are working as a result of our salvation...

A religion that is pure in the sight of God is a "discipline" which results and originates, from God. We do these things as a result of being justified. We do these things because God has declared us "not guilty" because of the passive/active obedience of the Messiah being given to us as a gift. His works are what save us. In contrast, the religions of the world who deny justification seek to bring their "religious" efforts to God to "save" them.

...We as believers have a beautiful religion because it is a fruit which comes from God. It starts with him and ends with him. Like I said; the religion we show is a result of what God did. It is an external response. For example, we love because he first loved us right? The false religions out there have a completely different gospel. As a result they bring their filthy rags and present then to Gtod thinking they are working their way to God. We have been made clean by [Jesus Christ]. The false religions make themselves clean."

In reference to Hell

>>because you clearly believe that this (Hell) is all not only fair, but just and merciful. Or unfair, but not to us. We're the recipients of your God's unfairness to himself...which I'm trying to make sense of.

Yes its fair. Is it fair to punish the violator of a law? Should the punishment fit the crime? If you see in the newspaper a man getting a small $20.00 fine for an infraction you would assume that the infraction was petty or small. When you find out the fine was for raping and murdering 10 woman in cold blood you would be outraged, as we all would be.

So what is the punishment for one little lie? Hell.

Why is that? Sin is always directly against God. GotQuestions.org puts it this way, "God is an eternal and infinite Being (Psalm 90:2). As a result, all sin requires an eternal punishment. God’s holy, perfect, and infinite character has been offended by our sin. Although to our finite minds our sin is limited in time, to God—who is outside of time—the sin He hates goes on and on. Our sin is eternally before Him and must be eternally punished in order to satisfy His holy justice."

I believe a sinner, without being forgiven of sins, cannot be in the presence of God because he/she would burst into flames (Genesis 32:30). God is perfect so we must be perfect to be in His presence. Without the mediator we would perish (1 Timothy 2:5). Look what happened to Saul (now Paul) he was blinded by God's holy presence of light.

The rich man is a good example of someone that understands the gravity of sinning against God and going to Hell. God loves us (John 3:16) and wants us to be saved from Hell (2 Peter 3:9).



bit.ly/whyJesus

Does God Exist?

Dr. Stephen Meyer did an interview recently that was quite interesting to me. He discusses some of the evidence for ID as we have been talking about here recently so I thought y'all would enjoy some of the points. I enjoyed how he scientifically broke things down to understand the data presented. Anyway, here it is in its entirety to listen to or download for future reference. It may not be up for long so you might want to download it.

I was able to get this from Diane Eble, the one that held the interview. To order the Seminar go to True U Tour. Enjoy.

Part 1

Part 2

Update: Thanks to Rufus we found out that Stephen Meyer was on Praise the Lord recently along with many others, including Ray. Told you there is a God.

Follow this link and check out the program from May 20.

Thursday May 20, 2010
Paul Crouch, Jr. hosts "Creation, Evolution and God In Science Night" with Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, Eric Hovind, Sean McDowell, Greg Koukl, Ray Comfort, Dr. Hugh Ross, Doug Phillips in Costa Mesa, CA. Archives

bit.ly/Godexists

Whining About Wine

I was in a conversation, or battle, with this professing Christan named Wilson over at Triablogue and I thought it would be a good post because of the subject and points that was made about alcohol. This guy that I was talking to is not the point here, even though his ego needed a check, the point was what was said about the consumption of Alcohol.

My points were these:

Is getting drunk a sin? Yes! (1 Corinthians 6:10)

Keep in mind that the blood of Christ is "new wine."

Because of all the parasites in the water back then it was safer to squeeze grapes for drinks but that is called 'new wine' and do you know what new wine is? Grape juice.

Jesus turned water into grape juice. Remember the verses about putting new wine into old skins...(Luke 5:33-39)

Personally, I try to do all things that glorify God and I cannot see drinking hard liquor as glorifying God.

Is tobacco a sin? Probably, if you put it before your kids health, it may be. If you place it before your own health, and lose a leg like my Father In-Law, it may be. Is hoarding, if it causes your kids to be unhealthy or unsafe? Sure. Not being considerate of others can be evil. If you will not give it up for anything or anyone, that you covet it more then God Himself, then sure, it is a sin.

When the Lord spoke about it as favorable in Isaiah 65:8 "Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all." (my emphasis)

Also, a wine press does not create wine, AT ALL!!! A wine press (referenced throughout the Bible) makes grape juice.

Fermenting grapes makes the wine and is called many things because of it. Other terms fermented wine is referenced in the Bible as: Wine, Strong drink, Vinegar of wine, Vinegar of strong drink, Liquor of grapes, Dried grapes, The kernels, The husk.

This was not a conversation about Kashrut but look what it says in Numbers 6:3-5 "He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried.

All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk. "

To avoid Fermented grapes "until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the LORD, he shall be holy,"

To be Holy is to separate yourself from fermented grapes!!

To be a drunkard is a sin and you are anything but a Christian if you are one. (1 Corinthians 6:10)

Does that mean that whoever drinks a glass of wine is going to hell? Of course not, but if you are an alcoholic and you are tempting yourself with wine that leads to other things then you may be sinning.

Look at Hosea 9:2 and Proverbs 3:10 Do you see that the Bible makes a distinction between wine and new wine to let us know the difference between fermented wine and grape juice? Jesus taught that new wine was not put into old bottles because they couldn’t expand with the pressure. (Matthew 9:17) Right?

Because the fermentation process, yeast acts on the sugar in the grapes to produce alcohol and carbon dioxide which builds pressure. According to the Bible, new wine is, therefore, not fermented. Also, the Lord's Supper was grape juice, evidenced because when Jesus spoke of the "fruit of the vine" (Matthew 26:29) He was speaking of new wine. He didn't even use the term wine, but fruit.

Logic also says that the fermentation of wine is the result of adding yeast, a leavening agent, to the grape juice to make alcohol. Correct?

At the supper of unleavened bread, do you think the Lord would offer a drink made with yeast?

There is no way He would logically do that. Grape Juice is new wine.

bit.ly/Whinewine

Free eBook: Signature of Controversy

I received, in an email, an invitation to review a new eBook called "Signature of Controversy". I was going to read it before posting it but I see Brian has posted it, so I might as well also.

Signature of Controversy is a free eBook with contributions by David Berlinski, David Klinghoffer, Casey Luskin, Paul Nelson, Jay Richards, Richard Sternberg and Stephen Meyer. It contains responses critics of Stephen Meyer's book Signature in the Cell.

Download the PDF ebook here. (expires soon)

Enjoy.

Check out more Stephen Meyer resources here. Including the full mp3 audio of the book, Signature in the Cell.

Hat tip to Apologetics315.

Also, if you care, you could join the online interview being offered.

Why Are We Even Here?

Wem quoted Strombringer's profile:"I define manhood simply: men should be tough, fair, and courageous, never petty, never looking for a fight, but never backing down from one, either." — John Wayne

I love that quote! You get, at the very least, 10 points for that one.

Like a good snowball fight, flinging poo can be entertaining, but it distracts from the issue we are discussing. In an academic debate, no one can do it better then Aykroyd and Curtin, they are extremely entertaining so don't even try to top them.



Ask yourself if the points made were valid and strong arguments. Do we even care what the points were after that hysterical banter?

Why are we here? I am here to Debunk Atheists, but I also believe we are here for something else. Do you know what that is? Do you know why we are here?

Evolution, Smoking Gun?

Reynold said: >>Oh yeah, Dan. I'm still waiting for your evidence that the "false claims" on that site I gave earlier are actually "false".

Well the Bible, my authority, claims something entirely different so I am going with that. I don't claim to know all things and I cannot explain half of the finding but you must admit, in intellectual honesty, that the data we have available to us can be interpreted into two different worldviews. That is why we are able to have thriving organizations like the Creation Museum, AIG, IRC, Bio-Complexity, ISCID, Origins.org, People of the likes of Pvblivs, Discovery Institute, Intelligent Design Network, Access Research Network and a plethora of others, flourishing and continuing to make headway in science, even if they have to go it alone without the governments backing them, like the secular scientists have.

IF, big IF, you all were doing your jobs correctly, evolution would have shut us all up years ago. We are still waiting.

Where is the smoking gun?

Really? After all these years you cannot even come close to really showing evidence for evolution that shuts us all down and closes our doors? Are you ALL really that inept?

For example, we all see a fossil of a leaf, or a fish eating another fish.

Evolutionists "interpret" it as sedimentary layers slowly laid down over a period of millions of years while simultaneously preventing the decay of rotting flesh or plants in some miraculous way to form a fossil.

Creationists see a rapid burial through some event that just so happens to be pointed out in a myriad of nations legends, archeological finds (Ahora Covenant Inscription), and books of antiquity (Ogygian deluge, Plato in his Laws, Book III), including the Bible. We only have to go into our back yard to see leaves that decay in a few short days.

Let me know and I will make you a fossil in my backyard with a little concrete.

We all see the bias displayed with headlines like "70 million-year-old fossil yields preserved blood vessels"

O'rly? Is that your smoking gun? I can go on and on but you get the point. There is zero evidence that knocks us on the ground to the point we cannot get up. Archeology and Science are both showing strong evidence for the Biblical claims daily. We are no going anywhere, but you are. We have patience.

I need to add the survey of failed evolutionary predictions.

The Bible, Bunch of Fairy Tales

Oh, how many time have I heard from Atheists that the Bible is just a bunch of Fairy Tales...

“Have you ever heard of anyone in history being imprisoned or executed for distributing copies of Grimm’s fairy tales? What would you say if you’d heard that copies of The Iliad and The Odyssey had been banned in Saudi Arabia and North Korea? Imagine people trying to smuggle copies of Hans Christian Andersen’s works into China? Such ideas are comical, but the Bible, which has been called a mere collection of myths and fairy tales, has suffered all of these fates. Throughout history and even today, copies of the Bible are banned and burned, and those possessing it are persecuted and imprisoned. There’s something about this ancient book that threatens and frightens those in power, especially those who use power to oppress people weaker than themselves. And they have every reason to be frightened.”

Eric Metaxas, Everything You Always Wanted to Know about God (Colorado Springs, 2005), page 155.

bit.ly/Biblefairytales

Worldview Quote-Presumptuousness

"To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false.... All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists." (Outspoken Atheist-Kai Nielsen)

"Atheist’s denial of God’s existence needs just as much substantiation as does the theist’s claim; the atheist must give plausible reasons for rejecting God’s existence." (Paul Copan)

bit.ly/presumptuousness

The Evolutionary Paradigm Breeds Atheists

They have no where else to go. There entire industry, careers, and grants are geared to the paradigm of evolution. If wrong, then there is a Creator. These points were discussed in the article named "What Do Scientists Really Think?" that reviews a new book called,

Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think.

We get some of the insight and opinions of secular scientists for example, that was quoting the book, "None of the religious scientists I talked with supported the theory of intelligent design. (94% of religious scientists think that evolution is the best explanation for the development of life on earth)." (pp. 29-30).

Why would they? As Expelled, the Movie points out they would be laughed out, or fired, for such blasphemy towards science. Little do they know science was encouraged in the original Christian universities that searches for the 'Fingerprints Of God'.

Harvard and Yale (originally Puritan) and Princeton (originally Presbyterian) once had rich Christian histories.

Harvard was named after a Christian minister. Yale was started by clergymen, and Princeton’s first year of class was taught by Reverend Jonathan Dickinson. Princeton’s crest still says “Dei sub numine viget,” which is Latin for “Under God she flourishes.”(AIG)

Yea, 'under God she flourishes' and not under God, they will fail. Evidenced by the current Evolutionary Paradigm. Evolution is the biggest lie ever perpetuated on mankind, besides man causing global warming that is.

Someone that reviewed the book said "Perhaps its most surprising finding is that nearly a quarter of the atheists and agnostics describe themselves as 'spiritual.'"

O'rly? Closet Christians? No such animal.

The author, Elaine Ecklund, attempts to show that "Only a small minority are actively hostile to religion. Ecklund reveals how scientists-believers and skeptics alike-are struggling to engage the increasing number of religious students in their classrooms and argues that many scientists are searching for "boundary pioneers" to cross the picket lines separating science and religion."

Our War-Abortion

YCRBYCHI

An Aids victim pleaded with Mother Theresa as she made her rounds in the hospice, to pray for a cure for Aids. Mother Theresa replied, "I have already prayed to God for healing for Aids, and God's answer to me was "the one I sent to you was aborted in his mother's womb"

Get Involved!!!

Update: As a follow up I was just told of a movie that will be coming out soon.



Show your support at bloodmoneyfilm.com

Individuals and family members are often hurt emotionally following an abortion. If you, or someone you know, needs help, please contact Abortion Recovery InterNational (1-866-4-My-Recovery)

bit.ly/ourwar

Ask And You Shall Receive...BIO-Complexity

Dr. Dembski at Uncommon Decent alerted us to a group that is undertaking a new endeavor.

I cannot tell you how many Atheists have asked for real peer reviewed scientific papers on Biblical Creation or the lesser, Intelligent Design. Many Atheists I know, religiously, rely on science as their ONLY source of life's questions.

Well my friends, this year introduces the new:

BIO-Complexity

From their Purpose link:

"BIO-Complexity is a peer-reviewed scientific journal with a unique goal. It aims to be the leading forum for testing the scientific merit of the claim that intelligent design (ID) is a credible explanation for life."

Young-earth creationists (YECs) and the Intelligent Design Movement (IDM) are natural allies in many ways, although we have major differences as well. There is a distinct difference between what I believe, as a Young Earth Creationist, and what proponents of Intelligent Design believe, mainly IDM avoids appealing to the Bible as authoritative "special revelation".

Things for us all to look for are, for example, in the condition of complexity, variety and adaptability in living organisms and ecological systems where the Creation Model espouses that inherent and complete in original populations as created; manifested (and subject to degradation) over time through genetic variation and natural selection. The Evolutionary Model espouses that it increased over time from zero via DNA copying errors (i.e., mutations), natural selection, and millions of years and both are empirically falsifiable.

In the Condition of Massive amounts of Coded Genetic Information, again the Creation Model espouses that inherent and complete in original populations as created; sum total has steadily declined over time via mutational degradation and the Evolutionary Model espouses that increased over time from zero, via DNA copying errors (i.e., mutations), natural selection, and millions of years. Again both of these are empirically falsifiable. (True Origins)

Will these conditions be addressed? Only time, and funding, will tell. This, for now, is the best hope for the Atheists to find, their much desired, extrabiblical truth.

Maybe it would be a good idea for the Atheists to support this effort financially.

Maybe, just maybe, future findings could help the Atheists change their viewpoint of our origins. I will not hold my breath, but I will always remain hopeful for all of you. Your lives, as you all claim, dogmatically depends on that information.

bit.ly/IDMBio

Prophet Muhammad, Pee Be Upon Him

It was interesting that Matt and Trey, creators of South Park, were threatened by the rabid Islamic radicals.

The worse part of the story was the Comedy Central or really the owners, Viacom, was protecting this Muhammad who was an illiterate, racist, murderer, and a pedophile!

Did Viacom give the same respect to Jesus? Nope!

RevolutionMuslim.com posted the warnings which included a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad disguised in a bear suit. The Web posting also included a graphic photo of Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker who was murdered in 2004 after making a documentary on violence against Muslim women.

"We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show," the posting reads. "This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."

Since then RevolutionMuslim.com has retracted their original stance and back peddled a bit. Or was that a lie? I guess this would be a good time to add this:



We all know very well that Allah does not equal Yahweh either.

Now the real point here, and to add insult to injury, the weak, cowardice, and biased owners of Comedy Central, Viacom, decided to censor Matt and Trey when it comes to the prophet Muhammad but not Buddha doing lines of coke or the thousands of digs, throughout the years, at Jesus. What gives Viacom? Scared much? Hypocrite much?

Did "the media" cover that point at all? Nope! Scared of Viacom much?

The purpose of the South Park episodes, 200 and 201, was to criticize political correctness in our society, where it is OK to criticize Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc., but not OK to criticize Islam or Muhammad. Also in the episode "The Cartoon Wars" Muhammad's image was censored, while the show depicted Jesus defecating.

Well, instead of the hilarious bear suit, I will help Matt and Trey with the freedoms, that they deserve, and post their depiction of Muhammad. Muhammad is the one on the right, pee be upon him. If we keep allowing people to censor our viewpoints, then it is a slap in the face of God and our Founding Fathers to have freedom to speak.

If I choose to be an ass, that is my choice to do so and it is backed by the Constitution. Nobody has any right to threaten, or stop, those freedoms.

I had my own run in with the anti-Constitutional Viacom. It seems that Viacom didn't want me to post any of their videos discussing Dr. Ron Paul and they had Youtube shut my account down. I followed the counter-notice procedures. I said to Youtube that it was OK to give the complainants my name and address to sue me. If Viacom didn't respond to my letter then I would get my account back. Viacom's lawyers called me and told me to retract my counter notice and they wouldn't sue me. I said NO, that they had to call off the wolves and I would just delete their content but I wanted my account restored. It was a comprise that I didn't want to do but it would be hard to prove the "fair use act" before the primaries and I wanted Dr. Paul messages out there.

After a week Viacom called and said they didn't want to go to court for this and I said I wanted my account back so if that meant suing me then go ahead. Viacom agreed to not respond to my letter if I agreed to delete their Comedy Central videos and my account would be restored. I reluctantly agreed.

The people who were the most instrumental in helping me out in researching my options on what to do with Viacom was a beautiful person who really cared about me named Eva Galperin with EFF.ORG these are great people and deserve our support and donations. She pointed me to a wealth of information at chillingeffects.org and was instrumental in helping me WIN against Viacom. Thanks Eva you will always have my support and I will tell EVERYONE about your so very important organization. God bless everyone at EFF.ORG

Shame on you Viacom. We are watching you, "pee be upon you" and that is tonight's word.

UPDATE: After posting this, I found out that May 20th is Draw Muhammad day. They have made a Facebook link to upload them.


bit.ly/peebeupon

The Problem of Evil Atheism

From antiquity to today, the evil in the world has always been a powerful mandate for evolutionary thinking. God would not have designed or created this evil world, so it must have originated by the blind play of natural law. For centuries this solution has fueled atheism, but from where did evil-ness come?

The evil in the world is obvious and upsetting. Atheists, no less than others and perhaps even more so, are exercised by creation's terrors. Earthquakes and tsunamis kill thousands, diseases terrorize, floods destroy and droughts starve. Then there is the seemingly unending narrative of predation in the biological world. Nature is red in tooth and claw, as Lord Tennyson put it.

Atheists often proclaim this problem of evil as a justification for their beliefs but ironically this evil is as much a problem for atheism as it is a motivation. The problem is that atheism fails to...Read More.

Tea Party Thieves?

Just noticed something called a Tea Party Barbie online that was posted on April 12th.


But that seemed awfully familiar to something I saw posted on April 8th by Jen McCreight over at Blag Hag.



Which came first? You be the judge.

The Tea Party was allegedly created with the tag line to "take back America," with this new evidence they might do that by stealing it.

Worldview Quote- Nowhere To Go But...

George Wald (1906 - 1997) Professor of Biology at Harvard University and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine said:

The reasonable view was to believe in spontaneous generation; the only alternative, to believe in a single, primary act of supernatural creation. There is no third position. For this reason many scientists a century ago chose to regard the belief in spontaneous generation as a "philosophical necessity." It is a symptom of the philosophical poverty of our time that this necessity is no longer appreciated. Most modern biologists, having reviewed with satisfaction the downfall of the spontaneous generation hypothesis, yet unwilling to accept the alternative belief in special creation, are left with nothing. "The origin of life" Scientific American August 1954 p.46

Two for Tuesday:

Mao Tse-tung: "Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977)




Rhiggs,

>>Call me pedantic, but shouldn't a series of posts called "God Quote of the Day" feature quotes about God, and be posted every day?

OK pedantic, you're right, I will call it "Worldview Quote" instead. I hope that appeases the logic gods. Forgive me.

What Is One Little Lie?

God's Commandments are being violated if you lie.

By lying you violate the 5th, (by dishonoring your parents by lying) the 9th, the 2nd (created a god to suite yourself), and the 1st Commandment. (Didn't put God first)

When you steal you violate the 5th, the 8th, the 2nd, and the 1st Commandments.

By breaking a Commandment it actually is blasphemous to God. We are made in his image after all, so God sins? There goes the 3rd also.

If we really think about it, we are even violating the 4th since Jesus is now our Sabbath Rest. (Matthew 11:28-30, Hebrews 4:9-10) We are not "keeping it Holy" (Exodus 20:8) so there it goes. When you sin you are breaking, which ever sin PLUS, the first 5 Commandments.

You are breaking a great deal of Commandments with one simple lie.

Let's compound that. Let's just say, you break God's Laws (Lie, steal, lust, or covet) 5 times a day. You lied once, lusted once, stole something, etc. In one year, that would be 1,825 sins. If you live to 85 and started sinning at, lets just say age 15, @ 70 years of sinning you would have broken God Laws 127,750 times.

Compounded again, if you sinned one time, and thus breaking 5 other Commandments each time totaling 6 sins, and did that 5 times a day that would be 766,500 sins in a lifetime!!!

Now take that times just 6 billion people and that is some 4.6 quadrillion sins for the planet on an average.

Now, lets multiply that by many generations throughout history...

Dude, that is a lot of sins!!!

You're made in God's image. When you lie, you're calling God a liar.

Now can you see that sinning is not just a little thing? Its a big, big deal!!



bit.ly/onelittlelie

NASA Will Be Supporting Creationism!!

Does NASA support Creationism?

In a wild turn around NASA will soon be promoting, and funding, Creationism.

NASA apparently felt they could do just what the movie "Expelled" exposed.

In this PR nightmare, supervisors at NASA’s prestigious Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) decided to violate someones First Amendment rights and in turn will be paying for, and bringing attention to, the subject of Creationism. Wahoo!

We just love when Government agencies do this. It just shows the foresight that our Founding Fathers had to protect our rights as individuals against large entities and Government organizations.

David Coppedge was a “Team Lead” Systems Administrator on the Cassini mission until JPL demoted him for allegedly “pushing religion” by loaning interested co-workers DVDs supportive of intelligent design.

Coppedge is now suing for religious discrimination, harassment and retaliation; violation of his free speech rights; and wrongful demotion.

“Anyone who thinks that today’s culture of science allows an open discussion of evolution is sorely mistaken,” said Dr. John G. West, associate director of the Center for Science and Culture. “When it comes to intelligent design, private and government-run agencies are suppressing free speech.” [complete article]

I was wondering if this is the same David Coppedge who is continuing his Father's ministry? Dr. James Fletcher Coppedge, Jr. wrote a book on the subject of molecular biology and the laws of chance. If it is, I am sure the money will be put to good use.

Thanks Government!

Worldview Quote -Unintelligent Design

"I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question, and this cannot possibly be done here." (Charles Darwin, Introduction, On the Origin of Species 1859)

Two for Tuesday:

"Directed by all-powerful selection, chance becomes a sort of providence, which, under the cover of atheism, is not named but which is secretly worshiped." (Grasse, Pierre-Paul (1977) Evolution of Living Organisms, p. 107 Academic Press, New York, N.Y.)

Worldview Quote

Colin Patterson (1933 – 1998) Senior Palaeontologist at British Museum of Natural History

"Just as pre-Darwinian biology was carried out by people whose faith was in the Creator and His plan, post-Darwinian biology is being carried out by people whose faith is in, almost, the deity of Darwin. They've seen their task as to elaborate his theory and to fill the gaps in it, to fill the trunk and twigs of the tree. But it seems to me that the theoretical framework has very little impact on the actual progress of the work in biological research. In a way some aspects of Darwinism and of neo-Darwinism seem to me to have held back the progress of science." The Listener October 8, 1981 p.392

How about a two for Tuesday:

Michael Egnor Professor of Neurosurgery at Stony Brook

"I never use evolutionary biology in my work. Would I be a better surgeon if I assumed that the brain arose by random events? Of course not. Doctors are detectives. We look for patterns, and in the human body, patterns look very much like they were designed. Doctors know that, from the intricate structure of the human brain to the genetic code, our bodies show astonishing evidence of design. That’s why most doctors -- nearly two-thirds according to national polls -- don’t believe that human beings arose merely by chance and natural selection. Most doctors don’t accept evolutionary biology as an adequate explanation for life. Doctors see, first-hand, the design of life." Evolution News & Views: March 2007

I Saw Jesus!

Well His 3D image anyway. I don't know who caught this, but I found the whole show on Youtube. It probably won't be there for long but I did find it interesting. If it disappears just go to Youtube, or Google, and search for "real face of Jesus Ray Downing" to find something on it.

Is that Him? I will look for Him in the future to see if it was.

UPDATE:

Zilch commented: >> That's already been determined to be of medieval provenance. Very interesting to be sure, and very clever, but a fake.

You are only giving half the story. Now, I will give you the benefit of doubt to the facts that you may not have heard, but the Shroud is the real deal.

What you claim was the headlines all over the world but something was discovered and the original scientists agree with the finding that the shroud was actually repaired and dyed at one point

This has been confirmed by many people in the field including the original scientist that performed the experiment named John L. Brown who hurriedly spent his remaining days refuting the original, and flawed, findings.

From another study it says:

Rogers discovered evidence of nearly invisible mending: dyestuff and spliced thread. Just to be sure, he sent samples to John L. Brown, formerly Principal Research Scientist at the Georgia Tech Research Institute's Energy and Materials Sciences Laboratory. Working independently and using different methods, Brown agreed with Rogers. He wrote: This would appear to be obvious evidence of a medieval artisan’s attempt to dye a newly added repair region of fabric to match the aged appearance of the remainder of the Shroud.

The findings were verified and replicated that the original had been altered. The new finding are irrefutable but unfortunately they did not get the "press coverage" the original, though flawed, findings got.

So please tell the whole story and do not propagate a story half told. This stands as another reason not to trust the science publishing of men. When found to be incorrect, the damage has already been done. The recanting is much like a retraction in a news paper that is buried deep in the unpopular section with a " we made a mistake" that gets lost and unread.

The Shroud of Turin is the real deal.

The Joke is on the Government!

Apparently today the "fools" are the Government.



Thanks infowars.com

The court ruling here says it all. "Because the Million Dollar Bill does not pose any resonable risk of fraud, nor does it pose a risk of facilitating would-be counterfeiters it does NOT violate 18 USC 474 or 475."

The Judge adds "Secret Service Agents violated the fourth Amendment by seizing the Million Dollar Bills from GNN's Office without a Warrant or Valid Consent"

Ray said "This week a Judge ruled in favor of GNN and ordered the return of the 8,300 Gospel tracts!

We thank God that the Judge also ruled that our tracts are NOT violations of the counterfeiting law (the basis for the illegal search and seizure). Additionally, Judge Solis stated that two of the Secret Service agents "conspired together" to cover up their actions, including lying on the stand."

So our Government will possibly have to pay for this Ministry's legal fees and GNN has the right to sue for damages that extend into the millions. (get it?)

So this Government will, by proxy, fund the ministry of Christianity! Bwahahahahahah

God, you crack me up. Thanks for the smiles.

Atheists Adopted a Worldview That Science Never Intended

"The Darwinian revolution was not merely the replacement of one scientific theory by another, as had been the scientific revolutions in the physical sciences, but rather the replacement of a world view, in which the supernatural was accepted as a normal and relevant explanatory principle, by a new world view in which there was no room for supernatural forces."

--Ernst Mayr (1904 – 2005) Professor of Zoology at Harvard University

I just read an article that backed up this quote.

The article was called The Burden of Proof: How Atheism Has Adopted a Worldview That Science Never Intended

"I assume that most atheists, who are generally intelligent people, are smart enough to realize that standing from the sidelines and claiming that there is no value in something that they do not practice themselves is not a defensible position. Atheists obviously don't know the value of spiritual practice, because they don't experience its value. Its a bit like someone who has sat idle in front of a computer for most of their lives telling a soccer player that there's no value in soccer. Coming from a non-soccer player, the statement means absolutely nothing..."

"...When and where, in the history of science, do our greatest scientists tell us that one should live their lives believing only in that which can be proven? Who of them has said that it is more 'intelligent' to accept nothing in life but modern western scientific proof?"

It was certainly worth the read.

Worldview Quote

A lively Atheist named Antzilla said to me

"I mean for people thousands or even hundreds of years ago to believe this crap I understand. But today 2010 ACE (AC) with all the knowledge available to believe creationism you would have to really, really try to bypass your intellect or have no intellect, or be brainwashed since a child."

Then he quoted, I believe, another Atheist Brad Reddekopp "If people don't want their beliefs laughed at, then they shouldn't have such funny beliefs"

I gave him a couple of recent quotes to help him along. Then after reading some more quotes that were quite inspirational, I thought it would be good to include some as a post now and then. So now I feel the need to highlight the champions that stand on God's Word and possibly face persecution in their fields for doing so.

The first one a couple of days ago was Robert Jastrow (b. 1925) PhD. Physics, recipient of NASA Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement.

"At present, science has no satisfactory answer to the question of the origin of life on the earth. Perhaps the appearance of life on the earth is a miracle. Scientists are reluctant to accept that view, but their choices are limited; either life was created on the earth by the will of a being outside the grasp of scientific understanding, or it evolved on our planet spontaneously, through chemical reactions occurring in nonliving matter lying on the surface of the planet. The first theory places the question of the origin of life beyond the reach of scientific inquiry. It is a statement of faith in the power of a Supreme Being not subject to the laws of science. The second theory is also an act of faith. The act of faith consists in assuming that the scientific view of the origin of life is correct, without having concrete evidence to support that belief."

Until the Sun Dies (1977) pp. 62-63

Today the quote is from John Lennox (Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford and Fellow in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science)

"The fact that there are scientists who appear to be at war with God is not quite the same as science itself being at war with God. For example, some musicians are militant atheists. But does that mean music itself is at war with God? Hardly. The point here may be expressed as follows: Statements by scientists are not necessarily statements of science. Nor, we might add, are such statements necessarily true; although the prestige of science is such that they are often taken to be so."

God's Undertaker (2007) p.18

bit.ly/GodQuote

The Environment

We were having a discussion on the environment and I thought it would be better to voice my opinion on the matter. Now, I was going to point out the recent discoveries of the lies told in the name of the global warming and the whole cap and tax (trade) scenario and such but then I remembered what George Carlin said about it that almost mirrored what my beliefs about this subject were. Now, if we take out the belief of God in this manner, that the earth is 4 billion years old, and the occasional cuss word, Carlin's and my viewpoints about the arrogant environmentalists are pretty spot on. Save the planet? Give us a break.



WARNING!!! ***Strong language and uncensored material not meant for sensitive ears.***

Update: There is nothing we could do to destroy this planet at all!! Nature itself is far, far, more hostile then little ol us.

There is methane in the ocean that would destroy this planet's life in a few moments if it were to melt or be brought to the surface (like from an earthquake). There is toxic waste in the form of sulfur that will choke the life out of any of us if spewed into the atmosphere from a volcano. Earthquakes, Tsunamis, and Super Volcanoes are just a short few that could wipe us from the planet and all of science agrees that it will happen, it is just a matter of when. The evidence for a hostile planet is all there for us to see.

Not to mention that our destructive behavior will probably be our own demise anyway. So where do we stand in all of this? Nowhere. There is no need to crap and tax, there is no need to worry about any of it, because it will play out.

We all understand that Egypt, and the Sahara desert, was once was a forest, right? The planet changes and we just need to change with it...or cry about it.

"Carbon monoxide is a byproduct of the basic process whereby silicon is prepared from silicon dioxide"

Geek hypocrites. Get off the internet, you are destroying our environment!

Does Allah = Yahweh?

This presentation will add to my previous post about False Religions.

Matthew 7:13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it."

The Muslims of today use to be the Pagans in the Biblical days bit.ly/NotAllah

Is America a Christian Nation?

If you don't have the time to watch or listen, the Cliff notes says yes it certainly is.

I remember posting the following in a past post but it stands true in this subject and is worth repeating.

What is Truth?

Evolutionists Were Wrong Again

Once again it was reported today that Evolutionists were wrong about something... yet again.

Evidently the "Scientists find big differences in Y chromosomes of men, chimps"

I did find the first comment in the article spot on when it says:

"No, it may indicate that the human didn't come from the ape to begin with.

Funny how that logical possibility didn't even occur to them."

This article reminded me of another article that I read last year called

Evolution of the appendix: A biological 'remnant' no more.

In a past post it was mentioned that "Evolutionary theory artificially rules out a kind of cause before it has a chance to speak by the evidence. The cause of intelligence. This is why they pigeon hole themselves and scientists often wear, with pride, the title of metaphysical naturalism. Does anyone now see the dangers of scientists taking philosophical positions such as this?"

Someday, hopefully soon, they will understand they are going down a rabbit hole and getting deeper and deeper into a failed religion of falsehood.

bit.ly/wrongagain

Richard Dawkins is a bigot

I just read something entertaining from an Atheist and thought I would link to it for the Dick fans out there.

Even some Atheists are noticing and exposing this joker. That is quite refreshing.

Richard Dawkins is a bigot

2010 AD

I hope everyone had a great year as we start another. In reflection, I was amazed how much in denial that Atheists were about many subjects that dealt with God. I have learned a great deal about the Atheistic mindset since I started this blog.

I also found it fascinating that Atheists cannot even bring themselves to say anything that relates to Jesus. It appears to infuriate them. In these past years, some have blasphemed His name, call Him derogatory names instead of being respectful by calling Him Jesus, God, Yahweh, Elohim, Yahshua, or Yeshua bar Yosef, for these are fighting words for the Atheists apparently.

They even had to rename our dating system for themselves to fit their worldview and now attempts to disguise it and use CE (Common Era) and BCE (before Common Era) instead of what it always has been, BC (before Christ) and AD or Anno Domini (Latin for "In the year of our Lord").

So when you were celebrating this New year we all understand that you were really celebrating, another year in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ!

Deny it all you want, find some intellectually palatable means to disguise something, but denial is just that.

I believe it was Steven Weinberg who said, in a interview with Jonathan Miller, that "there is a mystery" in life, "why that theory and not another?" That, as scientists, "we are permanently in a tragic position of not being able to fully understand the reasons of things being the way they are." Dr. Weinberg believes that there is no necessary conflict with science and religion since he knows many scientists that are believers of God.

He did say, poetically I might add, "Science didn't make religion impossible, but it made irreligious possible." I would say the same for evolution.

Dr. Weinberg said "I don't like God" of the Bible. From his vantage point God is a "terrible Character". Right after 9/11/01 he said religion by force is very dangerous and religions with that worldview are the dangerous ones, like radical Islamic believers. He also said that "most physicists cannot call themselves practicing Atheists" for that reason.

He said "As a scientist I care about searching for truth and the theory of the world. Christianity provides an alternative theory of the world. Now that, I have something to say about, I can interact with, I can respond to. On the other hand, if someone just doesn't want to eat pork or kill cows (like Hinduism), or whatever it is, then more power to them, it has nothing to do with me, there is no argument there."

I believe that is why we, as fundamentalist Atheists and Christians, enjoy discussing these things with each other. Because we cannot do anything without a theory. There is no discussion without them. That is why these liberal Christians are not as enjoyable to have a conversations with, because they believe in anything that comes along without standing on a theory.

Speaking of liberal Christians, Dr. Henry Morris said "Perhaps the more sad commentary is that only Christian scholars compromise their position on the creation of the world. The evolutionists and atheists do not."

So as we go into a new decade of Debunking Atheists, keep in mind that the Atheists are not the same as science. Science is attempting to figure out the theory of the world, Atheists are attempting to push their own worldview, agenda, or as I say religion.

bit.ly/2010AD

The Rise of Atheism (Unhappiness)

There is some statistics that are relevant to recent discussion about kids and religion. The results in the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) were interesting and quite revealing. Apparently the comparison of past to present claims of religious status is changing America in a big way.

An article said that, So many Americans claim no religion at all (15%, up from 8% in 1990), that this category now outranks every other major U.S. religious group except Catholics and Baptists. In a nation that has long been mostly Christian, "the challenge to Christianity … does not come from other religions but from a rejection of all forms of organized religion," the report concludes.

The same study concluded that we, as Christians, are staying about the same. This is probably because we are already written in the Book of Life in ink that cannot be erased.

So, this report also shows that actual soundly saved Christians do not have much fluctuation in beliefs and do not fall away and become ex-Christians as some Atheists attempt to claim.

The percentage of those who choose a generic label, calling themselves simply Christian, Protestant, non-denominational, evangelical or "born again," was 14.2%, about the same as in 1990.

Also, a study has found that spirituality and higher levels of religious behavior account for 5% of an adult's happiness. The results of the UBC study came as a surprise: to 16.5% of children's happiness can be accounted for by spirituality.

"From our perspective, it's a whopping big effect," said Holder. "I expected it to be much less — I thought their spirituality would be too immature to account for their well-being."
The less happier you are, the less God is in your life. Do you now see a void of hope in the lie of Atheism? Where is the justification for those Death Camps? So why don't you let those kids choose happiness/spirituality instead of indoctrinating them? Let them grow up and choose for themselves. What do you have against happiness?

Banana Dick Debate Continues

[click picture to play]

We all recently handed out some books at the Universities and Ray is catching some rude comments for doing so. Ray has asked to "keep Richard Dawkins in your prayers. Our aim isn't to make him an enemy, but to see him converted before he goes to meet his Maker."

On that same subject, apparently Ray also allowed an interview with the Friendly Atheist if you wish to check it out.

Also, consistent with his so called "scientific approach" to evidence, Dawkins asked all his atheist friends to rip out the introduction instead of examining the evidence presented in Ray's Origin of Species.

bit.ly/BananaDick

Atheists Borrow From Christianity, Yet Again

According to Times Online,

"The two children chosen to front Richard Dawkins’s latest assault on God could not look more free of the misery he associates with religious baggage. With the slogan “Please don’t label me. Let me grow up and choose for myself”, the youngsters with broad grins seem to be the perfect advertisement for the new atheism being promoted by Professor Dawkins and the British Humanist Association."

"Except that they are about as far from atheism as it is possible to be. The Times can reveal that Charlotte, 8, and Ollie, 7, are from one of the country’s most devout Christian families"

"A spokeswoman for the BHA admitted that the images had been taken from a photo website, and said it was unaware of the religious beliefs of the young models."

Silly Dick.

Also a valid point was made in a follow up article. "It’s a fantasy to imagine that children can be raised in a philosophically neutral environment without some dominant world-view."

"Contemporary secular humanists are largely unable to explain to children why their freedom and autonomy have any significance, why their life has any meaning – and this is why the exaltation of freedom proposed in this poster feels a bit hollow. If you really want your children to be free, you need to tell them why their freedom matters, and help them appreciate some of the values they might pursue. And to do that, you need to use at least a few labels."

Forcing Dick's agenda on children is dogmatic as any religion out there. From a Washington Post article "The American Humanist Association has a real problem with the public expression of religion. Yet, it's website says the organization is celebrating "a new kind of holiday tradition." The AHA is holding "the first-ever nation-wide humanist holiday" to "promote the humanist movement and our ethical life philosophy." The organization has its own philosophy, holidays, and is on a proselytizing campaign to convert others to follow its belief system......sounds a lot like a religion to me."

Atheism is a religion indeed.

Epigenetic Switches

I did a post a while ago called Science needs a better god. I was pointing out how man is intervening with the natural order that God set out. The adverse effects of such manipulations with genetic engineering are yet to be determined and may pose a real problem with mankind.

We also recently, in the comments of a past post, were discussing IVF's and abortions. It reminded me of this show I watched on PBS a while back. I was able to find it and I will link to it here.

The old saying of "you are what you eat" is not fully accurate anymore. A more accurate saying would be "your grandchildren are what you eat" There is something going on in the science industry that is fascinating. They are discovering something called Epigenetic switches in our epigenome, in that, the environment has a huge role in the development of many generations.

In relation to the IVF's that we were discussing they have found diseases to form by the mere fact that the kids were IVF babies. God's perfect plan is being manipulated and pushed aside for our desires and the results are bad. We must trust God.

God has designed a system that, if manipulated improperly, has very dire and adverse consequences. While the scientists of today genetically alter our milk, vegetables, meats, our environment through pesticides and insecticides, and such could trigger some of these switches that can be dire for our grandchildren survival. Vaccines may be causing more harm then we could ever imagine. Our intake, our stresses, our lifestyles all effect our great grandchildren.

Mankind is manipulating the environment too much.

Also in an older post, called In the cult of science, it was pointed out "Technology and science, though they are cumulative and have improved, in many ways, the lives of people within the industrialized nations, have also unleashed the most horrific forms of violence and death, and let's not forget, environmental degradation, in human history."

The negative effects of these manipulations are yet to be fully understood. We may see some horrible things happen to our families in the near future. Our genomes are being manipulated at an alarming rate and should be understood better before blatant, if any, manipulation.

We hear in commercials of all these 'serious' side effects warnings that the pharmaceuticals have on our bodies, one can only imagine what effect they will have on our great grandchildren.

So who do you trust God or man's plan?

Please watch the show. It will be worth it and may get you to think of the lifestyle that you are living. We are truely the ambassadors to our genetic code for our future generations. Live a lifestyle that is pleasing to our genome and God.

The show is called "Ghost in your Genes", it is too important to miss in my opinion. Please consider watching it.

Atheists places too much trust in Man, this show may help you understand, yet another reason, how wrong that viewpoint (worldview) may be.

A good tree will bear good fruit. We must keep God's Creations more sacred then we are. As I said, Science has no moral rudder and the ship is adrift. Our future may depend on you understanding this point.

Ghost in your Genes, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

bit.ly/EpigeneticSwitches